174 Boundaries and Beyond
access to reliable sources and based their comments on hearsay or
gossip. Certainly, foreigners did not have a βirm grasp of the workings of
Chinese society and the political system. A case in point is that, whereas
the Chinese provincial authorities were more than passive recipients
of orders from the Court, their authority was often constrained by
local pressure groups. On one occasion, Sinclair informed Welton and
Jackson that he had received a communication from a Chinese ofβicial,
requesting him to have them removed from their rooms in the Shenguang
Temple. The communication included a statement to the effect that “the
basis of good government consisted in complying with the wishes of the
people”. Sinclair took the statement lightly, and in reply stated that in
England and Europe good government consisted in making the people
obey the Laws.^95
Consequently, βirmness and a confrontational approach were deemed
effective means. As a matter of fact, even some editorials in the Hong
Kong newspapers at the time commented that it was impolitic for the two
missionaries to retain possession of rooms within the city contrary to
the will of the authorities. When Sinclair wrote Welton a note expressing
his surprise that he had not moved, Welton in turn felt surprised by
the letter, and referred him to the terms upon which he agreed to give
up possession of the Shenguang Temple. He said in his letter that he
intended to abide fully by the terms, and asked Sinclair to communicate
his determination to the Chinese authorities. When Welton consulted two
of the longest-serving missionaries in Fuzhou on the matter, they urged
him to be cautious and wary.^96
This chapter is not suggesting that the labor of spreading the Gospel
in Fuzhou might have been more successful had Welton been more tactful
and compromising. What it shows is that the missionary’s misconception
about conditions in the βield and his confrontational approach made life
difβicult for him. The hardship that the two missionaries experienced in
the present case has been seen in the literature as a showcase of Chinese
xenophobia and anti-Christianity. In fact, it had little to do with either of
these issues.
- Welton’s “Journal”, September 18, 1850.
- Welton’s “Journal”, January 3, 1851.
http://www.ebook3000.com