could indeed tolerate for a day the continuance of such a practice.  The question which remains for consideration is whether the efforts of the Portuguese Government, in the sincerity of which there can be no doubt, have been successful or the reverse.  Has the cessation of the traffic been real and complete or, as the Anti-Slavery Society appear disposed to think, only partial and “nominal”?  On this point the evidence is somewhat conflicting.  On the one hand, M. Ramaix, writing on behalf of the Belgian Government on May 1, 1912, says, “It is well known that the slave trade is still carried on to a certain extent in the neighbourhood of the sources of the Zambesi and Kasai, in a region which extends over the frontiers of the Congo, Angola, and North-Western Rhodesia,” and on June 8, 1912, Baron Lalaing, the Belgian Minister in London, said, “At the instigation of the traders the population living on the two slopes of the watershed, from Lake Dilolo to the meridian of Kayoyo, are actively engaged in smuggling, arms traffic, and slave trade.”  On the other hand, Mr. Wallace, writing from Livingstone, in Northern Rhodesia, on June 25, 1912, says that “active slave-trading does not now exist along our borders.”  On December 6 of the same year he confirmed this statement, but added, “occasional cases may occur, for the status of slave exists, but they cannot be many.”  Looking to all the circumstances of the case—­to the great extent and, in some cases, to the remoteness of the Portuguese dominions, the ruthless character of the slave-traders, the pecuniary inducements which exist for engaging in a very lucrative traffic, the helplessness of the slaves themselves, and the fact that traffic in slaves is apparently a common inter-tribal practice in Central Africa, it would be unreasonable to expect that the Portuguese Government should be able at once to put a complete stop to these infamous proceedings.  It may well be that, in spite of every effort, the slave trade may still linger on for a while.  All that can be reasonably expected is that the Portuguese authorities should do their utmost to stop it.  That they are doing a good deal cannot be doubted, but it is somewhat of a shock to read (Africa, No. 2 of 1912, p. 59) that Senhor Vasconcellos rather prided himself on the fact that certain “Europeans who were found guilty of acts of slave traffic” had merely been “immediately expelled from the region,” and were “not allowed to return to the colonies.”  Surely, considering the nature of the offence, a punishment of this sort errs somewhat on the side of leniency.  Had these men been residing in Egypt or the Soudan they would have been condemned to penal servitude for a term of years.  It is more satisfactory to learn, on the authority of Colonel Freire d’Andrade, that the convicts to whom allusion has already been made are “no longer permitted to roam at large about the colony, but are, save a very few who are allowed to live outside on giving a security, kept in the forts of Loanda.”