it could be amprositala
readring,
Fast
کی کار
113
1187
with the cost of printing zu Parliament
for
I should be inclicied to the sine the Governan.
bo tell the Missionarie
read their letter
Lok has theat t
&is glad to be able to
accompanied
them that it
W
you assurance from the Smiths that
inform them
he had no intention
his menco.
fe
AL
pace 37
Rent Den 8/21
(Unsmith will leam;
very careful
At as be grows older, to
about clergy)) Jays
what the
Je Hublet
I think your purposed
Credit for the temperate
whale
Accord will
do
every
will. [ me smitte
descues
in
the
lilla
Comment]
Z
the misumaries, parographe
5 of Miche
The matter is
it
worth
while
is most offensive
too small
ster up these gentlemen.
L
frither
コ
K Bu 9/11
TO THE
HON. J. GARDINER AUSTIN,
Colonial Secretary.
FC., FC., FC.,
SIR,
HONGKONG.
LONDON Mission House,
HONGKONO, blh October, 1871.
Is the memorandum by the Hon. Cecil. C. Smith upon or rather against the Chinese petition for the suppression of licensed gaming houses, which has been reprinted from the Blue Book, (Papers relating to Gambling Houses in Hongkong; page 72) in one of the newspapers of the Colony, that gen. tleman says, "This petition can only be considered as another effort on the part of the missionaries." In the next sentence Mr. Sinith expressly refers to the "London Missionary Society. Being thus almost pointed out by name, and knowing this statement to be altogether unwarrantable, and one calculated to do the Chinese Petitioners a grievous wrong, we feel it our duty to lay the following remarks before you for transmission to His Excellency the Lieutenant Governor, and to request that His Excellency will be pleased to forward this letter to the Earl of Kimberley.
(1.) We much regret that Mr. Smith did not make a detailed report of the character and value of the nine hundred and forty seven seals and signatures appended to the petition in question; and that he did not state the number of the signatures which he deemed objectionable. We are assured, and believe, that a candid estimation of the docuraent, taking into consideration the leading position, good repute, and property qualifica tions of the signers, would show that the petition is nothing less than an overwhelming declaration of Chi- nese public opinion on the subject of the licensed gaming houses.
(2.) Mr. Smith attempts to neutralise the effect of the petition by representing it as the result of mis- sionary influence and activity. We wish that we had such an influence with the Chinese as he would attribute to us; but we have no such influence, and we used no such activity. Our connexion with the petition was limited to informing a few Chinese friends that the English and other residents were preparing a petition against the gaming houses, and suggesting that a simultaneous petition from the Chinese would undoubtedly carry great weight with it. Having done so much, we kept entirely in the back-ground; not because we were unwilling to help on the progress of the petition, but because we knew that interference on our part would rather operate to its disadvantage. Nor can we refrain from expressing our surprise that one in Mr. Smith's position, acquainted with the Chinese language, and officially styled the Protector of the Chinese, could be so ignorant of that people, and of their attitude towards Christianity, as to be able to believe that any exertion on the part of the missionaries could induce nine hundred of the principal inhabitants of the Colony, to follow them in a course which did not, on consideration of its intrinsic merits, commend itself to their resson and con- science.
(3.) The statement that "the Chinese community had been canvassed by a native preacher of the Lon- don Missionary Society," is equally calculated to mislead. The Revd, Ho Tsun Sheen (who is since deceased) took no active part in the canvassing for signatures. That was done by Chinese men of business, who were all, with the exception of one Christian shop-keeper, entirely unknown to the missionaries.
(4) We are sorry that the Hon. Mr. Smith speaks slightingly of the protest of the missionaries against the gaming houses in 1867 (we do not know why 1869 is mentioned in the memorandum). We bo lieve they are not ashamed of what they then did to prevent the establishment of so great a social evil. Soe- ing however that their opposition in that year was ineffectual, we are the more confident that neither the Go- vernment nor the public will look upon the statement that the Chinese petition was ONLY another effort of the missionaries, as a satisfactory method of disposing of it. We have shown how without foundation the statement is; and we beg further to say that the very slight amount of furtherance which the petition received from the missionaries was certainly more than counter-balanced by the influence of the Registrar General in opposition How it came about we do not pretend to say, but we know that an impression existed that any Chinese who should sign the petition would do so at the risk of his personal displeasure.
to it.
(5) We find it difficult ourselves to believe that Mr. Smith's memorandum was written in good faith; and in the event of Her Majesty's government appointing a commission in accordance with the prayer of the Memorial sent home by last mail from the whole of the community, we venture to submit that it would be a fit subject of investigation whether it was not recklessly put together to lessen the weight of a petition which be knew deserved a far different notice.
In accordance with the custom in such cases we enclose three printed copies of this letter: and remain.
Sir,
Your obedient Servants,
JAMES LEGGE, D. D., L. L. D. E. J. EITEL, M. A. PH. D. F. S. TURNER, B. A.
Page 120Page 121