NELSON YOUNG MEN'S CHRICTIAN ASSOCIATION.

Colonist, Volume XXII, Issue 2551, 20 May 1879, Page 3

NELSON YOUNG MEN'S CHRICTIAN ASSOCIATION.

DußiNCr a recent debate on the _ Chinese question, at a meeting of the debating class in connection with the above Association, one of the members produced the following arguments against, the introduction;. of the Celestials into this- Colony i.rr-5 y.«^. <■*'? The opener of this debate referred to the Chintse question as an international one; I admit it because it has referenoe to the intercourse of nations, hot I would argue that it is also _ national one, While fit .is well to. take broad and liberal views on general ! questions, circumstances sometimes compel us to j narrow some questions down so that they become purely national, and must bs looked at from a national point of view.- We are living in New Zealand, and our first duty is to our neighbors and fellow colonists,' and our first thought ought to be how will it affect them. My opponent makes muohof the tr_aty obligations of Great Britain, and enlarges therefore upon the injustice of refusing permission to the Chinese to come and go as the please. But where is. the analogy P Beoause England in 1842 and 1856 forced upon the Chinese at the point of the bayonet, what my opponent terms an unjust treaty, are we in New Zealand in 1879 forced to admit hordes of immoral Chinese bachelors to compete in our labor mtrket, to demoralise by eiample our upgrowing • youth, to spread contagion in our comparatively, healthy oities. I say a thousand times, no! Sir, my worthy friend quotes Soripture, and speaks glowingly of the doctrine of brotherly love as taught by the greatest of all: teachers. I yield to no man in my admiration of thejdoctrines taught by Christ. Liberty, equality, and fraternity have so much of my sympathy that I have been frequently mistaken for an ardent Republican. But, alas for these doctrines, unless men are imbued with the spirit of Him who taught them, they are impr-ftioable of application. Do we not see this illustrated every day P Am lat liberty to turn out all the filth of my bouse,: and allow it to aooumulate in my back yard—certainly not. I can only: be allowed liberty to do as I like with mine own as long as it interferes not with the well being of my neighbor. Who is my brother? No doubt all mankind are my brethren, but is there not a brotherhood in a more restricted sense—undoubtedly? Look at those little cottages dotting the hillsides and valleys of our oities. Are hot the .occupants of-these our brethren P Is our brotherhood such, that while it holds out the right hand of welcome to men who come here for no other purpose than to make money that they may go back to their own country, and live in comparative luxury, •nd says to the oooupants of those cottages, if you cannot compete with these rice eating, hut crouching bachelors you must oome down from your snug little cot, you must give, up your flesh eating and your white wbeatea bread, and adopt their style of living. I say such brotherly love deserves the brand of infamy. Sir, we have been boasting that in our nineteenth century we have made some progress in the art and soienoe of living well. We can compare the rural population: of England with those of the past century; and can say that they are now bettor fed, better; clothed, better housed, and better educated than they, were in the past. We can say the same of the industrious artisans in the tbwb. We can compere the position of the working man in Nsw Zealand with those of England, and say whether there is mark-d improvement for the better. > dan any m»n with any claim to the name of Christian or Philanthropist, wish it were otherwise. It can only be men whose heads are filled with false ideas of liberty, or men determined to get rich at all hai_rd that would do anything to reverse ; it. Would not the free • admission of Chinese labor do this most undoubtedly.. We have boasted thatEogland spent twenty millions to free the slaves of the West Indies, and that her persistent efforts and example have well nigh swept that curse from the face of the '. earth. Are we, in New Zealand, going to allow the r_ver»-l of that polioy? We well know that the product of the introduction of South Bea island labor into Queensland was a species of slavery. -Would the Chinese fare better? I am told already that if you want Chinese/ labor, you must. apply to the Chinese merohant, and he will undertake to obtain them. Now that kidnapping is not resorted to, how know we that criminals are hot imported by diverse engagements with the Chinese Government f we cannot know. Then are we not right if we refuse to receive immigrants, over whom we bare never had: the slightest control. Was Tasmania right ? Was New South Wales right in their refusal to reoeive the criminal population of England P Undoubtedly. Should we be right in refusing to reoeive the able bodied paupers of England, if they ohoie to send them? Undoubtedly. Then I say we have just as undoubtedly the right to receive what may be the soum and offsaouiing of China. You may ball them industrious if you please.' I maintain that their criminality and sensuality counterbalance all their industry. Men that are noted as clever thieves, as professional gamblers, as filthy sensualists, are not: the people that are best fitted for our neighbors, and are • men,;industrious as 'they may be, we can do' very well without. Sir, it is the duty of the Legislature to pass suoh laws that will baao effectual bar to their coming, and thus I think may be by stringent laws and heavy fines upon those who are the n_raos of bringing them. I do not blame the Chinese, themselves for coming j I do not blame the shipcoasters so much for bringing them j but I do blame with nay whole soul those villainous capitalists, who, destitute, of love of country, destitute of all human feeling, are ende_voring by the importation of Chinese labor to take the bread out of the mouths' of the wives and families of tbe sons of toil, just for the sake of adding to their already illgottea gain. Sir, such men are a curse to any country in which they live. And to them must be charged all the riots and bloodshedding that is sure to take place if their evil course is persisted in. Sir, I could go on for, yes, another half-hour, and prove that the introduction'' of Chinese labor 'doss not benefit capitalists generally, for not only would they oast the working man, but they would ruin the email traders. As a consequence they would oreep into mercantile positiop, and, if manhood suffrage became law, what, would; hinder them from; monopolising., the, Government. ' But I think I have said enough to convince you that Chinese immigration would be detrimental to the best interests of New Zealand, and therefore it must be restricted.- . - : >. ..;■;.