teral ruination. The reasons, so far as I can gather from your leading article of the 15th instant, can be summed up in the following words: "One Asiatic has gone into insolvency, and paid 5d. in the £. This is a fair sample of an Asiatic trader. He has driven out the small European trader."
Now, granting that a majority of Asiatic traders do become insolvent, and pay very little to their creditors (which is not at all the case) , is that a good reason for driving them out of the Colony or South Africa? Does it not rather show that there must be a defect in the Insolvency Law that they can thus ruin their creditors? If the law would give any latitude for such practices, people would take advantage of it. Do not the Europeans seek the protection of the Insolvency Court? I do not, of course, mean to defend the Indian traders by this tu quoque argument. I sincerely regret that the Indians should resort to such practices at all. It is a disgrace to their country, which one time had too great an idea of its honour to be associated with any dishonest dealing in trade. But it certainly seems to me that a case is not made out for expelling the Indian traders on the strength of the fact of their availing themselves of the law of bankruptcy. Not only can the law put a stop to the frequent occurrence of such cases, but the wholesale merchants, too, by being a little more careful, can do so. And, by the way, does not the very fact that these traders do get credit from the European merchants show that they are not, after all, so bad as they are portrayed by you?
If the small European trader has been driven out, is it to be laid at their door? This shows, it would appear, a grater competency on the part of the Indian trader in commerce, and this very superior competency is to be a reason for his expulsion! I ask you, sir, is this fair? If one editor edited his paper more ably than his rival, and consequently, drives the latter out of the field, how would the former like to be told that he should give place to his crestfallen rival because he (the successful one) was able? Should not the superior ability be a special reason for encouragement so that the rest may try to rise as high? Is it a sound policy to stifle healthy competition? Should not the European trader take a leaf out of the book of the Indian trader, if that be not below his dignity, and learn how to trade cheaply, how to live simply? "Do unto others as you would be done by."
But you say these wretched Asiatics live a semi-barbaric life. It would be highly interesting to learn your views of a semi-barbaric life. I have some notion of the life they live. If a room without a nice, rich carpet and ornamental hangings, a dinner
