The first response to "Justitia" from "Occidental" appeared in the Free Press of February 25:_x000d_
Kananda Again._x000d_
To The Editor of The Detroit Free Press:_x000d_
Being one of those found fault with in a communication in Friday morning's Free Press for assuming to criticise Mr. Kananda without having heard him, it seems eminently proper to state my position. Mr. Kananda has been thrust upon me as a subject for discussion without my asking. Some of my most intimate and cordial friends, who have heard the Hindoo monk, have not hesitated to discuss the subject matter of one or more of his addresses in my presence, thereby inevitably thrusting upon me the position of defending my own tenets of faith or giving silent consent to those of the discussion. And now, for sooth, one is told that he must have heard the addresses in order to deal fairly with the subject._x000d_
My position is like this, which is formulated merely from the statements of what my friends have heard. The conviction is strongly impressed on my mind that this man of the east is as great a trickster with facts as some of his native prestidigitators are with eggs, or other material objects, making them appear and disappear at pleasure. Don't infer from this, please, a fear on my part of having my religious faith shaken by what he might say; this would imply a decided lack of steadfastness, but rather infer a scorning to hear sacred truths handled in a spirit savoring in the least of unfairness or charlatanism._x000d_
And now please follow me through one or two examples of this lack of fairness in Mr. Kananda's method of treating Christianity. In the course of one of his discussions he read letters or extracts of letters that had been addressed to him here. One of these he stated contained a picture, for which he desired to return thanks, which picture he further stated was ca4ed "The Heart of Our Savior." Of course it was only necessary to make such a statement without comment to cause a sardonic smile to ripple over an audience of Christian believers, to say nothing of the emotions caused in the skeptics present. However, Mr. Kananda must have known that he thus implied an exhibition of a synonym of our religion, whereas, and notwithstanding any amount of gentlest sentiment that might cluster around such a symbol of our Savior's love for the sender, ninety-nine persons out of every hundred would say, and ought to say, on sober second thought, that there was more sentiment than sense in thus placing a weapon of ridicule in an opponent's hands. But is this a fair way to deal with such a sacred subject, may I ask? _x000d_
Again, Mr. Kananda stated that one inquirer wished to know whether or not they burned widows in his country. To this he replied by condoning the fact that widows burned themselves, as he stated, and added: "We do not burn witches in India." Here is exhibited the same spirit of unfairness and ridicule. Does Mr. Kananda mean to seriously imply that we condone the burning of witches as a tenet of our religious faith, or that the Christian world ever did so?_x000d_
We assume to be progressive, if anything, and assert with little fear of controversion that Christianity has done more to humanize mankind, wherever founded, than any or all other religions. Then, why this implication by Mr. Kananda? Undoubtedly we have the Spanish inquisition, the Scottish kirk and the Salem, Mass., episodes to blush for in connection with the followers of our faith, but we have not, thank heaven, such scenes as attended the Sepoy insurrection as a recent heritage from the humanizing influences of Christianity._x000d_
Let me suggest, in closing, that if any friends conclude to serenade Mr. Kananda before he leaves our city, that they may secure a Scotch band to play "The Campbells are Coming," which, it will be remembered, was the first sound to greet the ears of the besieged at Lucknow and notify them that relief was at hand._x000d_
OCCIDENTAL._x000d_
Detroit, February 24,
Before "Justitia" had a chance to answer this diatribe, she gained an ally in "One Who Heard All The Lectures":_x000d_
Doesn't Think Hearsay Will Do._x000d_
To the Editor of The Detroit Free Press:_x000d_
I observed a communication in this morning's Free Press from one who signs himself "Occidental." The writer states that one cannot judge Kananda, so he is told, unless he has heard the monk. The writer of the communication expresses surprise that he is not capable of judging him from what his friends have told him about the lectures. It seems to me that one could as easily criticise one of Raphael's pictures from hearsay as to express an opinion about anyone without having heard him. I could just as accurately pass an opinion upon one of Mozart's operas from having heard a friend hum or whistle a few arias as this writer can upon the Brahman visitor without either having met him or having listened to him. Under the circumstances it seems supremely stupid either to sit in judgment or even to venture to express an opinion, no matter how pompous the writer may be in the way he words his opinions. In confessing to ignorance of the monk, the writer stamps his ideas of him at once as totally valueless and unworthy of more than passing mention. One should realize that hearsay cannot be depended upon; after statements have passed through a few hands they emerge in all kinds of distorted forms, and this meager and misleading information is all that the writer has to base his opinions upon. Without in any way desiring to eulogize Kananda, it might not be amiss to respectfully advise the writer of the communication under consideration to go and hear the monk when he again comes here, to digest carefully what he says, sleep over it, throw away from his clouded intellect all habiliments of prejudice and then, after praying and fasting For a time, write another letter to The Free Press, giving his estimate of the character of the visitor's religious teachings._x000d_
I was at the lecture and heard what Kananda said about witches. He cast no reflection on Christians. What he said was that, so far as widows being thrown into the flames by the people of his country was concerned, no facts could bear out the exaggerated statements of travelers relating thereto. After refuting the falsehood, he added, but in "India they never did burn witches." So much for this alleged fling at Christianity. The conclusion of the letter is unworthy of serious consideration. In India Kananda says that the Hindoos receive the Christian missionaries in the spirit of tolerance. They smile at them and say: "Let them go ahead. They are children in religion. Let them amuse themselves." They regard them with a broad philosophical smile. How differently have we treated a single Hindoo missionary? We haven't stoned him or tried to boil him in a pot in a cannibal fashion, but we have assailed him with mean, anonymous letters, calling him all kinds of vilifying names and have politely informed him, without signing any names, that there was a warm place waiting for him hereafter, and we have robbed him of the funds to which he is entitled as a lecturer. No wonder he feels bitter toward Americans as a money loving country when he has realized hardly nothing from his lectures for the grand object he has in view the establishment of an educational institution in India while his unscrupulous managers have reaped nearly all. Kananda knows not the value of money. He was an easy mark for speculating managers. I am not a profound admirer of Kananda, but I like to see a square deal given everyone even if he is a "heathen."_x000d_
_x000d_
ONE WHO HEARD ALL THE LECTURES._x000d_
Detroit, February 25.
"Occidental," who, on the whole, does not appear to have been very bright, evidently confused "One Who Heard All the Lectures" with his original opponent `;Justitia," and answered as though carrying on the same correspondence:_x000d_
More Kananda._x000d_
To the Editor of The Detroit Free Press:_x000d_
It appears that "One Who Heard All the Lectures" (Kananda's) still insists that a person must at least hear the oriental, whether inclined that way or not, in order to enter into an intelligent discussion of the subject matter of his discourses. But, unhappily for me, there is added both penance and prayer before my condition will be fitted for this exalted privilege. And it is hinted at in the Raphael simile that one must see as well as hear Kananda before a just estimate of his discourses can be formed; be it known, therefore, that Occidental must have seen him once, having occupied a front seat at the opening of the world's congress of religious bodies. However, isn't all this simply absurd?_x000d_
Suppose the Hindoo's addresses had received that attention that "One Who Heard All the Lectures" regards as requisite, must another person surrender at command every opinion formed by forty years of casual reading as well as those resulting from conversations with an intimate acquaintance (a missionary's son), born in India, who grew to young manhood there, speaking their language and singing their songs, merely on Kananda's statements?_x000d_
Having heard and seen the Hindoo, is it not possible that some might not be better prepared to discuss the questions involved than before: besides, in this country is it not usual to defend opinions when they are assailed without such formality as this case seems to demand?_x000d_
Sympathy is extended to the disappointment manifested over the financial failure of Kananda's undertaking, but if he also failed to make converts here, please regard the sympathy as ending with the money questions involved._x000d_
In conclusion, please receive assurance that nothing has been said less complimentary of Kananda than he has said collectively of all American men and women. _x000d_
OCCIDNTAL_x000d_
February 27, 1894
But it was "Justitia" who had the last word. In the same column as the above letter, appeared her reply to "Occidental's" previous one._x000d_
"Justitia" to "Occidental."_x000d_
To The Editor of The Detroit Free Press :_x000d_
Referring to the letter of "Occidental" in reply to my former communication, I am pleased to see the gentleman realized his position required defense. He admits that the inquisition, Scottish kirk and Salem persecutions were stains upon our past, but from his manner of referring to the Sepoy insurrections as a recent outcome of the eastern faith, one is led to infer that he would have us think we have no blots upon our modern life to blush for. In the first place, the Sepoy rebellion was not altogether a religious matter. It was the rising of a subject people against a foreign invader, and would never have occurred if the English had kept their hands off India. It was not a case of fratricidal strife of the people among themselves. Let us look at Christendom. Has the gentleman forgotten the French revolution, an internal outbreak of the people against rulers of their own blood and faith, the atrocities of which certainly equaled, if they did not surpass, those of the Sepoy mutiny? And yet France had been Christian for centuries. Coming to our own time and country, has he also forgotten the war of the rebellion, which emphatically was one of brother against brother, where we sprung to cut one another's throats in the heart of our own nation and the horrors of whose Andersonville and Libby prisons, at least, were not far behind those he refers to? And yet we were Christians, and so were our forefathers for genera¬tions before us. Kananda does not claim that his religion and civilization contain all the good there is in the world and ours all the bad. Neither should we, I think, arrogate to ourselves all the good and ascribe to his land all the bad. Let us be actuated by a broad spirit of charity and remove the beam from our own eyes before we attempt to do so for others. As to the principles upon which our civilization and faith are founded, there are none grander. Let us live up to them._x000d_
In conclusion, I would ask the reverend brother whether he thinks such preaching and writing as he has indulged in exemplify a gospel of love. Also, would a brass band serenading Kananda with "The Campbells Are Coming" be Jesus' way to bring the stranger within our gates to a realizing sense of the "humanizing" influence of Christianity?_x000d_
JUSTITIA_x000d_
Detroit, February 26.
This was the end of the matter. "Occidental" no doubt went on thinking as he thought, but for nearly a month he wrote no more letters, or if he did, they were not published._x000d_
While we are on the subject of letters, a curious one appeared in the Free Press letter column during the progress of the above controversy. It is difficult to know just what the writer was endeavoring to prove, but whatever it may have been, his letter stands as added testimony that Swamiji's statements were not taken lightly by anyone. They were either vehemently resented or heartily endorsed. In this age of transition, in which Western civilization was beginning to re-examine its foundations and structure, Swamiji, as has been pointed out, championed the reforming and progressive spirit of America. The liberal forces rallied round him, while the reactionary forces attacked him with any weapon they could even citing at length the ancient laws of Manu. The letter in question read in part as follows:_x000d_
_x000d_
Hindoo vs. Christian Civilization and Law._x000d_
To the Editor of The Detroit Free Press:_x000d_
In view of the fact that this community has been recently favored with the presence of a distinguished and learned Hindoo monk-Kananda-who expressed himself freely, as he had an undoubted right to do, in criticism of our "Christian" civilization, I am tempted to devote a leisure hour or two in laying before the multitude of your readers, a few scattered points of Hindoo law, as taken from Sir William Jones' "Institutes of Hindoo Law," being a translation of the "Ordinances of Manu."_x000d_
The laws of a nation are the best criterion of its civilization. The extracts herewith presented like the early statutes or ordinances of the Puritans in this land-may have been, many of them, repealed; but do not both tend to show the fact, as the monk is reported to have stated, of a kinship of both peoples to the ancient Aryan race, with the Sanscrit language in common? I quote: "In the Hindoo law of Baron and Feme we find many judicious enactments. Thus every Hindoo is enjoined not to marry `a girl with reddish hair,' or `with inflamed eyes,' or who is `immoderately talkative,' but one who `walks gracefully like a phenecopteros ( ?) or like a young elephant.' By way of insuring respect for the Feme (woman) in the married state, the Baron is very properly forbidden `to eat with his wife or look at her eating or sneezing, or yawning, or sitting carelessly at her ease.' The gentleman is also himself en¬joined not `to read lolling on a couch, nor with his feet raised on a bench, nor with his thighs crossed, nor having lately swallowed meat.' "_x000d_
The mode of recovering a debt is much the same as under the Grutoo law: "By whatever means a Lawful creditor may have gotten possession of his own property, let the king ratify such payment by the debtor, though obtained even by compulsory means. By the mediation of friends, by suit in court, by artful management, or by distress, a creditor may recover the property lent, and fifthly by legal force." [Here followed a solid column of ancient Hindu laws which were not pertinent to nineteenth century America. The writer, no doubt a lawyer, ended his letter with the following plea:]_x000d_
I ask the admirers and apologists of this monk if the standard of civilization is the regulated liberty enjoyed by and the enlightened intelligence possessed by the individual in a nation, about how much inferior are the American people of to-day to this priest-ridden people of Hindoostan? _x000d_
_x000d_
HAMILTON GAY HOWARD._x000d_
Detroit, February 23, 1894