lackadaisical writers picture the Christless nations as in the
innocence of Eden, shall we, at the antipodes of fact and
truth, proceed to blacken their characters? Shall we compare
the worst in Canton, Benares or Zululand, with the best in London,
Berlin or Philadelphia? Surely God cannot look with
complacency or hear with delight much of the practical slander
spoken among white folks and Anglo-Saxons of His children
and our brothers.''

There has been too much of a disposition to think of the
Chinese as a mass, almost as we would regard immense herds
of cattle or shoals of fish. Why not rather think of the
Chinese as an individual, as a man of like passions with
ourselves? Physically, mentally, and morally he differs from us
only in degree, not in kind. He has essentially the same hopes
and fears, the same joys and sorrows, the same susceptibility to
pain and the same capacity for happiness. Are we not told
that God ``hath made of one blood all nations of men''?
We complacently imagine that we are superior to the Chinese.
But discussing the question as to what constitutes superiority
and inferiority of race, Benjamin Kidd declares that ``we shall
have to set aside many of our old ideas on the subject. Neither
in respect alone of colour, nor of descent, nor even of the
possession of high intellectual capacity, can science give us any
warrant for speaking of one race as superior to another.'' Real
superiority is the result, not so much of anything inherent in
one race as distinguished from another, as of the operation
upon a race and within it of certain uplifting forces. Any
superiority that we now possess is due to the action upon us of
these forces. But they can be brought to bear upon the