EWING’S CASE.

Evening Star, Issue 2941, 23 July 1872, Page 4

EWING’S CASE.

To the Editor.

Sir, —The diversity of human nature ia considerable. Some men are mercurial in their temperament, fond of jumping to hasty conclusions—in fact, French in their whole bearing and conduct; others again are more slow in the formation of their judgments. This diversity is, however, constant. With little variation it continues year by year. Statistics prove that about the same number .of letters, unaddressed, are each year dropped into the Post Office receiving boxes ; the like number of suicides occur in Paris by charcoal—and so on. In discussing the guilt or innocence of an accused person the same diversity of opinion is manifested. There never was an impostor but what found followers, nor ever a guilty man condemned but what kad believers in his complete innocence ; and, on the other hand, there never was an innocent man found guilty but what he had enemies. Such is human nature, and illustrations are daily to be seen. In England the commotion caused by the Poole Tragedy, and by the prolonged trial of the claims of Thomas De Castro, is an example. Here your correspondent “Ah Wo” also shows that however near unanimity a community may be, there is always some one who disagrees with the mass of his neighbors. It is wise that such should be the case. Where such freedom is allowed, it shows that we reside not under French but English rule. Indeed, whin I read “Ah Wo’s ” letter I felt that there was some reason for asking Ewing’s pardon, else it would not have been written, for “Ah Wo” betrays an animus in every line of his epistle, I presume “Ah Wo” is what some New Zealand diggers would call a “ Pakeha Chinaman.” Most probably, during his eleven years’ residence amongst the Celestials in Ballarat, ami perhaps a like number of years in other parts of Victoria or in New Zealand, he has learned their habits, adopted their customs (minus the pigtail), and got a smattering of their language. Perhaps he has married a Chinese wife. These eccentricities are continually committed by Europeans. If my surmise be correct, it is not at all surprising that “Ah We” should wish light, if any, punishment to overtake a Chinese robber and maimer, while at the same time he desires that any unfortunate European who attacks a Celestial should be punished most severely. He would not bo a good Pakeha Chinaman did he not thus exemplify the influences of his Celestial countrymen—- . “ That for ways that are dark, And for tricks that are vain, The heathen Chinee are peculiar, Which the same J am free to maintain.”

Like one who looks at an object from only one point of view “Ah Wo'’ has got a distorted impression of the facts of Ewing's case. Ho has fallen into inaccuracies in his letter. Ido not here allude to the peculiar construction of his sentences, nor to the mis-quotcd lines in his letter—these are merely proofs of his ardent study of the language of his adopted coontry. He has omitted all mention of the faets on which the numerous petitioners both European and Celestial—base their request to His Excellency ,for free pardon. Ewing did not know the Chinaman was bound, nor was be aware that ©nly one Chinese robber was on his claim. The presumption, as you have in your leading article shown, is all the other way. .Now “Oh, brave and noble” “Ah Wo,” “Whereas your sense of fair play” in omitting this ? As to the other case*to which “Ah Wo” refers, the facts of that case are also misrepresented. Indeed, so much so, that ot,e would imagine that the convicted Chinaman had retained “Ah Wo” as counsel ib his behalf, for

“ I know you lawyers cau, with ease, Twist words and meanings as you please. ” It is true the able counsel who appeared for the convicted Chinaman urged that there was nob sufficient proof of the identity of the prisoner, but it was only his suggestion. Acting no doubt on the advice of the Chinaman’s attorney, ho called no witness for the defence. If there had been any doubt of the prisoner’s identity, why were noc witnesses called ? Besides, the Chinese were the attacking party, and the injured miner swore that the attacked European would have been killed had he not gone to his assistance, Fur saving the life of his countryman he got a broken arm, and had to be off work for some months. I may add that a large number of Chinese miners have petitioned in favor cf Ewing ; not one of them has asked for their convicted countryman’s release. This illustrates the truth of the remark that the new convert is generally the most bigoted, and by analogy the Pakeha Chinaman is more Chinese than his brother Celestials. It is a pity that “Ah Wo” did not, in his quotation from “The Merchant of Venice,” give the next two lines. They are—“A Daniel come to judgment—yea, a DanieL” Perhaps to make the question palatable to “Ah Wo” with his Chinese sympathies, I may be allowed to read it thus—“A Confucius come to judgment—yea, a Confncius.” I am, &c.. One of the Petitioners.