PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION.

In the preface to my first edition I expressed a hope that these lectures,

however imperfect, would prove in some degree instrumental towards

breaking up the Anti-Opium confederacy, and I have the satisfaction of

knowing that my anticipations have not been altogether disappointed. The

lectures were well received by the public and the press, and struck the

Anti-Opium Society and its versatile Secretary, the Rev. Mr. Storrs

Turner, with such consternation that, in the language of people in

difficulties, "business was discontinued until further notice." Mr. Storrs

Turner,--the motive power which kept the Anti-Opium machine working,--who

had hitherto been so active, aggressive, and demonstrative--a very

Mercutio in volubility and fertility of resource,--became suddenly silent,

mute as the harp on Tara's walls. He who once was resonant as the lion,

like Bottom the Weaver, moderated his tone, and roared from thenceforth

"gently as any sucking dove." Until the delivery of my lectures, no lark

at early morn was half so lively or jubilant. Letters to the newspapers,

articles in magazines, improvised lectures and speeches, flew from him

like chaff from the winnowing-machine. Heaven help the unlucky individual

who had the temerity to differ from him on the opium question, for Mr.

Storrs Turner would, as the phrase goes, "come down upon him sharp."

This kind of light skirmishing suited him exactly; it kept alive public

interest in the Anti-Opium delusion, and no doubt brought grist to the

mill, without committing him to anything in particular, or calling for any

extraordinary draft upon his imagination or resources. He had only to

reiterate loud enough the cuckoo cry that his deluded followers had so

long recognised as the pæan of victory. But when my lectures were

delivered, and it was announced that they would be published, "a change

came o'er the spirit of his dream." Having for so many years had

practically all the field to himself, it had never occurred to him that

another and more competent witness from China, where all these imaginary

evils from opium smoking were alleged to be taking place,--who had had

better opportunities of learning the truth about opium than he could

possibly have had, and who had turned those opportunities to good

account,--should appear and refute his fallacies. This was a _dénouement_

that neither he nor his Society was prepared for, and dismay and silence

prevailed in consequence in the enemy's camp.

And the tents were all silent,--the banners unflown,--

The lances unlifted,--the trumpet unblown.

My lectures were delivered in February, 1882. The Rev. Mr. Storrs Turner

attended them and corresponded with me upon the subject. In those lectures

I criticized his book and pointed out its misleading features and

inaccuracies; but, recognizing the force of Sir John Falstaff's maxim,

that "the better part of valour is discretion," he never attempted to

controvert my case, nor justify himself or the Anti-Opium Society, who for

so many years had made such noise in the world. It was only in October,

1882,--eight months after my lectures had been delivered,--after an

article appeared in the _London and China Telegraph_, commenting on the

collapse of the Anti-Opium Society,--that Mr. Storrs Turner, like

Munchausen's remarkable hunting-horn, gave utterance to a few feeble

notes, to the effect that his Society was still alive; for he well knew

that all that I had stated in those lectures I could prove to the

hilt,--aye, ten times over.

But if Mr. Storrs Turner has declined the contest, an acolyte of his, Mr.

B. Broomhall,--who appears to be the Secretary of the Inland China

Mission, and one of the "Executive Committee" of the Anti-Opium

Society,--comes upon the scene like King Hamlet's ghost, declaring that he

"could a tale unfold, whose lightest breath would harrow up your souls,

freeze the hot blood, and make each particular hair to stand on end."

Plagiarising, if not pirating, my title, with a colourable addition of the

word "Smoking," he produces, in November 1882, a compilation entitled "The

Truth about Opium-_Smoking_," rather a thick pamphlet, made up of excerpts

from all the writings and speeches, good, bad, and indifferent, that have

been published and delivered within the last thirty years on the

Anti-Opium side of the question, with some critical matter of his own,

from all of which it appears most conclusively that he, Mr. B. Broomhall,

is perfectly innocent of the subject he undertakes to enlighten the world

upon. I think I see through this gentleman and his objects pretty well.

With respect to the authors of these writings and speeches, I may say at

once that I hold them in as much respect as Mr. B. Broomhall does himself.

Some of them are very eminent men, who, apart from this opium delusion,

are ornaments to their country, and all, I have no doubt, are men of

spotless honour and integrity; but what, after all, does that prove? Why,

simply the _bona fides_ of these gentlemen, which no one ever questioned,

and nothing more;--that in writing those pamphlets and articles they

honestly believed they were giving utterance to facts and recording

circumstances which were true, and which it was for the good of society

should be widely known. The good and just man is as liable to be deceived

as he who is less perfect,--indeed, more so, for his very amiability and

guilelessness of heart allay suspicion and make him an easier prey to the

designing and unscrupulous. Not one of those gentlemen, save Sir

Rutherford Alcock, and one or two others, whose opinions are coincident,

in fact, with my own, have had any actual personal knowledge of the facts

they write about, and such a statement as the following might well be

printed in the front of each of their books or writings, viz.: "I have

read certain books and articles in newspapers, and heard speeches upon the

opium question, which I believe to be true, and on such assumption the

following pages are my views upon the subject." To prove to my readers the

utterly unreliable and deceptive character of Mr. Broomhall's compilation,

it is only necessary to refer to one passage, which will be found at page

122, where it is gravely put forward THAT THE INDIAN MUTINY WAS BROUGHT

ABOUT BY THE INDO-CHINA OPIUM TRADE! After that, Tenterden Steeple and the

Goodwin Sands will hardly seem so disconnected as has been hitherto

commonly supposed. But then the book is illustrated; there are the

pictures copied from the _Graphic_. There is the poppy, and there is the

opium pipe. Of course Mr. B. Broomhall knows all about opium smoking,--or

the illustrations would not be there. Mr. Crummles, with his "splendid tub

and real pump," could not have done better.

As to Mr. B. Broomhall's remarks respecting my book I have very little to

say; there is nothing in them. Like Mr. Storrs Turner, he has found it a

poser, and has said very little respecting it. When your opponent gets the

worst of an argument, if he does not honestly acknowledge his

discomfiture, he generally follows one of two courses--either he loses his

temper and takes to scolding, or he suddenly discovers something

wonderfully funny in your arguments which no one else was able to detect.

Mr. B. Broomhall eschews the former, but adopts the latter course. He

selects a paragraph or two, and says, "That is ludicrous," but he never

condescends to enlighten his readers as to where the fun lies, or in what

the drollery consists.

But, although Mr. B. Broomhall makes light of my book, he has thought

proper to imitate its title. He evidently thought there was nothing

ludicrous in _that_. This was very "smart," but smartness is a quality not

much appreciated on this side of the Atlantic. As my book had dealt a

heavy blow to the Anti-Opium Society, and a cheap edition might prove

still more damaging, an opposition book, with a similar title, might so

confuse the public as to be mistaken for mine. Imitation has been said to

be the sincerest flattery, but I dislike adulation even when administered

by the Anti-Opium Society. This gentleman and his compilation bring very

forcibly to my mind the profound Mr. Pott, of the _Eatanswill Gazette_,

who, having written a series of recondite articles on _Chinese

Metaphysics_, brought his lucubrations to the notice of his friend, Mr.

Pickwick. That gentleman ventured to remark that the subject seemed an

abstruse one. "Very true," returned Mr. Pott, with a smile of intellectual

superiority, "but I crammed for it--I read up the subject in the

_Encyclopædia Britannica_. I looked for metaphysics under the letter M,

and for China under the letter C, and combined the information." This

seems to be the sort of process by which Mr. B. Broomhall has arrived at

his knowledge on the opium question, and with similar results. I do not

wish to be too hard upon this gentleman, who, after all, may have been

only a cat's-paw in the matter--for it must not be forgotten that there is

Mr. Storrs Turner in the background; but he himself, on reflection, must,

I think, admit that it was going a little too far to introduce into his

compilation a parody--which some might call a vulgar parody--on one of the

verses of Bishop Heber's very beautiful and world-renowned Missionary

Hymn. I will not give my readers the "elegant extract," but they can find

it for themselves at page 117.

I have in this edition amplified the matter and given extracts from the

Reports of Mr. William Donald Spence, Her Majesty's Consul at Ichang, and

Mr. E. Colborne Baber's _Travels and Researches in Western China_, which

throw a flood of light upon the opium question. I have also quoted from a

very valuable work of Don Sinibaldo de Mas, an accomplished Chinese

scholar, formerly Spanish Minister to the Court of Peking, published in

Paris in 1858, which in itself is a complete vindication of the opium

policy of Her Majesty's Government in India and China, and an able

refutation of the unfounded views of the Anti-Opium Society; and I believe

this edition of _The Truth about Opium_ will be found a very complete

defence of the Indo-China opium trade.

_30th January 1883._

The truth about opium · 第 3 / 27 题