Again, in another passage, speaking of inventions, he says:—
"I do not contest the technical superiority of the West. I myself am a promoter of progress, but I do not desire that our institutions, which have stood for centuries, should be transformed all in a moment. I note with satisfaction—speaking of progress—that the same elements which at first raged so fiercely against the introduction of railways and steam navigation, have now become the most staunch supporters of these useful inventions."
An equally interesting specimen of a modern Chinaman's opinion of European affairs, is a pamphlet which appeared some years ago, in the English language, under the title of "Letters from a Viceroy's Residence."
The author is a young Celestial who spent many years in the West, and upon his return was appointed secretary to one of the viceroys. The object of these letters was, in the first place, to convince his master of the fact that, in spite of his long residence in the West, he had remained a good patriot. In the second place, he hoped to awaken the interests of the Queen Regent. Several of these letters appeared first in the columns of an English newspaper, published in Japan, and unquestionably praise is due to the author, Ku-hung-ming, at least for his zeal in making himself acquainted with the various languages and literatures of Western lands. The power of his discernment and discrimination may be seen from the manner in which he points out what there is defective, puerile, and unintelligible amongst us. When he condemns shortcomings he generally does so by quoting our own writers against us, and he exposes our mistakes to the merciless scourge of our own criticism. There is not a writer, a statesman, or a philosopher, of any note, to whom he does not in some way or other appeal. He concludes an elaborate study of the civilizations of the West and the East with the words of Carlyle: "Europe is an Anarchy, with a policeman at its head"; and he quotes Ruskin, to apply to China the theory that "culture means a society of cultured beings."
"To the ordinary European trader it seems no doubt a strange thing that we should object to what he describes as the opening out of our national resources. Viewing everything, as he habitually does, from the standpoint of profit and loss, he conceives that if it can be shown that a certain course will lead to the increase of wealth, it follows that that is the course that ought to be adopted. The opening of China to his country and his trade he believes will have this result; and he concludes that it is our interest to welcome rather than to resist his enterprise. From his point of view he is justified; but his point of view is not ours. We are accustomed, before adopting any grave measures of policy, to estimate their effects, not merely on the sum total of our wealth, but (which we conceive to be a very different thing) on our national well-being. You, as always, are thinking of the means of living, we, of the quality of the life lived. And when you ask us, as you do in effect, to transform our whole society, to convert ourselves from a nation of agriculturists to a nation of traders and manufacturers, to sacrifice to an imaginary prosperity our political and economic independence, and to revolutionize, not only our industry, but our manners, morals, and institutions, we may be pardoned if we first take a critical look at the effects which have been produced among yourselves by the conditions you urge us to introduce in China."
This statement is of peculiar interest as showing that with regard to European innovations China occupies a position diametrically opposed to that of Japan. Evidently China is not blind where European conditions are concerned. The Chinese do not ignore the material and technical advantages and achievements of Europe. They realize with tolerable clearness the superior material conditions which modern life offers. The only point upon which they are not clear is how far all these innovations help us to make life more tolerable, and how far they contribute to the inner satisfaction or happiness of the people.
"I have learned that the most brilliant discoveries, the most fruitful applications of inventive genius, do not of themselves suffice for the well-being of society, and that an intelligence which is concentrated exclusively on the production of labour-saving machines, may easily work more harm for the dislocation of industry than it can accomplish good by the increase of wealth. For the increase of wealth—that is, of the means of comfort—is not to my mind necessarily good in itself; everything depends on the way in which the wealth is distributed and on its effect on the moral character of the nations. And it is from that point of view that I look with some dismay upon the prospect of the introduction of Western methods into China."
The author then describes at some length, and perhaps in somewhat too glowing terms, the cheerfulness, the contentment, the philosophy, the joy of living of the Chinese people. He speaks of the strong bond of affection which unites families, their literary and artistic tastes, their deep-rooted love of nature, all of which stand them in such good stead in time of trouble.
"All this is peculiar to our nature, it is the basis of our inner contentment, a contentment which no one can give, but which may easily be taken from us."
Even for the much-criticized, and unquestionably corrupt institution of the state, the loyal patriot has a few condoning words:—