February 18, 1899. J
CRICKET.
ROYAL ENGINEERS V. 11.M.8. “CENTURION." This match was played at Happy Valley on Saturday and resulted in a victory for the Cen- turion by 12 runs, mainly owing to good play by Golding and Shrubb, the last two wickets. The following is the score :—
ROYAL ENGINEERS.
Woods, b Killick
Spillard, b Killiok
Sivier, b Lawson
Jolly, not out
Extras
1
Hall, o Killick, b Shrubb
12
Capt. Mauld (Capt.), b Lawson
Lieut. Stephens, o Jordan, b Shrubb
4
Barayather, o Jórdan, b Shrubb
0
Wild, o Jordan, b Shrubb
8
Moore, a and b Shrubb
8
Davis, o Braad, b Shrubb
2
8
25
5
5
Total
8
H.M.8. -“ CENTURION,'
Gibshan, b Moore
17
Jordan, b Moore
5
Lawson, o Sivier, b Spillard
0
Chapman, b Moore ..
7
Killick, b Moore
8
Braad, b Moore
0
Golding, b Moore.
31
Barker, b Moore
Bergt Shrubb (Capt.), b Moore
18
Hause, b Wild
2
Summerban, not out
0
Extras
Total
CORRESPONDENCE.
93
[We do not hold ourselves responsible for the opinions expressed by our correspondents.)
SCHOOL AND ORPHANAGE FOR
६
GIRLS.
TO THE EDITOR OF THE
DAILY PRESS.
MY DEAR SIR-I am sorry to trouble yon so soon again with correspondeuce on the pro- posed school for girls, but I am afraid some of your readers may be misled us to the character of the education which it is proposed to give. The word "liberal" was used in the resolution in no illiberal sense: perhaps it would have better described the purpose if the word practical had been added. It is certainly in- tended that the education should be useful, and such as is best suited to the needs of the childreu who come to the school. There is no wish to give what your article describes as a "high class education," such as can be enjoyed by only a limited proportion of " children. Nothing was said, at the meeting, relating to the pro- posed school, to lead any one to put this construction on the scheme.-Yonrs faithfully,
R. F. COBBOLD.
Hongkong, 14th February, 1899. [In connection with the closing remark of Mr.
Cobbold's letter we would invite attention
to the speech made at the meeting by Sir John Carrington, which appears to indicate that the Chief Justice was led to put the same construction on the scheme that we did, for bis Lordship spoke of giving the girls some degree of "culture" and of the backwardness of Hongkong is the question of "
"higher education." Such remarks, which were al- lowed to pass without correction, taken in con- nection with the use of the word "liberal" in the resolution itself, naturally led, we submit. to the conclusion that it was intended to give something more than the ordinary education enjoyed by the majority of children.-ED. D.P.]
MR. FRANCIS'S LECTURE.
TO THE EDITOR OF THE
T
CHINA OVERLAND TRADE REPORT.
141
ful. Those who are unable or disinclined to think for themselves on publio questions will consider this rank heresy, but it is true, never- theless..
Lord Curzon in "Problems of the Far prospect after the East" says in discussing (China) deliberately refrains from doing "the probable war that if she'
o (ie. complete reform), the tutelage which she will not voluntarily engage for herself will her industrial exploitation, once taken seriously Fume day be forcibly applied to her by others; in hand, will pour wealth into other coffers, not into her own; in her refusal to employ foreign servants she will discover that she has invited foreign masters; and where procrastination has been the vole policy, she may find, when it is too late, that partition is the inevitable result.”
ence" is here already, and (as) said in a former letter), that it has come to stay. The amusing part of this is that the situation now is no dif- ferent from what it was on 28th December last, famous " when the China Association trotted out their now have the Chairman saying what is perfectly 'open door" resolutions, and yet we true, namely, that the time for action in that direction is long past, and should have been taken at the time of the Kizochao incident.
Mr. Francis said that Great Britain said "No
when appealed to, not only at this time, but when Russian and French aggression took place in the north and south, and from that moment Great Britain has ac- knowledged "spheres of influence" in China. Mr. Francis said it was incomprehensible to him that anyone should use this phrase in con. nection with China unless he meant the dis- How true all this is, and yet there are people interation of the Empire, but be suggested no who wilfully shut their eyes to the truth, and other. He said that China had not resigned still believe in the "strength and integrity of all authority over the varions "lenses," there-China" when she cannot even stand, much less fore it was not right to nge the phrase "spheres of influence." I maintain that, according to Mr. Francis's own definition, the phrase exactly fits the present circumstances. wany nor Russia asked China's permission to do what they did. They did it, and talked about it afterwards. Mr. Francis, and I should hope everyone, knows perfectly well that the recent conventions and so-called “leases" are nothing more or less than shams in the ancient force of keeping face." China, after finding no one to kick out aggressors, says to the latter:
'Don't take the place, we see you really | require it and are only too delighted to lease it to you," and so saves her "face." What non- sense all this is when everyone knows that none of the European Powers will ever retire one step from the present position; on the other hand they will advance.
"DAILY PRESS. Bir,-At last! Even the Chairman of the local branch of the China Association now practi- cally admits that the advocates of the open door" have been pursuing a shadow. Through- out his interesting lecture he never once refer. red to the future in connection with the "open door;" reference to this part of his subject was always in the past tense in such phrases **might have bɩen,” “should or could bave been and “should have done.” In fact Mr. Francis really acknowledged that the "sphere of influ-
•
walk.
Sir John Davis said, nearly half a century ago, "In no country is the maxim principiis Neither Ger-obsta so indispensable as in China." How true this is also and yet Great Britain bas never practised it. Other powers have done so, and with infinite benefit to themselves.
|
|
|
Exit therefore the " by the Chairman of the China Association at open door," discovered
rome time since the 28th of December last to Le a ghost and therefore not tangible; exeunt also (as the greater includes the less) the China Association's resolutions of the above date; exit the utterly impossible quadruple alliance concerning which, by the way, Mr. Francis thought it to say nothing yesterday; exit Lord Charles Beresford loaded with military eform ; and what remains? Russia 'remains where she remain. All three will extend their influence --- ban put her foot, and France and Germany it is only a question of time-nd we must follow.
In referring to railways, Mr. Francis again admitted that they will certainly lead to "spheres of influence." I go further and wish to know how they are going to be built before that hap- I do not think Mr. Francis, in speaking of British capitalist is not yet burn who will known of its extent. The East India Com- pens. Whatever others may do, I am sure the the trade with China prior to 1842, can have invest a ten-dollar note in railways in Mid-pany's figures for the years 1817-1828 show control, and the control of a huge trunk line millions sterling, while from 1829-1839 the China unless that railway is under foreign an average annual trade with China of over 91 must carry with it the control of the adjoining average annual British trade at Canton alone country. Lord Salisbury, who still speaks of the "integrity of China" (a thing which has the trade done by American vessels only at was just under 8 millious sterling. Further, ceased to exist) and who talks of China as a Canton from 1817-1829 averaged annually
going concern may see how it is to be done. over 14 million dollars.-Yours faithfully, I confess I do not,
**
bring about spheres of influence and the dis
Mr. Francis says he fears that the future will integration of the empire. Why cannot Mr. Francis and other alleged leaders of public opinion admit once and for all that the dis- memberment of the empire has begun some time ago, and will continue. If, as Mr. Francis fears, Russia and France decline to give freedom of trade in their spheres (as is only too probable) only thing remaining for us therefore is to take we cannot help it now, nor can we object. The steps that the rest of China is not shut to us. China is powerless to prevent such a calamity even were she willing, which she is not, and we must act by ourselves.
Should freedom of trade in the greater part but probable if things are allowed to go on of China be lost, as is not only possible,
as at present, no one in China cau with justice blame the British Government, who have been during the past year grossly misled by the representations of bodies like the China suggestions of Chambers of Commerce." It may Association and the impracticable and impossible be said that institutions like these are the mouth. pieces of public opinion. They certainly ought to be, but I distinctly maintain that with regard to the China question they are not.
In
Hongkong, 14th February, 1899.
B.
FOUL AND DUSTY ROADS.
TO THE EDITOR OF THE DAILY PRESS'
DEAR SIR,-in calling attention to the state of our roads " Wayfarer" bas done the public a good service. There is no excuse for Queen's Road being in its present disgraceful condition. deal of traffic and the dust is most annoying. Every day. from about 3 to 7 p.m., there is a great Besides, such dust as this is calentated to cause serious diseases by carrying poisonous germs into one's nasal cavities, throat, and lungs. Every medical man knows this, and, I trust, our very own Medical Officer of Health will take danger which now exists by ordering that the steps, at once, to protect the public from the road shall be watered in a proper manner. am, dear sir, yours faithfully,
PEDESTRIAN.
Hongkong, 10th February, 1899.
EL
-I
every community in China you will find those settle the dispute by paying $9,000,000he
the
A HOK v. BELILIOS.
TO THE EDITOR OF THE DAILY PRESS.
DEAR SIR,--it transpired in Court the other day that an offer was made by Mr. Belilios to who, with sheep-like stupidity, will follow a plaintiff's claim, the Government to for themselves, contenting themselves with the the trial was that a sum of some 89,000 in costs leader over a precipice, without pausing to think other half, but this was refused. The result of remark, "I haven't thought much about it, but if so-and-so does it, it must be all right.”
was added to A Hok's claim of $21,000. It There are hundreds of such people, but there matters will be allowed to rest where they are, does not seem to me the least bit likely that
who can see when an error has been committed. settled for $9.000 if Mr. Belilios's a are many more who do think for themselves, and seeing that the whole thing could have been but who are prevented from pointing it out been accepted 1 cannot help asking you. Mr. offer had from the knowledge beforehand that their Editor, if A Hok brings an action against the views will be pooh-poohed by the select bandful Government and succeeds who is to pay this who control the destinies of the community aided | large difference. Are the taxpayers to suffer by the ovine followers of the aforesaid hand-or this folly, or will the luminaries
|
сп