17th Sept. Tue Far Eastern Question and the present and future aspect of affairs in China are still occupying a large' share of the attention of the thinking public in England, and justly so, There has been the maximum of talk and the minimum of action in connection with sh policy in China, in fact, there has been such a plethora of the former that very little more remains to be said on the subject and any one attempting fo write upon it is extremely liable to lay himself open to a charge of plasiatising other peoples' ideas. Attacks have been made by note or less responsible persons in the Press, in Parliament, aid on public platforms, on the' Chinese policy of the British Government and on those entrusted with the carrying out of that policy, much of which, it must be: admitted, has been only too well justified by the outcome of our policy in China, The Saturday Revietv, however, in the course, of an able review of Mr, Colquhonn's new. book, China in Transformation, wakes an attack upon Sir Claude Macdonald which is, we think, entirely unjustified and. unjust titiable, having regard to facts. Ihe man who states that aaa Minister Sir Claude's failure has been " conspicuous and congplete" can have very little knowledge of the amount of really good solid work Sir Claude has done for British interests in China, handicapped and fottered as he has been by Chinese duplicity and procrastination on the one hand, combined with the intrigues of others, and the criminal supineness of the Foreign Office on the—other. There can be very little doubt in the iinds of those who have had the opportunity of studying the trend of events on the spot that Sir Claude is a really able Minister, and that had he been allowed " free hand instead of being hampered by instructions from home, the outcome of our policy in China would have been far different from what it actually lias been. We do-not-pretend to believe that it would be impossible to find a better man to represent British interests in Peking—Lord Cromer, for. instance, would, we think be a better—but we do maintain that he isa thoroughly good and conscientious Minister, and that the failures have not been his, but are-to be laid directly to the charge of Downing Street.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.