The chorus of praise of the new Cabinet, transmitted by Reuter's correspondent in Peking, would carry more weight if the source of it were quoted, as it certainly should be. We have already more than once objected to Reuter's telegrams from Peking indulging in ipso comment and we dixit reiterate those objections. A newspaper bears its responsibility for what it or its own correspond: ents say. But it is a fundamental principle of news agency messages that they should not contain comment without giving the source of it. In the present condition of China much harm may be done by the imprimatur of a great news agency like Reuter being lent to a new Cabinet, which it is quite possible that the people of China may view in a totally different light to that in which it is regarded in interested quarters in Peking. We say this with all possible respect to the new. Prime Minister and his colleagues. From what we can Jearn in Shanghai the praise bestowed on them is fully deserved and in any other circumstances their advent to power would probably meet with wide approval. The criticism that will be directed against the Cabinet, however, at the present juncture is, in all probability, that it is merely a device of the President's to tide over an awkward juncture and avoid the reassembling of Parliament, which China at the moment appears earnestly to desire, until that. step can be taken without fear of the disturbance of settled interests. What we raise objection to in Reuter's telegram is not the praise in itself but the general principle of comment without quotation.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.