Part 31 (1/2)
At the 89th page of ”Peking and the Pekingese,” Dr. Rennie endorses the following misrepresentations:--
”The Taepings who, Mr. Parkes states, endeavour to copy the most objectionable traits in the Imperialist character (?), in addition to which a sort of 'High life below stairs' farce is enacted, embracing the most absurd a.s.sumptions of dignity, with general licentiousness, blasphemy, and obscenity....”
Then Dr. Rennie's ire becomes aroused at the thought of such wickedness, and the consciousness of moral rect.i.tude filling him with a strange _cacoethes scribendi_, he abuses the Ti-ping w.a.n.g very cruelly, by declaring:--
”This lunatic monarch (for such he would really seem to be) is waited on only by women, no males being allowed to approach him; bigamy (?), with general immorality, is said to be the prevailing inst.i.tution of the Court of Nankin.”
Now the above statement is no less incorrect than absurd. The Tien-w.a.n.g regularly held council with his ministers and chiefs. The insertion of the word ”bigamy” suggests motives on the part of the writer, who, we may suppose, means polygamy. He not only forgets to blame his Imperialist friends for conforming to _the same custom of China_, but he must be ignorant of the fact that ”bigamy” means the crime of marrying more than one woman _only_ in countries where the civil law makes such connection illegal. Not satisfied with thus abusing those he had never seen, Dr. Rennie proceeds to _mis_quote from Blue Books. He says, at the same page:--
”The following rhapsody has lately appeared, in the form of a proclamation, from the Teen-w.a.n.g.”
He then quotes a decree, issued on the 7th of March, 1861, to establish certain regulations in the civil department of the Ti-ping Government,--a translation of the same being given at page 44 (Inclosure 6, in Number 11) of the Blue Book on China, presented to the British Parliament, ”in pursuance of their address, dated April 8, 1862.”
The clause which either Dr. Rennie or his authority has altered, in the original and official translation, is as follows:--
”Thus, in addition to the perfect regulations, we have added six more, making nine altogether. Do not go and turn your backs on the Father, Brother, myself, and my son, who illuminate all places, benevolently harmonizing them for a myriad myriad generations....”
The words ”Father--Brother” are, in the Chinese text, _raised_ the usual number of s.p.a.ces above ”myself and my son,” which at once properly represents the Divinity. Any unprejudiced mind would certainly understand the sentence as meaning that--”the Father, Brother, Myself, and my Son,” in our respective spheres, benevolently harmonize all things. Dr. Rennie, however, tries to prove the blasphemous nature of the Ti-pings in the following manner:--At page 90, first volume of his work, he misquotes the clause of the proclamation referred to in this way:--
”Now do not in the least turn away your back upon Ya-ko-chum and Yan (?)--G.o.d, Christ, myself, and son--who illuminate all places AS ONE BODY POLITIC, benevolently harmonizing them for ten thousand times ten thousand generations.”
Where does Dr. Rennie get the interpolation from? It is a totally un-Chinese expression, but a favourite term _with English diplomatists_.
It appears a clever attempt to alter the sense of the proclamation, and brand the Ti-pings with the crime of blasphemy. There are other cases in which the author of ”Peking and the Pekingese” goes out of his way to endorse second-hand opinions inimical to the Ti-pings; but as he does not attempt to corroborate them by any mention of his own experience, it is unnecessary to further notice such valueless statements; the misquotation exposed above, not only evidences how little reliance is to be placed on the clique of Ti-ping maligners, but forms a fitting conclusion to our acquaintance with a book which would have been more valuable had the author refrained from aspersing a political cause of which he knows literally nothing.
The misrepresentation contained in ”Chinese Miscellanies,” though merely consisting of one sentence and a foot-note, is important and worthy of contradiction, because it is promulgated by Sir J. F. Davis. Speaking, in the preface, of the Governments of China and j.a.pan, he states:--
”With all their faults they are, in their integral characteristics, better than the _mock_ Christian[85] Taepings of China....”
As for the mockery of Christianity, perhaps the readers of ”Ti-ping Tien Kwoh” may agree with its author in believing that it has been altogether upon the part of those who, like Sir J. Davis, have scoffed at, abused, and ridiculed the faith of the Ti-pings. Many millions of men do not establish a great revolution, and sacrifice their lives for a _mock_ purpose, whatever Sir J. Davis may think to the contrary. If ”it has been _plain from the first_” that the Ti-pings were no more like Christians than Mahomet was like a Jew, will the clever discoverer kindly explain the meaning of the statements of the Bishop of Victoria, Revs. Edkins, John, Medhurst, Muirhead, &c., referred to and quoted in this work?
All that now remains to be noticed are the movements of the Ti-pings since capturing the city of Chang-chew, near Amoy, their present circ.u.mstances and position.
After holding a large portion of the province of Fu-keen for about eight months, on the 16th of May, 1865, the Ti-pings evacuated the city of Chang-chew, and moved off to the westward.
This proceeding took both Europeans and Imperialists completely by surprise; for, up to the day before the s.h.i.+-w.a.n.g left Chang-chew, his outposts were five miles from the city, and the Manchoo forces had not ventured to attack them for a long time. The place was also strongly fortified and well-provisioned--so much so, indeed, that large stores of grain, &c., were left behind,--while the country to the west and south was entirely under the control of the Ti-pings.
The explanation of the s.h.i.+-w.a.n.g's sudden movement is due to the fact that eleven days afterwards he joined his forces with Hung-jin, the Kan-w.a.n.g, at a distance of eighty or ninety miles inland.
Of course, as usual, frightful accounts of Ti-ping atrocities on the march were concocted to harrow the feelings of those simple enough to believe them. It is fortunate that trustworthy evidence exists to prove that the Ti-pings have not yet become the ”horde of banditti” England's policy has worked so hard to make them. The Rev. W. McGregor, English Presbyterian Missionary at Amoy (about fourteen miles from Chang-chew), in a letter dated 10th April, 1865, declares that, whilst conquering neighbouring parts of the province by expeditions issuing from Chang-chew,[86] ”the Ti-pings had been guilty of no wanton destruction of property or slaughter of the people.” Again, in another letter, dated 26th May, 1865, after the revolutionists had retreated inland, he states:--
”Of course many stories are being put in circulation about the cruelties of the Taepings when in possession of Chang-chew; but it must be remembered that these come from Mandarin sources, and thence through the foreign custom-house pa.s.s into circulation in the foreign community, while a little investigation often shows them to be quite unfounded. For example, it was reported that the Taepings left Chang-chew a perfect shamble, having ma.s.sacred all the people that were of no use to take with them, and in corroboration of this some of the foreign community were taken up, and shown the city burning in several places, with numbers of dead bodies lying about; but it has to be kept in mind that, before this the Mandarin troops had been some days in the city, and the remembrance of Soo-chow ought to teach Englishmen, at least, how these days would be spent. The Chinese have a technical term for a proclamation issued ordering soldiers to desist from _indiscriminate_ slaughter and plunder, and I casually got the information from my teacher (who has the means of getting all news circulating in the Yamens), that Chang-chew was in the hands of the Imperialists four or five days before this proclamation was issued. The fact is, that, immediately on the Taepings leaving, the people whom they left (they took a large number with them as baggage-bearers, &c.), endeavoured to escape from it as fast as possible; and we have information from some who have escaped that, before the departure of the rebels no slaughter took place. How the Imperialists have acted in Chang-chew and the surrounding villages will be apparent from the single fact that, since they entered the city, the soldiers have been selling women at four dollars each. No evidence has yet been produced that the Taepings have been guilty of such atrocities as are implied in this statement. A short time ago, in consequence of some disturbances in the Tung-au region, a body of soldiers were detached from the Mandarin force, near Chang-chew, who by their own account burnt over twenty villages and ma.s.sacred over 2,000 women and children, without meeting with any resistance. They ultimately returned, in consequence of the villagers, farther north, forming a combination for mutual protection, and threatening to join the rebels. We have not heard of an instance of the Taepings acting in such a manner.”
It is impossible to tell, at present, whether the Ti-pings may become a scourge to their country, or whether they will again rise into power and importance, and occupy their old position. But the fact must be carefully recorded that, in event of the former deplorable contingency, it is British interference which has made them what they are, and that it must be regarded as the original and responsible cause of all that is or may be objectionable. It is now placed beyond doubt that the Kan-w.a.n.g is at the head of a great body of Ti-pings, although it is equally certain that other divisions not under his command exist in various directions; but, so long as he remains in authority, there need be little fear as to the deterioration of the movement. One fact in connection with the retreat from Chang-chew speaks volumes. It seems that when some missionaries visited the place immediately after the Ti-pings had fled, they made the interesting discovery described by Dr.
Carnegie (medical missionary) in the following words:--
[87] ”Only some two or three of the Christians have been heard of....
A native preacher is amongst the missing. An interesting fact, however, remains to be told in connection with the rebels, and it is this:--That whilst they gutted the heathen temples and utterly demolished the many hundreds of idols with which these temples were stored, they respected the Christian places of wors.h.i.+p, and in one of the chapels, where there is a scroll bearing these words, 'The pure religion of Jesus,' some of them added underneath, 'MAY IT SPREAD OVER THE WHOLE EARTH!'”