I regret to note, by the report of the annual meeting of the Indo-China S. N. Ca, held in London on the 9th of June, that the Chairman had but cold comfort to give the shareholders with regard to the loss of the steamer Kowshing while under charter to the Chinese Government. He tted that all efforts made to induce the Government tomake up this gross case bad been unsucoessful and it was clear the Chinese Government would not reimburse the company unless they were obliged to. Why in Heaven's name they are not compelled to The arch plotter Li Hungebang chartered do so passeth my poor comprehension! the ship intending to use her as a he dispatched the troops in her after the Japanese had given waming that they should regard the dispatch of more troo} mandarins in charge' of the ship refused to Corea as an act of war; and the ssily
to allow the vessel to surrender to the Japanese when summoned to do so. What farther proof of the responsibility of the Chinese for the loss of the steamer and some geo lives on board of her is desired the Chinese Government accuse the commander of the Kowshing of refusing to surrender? Do they deny the charter? What is their contention in the matter? It would be interesting to know. Perhaps they contend that the steamer
guns! Their refusal to pay up in a case ought to have been proof against Japsnese where their liability is so absolutely clear, of course, stamps them as most dis honourable shufilers, to say the very least, and if the British Government had any backbone it would refuse to again receive the Chinese Representative in London until this bill had been fully settled.
Hongkong, 8th July.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.