1 28th Oct.
We have already mentioned the article in the Economist of 12th September on "The Situation in China but we feel so much respect for the Hconomist's editorial articles, distinguished as they usually are by their moderation, common sense, and evident intention to be impartial, that we are anxious to examine it a little more in detail. 'The opening sentences of the article are as follows It is right enough, and, indeed, unavoidobie, that armed ships of all' nations should be hurrying to China, for the Chinese mob, when excited, often needs to be overawed, and recognises no diffetences among the white men, but we hope our representatives in Peking have instructions to be strictly moderate. It is necessary to secure the personal safety of Europeans, including missionaries, whose right of teaching is guaranteed by treaties, and heartily as well as publicly acknowledged by the Chinese oreign Office, and by the Emperor himself; but besides this, we greatly doubt whether the government of Peking is not on this occasion sincere, and it has a most difficult part to play." There is a party in China, we are told, which is hostile to foreigners, and uses the prejudices of the mob, leaguing itself on this occaio n with the secret societies which are hostile to the Tartar throne. Violence, using the foundling asylums as From time to time this party resorts to
a pretext. 'I'he central government when appealed to does not know what to do, It has no prejudices against missionaries, and it is permanently anxious to see order preserved; it dreads using troops against the people, and it fears a conflict with the societies, "lest the great Nationalist party should take up arms." Foreigners are naturally exasperated at the indecision and dilatoriness of the government, "and they press for measures which might, if adopted, bring on civil war. hey are often in the right, Chinese revolutionaries constantly yielding when they are faced, bat in pressing such measures they nevertheless run a great risk, for if the populace is greatly irritated the civil war may begin, and if it does, the 'I'reasury will soon be empty, trade will be stopped, and the misery of the insurgent districts, which during the Taiping movement was beyond description, will be reflected in all Consular ports."
There is strong presumptive evidence, the Economist goes on to say, that the government is sincere in its endeavour to put down the riots and protect foreigners, and it will be more severe than it has been already "as soon as it can collect sufficient reliable troops." This is very difficult, because it has never had a properly armed trustworthy central force. If we believe in the sincerity of the government, we should assist it rather than attempt to coerce it: "it is not our interest to bring down a ricketts old tower on everybody's head." Then the Lconomist turns to its second and stronger reason for moderation, the uncertainty of the maintenance of an honest accord between the Powers. Russia, as has been often affirmed, will not go to war with China until her Siberian railway is finished, and France has a close understanding with Russia. The conclusion of the article we have already quoted in our review of the mail papers.
The Economist then holds that China must not be pressed, (1) because of her weakness, (2) because Russia is not to be depended on. Now, as we have said before, it is very difficult to get at the
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.