410 REMARKS ON TIIR PRESENT POSITION AND 



If the al)ove remarks be just, there is an end put to the conten- 

 tion about insulting language, and Mr. Lindsay, by his own indis- 

 cretion, has called forth remarks which defeat the object of his pam- 

 phlet — to have recourse to arms to teach the Chinese etiquette. 



The writer, before be concludes, cannot refrain from noticing a 

 pamphlet entitled " Remarks on the British Relations with China, 

 and the Proposed Plans for Improving them. By Sir George Thomas 

 Staunton, Bart." Its birth is owing solely to Mr. Lindsay's Letter, 

 which we have noticed above, on which it contains strictures. It 

 commences by saying, " I very reluctantly take up my pen for the 

 purpose of entering into the field of controversy ; but feeling, from 

 early associations and nruch subsequent intercourse, diplomatic as 

 well as commercial, with the people of China, a deep interest in the 

 preservation of our peaceful relations with them," &c. The pam- 

 phlet is highly interesting, as advantage is taken of some remarks 

 which appeared in the Quarterly Review on this important subject. 

 Sir George Staunton, besides calling in question the propriety of 

 adopting Mr. Matheson's and Mr. Lindsay's suggestions as to the 

 policy of sending an armed force against an inoffensive people, 

 gives a minute account of the misjudgment, on the part of Lord 

 Napier and his advisers, as to the' measures he unfortunately adopted 

 at Canton. He, however, falls in with Mr. Lindsay's idea of the 

 propriety of the " withdrawal at once of all his Majesty's Commis- 

 sioners (from China), and of sending a person of no pretensions to 

 rank as agent for the customs." 



- At page 31, Sir George says, " I cannot believe it possible that 

 our government can, for a moment, listen to the first of Mr. Lindsay's 

 proposals; but I do hope that they will pay that deference which is 

 due to his knowledge and experience, by adopting the second." 



Sir George Staunton is the author of a translation of the Chinese 

 Penal Code, and is therefore acquainted with the language. On 

 alluding to the controversy between Mr. Lindsay and the Quarterly 

 Review, as to the import of the epithets "barbarians'' and "devils,'' 

 when applied to Europeans, he says, "With respect to the term E, 

 which has been translated 'barbarians,' I am far from undertaking 

 to say that it is the most honourable term that might be applied to 

 foreigners." The writer is surprised that Sir George has not dis- 

 covered the error that Mr. Lindsay has fallen into as regards the 

 word E, implying " barbarians." 



At page 36, Sir George Staunton, referring again to the contro- 

 versy between Mr. Lindsay and the Quarterly Review, remarks, 



"Among these distinguished Chinese scholars must be reckoned the late 

 Dr. Morrison himself, though the Reviewer erroneously concedes the weight 

 of his opinion to be in the opposite scale ; for the word E is thus explained 

 in his Dictionary : — ' Foreigners in the East ; foreigners generally ; the cha- 

 racter E being formed of ta, great, and hong, a bow, in allusion to the great 

 bows used byforeigners in the East. Ejin, a foreigner; E chuen, a foreign ship.'" 



All this is a correct definition of the character E. Sir George 

 then adds, " Various other meanings follow, but not one which justi- 

 fies, in the smallest degree, the interpretation of "barbarous'' or 

 "barbarian." Here Sir George shows a want of acuteness which 



