In the documents you will find the passages to which I have now come, which are contained in this: “Flogging a native by order of De Keyser. At Basoko, the headquarters station of the district of the Aruwimi, where the notorious De Keyser [meaning thereby the Plaintiff], of hand-cutting fame, was in command, women were daily flogged for the most trivial offences, etc.” This, you will notice, is stated to have occurred in November, 1897. It was a time when Captain Burrows himself was not in the Congo State at all, but you will hear from Captain De Keyser that there is not the smallest ground for the allegation of cruelty that was made against him. It is true that a chief was taken down in the steamer on which Captain De Keyser was, but the suggestion that he was treated in that barbarous fashion is entirely untrue. The next passage which has to be read is with regard to Basoko, and as to Basoko, what I have told you is that at Basoko, for fourteen days only, Captain Burrows was at the place where Captain De Keyser had his command. “At Basoko, the headquarters station of the district of the Aruwimi, women used to be flogged almost daily for the most trivial offences. In one case five women were beaten for daring to go to a village a short way up the river to buy food without having previously informed the commandant.” Thus, after six and a half years, during which no breath of accusation has been made with regard to these matters by Captain Burrows, there comes this extraordinary attack: “De Keyser, of hand-cutting fame”; “De Keyser’s massacre”; De Keyser described as walking about the station where he was employed with his gun, and shooting with reckless cruelty at the natives—De Keyser, who is accused of taking a man prisoner and practically roasting him on the stack-pipe of the boat as he is going down the river. There was not only that, but the imputation of habitually flogging women at this place. These odious and appalling accusations, the echo of which follows a man through his whole life, are made against him, and made against him by whom? By a man who had been in the service of the Congo State itself, who, in the year 1897, as I have shown, made himself the defender of the administration of the Congo State, and declared in an article which was put in the interview which he had with _L’Étoile Belge_, that there was no foundation whatever for the accusations which had been made against the Belgian officers, and he was able to say so because he knew the truth. He attacked Captain Salusbury and disposed of that. This man, who in 1897 was taking that attitude, who afterwards leaves the service of the Congo State and feels himself aggrieved because he has not been so highly paid, because he has not had such distinction conferred upon him as others have had conferred,—he, seven years afterwards, enters into this—is it too much to call