The latest papers out from Home all again contain startling accounts of factory conditions in China as detailed by Miss Agatha Harrison, supported this time by a Sutton, another Y.W.C.A, work: The lust time we had the temerity to suggest that Miss Harrison could not possibly ut everything jour China during her brief visit, int she omitted many essential yerely criticized by 30 associates here, who said that it wi unfair to take a summarized report and assume that it presented all that Miss Harrison said. Well, it is strange that again Miss Harrison declares that "'there is something terrible for the West to answer for in the East," and that "the people who were interpreting Christianity in China from the West had a share of the responsibility." And much the same from Miss Sutton. Stateents like that rank as very good "copy" and find a place accordingly. Still more striking "copy" and some that no reporter would dared miss or any sub-editor delete would have been a statement that Western employers of factory labour here already have attempted much for the amelioration of hardships and that they have expressed their willingness and shown their desire very much to lighten the conditions of child labour, or to abolish it|* altogether, but that they can do practically nothing because of the general conditions in China and opposition they would meet from the children's own parents and gu Statements like that, which are absolutely true, would hat pealed as still more striking and even would have been given precedence had there been a rush on space, and because they did not appear it is perfectly correct to sume that they were not made. One may ask why they were not made, why were not both sides of the case put forward by these experienced social workers, and why, in view of inble facts, there is so much "responsibility on the West"? Miss Harrison is not conducting her case in a winning way,
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.