To the Editor of the "Nonrm-Onixa Datty News."
Sim—One cannot but agree with what is said in your article under the heading "The Anti-American Agitation" on the value of public discussion. But itis well to bear in mind that such @iscussion should proceed from a spirit of candour and honesty. This spirit, it ix to be regretted, has by no means pervade ed the recent utterances of the Chinese who are conducting the boycott—ride the statements made in the proclamation published in Chinkiang, which was reported in your issue of yesterday. The authors of those statements know they are untrue—or at least. they possess ample opportunity for informing themselves of the facts. They have descended from the platform of honest and fair discussion to the art of the demagogue, and their efforts to: provoke the masses an unwarranted hostility to America: cannot receive too severe censure. Unless the responsible Chinese express unequivocally their disapproval of such misstatements, the inevitable result will be that public opinion in America, which is now with the Chinese in the efforts to secure a fairer execution of the exclusion laws, will experience a violent reaction, andthe friendship which that country has hitherto shown China will be chaaged to indifference and even hostility.
Open discussion is a valuable agency in public affairs, but it should be guided by honesty and candour. This was the case eatlior in the present agitation, bu everyone must admit that the statements recently made show that the movement has fallen from its former plane.
Tu conclusion, one can only concur in the hope expressed in the article referred to, that the Chinese will be just as active in' directing attention to some of the evils in their own body politic which call for reform far more imperatively than the Chinese Exclusion Laws.
Lam, ote, 8th August,
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.