Mr. Grzs has evidently found time hang somewhat he hands at Tameui, powers rust inglorious, has cast about him to find by object for his blade. He has track in the columns of the last number of the China Review, where it course, another logue for al great happiness of sinologues picking oles in each other's coats; but MIN Giles is not content with a single opinto all the previous singular hok of so-called the ° Lao-tel-ching. called "The Remains may be an allusion to the very small fr ments of the philosopher that are left on Id after Mr. Giles's attack; but it should rather have been called he Pulverisation of the Tao-teli-ching and ita Lranslators." It is a peculinrity of the Chinese Classics that uvbody d four-fifths of them, as they There are sentences in the Coufucian Analects whose meaning is evident to any formal capacity: but the majority even of the reported sayings of Confucius i telligible, as they have come the object of translators and commentators, Chinese avd foreign, is to read into the unintelligible eighty per ing of some kind, evolved out of and the moat successful commentator is he who can find a practical moral in such a mystical saying of the Master as "Thy pheasant, the pheasant, thrice he whistled, and then rose." Laotzii, founder of Taoism, was in his dotage when the sun of Confucius was rising they are reported to have met once and the old philosopher snubbed the young one most effectually for the time. " Before he died, Laotzii wrote a book, cental sketch of hi nese race, putting his thoughts on record 2,400 years ago." This is a hardy statement, to say the least of it. akes-peace wrote only 300 years id there jtilentis 3 noisy If there are doubts about Shakespeare, who lived almost in our owl days, it is a little bold to affirm so positively the authenticity of a book written 2,400 years ago, particularly who ye remember that all the book:
have en burnt once, if not twice, Mr. Giles boldly attacks ie, Faber, and Bal-sideration of the queatio now known as the Tao Teh Ching?" to which ho replies with a most unqualified negative: he says, "The work in question is beyond all doubt a forgery. It contains indeed much that Lrwtzi did say, but more that he did not. What he did say, as found therein, has been mostly mistranslated. The meaning of what he did not nay, if meaning there be, may be safely relegated to the category of things unknown," We have no space to summarise the arguments by which Mr. Giles effectually disproves the authenticity of the Tao Teh Ching. Even the few people who are interested in Chinese philosophy will enjoy Mr. Giles's paper: for the style is bright and telling, and Me. Giles lays about him with a vigour which we must admire, even if we do not care who comes best out of the fight, Mr. Chalmers and Mr. Balfour are the chief victims of his onslaught 5 no words of d to characterise it sometimes seems, however, to the reader a little hard to shew thut a man is wrong, and call him a fool and an impudent ass and an idiot at the same time, With thie slight exception, Mr. Giles'a is a delightful article, Mr. Parker follows with another contribution towards the history of China, called "More about Chinesy Relations with Tartar Tribes." The utility to the student of papers of this kind is obvious the general reader may be interested in the conclusion, For at least half of the last 2,000 years, says Mr. Parker, China has been under Tartar. rule, and overrun with Tartare, ' It is capable of torical proof that the Canton province and parte of Kinngsi are the true homes of the purest Chinese races, as of the purest dialects, North of the Yangtse, xe languages, us the population, have a very strong Tartar admixture. the Cantonese are to the Chinese what the Greeks and to Europe, the shrewd, fiery, ndictive, p but hat degenerate Romans'
avy, uncouth, but patient Germ the independent Britons; the fiery, fickle Gauls, and the gloomy Russivns, are the Huns, the Turks, Tunguses and 'Tibetans of Europe. From a Chin i We wre one race, speaking one langurg various dialects, and using the name letters. China, Japan,' Mongolia, Tibet, Corea, the yellow world' wi history and languages: we Mr. Taylor cvutinues his very delightful papers on the aborigines of Formosa; and Dr. Macgowan aouds " good article on Volcanic. Phenomena in' Kokonor and Manchuria and Earthquakes in Chili and Formosa, which is w trifle discursi Many people who wonder at aystem of underground drainage in now worse than useless, are not aware it was entirely dislocated by a succession of violent earthquakes in 1680, and has never been repaired. Among the Notes and Queries, there is a pleasant bit of humour from Br. Playfair in a note on An army of pirates besieged 3 the people flocked to the temple of Kuang Ti, the Chinese Mars, and besought his assistance with such suocess, that when the pirates arose early in the morning, behold they wore all dead corpses." Of which Mr. Playfair remarks, "as there were no survivors, the truth (of how the pirates came by their death) witl probably never be known." Mr. Taylor tells a little story of Po-po-hoon simplicity, which is worth preserving:—*' A Chinaman bought a bamboo from a Po-po-hoon. Next year another sprouted up from the old stump, and the Po-po-hoon sent a mexsenger to the Chinaman telling him that bamboo had grown up again beautiful, and {he had better come and cut it down, and the son of Han did so."
Dr. Eitel reviews very favourably Mr. Gould's handsome farrago of fact and fiction, Mythical Monsters," and calls it precisely what it im't, 'a thoroughly entific combination of palsrontologic and wologic research." But Mr. Giles's paper is so very good, that we could not expect more of similar quality in the same number.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.