Los Angeles herald., 1910-01-27
SAYS HE CANNOT STAND FOR
ROCKEFELLER CHRISTIANITY

LOS ANGELES, Jan. 22.-GEditor
Herald: Mr.. Liscomb finds me il
logical, and blames me for what he
calls "garbled" quotations from Bishop
Lewis address. He says: Quotations
from the words of Bishop Lewis are
so made as to wholly misrepresent,
etc. Why $50" made? By whom?
Does he accuse ME of garbling? l
have taken the press accounts; I have
not mutilated or twisted the text, but
have quoted the sentences whole.
Wherefore, if there is any misquota-
ton of the bishop, Mr.. l.. should go
after the newspapers, and not throw
reckless charges of garbling and lack
of logic at me. There is an old axiom
worth remembering, You can't be too
careful"
But Mr.. Liscomb is, seemingly, Meth
er very careful nor very clear-sighted;
and withal, 1 fear he lacks a sense of
humor, or he would not have mentioned
Mr.. 'onger. That was rash indeed.
Strongly tempted to cite that very
name myself, l yet refrained; and I
am more that surprised at Mr.. LIS
temerity, in view of happenings so
very recent. Why, the type is hardly
yet pied that printed the catalogue
for an auction sale of loot with which
a certain United States minister came
home loaded like craftsman after an
extra good thing''-loot which was
passed in duty free by the customs au-
thorities of this christian" land on
behalf of it's christian" minister, to be
auctioned off later for some tens of
thousands of dollars-loot from 1.-THE
heather" of Picking; and no mere odd
articles gathered through the years,
but Ceases and dozens" of high class
wares acquired literally lat whole
sale''-straight from stock-precious
pieces of china by the dozen, man
darinS' coats and other silk pieces of
the richest-so many of this, so many
of that-JUST LOOTED MERCHAN-
Disc FROM THE BAZAARS OF
PICKING. So rank was the whole
business that even the staid old
Times (of London), usually somewhat
blind to the sins of the mighty, was
prompted to give it a column of de-
predatory comment.
Further, If Mr.. Liscomb were more
careful and clear-sighted he would
have perceived that my letter was not
so much an objection to the founding
of universities in China as to the ap
parent insinuation running through the
whole discourse that the paramount
value and benefieence of these insti-
tutions was somewhat bound up in
their "Christian" character And that
is not ALL While the lacking of the
name christian" to a university is,
to me, a good deal like talking of
Christian" mathematics or Chris
tan" chemistry, yet it is probable my
letter would never have been written
had these missionary bishops kept the
name of Rockefeller out of it. Also
am but mortal, and a bit weak-stom-
ached at that, and 1 confess that my
gorge rises at Christianity of the
Rockefeller brand.
If Christianity today yet retains any
shred of it's original virtue that we can
with moderately good conscience offer
to the "heathen Chinee" for his souls
betterment, in PHYS name let us at
least present it to him free from the
greasy faint of Standard Oil and all
the skulduggery it stands for. Indeed.
any Christianity that will mix with
Standard Oil is, by that alone, proved
worthless-and worse.
Universities for China? Goodl
"Christian" universities? Not so goodl
Rockefeller Christian universities?
Bad! FRANK f. STONE.