THE Evening Star. PUBLISHED DAILY AT FOUR O'CLOCK P.M. Returrexi. THURSDAY, JANUARY 30, 1879.

Thames Star, Volume X, Issue 3105, 30 January 1879, Page 2

THE Evening Star. PUBLISHED DAILY AT FOUR O'CLOCK P.M. Returrexi. THURSDAY, JANUARY 30, 1879.

We have received from the publisher, Mr F. F. Bailliere, Melbourne, a pamphlet entitled " The Chinese Question in Australia— 1878-1879; edited by L. Kong Meng, Cheok Hong Cheong, and Louis Ah Mouey." (What these highly respectable gentlemen had to do with the writing of the pamphlet, or what their editorial duties consisted of we are unable to say, but it probably was limited to making liberal remuneration to the gentleman who has in the brochure made out such a good case for the Chinese from a celestial view point. (The writer or editors commence with reminding the people of the Colonies of the circumstances under which emigration from China commenced. It is pointed out that until England disturbed the " contented isolation" of China and " extorted" a treaty of commerce from the Emperor, the Chinese were living in blissful ignorance of what was going on in the world of the outer barbarians. This was in 1842, and the example of England was followed by other Western European Nations, and subsequently by the United Stales. A second treaty made in 1860 by England and France with China, our editors point out, guaranteed the people of both nations "the utmost freedom of ingress and egress, and reciprocally bestowed upon the Chinese a similar freedom as regards the territories of France and of the British Empire." The " Burlingame Treaty" with the United States is also cited to show that the Chinese have right on their side in scattering themselves over the States of America. They beg especially to impress upon readers that " this outflow of population was never sought for by us." There is much more matter of a kind that may be characterised as "special pleading " for the Chinese. We are reminded of what our missionaries taught in China, and bow the teachings of the New Testament harmonise with the sentiment promulgated by the great Confucius and the lesser Mencius; how little, in the experience of Chinamen, the practices of Englishmen accord with their precepts and

professions. In fact, a great deal is said which could easily be refuted, but the arguments all lead up to one point—that under existing international treaties the Chinese are free to come and go throughout all British possessions and to be free of any restrictive or special legislation. Though this is the aim of the editors, they have not made out a good case, as they have had to keep back one feature of the Treaties, namely, that only certain ports in China are open to English commerce, while they c!aim free access to any British or British Colonial community, with rights of citizenship, They make a great feature of an assault made upon Chinamen at the Buckland, on the Ovens, by some reckless diggers. How many massacres have been perpetrated on Europeans in China—on peaceful travellers since these boasted treaties were signed P Will Kong Meng and his co-litterateurs, who show such an extensive acquaintance with English books, enlighten us P These exaggerated instances of lawlessness prevailing in the colonies are beside the question. Kong Meng and his coadjutors have overstepped the mark. They have overdone the thing, and their pamphlet will really serve to attract a thoughtful consideration to the great Chinese question, which we must now leave for the present. '