A PARTING MESSAGE.

To the Editor of

"THE CHINESE RECORDER."

Shanghai, 16th June, 1894. DEAR SIR: On the eve of departure from China I desire to be allowed, through your columns, to thank the missionaries who have given me so hearty a welcome and such invaluable assistance wherever I have been, and to make known to them and to those whom it has not been my privilege to meet the result of my mission.

My objects in coming to China. were three-fold: 1. To obtain on the spot more accurate information as to the nature and extent of the evils flowing from opium than it was possible to obtain at home. 2. To make known to the missionaries and native Christians, so far as it might be possible for me to visit them, the work in which we are engaged in England on behalf of China, in order that they might be able more intelligently to help us by their sympathy and prayers. 3. To ascertain from the highest Chinese officials whether they still entertain their former expressed hostility to the opium traffic, and in that case to obtain their views as to the best way in which we can help them to get rid of it. I go home in the thankful conviction that, by "the good hand of ny God upon me," and in answer to the prayers of many of His children in the United Kingdom, in India, and in China itself, my mission has been successful in each of these particulars. I need only here refer to the last.

On the 24th April I obtained, through the kind help of Dr. Mackay, an interview with the well known Taotai of Wuchang, Tsai Sih-ying, who acts as foreign secre

tary to the Viceroy Chang Chihtung. At this interview the Rev. Dr. Griffith John, the Rev. J. S. Adams, and Dr. Mackay were also present. The result was that Mr. Tsai wrote me a letter the following day expressing the Viceroy's agreement with the view of the Anti-Opium Society that the restriction or abolition of the use of opium would be a benefit to his fellow-countrymen, and His Excellency's opinion "that the prohibition of producing opium in India would go a long way towards this beneficial aim." The letter stated that the Viceroy, whilst unable to give an authoritative opinion on the steps China might afterwards take in the same direction" would, if his advice were asked by the Imperial Government, give it in favour of the ends which had been explained to Mr. Tsai in the interview.

The proposal verbally put before Mr. Tsai, and which was subsequently embodied in a formal "statement" presented to the Tsung-li Yamên, was based on suggestions made by Chinese statesmen. It was to the effect that the opium trade and the growth of the poppy in China should be brought to an end by concurrent action in India and China, gradually reducing the area of poppy growth over a period of ten years.

On the 2nd June, kindly accompanied by the Rev. Dr. Blodget as interpreter, I was favoured with an audience at the Tsung-li Yamên, Peking, obtained through the valued help of Dr. Dudgeon. I understand that this is the first occasion which the Tsung-li Yamên has ever received a nonofficial foreigner. The Minister in attendance was His Excellency Chang Yin-hwan, Vice-President of the Board of Revenue, and former

on

ly Chinese Minister at Washing ton. He gave me very satisfactory assurances as to China's continued hostility to the opium traffic. He said that China regarded herself as bound by the treaty of Tientsin to admit opium from India, and, whilst expressing inability to make any positive statement as to what measures the government would take to stop the consumption of opium if the import ceased, he recommended that we should endeavour to put an end to the import from India as the best mode of helping China to put down the use of opium.

On the 11th of June, at Tientsin, I was favoured with an interview by the Viceroy Li Hung-chang, kindly arranged by Mr. C. B. Vice-Consul, Tenney, American

who accompanied me. Mr. Lo Fêng-lo acted as interpreter. The Viceroy was as emphatic with regard to China's hostility to opium

He as the two other Ministers. also advised that the stoppage of the import of Indian opium into China should be the object of our agitation. He gave me the most explicit assurance that if England ceased sending poison to China the Chinese government would certainly take measures to prevent its people from providing poison for themselves. He promised to write me a letter to London stating his views fully.

The result of the three interviews is to myself extremely satisfactory. Whilst the cautious procedure that I had suggested is not approved by the Chinese ministers, who probably feel that it would be impracticable to devise a plan of gradual suppression in China, they all ask for the much more drastic measure of immediate stoppage of the import from India. I entertain great hope that, in the present condition of public opinion in the United Kingdom, this request, coming as it does from the most authoritative exponents of Chinese

official opinion, will be granted; indeed it is hard to see how it can be refused, seeing that the statesmen of both parties in England have committed themselves publicly to the position that China has only to ask for the suppression of the trade, and it will at once be accorded. Still our dependence will, I trust, never be placed on popular sentiment or on official declarations, but on Him who works in His own way to bring about His purposes of love towards the nations of the earth.

I ask your missionary readers to make known to the Chinese Christians who have been joining in the prayer that these interviews might be accorded me, and that the result might be satisfactory, how graciously our prayer-hearing God has listened to their cry, so that they may join in thanksAnd I would giving to His name.

further ask that both missionaries and native Christians will continue instant in prayer that the workers in this cause may be guided in all their future movements, and that China may speedily be delivered from the curse of the opium traffic. Yours truly,

JOSEPH G. ALEXANDER,

Among them resides a Tao-sz, who seems to have great influence over his neighbors. Last autumn the youth above mentioned, on a dare from other youths, took a small public idol in his hands, turned it upside down and threw dirt in its face. This made a little talk, and the Tao-sz offered to perform purifying ceremonies if the youth would pay him 400 cash. This

he refused to do. Last winter a plague carried off a number of cattle, and the Tao-sz gave a response by the Kiang-ki, or Chinese planchette, as from the idol, to the effect that turning him upside down had confused his mind, and throwing dirt in his eyes had blinded him, and he had fumbled on to the cattle. The youth was fined ten taels silver. When we visited there in March some visited there in March immediately showed signs of anger at our coming, but nothing would probably have transpired had not the Tao-sz gone round and stirred

some

up the the people. Somehow the people of all this region have been deluded into the belief that we can see into the ground, and that the object of our tours is to spy things in the earth and carry them off to the great damage of the "Feng-shuei". The fact that Mrs. W. carried a hand bag, and the little incident of her plucking a twig from an evergreen tree, were magnified into proof of our designs on their "Pao-pei Tung-si". A crowd, said to number two hundred, were gathered at the ancestral temple, and gave the youth a pounding -fortunately not inflicting serious injury-and then the gong was beaten, and they came for us. Α few furious ones talked of killing, and one man harangued the crowd in favor of seizing and holding us for heavy ransom, but the main portion demanded only that we leave at once. As it was now dark, in a wild mountain region, and five miles to the nearest tavern, * Treasures.

we mildly but persistently protested against such a demand. The twig was restored to them, and after perhaps half an hour's besiegement we were left alone. The means used of God for dispersing the mob were a singular illustration of their credulity. There were two villages about a quarter of a mile apart; we were at the smaller one, and a few men from the larger one were present, and they were on the point of going to beat the gong and bring reinforcements from their village, when a man who was carrying luggage for us told them that I was of high rank Interviewing the magistrate greater by three grades," and they had better keep out of the muss. They took his advice, and at this the crowd began to get alarmed, and gradually melted away. In this "Demetrius and "Simon Magus" combined we find one source of the hostility of the Chinese to us and our work.

The hostility of the literati is often not unlike that of the Tao-sz mentioned above. Some years ago a Consul at Foochow, when in correspondence with the Provincial Governor in regard to a case of hostile interference with missionaries, put the question to him, "Why is it that the literati are so hostile to the missionaries"? He replied that the scholars were accustomed to regard the common people almost as their beasts of burden, and to be treated with the greatest respect by them, but that just so soon as a man embraced Christianity he ceased to reverence the literati'. There is truth in this, and some of the blame of it may lie with us. But the literati themselves are mainly the ones at fault. They possess neither the intelligence nor the morals necessary to command the respect of any one whose heart has been renewed by the Holy Spirit. I have had the opportunity to hear often the talks of a converted

Sieu-ts'ai addressed to heathen audiences, and in showing up to them the delusions under which they are laboring he makes some queer confessions. But it is a fact observable the world over that the more men are intrinsically undeserving of respect the more strenuously they cling to those outward distinctions of rank, &c., which among the unregenerate command respect, regardless of worth. But no theory will adequately account for the slanders against us and hostility to us, that leaves Satan out of the account; as well leave the moon out of account in explaining the tides. J. E. WALKER.

He then quietly placed the Bible on the desk saying: "Very glad you come this side. You no kick boy!"

That boy had evidently at some time been near Christian influence with opportunity of observing people who read their Bibles, and his observations had been of such a character as to give him confidence in assuming that a person who carried a Bible and read it would not kick boy.

Not having been long in China his remark surprised me, but I also felt real pleased. What others may think I do not know, but for my own part, if that boy's statement was not a testimony, well then I never heard one.

A. L. B.

ENCOURAGING WORDS.

To the Editor of

"THE CHINESE RECORDER."

In the early part of last year I joined a vessel at Shanghai as second officer, and after having found my room proceeded, with the assistance of the mess-room boy, to unpack my chest. Whilst the boy arranged clothes, etc., I was busy tacking up some texts, firmly believing that the best thing to do first on joining a new ship. Whilst thus engaged the boy drew my attention by exclaiming: "You read him"? Turning round I found he had just unpacked my Bible. "Yes," I replied, "I read him."

A CORRECTION.

To the Editor of

"THE CHINESE RECORDER." DEAR SIR: I have only just had brought to my attention the review by D. N. L. of Mr. Jackson's book on Philippians noticed in the March number. I would like to make a remark or two on the review. D. N. L. regrets a lack of homiletical suggestions in the book, because he thinks all commentaries in China should have them. This is amusing. The title of the book reviewed is Exegetical Notes, and the book is criticised, because it does not contain something else. I think it is a credit to the book that it sticks to its subject. It is a book of exegetical notes, and not of everything else that might be brought, regardless of the title, within the covers of a book.

The next point shows that D. N. L. has not read the book he criticises. He says that Ling-hwen for soul is discarded. On a single leaf I noticed the very term several times. Anyone who reads the book will see that Ling-hwen is used frequently for soul. Then D. N. L.

narrow.

proceeds to say that the author is Let the reviewer read the book before passing such severe opinions.

The author is also reproved for teaching the old heresy (!) of trichotomy. Should not spirit and soul be distinguished in Chinese? We have the separate words in English, and in the Greek πνεύμα and ψυχή, and in Chinese Shen and Ling-hwen. Are the soul and spirit the same? If so what is the meaning of Heb. iv., 12? We have there several fine distinctions, but real ones nevertheless. Paul is not uselessly tautological. I. Thes. v., 23 shows the same distinction. But I will not discuss this theory with D. N. L., but simply state that Mr. Jackson is following in apostolical footsteps when he uses Shen and Ling when for spirit and soul. If D. N. L. has a quarrel it is not with Mr. Jackson but with Paul.

The comment to i., 9, D. N. L. has evidently not understood. I cannot get any meaning out of his translation. Will D. N. L. deny that love exists as sence? Will he deny that God is love? His comment would show that he had not grasped the situation.

an es

In the matter of the last paragraph we have an expression of D. N. L.'s opinion and choice. It differs from that of Mr. Jackson's, but one may be as good as the other.

It is a pity that the book under notice has not been reviewed; it deserves a review, and criticism based on a knowledge of the book will be welcomed. Such a note as is presented to us by D. N. L. is worthless and conveys false impres

sions.

I am, Sir,

Yours sincerely,

EDWARD S. LITTLE,

IN MEMORIAM.

To the Editor of

"THE CHINESE RECORDER." London Mission, Wuchang, May 29, 1894. DEAR SIR: Many of the readers of the RECORDER will have noticed in last month's issue the notice both of the marriage and of the death of my brother, the late Mr. James Walford Hart, of the London Mission, Chung-king. Although his time of service in China was but short there are many who will remember him, both out here in China and at home in England.

Before he left home for the foreign mission field he had been practising for some time in London as a solicitor. He was in the habit of devoting all his spare time to work for Christ, and was never happier than when seeking to bring some of the lost ones for whom the Saviour died to know of His love and His salvation.

His faithfulness to his Master was a strong characteristic feature in his Christian life.

Not only when engaged in actual mission work but also when busy with the duties of his profession did he recognize the claims of Christ as the Lord of all his talents and of all his time. More than one client that dealt with him will remember the earnest words, tender but firm, that were spoken to him by my brother in some convenient season chosen for the purpose.

Two or three years ago he gave up a promising opening in his profession as he wanted to keep himself free for evangelistic work, and especially for work in the foreign field, and when at last the way was made clear he offered himself to the London Missionary Society for work in China.

In the autumn of 1892 he was sent out to Chung-king, and arrived there after a ship wreck, which cost