The publication of the Putumayo occurrences has revealed once more that tinge of hypocrisy in the British character of which other nations have accused us. Or, rather than hypocrisy, it should perhaps be termed an intensive shopkeeping principle. Due to this spirit the exposure was greatly delayed. No one would publish the Hardenburg account, because as a book it might not have been a paying venture. Only when the way had been prepared for a successful book, by the public scandal which resulted after attention had been drawn to the matter, was it resolved to publish it. The London Press at first was equally negligent or timorous, with the exception of _Truth_. It showed little disposition to take the matter up, until that paper, whose business it is to expose scandals and abuses, exposed the horrors to public gaze. Then, when the matter had reached the stage of useful "copy," it appeared in all the papers--in some cases with startling headlines. The daily papers feared that they would incur risk of libel proceedings in attacking what was regarded as a powerful London Company, with a capital of a million pounds and an influential Board of Directors, and at first hesitated to take the matter up. Had it not been for the work of the philanthropic society already mentioned, the Anti-Slavery and Aborigines Protection Society,[14] in London, and the courage of the Editor of _Truth_, to both of whom Hardenburg went, followed by the prolonged publications in _Truth_, the sinister occurrences of the Putumayo might have remained unrevealed, and the unspeakable outrages on the Huitotos Indians have gone on unhindered. The Anti-Slavery Society showed that "nothing reported from the Congo has equalled in horror some of the acts alleged against the rubber syndicate," and the reader of the present work will not dispute the truth of the statement. The Society brought the matter with such insistence before the Foreign Office that questions were asked in the House of Commons and inquiries set on foot by Sir Edward Grey, to whose everlasting credit it is that vigorous action was at length taken. The Peruvian Amazon Company protested that the allegations were made by blackmailers. This was denied by Hardenburg, and by _Truth_ on Hardenburg's account. There were, however, accusations of blackmail against others.[15]