143
The editor pointed out that his newspaper had taken a stand against the Light and Pass Ordinance from the beginning and that it would continue to condemn it. But there would be no action against it, “because we are different from the Chinese; we are not to be bullied or hectored or ordered about to do this and that at the good pleasure of any 'Passed Cadet' or 'Jack-in-Office' without rhyme or reason. We are not to be brought into the majestic presence of an Official Ogre and frightened out of our wits." Treatment could be meted out to Chinese which would not be tolerated by British residents.
The editor maintained that he had the backing of the majority in the Colony. If he meant by this the majority of Europeans, his statement was probably incorrect.
At any rate he claimed; “What we say is backed by the opinion of the whole Colony, except some few whining toadies who are practically beneath contempt. The Government may take steps against us, but they will at once have the whole Colony to deal with and we hardly think His Excellency the Governor would care to undertake to suppress the whole Colony's opinion.”
The editor gave fulsome praise to Ho Tung and Ho A-mei for their effort at political experimentation on behalf of their countrymen.
"All honour, then, to the enlightened and outspoken orators who have made such a bold stand, and have taught their less advanced Chinese brethren a valued lesson in the hitherto unknown art (among the Chinese) of holding public meetings to consider public opinion.”
The speakers, according to the writer of the editorial, were to be honoured as "pioneers of the glorious Anglo-Saxon principle of freedom of speech in this much governed and grossly mismanaged Colony, and (they) can do no harm by impressing on their fellow-countrymen the fact that every Briton has the right to convene public meetings of his fellow citizens and express his views in a fair and straightforward manner."