China and the West

August Diefenbacher ist Missionar der Basler Mission in China.

Richard Müssig ist als Arzt und Missionar der Basler Mission in China.

Anna Schmidt ist Missionar der Basler Mission in China.

Heinrich Traut ist als Arzt und Missionar der Basler Mission in China.

Elisabeth Kehrer ist Missionarin der Rheinischen Missionsgesellschaft in China.

Adele Ranke ist Missionarin der Rheinischen Missionsgesellschaft in China.

Georg Weig wird 1925 zum Apostolischen Präfekten in Qingdao ernannt.
1928 wird er zum Apostolischen Vikar und gleichzeitig zum Titularbischof von Antandrus ernannt. Er empfängt die Bischofsweihe.

Die Missionsstationen der Berliner Mission in Qingdao, Jimo und Jiaozhou werden Missionen der Unierten Lutherischen Kirche von Amerika.

Gründung eines deutschen Missionskrankenhauses in Nanxiong.

Errichtung einer Bibelfrauenschule der Berliner Mission in Yingde.

Gründung der Missionsstation der Berliner Mission in Yingde, Übernahme von den amerikanischen Baptisten-Mission.

Demonstrationen gegen Christen in China.

Johanna Dunker ist Missionarin der Berliner Mission am Findelhaus Hong Kong.

Eugen Imhof ist Kaplan in Caoxian, dann in Lincheng.

Gustav Schnetzler ist Vikar in Liangshan (Shandong).

Gustav Schnetzler ist Professor-Stellvertreter in Yanzhou (Shandong).

Russell, Bertrand. The Chinese Amritsar : extracting wealth from blood and tears [ID D28422].
The first necessity in this Chinese crisis is to be clear about the facts, which have, as usual, been distorted by the Press, the telegraph agencies, and the Government. The Professor of the National University of Peking have issued a statement in which they have endeavoured to counteract these distortions ; so has the Chinese Information Bureau ; so have various American missionaries. These accounts are universally believed, and have the effect of rousing humanitarian sentiment against Great Britain. But in England almost the whole Press boycotts the truth.
The trouble began with a strike in a Japanese mill in Shanghai. One of the strikers was shot by the Japanese. [The fuller information given in our leader of last week (i.e., 2 killed, 13 wounded) is, we believe, correct. Ed. New Leader]. Some Chinese students paraded the streets as a protest against this unjustifiable homicide. The students were, as the Professor state, 'armed with nothing more than pamphlets and handbills'. Many of them were arrested by the British police, whereupon the remainder marched to the police station to demand the release of their comrades. Terrified by this unarmed mob of boys and girls, the British authorities ordered the police to fire upon them, killing six and seriously wounding over forty. As the students continued to demonstrate, the police continued to kill them for six days, until 70 were killed and 300 wounded. To justify their action, the British asserted that the mob was armed and advanced with cries of 'kill the foreigner'. If such cries were uttered, it must have been by 'agents provocateur'.
The students who demonstrated were the kind of young men and young women of whom I saw a great deal when in China – eager, enthusiastic, idealistic, unable to believe that justice, however clear, is powerless against brute force. Chinese students are like the best of our sons and daughters, but slightly more naïve as regards the wickedness of the world. Confucius taught that human nature is naturally good, and one of the difficulties of our missionaries has been that they cannot get the Chinese to accept the doctrine of original sin. In this task they are receiving valuable assistance from the British police.
The rest of the Chinese population of Shanghai has resented this massacre, and has been engaged in a gradually growing strike. There is also a beginning of a boycott of British and Japanese goods throughout China. There have been simultaneous disturbances in other places in China. The navies of the world have assembled in Shanghai harbor so as to be ready to shoot more boys and girls.
To understand the situation it is necessary to say a word about the government of Shanghai. Shanghai is a city comparable in size to London, divided into three parts : the Chinese City, the French concession, and the International concession. The last, where the trouble has occurred, is governed by the capitalists exclusively : there is not the faintest hint of democracy. The capitalists are mainly British and Japanese, with a fair sprinkling of Americans. The British police are Sikhs (except the officers), who play the same part as the Cossacks played in Tsarist Russia. Whenever the capitalists of Shanghai get into trouble, warships of all 'civilised' countries hasten to their assistance, as in the present instance.
Where Young Life is Cheap
The right of the foreigners in Shanghai is the right of conquest – the same right that the Germans had in Belgium from 1914 to 1918. They arrived there in the first instance as a result of the Opium War of 1842. There is no justification whatever for their presence, except that the Chines are not a match for the foreigners in military and naval power.
Shanghai is an important industrial centre, and the labour conditions are quite as bad as they were in England 100 years ago. Young children work twelve hours a day for seven days in the week ; sometimes they fall asleep at their work, and roll into the unfenced machinery and are killed. Other children are employed in making matches. They get phosphorous poisoning, and most of them die young. There was a proposal before the Shanghai Municipal Council to introduce some slight regulation of child labour (at present there is none). This came forward during the first days of the present trouble, but fell through because there was no quorum – fortunately, according to the 'Times', as it might have encouraged the strikers. The conditions of adult workers are such as these facts would lead us to expect. They work from 12 to 13 ½ hours a day, and their wages vary from 16s. to 30s. a month. It is to prevent any improvement in these conditions that we are shooting unarmed boys and girls – usually in the back.
The Capitalist Mind
The issue which has been raised has two aspects ; one industrial, the other national, though it is impossible to keep the two quite separate. As regards the industrial aspect, we have the singular fact that in the Treaty Ports the workers have no voice in the government, which is an undisguised tyranny of the rich. Naturally, they use their power as they always do when they have it : to extort wealth out of the blood and tears of their victims. I do not pretend that Chinese capitalists would be more humane than those who are Christians or Japanese ; a capitalist, of whatever country, will be as cruel as is compatible with saving his skin, often more so. But Chinese capitalists would not long be able to call overwhelming military and naval force to their assistance. Left to themselves, the Chinese would develop industrialism very slowly, and would learn to control it by democracy to the extent that it is controlled in the West.
If we do not desire an irresistible growth of anti-foreign feeling in China, we must radically alter our ways. It would be a good thing if the authorities were to discourage white men from beating coolies whenever they are out of temper. They never beat Japanese coolies, however angry they may be ; the sole reason is that Japan has a powerful army and navy.
It would be a good thing to introduce factory legislation on Western lines. It would be a good thing if white men were to practice ordinary courtesy towards the Chinese. But none of these things will be done so long as the foreigners living in the Treaty Ports have the government exclusively in their own hands. We shall not, of course, evacuate the Treaty Ports except as the result of superior force, which the Chinese are likely to display within the next twenty years. But if we wish to delay the militarisation of China as long as possible, we shall be wise to control the foreign residents in Treaty Ports, and compel them to conform to those laws of elementary humanity which have been forced upon capitalists at home. This would, of course, be in the interests of British workers, who suffer by the competition of ill-paid labour. It would not be in the interests of British capitalists, who mean to invest their money abroad, starve out the British workers, and convert England into a country of parks and pheasant preserves.
Assuming that foreigners do not radically alter their policy towards China, it is easy to predict what must happen. Nationalist feeling will grow more and more inflamed, Feng or some other will put himself at the head of it, and with the help of the Soviet Union every Englishman, Frenchman and American in China will be driven into the sea.
Administering 'Justice'
At present, the movements which are taking place are not properly described as 'anti-foreign'. There are Labour movements, aiming at less intolerable conditions. There is the Young China movement, which wants to recover some degree of national independence. But these movements are not inspired by any hatred of individual foreigners. We are told that whatever crimes our countrymen may have committed in Shanghai, we must support them for fear they should be murdered. This is as yet a groundless fear. No policeman employed by Europeans, and only one European has been killed. But if the Europeans persist in claiming the right to shoot innocent Chinese whenever they feel so disposed, they must expect that, sooner or later, the Chinese will begin to think of retaliation. All the British in China who have not actively protested against recent occurrences are morally guilty of murder. They cannot be hanged, because the administration of 'justice' is in their hands. But if, ultimately, they provoke reprisals, which I profoundly hope will not be the case, they cannot be regarded as innocent victims. They have forced themselves, at the point of the bayonet, upon a country which did not want them, and they have used their military strength solely to grow rich by incredibly cruel exploitation.
There has been, ever since the November Revolution in Russia, a curious intertwining of the struggle between Capital and Labour on the one hand, and the struggle between West and East on the other. Russia was formerly dominated by foreign capitalists, and reed herself by an incredibly painful process. India and China are still where Russia was formerly. Western Labour cannot obtain full emancipation while it remains an accomplice in the profitable exploitation of the East by those who are its enemies at home. To talk of Bolshevik propaganda is nonsense : it is Western Governments and capitalists who have done the propaganda for the Bolsheviks. It is they who have persuaded young China that no spark of justice or humanity is to be expected from Western nations. Unless our democracies take hold of the Asiatic question, and insist upon seeing it handled according to Socialist principles, not according to the maxims of a ruthless capitalist imperialism, there is no hope for the white man in Asia, and no way of avoiding a clash which will be more terrible than any that mankind has yet known.

Russell, Bertrand. Deliver China from her bondage : peace or shame for Britain ? [ID D28425].
What has been happening recently in China appears to have taken our governing classes by surprise. 'The Times' on July 3 began a leading article with the words : 'something quite new is happening in China'. Those who have taken the trouble to study modern China are not in any degree surprised by recent events.
The British in China are broadly of three classes, traders, officials and missionaries. Of these the traders are the worst and most ignorant, the missionaries the most humane and the best informed. But all three classes, for varying reasons, have a conservative bias. Traders and officials regret the Manchu Empire, because it was weak externally, but strong enough internally to enforce obedience to concessions made to foreigners. Missionaries cannot be expected to like the fact that Young China, largely from patriotic motives, is becoming more and more anti-Christian. Nevertheless, the missionaries have shown themselves far more liberal in the present crisis, than the traders and officials. This is largely because they have a real contact with the Chinese, and because their activities consist in persuading, not in coercing. The contempt for Young China among the other sections of Anglo-Chinese is astonishing.
Recent events are a continuation of the movement which had a spectacular beginning with the Revolution of 1911, and has since had several notable effects on Chinese politics. It was Young China which caused the Chinese Government not to sign the Versailles Treaty, because that Treaty handed Shantung to Japan, as a reward to the Chinese for their participation in the war. It was Young China which caused the overthrow of the An-Fu (Pro-Japanese) Party in 1920, the method being propaganda by students among the soldiers. It was Young China which stirred up the movement which ended with the restoration of Shantung to China.
Nevertheless, the British in China have continued to speak of Young China with contempt, and to treat with disdain every Chinese who has received and education on Western lines. If our officials could have spared a little time from polo and bridge, they would have discovered the un-wisdom of this attitude. But the upper-class Briton is encased in idleness and superciliousness. With a little sympathy and a little industry we could avoid disaster in Asia ; but there seems no hope that either will be forthcoming so long as we continue to believe that our public schools produce heaven-sent rulers, who must be allowed to rule 'inferior' races.
Mixed with a wholly groundless contempt, both in India and China, is an ever-present fear, which must always exist where a small governing aristocracy oppresses a large population, and especially where the aristocracy is of an alien race. The shooting in Shanghai was obviously unwise from the standpoint of British imperialism ; so was the shooting in Canton. In both cases, terror caused the officials in charge to lose their heads. When they had killed so many Chinese as to rouse resentment throughout the country, they set up the plea of 'British women and children in danger'. On this plea it is urged that we must go on with the bad work. Any suggestion that the Chinese have a point of view is treated as treachery. The Archdeacon of Hong Kong was rated by Sir John Jordan as if he had been a naughty boy, because he was reported (apparently inaccurately to have said that the Chinese students had a serious grievance. Very instructive is the letter sent by the British Consul-General to the Government of Canton the day before the shooting at Shameen (the European quarter of Canton). I quote from the 'Times' of June 25 :
I learn from sources which I have every reason to believe trustworthy that in the course of a patriotic demonstration, arranged for to-morrow, the student element intend to make martyrs of themselves by attacking the bridges leading to Shameen… Any attempt to penetrate into the British Concession of Shameen will be resisted by force of arms… I write in this serious strain so that it may not be said hereafter that brutal Imperialist rifles wantonly massacred unoffending Chinese youth.
Nevertheless the Europeans were accused of firing first, not by the Chinese merely, but by the Canton Christian College. In this country we have not been allowed to see their statement, although it has apparently been published in America. So at least one gathers from the 'Times' of June 27, whose Hong Kong correspondent says that the Vice-President subsequently withdrew his signature.
This shows that the truth is doubtful, but British readers are not allowed to know the evidence on the side of the Chinese.
Evidently the British Government, from the standpoint of British interests, is behaving with the utmost unwisdom both in India and in China. Neither the officials on the spot nor the Cabinet at home seem able to adapt themselves to the post-war situation in Asia. In the Near East, the Treaty of Sèvres and the opposition to Turkish nationalism was a costly blunder, now universally admitted. In Persia, everything we thought we had gained by the war has been lost to America or Russia. Japan has been alienated by our policy since the Washington Conference, and especially by the Singapore base. In India and China, the war was regarded as proving the moral bankruptcy of European civilization, and the prestige of the white man was destroyed. Amritsar, and its counterparts in China, have failed to restore belief in our moral superiority.
If we are to avoid a conflict, almost sure to end in defeat, there is nothing for it but to abate our Imperial pride and treat with Indians and Chinese on equal terms. The late Mr. Das made a conciliatory overture, to which we have made no response, and it seems that we shall persist in this ungraciousness. This is madness. The methods of Clive and Warren Hastings are not suited to our age, but our Conservatives have learned nothing during the last one hundred and fifty years. Race pride and caste pride are greater obstacles to friendly relations with Asian than are the economic motives of exploitation. Very soon we shall have no chance to exploit either India or China, unless we learn to treat both countries with less haughtiness.
It is remarkable, and very serious from a British point of view, that the present agitation in China is directed especially against the British. Although the trouble began in a Japanese mill, the Governmental action that has been taken has been mainly British ; the Japanese, since the Washington Conference, have been becoming increasingly liberal, and have not shown themselves anxious to take stringent action in China. With Japan neutral and Russia hostile, the British have no chance of succeeding in a high-handed policy towards China. After giving an example of brutality, they will have to retire covered with shame – unless, at this late date, wiser counsels should prevail.
So much for the folly of our Government's policy. But even if this policy could be successful, it would still deserve the severest condemnation. Take first the industrial issue. It is pretended by official apologists that the British mills are better than others, and that British employers are longing to introduce humane Factory Acts, but cannot get the Chinese to agree. But, as Mr. C.R. Buxton points out in the 'Times' (July 3), the very largest number of children under twelve employed in any one mill in Shanghai are employed in a British mill. The produce of the Shanghai mills competes with Lancashire, and the bad industrial conditions are diametrically opposed to the interests of British Labour.
A have been taken to task for stating that young China regards the industrial issue as important. I repeat, with the utmost emphasis, that it is regarded as of the utmost importance. The great majority of Chinese students are Socialists, and are keenly alive to the evils of capitalism. They do not talk freely to those whom they regard as representatives or agents of foreign Capitalism, and these men often remain ignorant of the real views of their pupils. But in China opposition to Capitalism is naturally bound up with opposition to foreign domination, since it is the foreigner who is forcing capitalist exploitation upon the Chinese.
To treat Chinese nationalism as a crime is both ridiculous and short-sighted. For the last hundred years China has been weak, and white men have profited by her weakness to inflict intolerable humiliations. But China's weakness was merely governmental : the people are vigorous, industrious, patient and more numerous than those of any other country ; moreover, they possess abundance of raw materials. They have therefore every non-political element of strength. The one thing hitherto lacking si being supplied by foreign oppression.
China is demanding only what every independent country possesses already ; the Japanese at one time suffered the same disabilities, but secured their rights by creating a strong army and navy. Is this the only argument to which our Government will listen ? If so, it is likely before long to be forthcoming. Russia has freed herself from economic bondage to the West ; China inevitably will do, and will at the same time acquire full political liberty. With Russia and China pointing the way, India will find a method of emancipation from British rule. It is just that these things should happen, and it is the interests of mankind ; moreover, whether we oppose them or not, they will happen. Would it not be better to help them to take place peacefully, rather than to offer a resistance which must be costly, shameful, and in the end futile ?

Russell, Bertrand. Fair play for the Chinese [ID D28421].
[This very distinguished man of science spent some time in China ; he writes about it not only with special sympathy, but with special knowledge].
I hope your readers are not yet tired of the Chinese question. As I have often pointed out before, the truth about any Chinese occurrence cannot be ascertained until the mail arrives ; telegraphic news is always propaganda. Who could have guessed, from what was telegraphed about the Shanghai shooting, that 30 British missionaries had published a protest, saying among other things : - 'We desire to express our intense regret that these incidents should have occurred. We should go further. We recognize that the serious situation evoked is largely due to underlying racial animosities. We, as Britons. Admit that we have a large share of blame in the matter'.
To issue this statement must have required great courage – more than can be realized by anyone who has never lived in a small British community among oppressed population.
The Chinese Information Bureau has issued valuable corrections of British misstatements ; but even when its facts are drawn from the China Year Book (a British enterprise) they are regarded as biased ex parte pleading. For instance, attempts are made to give the impression that the International Settlement in Shanghai is mainly inhabited by non-Chinese. The facts are that the foreign population of the Settlement is 23,307 and the Chinese population 763,401. (The total population of Shanghai is close on two millions).
The foreigners alone have a vote for the Shanghai Municipal Council, which behaves as if it were a sovereign State, and has recently refused to acknowledge even the authority of the Diplomatic Body. It has nine members – six British, two Americans, and one Japanese. This explains why the Chinese hold the British specially responsible in Shanghai.
The American Government is anxious to use the Conference which was promised at Washington in 1921 for the purpose of seeking remedies for this state of affairs. The British Government wants to get the Conference indefinitely postponed, or, if America insists upon its being held, to have it confined to the one question of tariff revision.
Two Demands :
Two quite practicable demands should be made by our Government :
(1) The holding of an impartial judicial inquiry into the Shanghai shooting.
On this matter the British action is condemned, not only by the unanimous opinion of China, but by many British missionaries, practically all foreign missionaries, the diplomatic body, and the unanimous verdict of the non-British world. Our Government should undertake that, if an partial tribunal condemns the action of any Shanghai officials, he shall be punished.
(2) The holding of the Conference demanded by America, with the right to investigate the whole question of the position of foreigners in China.
Generally we ought to give it to be understood that we shall adapt our Chinese policy to that of America, which has been far more liberal than ours. This would also have the effect of improving our relations with America. Our heaven-sent diplomats are too ignorant to know how serious is the bad effect which such incidents have upon the attitude of Americans towards us.
India is the key to most of our crimes in China. We wish to keep up the white man's prestige, and imagine that that can best be done by wanton homicide. But modern China is not that of the Manchu Emperors, and our methods are out of date.

Russell, Bertrand. British policy in China [ID D28328].
The Chinese situation becomes, from the British point of view, more grave every day. In the present article, I shall deal only with immediate issues and immediate palliatives ; ultimate solutions are impossible in the present atmosphere.
The gravity of the situation is made evident by a long leader in the 'Times' of July 11th, apparently expressing the views of the Foreign Office. We are told in this article that we must not mind dissociating ourselves from the other Powers concerned by adopting a more vigorous policy, and that 'there is nothing in international affairs so immediately important as this menace in China'. Also that 'it has become obviously necessary to assure our naval strength in the Pacific, since the Chinese crisis is only a prelude to further complications in which British interests in the Pacific are vitally concerned. The present state of affairs in The Far East has an intimate connection with the discussion of the cruiser programme'. These words must be taken to mean that our Government contemplates fighting China and Russia simultaneously without securing any allies. I wish to suggest certain reasons for regarding this as an undesirable policy, from the standpoint of British interests ; also to point out the measures we must adopt if we wish to preserve our China trade.
First : any action in China which is to have any prospect of success must be international : the Consortium Powers, Great Britain, France, America, and Japan, must be united. If we take isolated action at the present moment, America and France will stand aloof, as their official acts already prove. Japan is likely to be actively hostile, since any increase in the influence of a white Power in China is against Japan's vital interests. Before the Washington Conference, we might have appealed to the Anglo-Japanese Alliance ; since that date, we have attempted to replace it by an Anglo-American Entente. To secure this end, we funded the debt to American and created the Irish Free State. Our Government seems, however, to have failed to realize that a non-imperialist policy in China was another requisite of American friendship. An Japanese friendship has, of course, been rendered impossible by Singapore. Indeed, since the evacuation of Vladivstock, the Japanese have shown an increasing tendency to co-operation with the Soviet Government in Chinese affairs. Considering that the present trouble arose from out attempt to protect Japanese employers from the just fury of their employees, Japan's recent aloofness has been remarkable.
The Soviet Government, meanwhile, is prepared to support Chinese resistance with all its strength. In these circumstances, any action we may take in China must fail. Chinese anarchy is an asset to China, since the occupation of Peking would not compel the Chinese to negotiate, and any treaty concluded by the Peking Government might be repudiated in the Province. We cannot conquer China, and we cannot compel the Chinese to trade with us. Force, therefore, offers no solution of our difficulties.
But if we are not to use force, we must try to understand the issues, and to see them as they appear both to the Chinese and to other white Power. Here there are two questions which must be kept separate : first, the narrow and definite question of the Shanghai shooting ; secondly, the general question of what the Chinese regard as their grievances under the Treaties.
With regard to the Shanghai shooting, some of the facts are still in debate, others are now generally admitted. The following facts are not in dispute : the crowd outside the police station was unarmed ; no notice was given of the intention to fire upon them ; the order to fire was given in English, and therefore not understood by most of the crowd ; the firing began ten seconds after the order was given ; many of those who were hit were shot in the back, showing that they were trying to disperse, but were not given time to do so. Other crowds were fired upon during the next six days. Altogether about seventy people were killed, with a proportionate number of wounded. Every non-British person, and almost every British missionary, who has spoken about the affair has pronounced that the British authorities were not justified in their action. For example, Dr. J.W. Cline, formerly head of the missionary college at Soochow, who saw the whole thing, says : 'I was not expecting to see the police fire, was shocked when they did fire, and have been sorry about it ever since'. According to the French and Japanese newspapers, the commission of the diplomatic body which inquired into the matter recommended that the American Chairman of the Shanghai Municipal Council should be dismissed ('Times', July 11th). The incident aroused unprecedented indignation throughout China, and united all parties in that usually disunited country – not only the partisans of the Bolsheviks, but even the most conservative sections. The strength of popular feeling is shown by the fact that Chang Tso-lin dare not act, though his rival Feng is profiting by the situation.
It seems obvious that, if we are to recover any reputation for just dealing, not only with the Chinese, but with the rest of the world, we must agree to have this whole incident investigated by an impartial judicial tribunal, and to act upon its findings. A mistake was committed by an official in a state of nerves – at least this is the view of everybody except the British. If this view proves on investigation to be correct, the official in question ought not to be supported by the Government if it is not to become an accomplice. This is so evident that I cannot understand why British public opinion has not forced our Government to act in the only reasonable way.
The cry of Bolshevism has been very much overdone. Such influence as the Bolsheviks possess in China is not due to their communism, for very few Chinese are communists in the economic sense, and the country is obviously unsuited for such a régime. The influence of the Bolsheviks throughout Asia is due to the fact that they appear (rightly or wrongly) as champions against Western oppression. The Chinese indignation at the Shanghai shooting was natural and spontaneous, and had nothing to do with Bolshevism.
But, we say, why is the indignation directed specially against us ? Are not other Powers also responsible ! The answer is that the International Settlement in Shanghai is, in fact, governed by the British. The governing body is the Municipal Council, elected by the foreign ratepayers. (The Chinese are allowed to pay rates, but do not thereby acquire a vote). The Municipal Council consists of six British, two Americans, and one Japanese ; the Secretary, who has the executive power, is also British. Thus the responsibility for what happens in the International Settlement rests with the British.
Those who wish to see how the matter appears to eminent Chinese intellectuals who are by no means Bolsheviks should obtain a little pamphlet called 'China's case', published by the Union of Chinese Associations in Great Britain, and written by four of the leading men in the Chinese academic world – men as learned, as widely travelled, as worthy of scientific respect, as any to be found in England. (I speak from personal knowledge). To attribute what they say to Bolshevik influence is as absurd as it would be to attribute Mr. Keynes's 'Economic Consequences of the Peace' to that cause.
On the wider issues, such as extra-territoriality, it is not necessary to come to any precipitate decision. At the Washington Conference it was arranged there should be a Conference to consider tariff revision, &c. ; the American Government is urging that this Conference must be no longer delayed, and many people have suggested that its scope should be widened. To both these proposals our Government ought to agree. And, speaking broadly, it ought to adapt its Chinese policy to that of America, and to state with emphasis that it means to do so. The policy of America in China has always been more liberal than that of the European Powers. If we are to retain any position in China, it has become necessary for us to adopt the principles which have guided the American Government. And this course would also greatly improve our relations with America.
Finally, I wish to say a word about the extreme gravity of the issue. A war with Russia about China, which is apparently in contemplation, would be strongly opposed by organized Labour in this country, and would almost infallibly lead to defeat. In our difficulties Indian nationalism would see its opportunity. The Empire would collapse in disgrace, and a large part of our population would die of hunger, probably after making an attempt at revolution. The present Government fails to realize that our position in the world is not what it was before the war. Being no longer so strong as we were, it has become important for us to avoid such injustice and tyranny as will rouse the disgust of the civilized world. These are motives of self-interest. Of the further motives which must appeal to every person possessed of the faintest feeling of honour or humanity I say nothing.