WHAT WE HAVE DONE FOR CHINA.

Hokitika Guardian, 25 June 1927, Page 4

WHAT WE HAVE DONE FOR CHINA.

(By SIB SIDNEY LOW in the “Daily Mail.”)

Labour politicians and various othei persons who suppose themselves to he large-minded and liberal, are curiously indulgent to the pretensions of tho denationalised CTtine.se Nationalists. ■Even “moderates" like Mr Ramsay MacDonald, who admit that we must protect our folks in the Concessions area, wish that we could give them till free passages to Europe. Then China, released f <•••»« the foreign incubus, would settle it- own destinies in a peaceable and orderly fashion, and we should have atoned lor our previous wrong-doing in torcing the cowed ’Celestials to receive our nationals. Even Sir Austen Chamberlain has occasionally spoken as il the mere existence of the European settlements were an injury for which we should make reparation. This attitude is based on a compete misconception of tho Lifts. Me arc not called upon to stand in a u bill sheet because of our past dealings with China, nor need we apologise to the Chinese. Wo hear a good deal about ( hinCsc civilisation and the respect wo owe to it. Much ot this talk is based (,u ill-informed sentiment and had history. The old Chinese civilisation has been falling to pieces lor centuries. When we came into political contact with it just 130 years ago China was misgoverned by u stupid and effete Manehu oligarchy who 'were almost as much foreigners to the mass of the people as ourselves. | AY hat China needed was an opening to the light, with opportunities for loreign trade, so as to utilise her vast resources; and emigration abroad to relieve her congested population. Great Britain, with some assistance from, France and other M e-tern Ruw- ■ ors. gave the Chinese what the more intelligent of them were anxious to cjbtaiu. M"o could not open a regular commerce unless our traders were j protected against the exactions ol a corrupt officialdom too treble to maintain order. So we made treaties under which our merchants and hauliers built up splendid Western cities beside the native towns. | There may have been a certain high-handedness about our proceedings when vigorous statesmen like Palmerston bad to deal with the ignorant and conceited representatives j of the Manehu Court ; but the gen- ' era I results were i xtremely beneficial !to China. A great overseas trade was developed in tho sale and progressive areas oj the treaty ports, j 11’ our own mnnulaetiirors made : money by sending cotton goods and | hardware to China, our shipowners oii- ! aided the Chinese to gel their tea. I silks, rice, cereals, and other commodities all over the world. That ! trade depend- upon the Concessions. | if they go it will decline, anil pro:'liable di-appear. Our opening of China led to the J diffusion of the Chinese population, i They were able to push out all round the Pacific and Indian Oceans and I farther afield. They have settled, made a living, and sometimes amassed wealth in Further India. Malaya. Ceylon, tho Fniled States, Canada. Australia, and Central America. I T here are more Chinese under the [ British Hag in Singapore than there ■ are English in the whole of China : some rich, many prosperous, ail enjoying the same freedom, protection, and security as other residents. True, thev are subject to British law. whereas tho British in China are not ' .subject to Chinese law. I But the British would willingly al-

low themselves to he placed in that

position if thev could rely on an in-

corrupt' judiciary and an efiie.ient. relice; which things Chinese “civil’sation” has not provided for a long time past and seems very unlikely to provide for a long time to collie.