AT first sight when Sir Franei Aglen's telegram regarding the issue of Treasury notes for the Peking Government came into our hands on Wednesday evening we were inclined to accept his point of view. He stated that the note issue was secured by' Presidential mandate on the German Boser Indemnity, after prior obligations had been met, and he described our article on the subject, which had assumed that Reuter's telegram meant that the notes were secured on Customs revenue, us "'misleading." The obvious inference from Sir Francis Aglen's message is that there was some sort of difference between the German Indemnity and other Customs revenue available for the securing of loans.
On further consideration, however, we must regretfully—say that we still find ourselves total at issue with the Inspector-Gene al, as, it may be added, we know that others find themselves. Whether the notes are secured on the German Indemnity or on any makes no difference whatever to the general undesirability of the transaction. To the people who tuke up the notes there may be a difference in having them secured on the indemnity: but to the Chinese public at large and for the ull important question of the stability of the Customs Service, there is none. German Boxer Indemmity is merely a name; it has been preserved because, when the payment of it lapsed owing te the Great War, the Peking Government found it convenient to borrow money on the security' it provided. But directly no} more indemnity was paid to Germany, the amount previously earmarked for her out of Customs revenues became.a part of the Customs surplus., To issue Treasury notes secured. on,-that
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.