ORIGINAL CORRESPONDENCE

Dunstan Times, Issue 474, 19 May 1871, Page 3

ORIGINAL CORRESPONDENCE

[Wo do not identify ourselves with the opinions that may bo expressed by our correspondents.]

(to the editor of the dunstan times),

Sir, — Would you kindly allow mo a small space in your paper to discuss that oft vexed question the Chinese. I have seen the general opinion of the mining community puf forward by a few solitary individuals, who, no sooner show their devoted heads than they are pounced upon and snubbed by a hundred and one would be “ Samaritans ” and generally by men who know as much of the Chinese and gold mining as they do of the Arctic pole, so that we are glad to hide our J insignificant heads under the shadow of obscurity. Mr. Dalrymple, of Port Chalmers, in a letter to the Editor of the In lnm of April 211u.1, indulges pretty freely in flights of his own imagination. He not only makes it appear that the Chinese are better Colonists, but that they are a far more intelligent race than the European mining and agricultural community, which statement 1 must certainly deny in full. For instance, who is it that taught us how to make and use ourcrushing machines, our dredging machines, and the scientific application of Vtatet. was it ihe ChineSelj Or in other words, who is it thatjhas opened the vast fields of wealth tlir -ughout the colonies ? Again, he makes out that the Chinese ore bettor workmen than the Europeans, and that they! work old ground that has been previously worked by Europeans. Well for Mr.TOalrymple’s edification, I will tell him that Europeans do the same, and ground, that on its first working paid only £3 or £4"per'week has,'on being reworked, yielded £lO to[£ 12 per week. Tins result is owing to the advance made in the appliances. Again, he says they , have worked ground passed over by Europeans as too poor to pay. I will admit they might have done so, but that does not prove' that a Chinaman can get more] gold out|of poor ground than a European can. There is this difference between the tworaccs. A Chinaman will work poor ground until he can get better. A European will'not work poor ground when is better to be got, but he will prospect until he finds better. As for general agriculture, I have not seen that we can learn much of them on that score. They are good gardeners, I will admit, for growing green stuff and such like. Not butwhatVEuropean can grow iit quite as well, and the same way as they do, hut. if he does, he must not be too fastidious. Give John his due he is Ingenious,'temperate, and persevering imhis hum drum way, and John is one that will look at both sides of a sixpence before he spends it. I have seen, in answer to one miner's statement, that we could not compote with them in the labor market, for one reason it costs us a great deal more for the necessaries of life than it does a Chinaman. He was charitably told to fight the Chinese with their own weapons —that is to do as they do and live as they live. Would those benevolent individuals who are so free with their advice start and set us an example, gratis ? For any benevoindividual wishing to start on his own hook I must tell him that what may be termed common necessaries to an European are luxuries to a Chinaman. Another benevolent orator calls John his brother. 1 think even that gentle- man would like the family connexion to re- main as it is—he would shrink at the idea of one for bins rotber-in-law. Mr. Dalrymple says : “jWouldthe miner detail the action he would recommend to avert the evil of this increase, which is allowed.” But this is not the question at issue at present. The question is, are the Chinese an injury and likely to be an injury and detrimental to the future welfare of the province? Every intellectual miner will tell you that [they will be, and I put forward a few arguments to prove it. First. The mineral wealth of the Crown belongs to Her Majesty the Queen, and is therefore the birthright of her subjects. Secondly. Tqe introduction of Chinese in any numbers will displace a great many Europeans, so that many valuable colonists will be lost to the colony. Thirdly. The Chinese are only migratory. A Chinaman may possibly live and die here, if ha can make nothing ; hut, as soon as he can make a hundred or two, John is off to the “girl he left behind him,” so that all John makes above what keeps him in the few necessaries of life goes for the enriching of China, and consequently is a dead loss to the province. Fourthly, The mineral wealth of the colony is limited, and will he worked out in time ; therefore it behoves every true man to work it in such a way that it will be some benefit to the colony in the future. No one can be but gratified with the favorable aspect of our goldfields here as compared with most of those on the Australian continent. A great many of our industrious miners have worked ther way up, have shares in waterraces and other mining property, are married, with increasing families, have houses furnished in a way your well-to-do farmers may well envy, and many others are following the example set them. Is it not -wrong then, I will ask, to introduce and encourage so many Chinese—a class of men who can never be of any real benefit to the colony, hut who deter hundreds and, perhaps, thousands of Europeans from settling among us ? If more population is wanted let those wfxo borne he Europeans, even if the colony lias to pay to bring them out. Let us have men whom wo can welcome as oUr equals. The Chinese benefit no one but a few merchants and others who have been the real i cause of their introduction, and who eni Corn-aged them for their own pecuniary ad- - vantage J but they are something like the dog in the fable, in grasping at the shadow i they art in danger of losing the substance, 1 I am, &c.,

BIRD'S-EYE;

‘Thorntons, Slay C, 1871