Page:Europe in China.djvu/452

434 acting Member' (F. Parry). The principal opponent of the measure was the Rev. F. S. Turner, of the London Mission, who wrote some stirring letters to the papers, published a pamphlet for distribution in England, and induced four other missionaries (Ch. J. Warren, J. Piper, R. Lechler, J. Loercher) and the Minister of Union Church (D. B. Morris) to join in the Crusade. These objectors, thenceforth known as 'the moral six,' presented to the Governor (July 24, 1867) a brief Memorial, complaining that the measure had been introduced in an underhand and un-English way, and that it was calculated to lead to a large increase of gambling. The Memorialists further alleged that the measure was objectionable to a large section of the Chinese community, and illegal by both British and Chinese law. They finally averred that the Government had no right to countenance and sanction vice. The Registrar General (C. C. Smith) had to do his best, by means of a contemptuous reply he sent to the missionaries in the Governor's name, to refute their arguments. He also wrote reports supporting the Governor's contention that the system had produced good results and gained the approval of the Chinese community. Sir Richard attributed at first no importance to the opposition of the missionaries, and the Duke of Buckingham also declined (September 26, 1867) to express any opinion on their Memorial, merely asking the Governor to report more fully. But the moral six, undismayed by the apathy of the community and the Secretary of State, appealed to the home country in a manner which speedily influenced the British press, re-echoed in Parliament and caused Sir Richard to complain (January 30, 1868) that those clerical gentlemen had elsewhere gone the length of enforcing their reasoning by designating him Anti-Christ and accusing him of wilful untruthfulness. Subsequently, when public opinion in Hongkong also commenced to turn against his scheme (May 23, 1868), Sir Richard at last combatted the position of the moral six as that of a lazy and easily satisfied morality which folds its arms and, while doing nothing to repress acknowledged evils and nurseries of crime, cries out against the Government