Up to the 20th of February, this doubt was an important factor in the case: Dr. Ament’s brief cablegram, published on that date, took the importance all out of it.
In the Open Letter, Dr. Smith quotes this passage from a letter from Dr. Ament, dated November 13th. The italics are mine:
This time I proposed to settle affairs without the aid of soldiers or legations.
This cannot mean two things, but only one: that, previously, he had collected by armed force.
Also, in the Open Letter, Dr. Smith quotes some praises of Dr. Ament and the Rev. Mr. Tewksbury, furnished by the Rev. Dr. Sheffield, and says:
Dr. Sheffield is not accustomed to speak thus of thieves, or extortioners, or braggarts.
What can he mean by those vigorous expressions? Can he mean that the first two would be applicable to a missionary who should collect from B, with the “aid of soldiers,” indemnities possibly due by A, and upon occasion go out looting?
EXHIBIT B
Testimony of George Lynch (indorsed as entirely trustworthy by the Tribune and the Herald), war correspondent in the Cuban and South African wars, and in the march upon Peking for the rescue of the legations. The italics are mine:
When the soldiers were prohibited from looting, no such prohibitions seemed to operate with the missionaries. For instance, the Rev. Mr. Tewksbury held a great sale of looted goods, which lasted several days.