It may be that we should rather rejoice at the position Russia is taking up against India and China; it may be that, even should the result prove injurious to us, it will not be felt till something like the lapse of another century; but these are grave questions, and it is quite within the bounds of probability that another few months may find us either defending our Indian possessions, or crushing internal dissension created by Russian intrigue amongst our coloured subjects.
It is scarcely to be expected (except in the event of European war) that Russia will make any direct attack upon British India, but the very contrast of her method of conquest with ours will create disaffection amongst the excitable, fanatical, treacherous natives. Why this result should ensue is explained by the well-known fact that (probably from the admixture of Tartar blood) the Russians can amalgamate with Asiatics, while the English cannot. Englishmen may flatter themselves that British rule is adored in India, but all the flattery in the world cannot obliterate the remembrance of the terrible mutiny, which, considering the numbers that joined it who were not sepoys, might more appropriately be termed a rebellion. Unless we have thoroughly established our rule in the hearts of the people, we may be sure that the vicinity of Russian dependencies will cause trouble, because Asiatics will become Russianized far sooner than we can Anglicise them, and Russian influences are already at work in Affghanistan, if not also in Cashmere—whence disturbances were lately reported. In conclusion, on this subject, it may fairly be said that Russia is performing a great work, no doubt to the benefit of thousands of uncivilized nomades, and that her course is very likely to lead her into collision with British India. England cannot stop her if she would; but England might have had a powerful friend and ally in the shape of a great Asiatic Power if she had not destroyed the Ti-pings who would have established it. By the wilful, unjustifiable, short-sighted policy of her Government, England has lost the glorious opportunity of helping to establish a vast Christian empire in Asia—a course the more impolitic because its reverse would not only have tended to raise a balance against the incessant encroachment of Russia in the East, but to create a strong friendly Power on the frontier of her own Indian possessions.
One object for which the author has steadily laboured, and which has had no small share in causing the production of this work, is to counteract the gross amount of ignorant prejudice which has been excited against the Tipings through the medium of false reports in England. Persons either individually implicated, or credulous enough to believe the interested statements of those who have been concerned in slaughtering the Ti-pings, have been gratified at the diffusion of their opinions by sundry publications, journals, and magazines—patriotic, very, no doubt, but nevertheless either unscrupulous or gullible.
Just to prove the utter worthlessness of the reports referred to, the following statements are selected from two new books ("Peking and the Pekingese," by Dr. Rennie; "Chinese Miscellanies," by Sir J. F. Davis); whilst it is also unhesitatingly affirmed that every similar effusion, having for its basis defamation of the Ti-pings, is equally untrustworthy, and as easily, if not more so, refuted.
In the Dedication of the former of the two works to Sir F. Bruce, Dr. Rennie has sufficient power of imagination to term that official's vacillating and inane diplomacy—
"A policy auguring so favourably[84][1] for the future of China."
With a further combination of inaccuracy, adulation, and prejudice, Dr. Rennie proceeds to state:—
"And which, having been mainly conducive to the extinction of the Taeping rebellion,[2] has already been attended with results of the highest importance to the cause of humanity."[3]
[1] It is for those who peruse this work, and all who have other opportunities than such as Dr. Rennie gives to enlighten them, to judge whether the "policy" in question has proved "favourable" or the reverse.
[2] As for the second passage, if Dr. Rennie means that the shuffling, spiritless, and vacillating conduct of Sir F. Bruce, marked by total want of energy and impartiality, conduced to a certain result, by means of having established no policy or principle of statesmanship whatever, he is right; but if he means that his patron advocated, advised, or countenanced the massacre of Ti-pings, he is labouring under some extraordinary delusion, and the words of him he tries to praise, but clearly misrepresents, prove it. Not only has the weather-vane of the political fancies of Sir F. Bruce never been blown to within many points of recommending direct intervention, but on the other hand he has violently deprecated any such operation, as may be seen by referring to page 280, Chapter X., and many other parts of this work. The finishing blow, however, is given to Dr. Rennie's illusory though amusing panegyric, and his unfortunate premises are proved to be without foundation; by the well-known fact that the "extinction of the Taeping rebellion" has neither taken place, nor even seems likely to be, as appears by a telegram in the London papers (November 24, 1865), viz.:—