167
the country he represented and the Government and people of the foreign territory where they reside.
Instead, it was claimed, “there would be little friendly relation manifested by him. He would simply be a spy. He would in fact be an enemy to the Government of this place.”
This totally negative view of a Chinese consul reflects a generally low estimate and distrust of Chinese character held by many foreigners at that time.
Another speaker, Mr. Granville Sharp, categorically stated that the Chinese nation and its people lacked integrity: “Her inhabitants from the highest official to the lowest coolie appear to be utterly incapable of understanding the social as well as moral necessity for truth.”
He analysed the suffering China was causing Hongkong. To him the resolutions of the meeting were cries of distress.
In his diagnosis he said: "We were all of us in pain: that we suffered. If anyone at the meeting said we did not, were we to believe him?”
This appeared to be a reference to Mr. Whittall's remarks that Hongkong trade had not been affected by the blockade.
Mr. Sharp regarded what had happened to Hongkong as producing cries of distress: "Every man, woman and child, and almost every animal had the power of expressing suffering, and by its cry of petulance, irritability or anger showed the nature and degree of its sufferings. No real cry of suffering should be disregarded."
Let Britain respond with sympathy and understanding to Hongkong's feelings.
Mr. Sharp attempted to put the resolutions not only within a general psychological framework, but also in an international political setting: