Referring to the Japanese blockade against Chinese shipping, "The Times" says that further confirmation is awaited. It appears, the correspondent points out, that there is some discrepancy between the Admiral's reported orders and the statement of the Japanese Foreign Office that no foreign ships are to be molested.
In any case, he concludes, the dangers of incidents are obviously Present, and it is strongly doubted whether the Japanese have any right to blockade the shores of a country with which officially they are not at var.—Reuter, Time for Britain to Act Washington, Aug. 27.
"Perhaps we shall now see the beginning of a British awakening to the significance of all that has been happening between the historic date of September 18, 1931, when Japan set her Asian march in motfor> and to-day," says the "Washington Daily" News" in commenting to-day on the wounding of Sir Hughe Knatchbull-'Hugessen, the British Ambassador.
Fundamentally, the newspaper declares, there' is little difference between this and the incident which (Continued on page 6)
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.