To the Editor of the Daily Times

　　Sir, —- You will find the Chinese Community of Singapore have always readily responded with a free hand and a liberal mind to the demand of Government for subscriptions in the ease of any distress, such as the late famine in India and the present one in Ireland, when appealed to though the sad events occurred in distant lands far away from them. Now, what may they expect in return from Government for their such ever ready pecuniary co-operation and assistance? And should they not be with justice well entitled to that very small piece of vacant ground in front of the Chinese Temple at Teluk Ayer, while the same has been consecrated to it, and used by them for about forty years for Theatrical performances usually made for religious purposes, and also as a place for the carrying on of certain religious rites and Ceremonies thereon on certain occasions, with the kind permission of our previous Government, as I am informed that our present Government would wish to deprive the Chinese community of that very small piece of grond unless they buy and pay for it when put up at auction for sale in process of time. Is this an appropriate return for their such acts of liberality, which seems to vanish in oblivion? It is said that many of my countrymen feel disinclined to contribute towards the subscriptions for the Irish distress for the above reasons, as they say

that as Government are illiberal hearted why should we be liberal with our money?

Your obedient servant,

A CHINESE RESIDENT

Singapore, 15th April, 1880

To the Editor of the Daily Times

　　Sir, — Regarding the statement made by a “Chinese Resident”, I beg to make the following corrections:

　　1. The subscriptions to the Indian famine fund and to the distress fund of Ireland, made by the Chinese Community, had nothing to do with the Government of the Straits Settlements, as you are well aware, but were organised by public meetings.

　　2. Respecting the small piece of land granted to the Chinese Temple at Telok Ayer by the late Indian Government, the Trustees of the Temple have received no notice that the Government intend to reclaim or put it up for sale, or to make the Temple pay for it, therefore I believe the impressions of “A Chinese Resident” in the matter are mistaken.

I am, Sir,

Your obedient servant,

TAN KIM CHING

Singapore, 16th April, 1880.

致每日时报编辑先生：

　　你会发现新加坡华社总是无悔无怨地响应政府号召，热烈捐款救济灾民，如当年印度的饥荒和当前爱尔兰的灾情，尽管灾难事件是发生在离开他们遥远的地区。他们随时给予金钱资助与合作但却能从政府那里得到什么回报呢? 难道他们不应该得到公平的待遇，享有使用直落亚逸华人庙宇（天福宫）前那片很小的空地的权利吗？该庙自建成后，40 年来政府允许他们在那里举办酬神戏，有时也在那里举行宗教仪式。据我所知，我们的现任政府想不让华社使用那一小块土地，除非他们在土地拍卖时买下来。这是对他们那似乎被漠视淡忘的以往慷慨行为的适当回报吗? 据说，由于上述原因，我的许多同胞都不热心捐助爱尔兰灾情，因为他们说，既然政府是铁石心肠，我们为什么还要慷慨解囊呢?

一位华人居民

新加坡，1880 年4 月15 日

致每日时报编辑先生：

　　关于“华人居民”所作的声明，我请求更正如下：

　　1. 华社捐助印度饥荒和爱尔兰灾情，与海峡殖民地政府毫无关系，正如你所知，这些捐款是由侨民大会发动的。

　　2. 有关前印度政府授予直落亚逸华人庙宇（天福宫）的小块土地，庙宇信托人没有收到政府通知要收回或出售或要庙宇购置付款, 所以我认为在这个问题上，“华人居民”是误解了。

陈金钟

新加坡，1880 年4 月16 日