, 1882-04-21

ment could easily have been dispensed
with. But to The letter. Mr.. john
stone says:
"You remark the American laborer
smokes cigars, which he has perfect
right to do if he pleases, but you say
nothing Of the far more pernicious hab-
it of opium smoking INDUCED in by
your friend from China, or of his gam
bling propensities which he carries so
far that he sometimes CANDLES himself
into slavery. You, as an editor, ought
to know Of the Chinese gambling dens
which are to be found everywhere where
Cinnamon most do congregate; but it
suited your purpose OF those whose ak
you were grinding, to suppress the
above facts when you sent your false,
slanderous article to the press"
Who said tAe American laborer had
no right to smoke cigars? On the other
hand, who dares tell us we have no
right to call the American laborer's at
tention to the fact that he would be
better of, healthier, more Independent
and less liable to injury from the COM
petition of cheap labor if he would
learn to spend less lor cigars, whiskey,
billiards, &c? We have not tried to
make Chinese appear to be saints or
faultless, and we are not ignorant of the
fact that many of them smoke opium,
or that, they gamble, &c. They would
be curious kind of people if they had
no dissolute, dissipated ones among
them. Our friend must not conclude
that an omission to call attention to
these matters betrays either an igno-
rance about them, desire to suppress
them, or that we are grinding anybody's
ak. Such insinuations on his part be-
tray the littleness Of his mind rather
than injure us-and he is welcome to
make them il they ease him any. They
are beneath contempt Does it neces
sarily follow that we know nothing
about any given question because we
may not fully agree with Mr.. Johnstone
or his fellow laborers apout it? His log
ic would seem to imply as much. But
while we are on the point of gambling,
opium smoking, &C., would it not be
well to compare Chinese with Ameri-
cans, since it is insisted upon? During
the Congressional agitation of the Chi
nese question in 1889, a vast amount
of reliable information was collected
from authentic sources by the Senate
committee to whom the noted Fifteen
passenger bill" was referred. Among
other things they found that from
official figures, there are more Euro
peans engaged in selling liquor on the
Pacific coast than there are Chinese
selling OPIUM" and that more money
is lost and won by white gamblers in
San Francisco every single day in the
year than by all the Chinese in Ameri-
Ca" Again, does our friend wish to be
understood that all the opium used in
the dens to which he refers is used by
Chinese? Is he ignorant OF the fact that
Americans patronise those dens largely
in San Francisco? Does he want us to
accuse him Of "suppressing" facts and
grinding somebody's AK? AS to whether
our article was "false' and ISLANDER
GUS" or not, let sensible readers Judge.
No, since the issue is forced, we will
venture guess that the very laborers
at Port Discovery, who are so indig-
nant, gamble on an average twice as
much as the same number of Cinnamon
would. This is an unfortunate point
to raise in attempting to demonstrate
the inferiority of Chinese. We quote
further:
"In enumerating the virtues Of the
Chinese, why did you not mention the
fact that they bring that delectable
disease, the leprosy, with them, and fill
our towns and cities with abandoned
females who are held in a state of slav-
cry, and sometimes murdered, by those
sober, thrifty, docile' friends of yours"
Our government has perfect right to
quarantine against the criminal classes
of Chirfa, or of any other nation, and to
keep their lepers away, just as they
would refuse to allow diseased beef or
pork to be brought here. They do keep
them out as far as possible. If it were
not for the support Of Chinese houses
Of prostitution by white persons in our
towns and cities, those abandoned fe-
males would not be brought here in |
such numbers; so here again our CORES
pondent has picked up weapon that
cuts both ways, But we will not argue
this point. There is no difference Of
opinion upon it. We do not defend
the Chinese in this matter and never