Defence or Psychology To the Editor of the "Mohrh-Chimn Dairy News"
Sir,—I have read with much interest íhe letter appearing from "Morner" in this morning's issue, as well as your sub-leader headed "Anti-Japanese" Feeling, First of all why, oh why, must you keep on referring to Yangiszepoo as "Hongkew"? I will have you know that our suburban susceptibilities are deeply offended, and if you reply that the Overburdened Protocol justifies your interpretation, I shall merely demand proof of your sincerity.
There is, however, one point on which I seek enlightenment, as it has puzzled me for a considerable time. As I have previously written you, my quarters are quite a distance within the boundaries, yet the "fighting" around here always seems to be of the "last' ditch" variety. It is always heartening to hear the deep throated roar of triumph accompanying the repulse of the "invaders," but what has been worrying me is this: If the higher command envisages their inability to keep the boundaries of the Settlement inviolate, then none of the forces can be said to be here for the defence of the town. or is it the true reason that tactics have been intermingled with psychology, and that invaders will be permitted to come well within the Settlement, so that when they get chased out they will have farther to run?
If someone can elucidate thi he will oblige one who now signs himself
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.