Sept 26.
Tr would be difficult to imagine a better, or worse example of studied duplicity, deliberate evasion and thinly veiled inscience than Peking's reply to the Lincheng Note. We are told that the outrage on the Blue Express occasioned the Chinese Government ''as much indignation as could possibly be felt by the members of the Diplomatic Body': but of the alleged regret we see no smallest trace of evidence in fact.
We read of '"'the vigorous measures taken to pursue the bandits and _suecour the victims.'' No measures of such a kind were taken until after repeated application by the Diplomatic Body, and ''vigorous'' was never an adjective to be applied to then; while, if foreigners themselves had not suceoured the captives, the latter would have fared even worse than they did. Finally there is the impudent attempt to make the Diplomatic Body responsible for the delay in the delivery of the captives, ''due to the adoption of. negotiation with the bandits as the safest means of effecting their release, which course was adopted in harmony with the wishes of the diplomats.'' (In passing which method would Peking have us believe that it adopted with the bandits, vigorous pursuit or negotiation? It can scarcely have it both ways.) That the Diplomatic Body addressed a sharp warning to the Waichiaopu, a fortnight after the outrage, to the effect that they would tolerate no attempts to
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.