We publish to-day a letter by Janother "Enylishman" this time from up country, which taken in conjunction with that print.
yesterday and also signed englishman", deserves careful consideration. The points of view of the two writers are i some ways similar, Yesterday's correspondent argued for reform of the Mixed Court and Chinese representation on the! Council. To-day's writer say: that the student movement i symptomatic of the birth of the! national spirit in China which Jcannot be ignored; he says that the students have been, as it were, unofficially delegated by the Chinese people to represent! them in their national aspirations; he sees no trace of Bol-, shevism in his particular loco ty; thinks that it is a mistake to accuse the students of being in league with the Soviet; and pleads for consideration of the Chinese point of view.
To one point in this writer's ter immediate exception must bbe taken. If he himself sees no trace of Bolshevism about him, he is lucky, May we ask him to' accept it from us that there is overwhelming evidence in the hands of governments at Home jand foreign authorities in China that the present disorders are the outcome of years of work by Moscow and its agents. Those efforts are not, to be met. by the! methods of. the Montessori Parent—putting ourselves in the corner when the infant China flies into a tantrum and
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.