To the Editor of the "Norru-Catna Darty News."
Sir,—In your issue dated January 7, the question of the right. term to describe British subjects You remark, in your leaderette on the subject, that Britons need not always be British subjects, and vice versa. If "Briton" is given the sense necessary to make this true, its use applied to subjects of the British Empire would be as in-vidians as that of the word "Englishman" applied to any and every inhabitant of the British Isles.
Furthermore "Briton" has about it a certain atmosphere of sentimentality and jingoism which causes its avoidance by most people. I submit that it is seldom used in conversation.
"Britisher" has at present an Sir,—May I be permitted to use the correspondence columns of your paper to ask Mr. Eugene Chen, whose knowledge and understanding of the Chinese and their affairs are generally admitted to illimitable, what, if any, truth there is in the rumour that the party he so ably serves is, directly or indirectly, responsible for the present seamen's strike in South China waters; whether the strike is an affair of labour or of politics; and whether the Canton Government is, at the moment, busily engaged in "pulling the strings" on the Seamen's side of the dispute?
Rumours of the above nature are becoming so persistent that a short denial or confirmation of their authenticity, from the able pen of your consistently well-informed contributor, would do much to clear the air in the matter.
I am, etc.,
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.