Part 9

(2.) A second and more pregnant feature of it is to be noted in the _good-will_ that in a peculiar degree characterizes the relations of our two countries in the past and in the present. This may seem a strange thing to say just now, but the truth of it will appear on a brief survey of facts. Probably it is less our merit than our fortune, but it is certainly the latter, that through the whole stage of that unhappy, though largely unavoidable collision of China with the foreign powers, by which she was forced off from her intolerable policy of exclusion, our Government was the least conspicuous of the principal aggressors,—less so than France, less so than England, less so than Russia. To the several treaties in which the collision issued, that with the United States, and that alone, contained the express provision that the parties to it, and their peoples respectively, should “not insult or oppress each other for any trifling cause, so as to produce an estrangement between them.” There has been, and is, less bitter remembrance of us on the score of that conflict than of the other belligerents engaged in it. Again, while we have subsequently had men in the various ranks of our diplomatic service in China who have hurt us there, and have them still, we have probably given least offence on _that_ score. No thanks to our civil service want of system; but in the providence of God, we have had more than our proportion there of men who have helped our good fame. Eighteen years ago we sent thither an ambassador, one result of whose six years of official life there was, that at the end of that time jealous Pekin had come to recognize in him, what he truly was, a friend to China. I mean, of course, Anson Burlingame, of Massachusetts. For his friendship, China offered to his acceptance honors never before or since conferred on a foreigner. She freely committed to his hands a trust of supreme magnitude. She made him her ambassador to all the western people. In that capacity he came home to his own country, and framed with us the first of that new series of treaties in which China gave and received the pledge that made her a member on equal footing of the family of nations. And that treaty, the work of our own citizen, large minded enough to value the capabilities of that great people, large hearted enough also to make his sympathy felt by its rulers, still stands, and is _going_ to stand. But this most remarkable and luminous paragraph of history—is there another such between China and any other nation but ours?

(3.) Finally, as if to supply the last term required to complete our relationship for all possible service to the Chinese race, as if to openly designate and summon us to the office of aiding its emergence into a new life, especially of ministering to it the holy faith, (which is the best gift we have to impart, the one secret and source of our happier lot,) for us and for us alone, of all Protestant Christendom, by bringing to our soil, to the presence of our institutions, to our church doors, a multitude of Chinese people themselves, God provided the condition of _personal contact_. That was the rounding and perfection of our opportunity.

But, it will naturally be inquired, is not whatsoever exceptional advantage gained for us in the past mostly annulled by the later and recent record of social and political hostility here at home, which stands against us in our account with China? I think not.

The shameful truth is, China is wonted to the ill-treatment of her subjects on foreign Christian soil, and if we have furnished no exception to the rule, our outrage has been milder than she is accustomed to; so that, after all that has happened to wound her feelings here, there still remains to us the benefit, though it is nothing, I repeat, to be proud of, of comparison with worse doers.

ADVANTAGES OF THE ANTI-CHINESE AGITATION.

I am glad to pass to a pleasanter topic, and to remark next, that there are certain incidental consequences of the anti-Chinese agitation, and, as well, certain circumstances felicitously contemporaneous with it, that have operated to offset and countervail the injury which that agitation may be supposed to have inflicted on our relation with China—that have done more than that.

First, it has developed and brought out into expression a _vastly preponderant public opinion adverse to the whole movement_. The argument for it has been heard and canvassed, and not without sympathy; for it was presented by our own countrymen, and it was not to be questioned that they were in a measure of honest difficulty of some sort with the matter they brought to trial. But I think it is entirely true to say that the event of the discussion has been that the argument is answered. It did not stand as to its facts. I believe that all the main counts of the indictment against Chinese emigration and Chinese emigrants we severally disproved to the public satisfaction.

But beside this aspect of the case, and to a great extent independently of it, the judgment asked for, _viz., the adoption of the policy of exclusion, was considered_. Whereupon it appeared that it was the proposal of an act no less serious, no less forbidden, than to disown and repudiate a principle, the maintenance of which more than any other thing distinguishes us as a nation, which our fathers built into the foundation of our government, which we have always advocated to the world in every publishment of our political creed—a principle which we have ever claimed to be one of natural right, which we have persistently endeavored, from the outset of our national existence, to persuade other governments to recognize as such, and which we had particularly emphasized in the very treaty of which this act, if consented to, would be the violation. It appeared, furthermore, that it was a proposal that we take toward China the very attitude which we had helped force China out of, as towards ourselves and other nations, _i. e._, that we borrow a page of cast-off Chinese politics and insert it in our law—that it was a proposal to return from the nineteenth to the eleventh century, and convert to the use of a modern free republic something in the likeness of a medieval edict against the Jews; that, finally, it was a proposal to go back upon ourselves, to revoke our own most recent step of advance in civilization, and restore that doctrine of race discrimination, which we had lately put away.

And when this was seen, the country said, No! Legislature, chamber of commerce, institutions of learning, benevolent organizations, united in the protest. The general voice was, that whatever evil there was to be remedied must be dealt with in some other way. A Congressional committee, indeed, brought in a report not warranted by the evidence it had heard, favorable to the policy of exclusion—the lamented Morton dissenting—and Congress itself passed the anti-Chinese bill. But that was Congress, which has reasons of its own for what it does sometimes, not very mysterious in this instance. But the report for the people, which the people with little distinction of party gratefully and audibly accepted, was made by President Hayes in his strong veto.

Of course the Chinese Government, through its representatives at Washington, is accurately informed of all this; and besides, the Chinese Government reads the papers. Thus an attempt which, had it succeeded, would have destroyed our friendship with China, has not only failed, but has been the occasion of such an expression of the national sentiment of good-will toward her as never had been made before, and as could not have been made otherwise.

A minor but very much to be noted result of the affair has been _the disclosure of the actual state of things in California_. It has shown how and where the anti-Chinese movement started, how low its origin was and how it grew, by what means, by what management it drew into it such respectable elements as it did; that it was fomented by the press operating in the field of State politics—that it was mainly a worked-up irrational furor kindling by contagion, and did not really signify what it seemed to. It was shown that much of the best part of California was not in it. Why, the evidence for the defence on which the country, balancing it with the other evidence heard, found its verdict aforesaid, was, all of it, the evidence of California men—men from the first rank of citizenship. It transpired that there was in California a not inconsiderable party on the poor Chinaman’s side, not forbearing to denounce and oppose the violation of his rights, and to testify in his favor, that much as had been said and done there against him, a good deal in the name of Christian benevolence and humanity and justice had been said and done for him. And so in the upshot of the public trial of the case it has come about that the offence of California is mitigated by it.

And to the affront perpetrated in the halls of Congress in addition to the offset furnished by the public attitude, there has been a special one, too remarkable not to be mentioned. It was a most lamentable spectacle to see a man like James G. Blaine, of New England, in the eminence of his position, his great gifts and his reputation, stand up in the United States Senate, and before the world turn the power of his rare eloquence against the cause of the weak. It was too bad. It cannot be excused. But not only did his utterances call out replies from the most capable and influential sources, notably from Dr. S. Wells Williams, long resident in China, but now of Yale College, than whom there is no higher authority on China and Chinese affairs living; from Henry Ward Beecher, in a splendid address given in Philadelphia on the 3d of last March; and from William Lloyd Garrison, in a noble letter of protest, his dying deliverance, the last shot the old warrior for humanity fired;—not only, I say, did Mr. Blaine provoke these replies by which he was convicted of ignorance and fallacy and his argument throughout annihilated; but it happened that almost at the same time he was misrepresenting both China and us at the Capitol, another citizen of this country, in the eminence of a still more illustrious fame, was in the far East, in the audience of China herself, speaking our true mind for us; for it was to a delegation of the Chinese merchants of Penang that, in the month of April of the present year, Gen. Ulysses S. Grant, in that felicity of well-chosen and straightforward simple speech that is characteristic of him, said, “The hostility of which you complain does not represent the real sentiment of America, but is the work of demagogues. * * * I do not doubt, and no one can doubt, that in the end, no matter what effect the agitation for the time being may have, the American people will treat the Chinese with kindness and justice, and not deny to the true and deserving people of your country the asylum they offer to the rest of the world.” And may God bless him for saying it.

Moreover, in the month of June following, this same man of great deeds and weighty speech, in an interview with certain of the highest officials of the empire at Peking, and at their request, offered counsel, which a few weeks later, on a like request, he repeated in an interview with the Emperor of Japan, to the effect that the time had now arrived when the two nations of China and Japan, in peace and close alliance with one another, should no longer submit as they had done to the interference and dictation of foreign powers in their affairs; should assume control of their own commerce, and together stand for their independence and their proper rights, as it became so great nations to do, and as they were able to do against the world. God bless him for saying that, too! It was the most seasonable word, next to the Gospel, that has been spoken on that side of the world in this age. And I, for one, am thankful and proud that it was an American who had the breadth of vision and the magnanimity to speak it.

And now there remains to be spoken of an outcome of good from the anti-Chinese agitation that is of more immediately practical consequence than any other. It has been the occasion of calling universal and earnest _attention_, such as had not been drawn to it before, and such as it is scarcely conceivable could have been drawn to it otherwise, _to the fact of the presence within our borders of so many of the Chinese people_. The nation at large is now aware of them and informed with respect to them. While it is not yet settled what is to be done with them politically, and while no doubt there will be further contention over them, it does seem to be settled that they are not to go by a violent dismissal. Here they are, then, more than a hundred thousand souls of them, and here they are to stay. They are an object of the very highest interest, and that for more reasons than one. Not only are they such in themselves, but they constitute by far the most vital point of our contact with that great nation beyond the sea, and afford the most available means and medium of reaching it that we possess. And we are interested in them on our own account. By their presence we have already been put to the test in one way, and we are still to be tested by them in other ways. We are to be tested as to the capacity of our civil institutions, and as to the power of our religion—no, not as to the power of our religion, but as to our power in it.

It is one of the most humiliating confessions that can be made, to say that these people cannot be granted room on our soil, with liberty and justice under our laws, with safety to ourselves. It is a still more humiliating confession to say that the attempt to Christianize them is a hopeless one.

Is it so that in their case we have come to the end of our resources for securing men the exercise and enjoyment of their few inalienable rights under our Government? Then they are vastly less than we had thought. Is it so that the encounter of our Christianity with heathenism in the persons of a few score thousand pagans, here on our ground, within hearing of our Sabbath bells, is too much to be ventured, lest heathenism win the day? Then there is not enough to our Christianity to make it much matter.

It is all absurd to say such things. It is not indeed to be questioned that the problem of dealing with this strange element thrown in upon us is a perplexed and difficult one; but it is not the first perplexed and difficult matter we have had to accommodate, nor is it the last. Our labors as a nation are not over. The time when there will be no perilous or incommoding exigencies arising to disturb our ease as citizens is far distant. Who thinks it not so is greatly mistaken. As other vexing problems in the past have been solved, so with patience this Chinese problem can be without sacrifice of principle.

OUR CHRISTIAN DUTY.

It is a work in which the state and the church must co-operate. But we are here to-day to look especially to the part which the latter has in it—as servants of Christ and as representatives of the Christian community to attend to the cry of the poor that comes to us from the Pacific coast, and to consider how we shall respond to it.

The one thing which we are disallowed, be it first of all observed, is to deem that our principal duty in the premises is discharged by giving hard words to California. We are not to sit in judgment on California. We are not in a position to do so, and I trust we are not disposed to do so. There are reasons which the rest of the country does not perceive, certainly does not feel as California does, why the presence in her population of this unassimilated foreign mass is very undesirable and very trying. Not a doubt of it. I have heard Yung Wing himself say it. We may with propriety, in view of some reasons, on the other hand, that naturally enough we see more clearly than they do in California, plead with our fellow-citizens there to try and discern the larger aspects of the situation, and to bear whatsoever ills it entails upon them till they can be remedied in the way that is best for all of us and for all men. If I had the ear of the Irish citizens of California I would plead with them, as lately foreigners themselves, and as sons of a church that for more than five hundred years has befriended China through her missions, and is still doing it, to regard these new foreigners with more kindness.

California is a grand State—splendid in her youthful prime—a queenly figure sitting there on her golden shore—our own flesh and blood. Our warmest sympathies, our best hopes are with her. To look upon any fault of hers with less than a generous charity is out of character, and besides, in the present instance, it is nothing to the purpose. The only course for Christian America to take at this juncture is to offer California our Christian service. That we can do, and the way of it is plain. There are faithful brethren and faithful churches in California ready and waiting for help in the work already by them inaugurated, and carried on sufficiently far to prove beyond cavil the practicability of its success, bringing these Chinese thousands under the sway of the gospel of Christ. Some help we have sent them, but not enough. There ought to be abundance of it; not only abundance, but a sufficiency—all that can be used to advantage. This is a mission that ought to be lavishly supported, that ought not to be stinted as respects either money or men. And the time to push it is now. If the churches of the country will encourage and assist the enterprise in a free-handed, free-hearted, neighborly way—the churches of our order, through the agency of this vigorous and patriotic Association—the Chinese question would ere long be satisfactorily and permanently disposed of. Nothing would be so effectual to modify and reshape the public sentiment of California upon it as such a Christian demonstration. Nothing would more effectually contribute to the evangelization of China. Nor is there anything at present within our power that would apparently do more to hasten the conversion of the world.

RECEIPTS

FOR OCTOBER, 1879.

* * * * *

MAINE, $94.74.

Bangor. First Parish Ch. $28.00 Bethel. Second Cong. Ch. 10.00 Brownville. C. L. Nichols, 2 bbls. of C. East Madison. Eliza Bicknell 5.00 Gardiner. Cong. Ch. and Soc. 16.84 North Yarmouth. Cong. Ch. and Soc. 5.00 Orland. M. C. Trott 5.00 Thomaston. Ladies of Cong. Ch., bbl. of C. Wells. First Cong. Ch. 15.00 Winterport. W. R. M. 2.00 Winthrop. Cong. Ch. and Soc. 5.40 Woolwich. John Percy, $2; E. H. T., 50c 2.50 Yarmouth. First Cong. Ch., 3 bbls. of C., Central Ch., bbl. of C.

NEW HAMPSHIRE, $121.58.

Amherst. Women’s Memorial Union, $10; First Cong. Ch., $7.50 17.50 Atkinson. Cong. Ch. and Soc. 10.00 Colebrook. Cong. Ch. and Soc. 4.00 Concord. No. Cong. Ch., bbl. of C. Derry. Mrs. H. R. Underhill, box and bbl. of C. Dover. Mrs. Dr. L. 1.00 Fitzwilliam. Cong. Ch. and Soc. 6.00 Hillsborough Bridge. Cong. Ch. 3.50 Lancaster. Cong. Ch. and Soc. 15.00 Milford. First Cong. Ch. 13.58 Nashua. First Cong. Ch. and Soc. 16.50 New Ipswich. Proceeds of Children’s Fair 16.00 New Ipswich. Cong. Sab. Sch. ($10 of which from Leavitt Lincoln) 13.50 Wolfborough. Rev. S. Clark 5.00

VERMONT, $303.38.

Barnet. Cong. Ch. and Soc., $18.29; M. Larens, $3.88 22.17 Cambridge. Madison Safford 44.94 Charlotte. Cong. Ch. and Soc. 41.50 Derby. Cong. Ch. and Soc. 5.00 East Poultney. A. D. Wilcox 5.00 Ferrisburg. Cong. Ch. and Soc. 2.25 McIndoe’s Falls. Cong. Ch. and Soc. 17.00 Montgomery Centre. “Friends” 5.00 Newport. Cong. Ch. and Soc. 6.00 Saint Albans. Cong. Ch. and Soc. 17.19 Saint Johnsbury. North Ch. Sab. Sch. 50.00 South Ryegate. Mrs. Wm. Nelson 50.00 West Brattleborough. Cong. Ch. and Soc. 14.66 Weybridge. Cong. Ch. and Soc. 22.67

MASSACHUSETTS, $6,208.96.