Atjeh in de Tweede Kamer (Aceh in the Second Chamber) was a Dutch-language political pamphlet published in 1897 at Amsterdam by the printer-publisher J. A. Fortuijn on behalf of the Sociaaldemokratische Arbeiderspartij in Nederland (Social-Democratic Workers’ Party in the Netherlands), reproducing the verbatim record of the Atjeh debate held in the Tweede Kamer during the treatment of the budget of Nederlandsch-Indië for 1898. Priced at ten cents and printed by Masereeuw at Rotterdam, the pamphlet was the party’s principal agitational instrument against the Atjeh-oorlog, and it preserves — in extenso — the speeches of H. van Kol, Troelstra, Van der Zwaag, Kuyper, Minister Cremer and eight other deputies, together with the full text of Van Kol’s motion and the roll-call of the division of 17 November 1897 in which the motion was rejected by seventy-two votes to three.
The pamphlet is one of the most complete Dutch-language records of the parliamentary case for and against the continuation of the war in Atjeh at the moment when the aggressive tactics of Van Heutsz and the Indies government were being consolidated, and it is, from the Acehnese side, a rare compilation of European testimony to the destruction, the branden en zengen (burning and scorching), the executions and the economic interests attached to the twenty-four-year war.
Bibliographical description
The title-page reads: Sociaaldemokr. Arbeiderspartij in Nederland. ATJEH IN DE TWEEDE KAMER. DEBATTEN BIJ DE behandeling der begrooting van Nederlandsch-Indië voor 1898. Prijs 10 Cent. J. A. Fortuijn, Amsterdam. 1897. Masereeuw, Rotterdam. The copy described bears the stamps of the Koninklijk Instituut voor de Tropen and of the Sociaal Wetenschappelijk onderzoek, Linnaeusstraat, Amsterdam, with the shelf-mark Br P95-178.
The body of the pamphlet runs to eighty numbered pages. It is organised not by chapter but by the order of speeches, with editorial cross-headings inserted by the party editors — among them Annexatie-geest (annexation spirit), Schandelijke oorlog (shameful war), Oorzaken van den oorlog (causes of the war), Zeeroof (piracy), Onderlinge twisten (internal quarrels), Vreemde inmenging (foreign interference), Onze veroveringszucht (our lust for conquest), Ontrouw aan ons tractaat (unfaithful to our treaty), Wij wilden den oorlog (we wanted the war), Gevolgen van den oorlog (consequences of the war), Wat nu? (what now?), De toestand niet verbeterd (the situation not improved), Verschrikkelijke sterfte (terrible mortality), Een Christen aan het woord (a Christian speaks), Door moorden tot het Evangelie (through murder to the Gospel), Militaire overmoed (military arrogance), Wat wil men eigenlijk? (what does one actually want?), De belangen der kapitalisten (the interests of the capitalists), De Minister als type der geldmacht (the minister as a type of the money-power), De partijen zijn redeloos (the parties are unreasoning), De Christenen en Atjeh (the Christians and Atjeh), Onze positie reddeloos (our position beyond saving), De motie verdedigd (the motion defended), De Sociaaldemokraten en Atjeh (the social democrats and Atjeh), Kapitalistische belangen (capitalist interests), Waarom in Atjeh blijven? (why stay in Atjeh?), Wanneer het einde (when the end), Wreedheden goedgepraat (cruelties talked away), Nog eens de zeeroof (once more the piracy), Onze volkenrechtelijke stelling (our position in international law), Ons prestige in Indië (our prestige in the Indies), Waarom niet uit Java? (why not out of Java?), Atjeh onneembaar (Atjeh impregnable), De belanghebbenden (the interested parties) and De conclusie (the conclusion).
The final leaf carries the publisher’s list of S.D.A.P. publications, including Troelstra’s Wat willen de Sociaaldemokraten? and De S.D.A.P., haar ontstaan, doel en streven, and advertisements for the party organs De Sociaaldemokraat — edited by Mr. P. J. Troelstra and W. H. Vliegen at Zwaanshals 127, Rotterdam — and De Nieuwe Tijd.
Occasion and purpose
The pamphlet was issued in the weeks following the sittings of 16 November and 17 November 1897. Its purpose, as Troelstra stated in the debate itself, was to carry the Atjeh question beyond the chamber: the three social-democratic deputies set themselves the task of “heel Nederland doortrekkende, steden, dorpen en gehuchten” — traversing the whole of the Netherlands, its towns, villages and hamlets — to rouse the people against “het onrecht, dat sedert 24 jaren wordt gepleegd” (the injustice that has been committed for twenty-four years), so that when they returned with a protest motion against the Atjeh-krijg they would have a great part of the Dutch people behind them.
The pamphlet thus belongs to the genre of the parliamentary vlugschrift — the cheap agitational reprint of a debate — and its editorial cross-headings are polemical rather than neutral. Its evidentiary value nevertheless rests on the fact that the speeches themselves, including those of the government’s defenders, are reproduced at length and without visible abridgement of the arguments hostile to the party’s own position.
Contents by speaker
The debate as printed opens with the sitting of Tuesday 16 November 1897 and the long historical indictment of Van Kol, deputy for Enschedé, which occupies pages 3 to 13 and closes with the text of his motion. There follow the speeches of Pijnacker Hordijk, of Verhey, of Kuyper, of Van der Zwaag, of Bahlmann, of Van Karnebeek, of Pyttersen, of De Visser, of Van Vlijmen and of Troelstra. The reply of the Minister of Colonies Cremer occupies pages 45 to 59. The sitting of 17 November 1897 contains Cremer’s supplementary statement on the declarations of the coastal princes, the rejoinders of Van Kol, Kuyper, Ketelaar and Troelstra, Cremer’s final reply, and the division list.
Significance
For the history of Atjeh the pamphlet is significant on four counts. First, it preserves the fullest surviving parliamentary statement of the Acehnese case against the legality of the war, drawn by Van Kol from the Treaty of London, the Atjeh-tractaat of 1857, the Siak treaty and the Sumatra treaty of 1871. Second, it records specific atrocities and named Acehnese victims — among them Toekoe Tjoet Machmoed Lam Tenzah, Toekoe Njak Amat, the Radja van Samalangan, the head of Bintara Peunang, Njahim and Joed Mohmed Lamtengah — which are otherwise sparsely documented. Third, it contains the government’s own authoritative description, through Cremer, of the post-1896 system of geconcentreerde stelling abandonment, mobile columns and coastal scheepvaartregeling. Fourth, it documents the economic interests — the Deli Maatschappij, the Koninklijke Paketvaart-Maatschappij, the concessions in Tamiang and Perlak, and the trade of Pinang — that Troelstra alleged were bound up with the prolongation of the war.
See Also
- Atjeh debate in the Tweede Kamer (16-17 November 1897)
- Van Kol’s Aceh War Motion (1897)
- H. van Kol
- Pieter Jelles Troelstra
- Van der Zwaag
- Abraham Kuyper
- J. T. Cremer
- Sociaaldemokratische Arbeiderspartij
- Tweede Kamer
- Indische begrooting voor 1898
- Aceh War
- 1897
- 1898
Source
Atjeh in de Tweede Kamer: Debatten bij de behandeling der begrooting van Nederlandsch-Indië voor 1898, uitgave van de Sociaaldemokratische Arbeiderspartij in Nederland (Amsterdam: J. A. Fortuijn, 1897). Koninklijk Instituut voor de Tropen, Br P95-178, title-page, pp. 3–80, and publisher’s list on the final leaf.
Acknowledgement of sources. The material in this article derives from Atjeh in de Tweede Kamer: Debatten bij de behandeling der begrooting van Nederlandsch-Indië voor 1898 (Amsterdam: J. A. Fortuijn, 1897). Dutch passages are quoted in the original with an English rendering.