The decree brings under the designation of forest products the products from all woodlands, whether fenced in or not, and even from isolated plantations, from bush and underbrush, bamboo and elm trees, and from all liquaceous plants, especially the lumber, the bark, the sap, the rubber, the leaves, the flowers, and the fruit. In such part of the territories as have, after effective occupation, been declared forest reservations by a public notice of the government, it is strictly forbidden to gather any kind of forest products, for _such harvesting is made an exclusive right of the Treasury_. That decree is interesting in many ways. First, it shows that the German Colonial Office has decided to systematically protect the forest domain of the Colony in order to prevent indiscriminate deforestation, which would rapidly bring disaster upon the country. But it also reminds one of the violent onslaught made by some English people, and especially by the Liverpool rubber dealers, against the Congo Free State. What England unceasingly argues against the Belgian Congo—_for the humanitarian movement is only a pretext_—namely, the exploitation by the Government of such parts of the territory as are not private property of individuals, is actually made a rule by the [German] decree just referred to. A previous decree of the Government has still more closely indicated what parts of the territory are assigned to the Treasury as forest reservations. Added to the other Treasury lands of various description they cover _more than nine-tenths of the Colony_. The conclusion is that in German East Africa, as well as in the Congo Free State, the rubber harvest, in which the Liverpool merchants take such lively interest, is gathered from crown-lands only, and practically constitutes a State monopoly. Now, a large part of German East Africa comes under the provisions of the Berlin Act. And, in order to show the extent to which British hypocrisy will go, it is enough to recall that for years, both in British East Africa and in Uganda, which also partly come under the scope of the Berlin Act, the same government rules have been enforced, declaring india-rubber a State monopoly not only on the crown-lands, _but even on private estates_. What is lawful for one party must be lawful for the other, and we cannot reproach the Congo Free State for upholding against British would-be interference such rights of the Crown as other governments maintain in their own colonies. This example of vigorous Teutonic candour might be repeated from the columns of many other European journals, but the desire to avoid passing from the historical to the controversial in the present work must limit the use of abundant similar material.