Shanghai know. this too well, but do nothing to see that any actual imof their own or representative interests, In stating a crisis is here now or coming, it is just what is to be ex-The sold for filthy lucre alone, to be rapidly sq Many years ago Shanghai was badly exploited by the creation of a water supply to allow private capitalists to corner the whole Waterworks concern instead of using it for if-as a public utility and Municipal Mbearing holding or Municipal investment of the gilt-edged class or lans standard.
Now we find the present Municipal rate is 18 per cent. and that it is to be 27 per cent. as from July 1 next, while in the French Concession adjoining us the rate is only 17 per cent. and likely to remain at that.
Again, in the Concessira, with its own electricity sup~®y (Municipal supply), the price of current is 50 per cent. (one-half) other lower than what we are paying to the Power Company on this side, run by this foreign electricity concern.
Then we take up any of our local Mr. McDonald and Mr. Shaw To the Editor of the "Nosru-CHiNA Dany News"
Sm,—With regard to the letter from Mr. Cuartes R. Saw, dated April 2 and headed "The Gentlemen's Agreement which appeared in your journal of April.4, I not infrequently read his letters with interest, amusement and profit when he is not excessively pontifical and self-righteous, out because of what I believe to be nis upright character and usually reasonable outlook, I "was. distressed at the tone of his letter in question.
I do not consider that the Japanese are more sensitive to criticism than the British, but I fully agree and would emphasize that the International Settlement was built up first and foremost by British courage, enterprise and effort and to a considerably lesser extent by the like qualities on the part of the much smaller American community, both im c operation "with Chinese when they the saw fit to ce-operate.
From the comparatively limited opportunities of observation which I have had, and from such reading as I have done, I am satisfied that the Japanese have in normal times in their past dealings with foreigners given concrete illustrations of their appreciation of what is fair and due io any form of legitimately vested interest. Sometimes it may be on an agreed basis after negotiation, at others, I understand, on a rough basis of compensation for a period up to 334 years or so.
I feel confident that they are fully cognisánt of all that the British have done in the past and will honourably discharge the obligations which this implication entails, but just as the smaller British in Shanghai intensely resent any form of Prussian or other arrogance from any British or other caucus which has usurped or purported to usurp dictatorial power, so also, I imagine, do the Japanese en-terrain equal resentment at any display of similar truculence or obstruction or non ce-operation on the part of such a caucus, With regard to the Afth' paragraph of Mr. Suaw's letter it is no business of his or of ours what the Japanese would choose to do with an independent Japanese candidate. That is solely their concern; but in the last sentence of this paragraph Ma. Haw inadvertently, I assume, lets the lack cat of his own political convietion out of the bag. He appears to be a Nazi-ite, naked and unshamed.
In the sixth and last paragraph of his letter he seems to me almost verging on hysteria, when he writes "The breaking of a gentleman's agreement, which means what it says, namely an agreement between gentlemen (and being such seldom a written agreement)" What does all this nonsense mean? What is the agreement which it is insinuated that I have broken? Let him define it? Who are the other gentlemen except myself? What court is to decide whether there was any, even a whom imaginary agreement, and if so, what it was? Let Mr. Smaw study the rudinientary elements of law before he attempts to pose as a jurist or even a moral or ethical guide. Let him eschew loose thinking and looser and more dangerous babbling or it will get him into trouble.
It is a matter of real regret to me, however misguided, I may consider Mr. SHAw to be, that I have forfeited eyes at any rate, the former position in the community which I apparently held. However I hope that when he has read this letter and my other and very lengthy letter to you of April 4, he will at least modify or qualify his views and perhaps even renounce them. I have still a few friends left, but the more the merrier. If I am subjected to much more abuse and persecution even that small band may waver, and Surely Mr. Suaw, with his kindly nature, would not wish to see me wholly and utterly ostracized, because I have done and am doing what ty conscience tells me is right in every respect: RANALD McDonatp Shanghai, Apr. 4.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.