"TO THE EDITOR OF THE 'FRIEND OF CHINA.'
"Sir,—I read in the North China Herald a letter from Gordon's head-quarters, in which the writer says that the slaughter among the rebels, after the capture of Hwa-soo, was terrible. Upwards of 9,000 were taken prisoners, and of these it was estimated 6,000 were killed or drowned, principally by the Imperialists. Further, that there is no doubt they would have killed ten times that number if they had the chance to do so. Now, Sir, I do hope there will be a stop put to such massacres, though I can but believe that the writer of that article must be, what they call in Australia, a new chum, for he cannot know much about the treachery of the Imps, or he would not dwell so much on it. Why, did not the Imperialists take rice, beans, wheat, and all other kinds of grain out of Wu-see, even while those around were starving; and as the old people came up to the gate to go outside the city with their few catties of rice, were they not stopped and their food taken from them, while, if they spoke against it, they were bambooed? There was rice sufficient in Soo-chow and Wu-see to keep the poor in the districts around for many months; why, then, could not the Futai and other Mandarins be made to relieve the poor in the surrounding country?
"At Chang-chow, again, in place of bambooing the poor when begging for a few grains of that which was taken from them, why were they left to die outside by starvation? I saw this, for I was one of the officers engaged in the capture of Wu-see, and other cities. From Wu-see we advanced towards Chang-chow, where, at first, there were but few poor to be seen. After we had been there a short time, however, there was a great number of them. Why?—Because the Imperialists had gained so much of the country, and the poor had been robbed by them. As for the much-lauded Gordon's troops, do they not rob the country people on the march? And if the disciplined troops do this with impunity, what can you think if the non-disciplined do it? I have seen beggars beheaded by these wretches in sheer wantonness.
"The Herald's correspondent writes within sight of the walls of Chang-chow, and says, the starvation and cannibalism which prevail are unrelieved by the fiends who have been the cause of so much misery! The writer of that article little thinks the Imperialists are the fiends, or he would not have written so. On the other hand, parties who have travelled in the rebel districts have seen the Taepings relieve their poor."
Besides the above letter, the following appears in the issue of the same paper on the 31st of January, 1865:—
"TO THE EDITOR OF THE 'FRIEND OF CHINA.'
"Shanghae, 26th January, 1865.
"Sir,—I see you say in your 'apology' for rebels that the destruction of the city of Quin-san was caused by the Taepings on their evacuation of it. Such was not the case. The idol temples and official quarters were destroyed or ransacked by them; but the destruction of the dwelling-houses of the inhabitants was the work of the Imperialists. I was one of the first in the city after its evacuation by the Taepings, and what I now state I saw with my own eyes. Indeed, it was, as you have stated repeatedly, a practice with the Imperialists to burn all which the Taepings left. Why they did so I can hardly tell, further than that the men were encouraged to do it by their native officers.
"I am, dear Sir, yours truly,
"Late of Gordon's Force.
"P.S.—Ching and Le[57] were the grand devastators, and have to be thanked for the bulk of the misery now so rampant all over the country."