The times., 1900-12-30
Circulation Statement.
NJ. De bloch on China.

We reprinted on Friday an article in the
current number OF The Independent
from the pen of NJ. Jean de Bloch, author
of THE Future of War" an excellent
work, but some of the assumptions and
predictions of which have been badly rat
tied by military experience since it was
written. NJ. de Bloch's present paper
deals with current conditions in China.
and ne severely criticises the policy and
course OF the Western European nations
in connection with them.
We must remember that the distin-
gulshed writer is a Russian privy coun-
cilor and as such may view the Chinese
situation through eyes more or less af-
fected by patriotic considerations Never
theless, what he says is worthy of re-
spectful hearing, and may not be very far
from the truth.
NJ de Blochs idea is that, in imposing
harsh and humiliating terms on China the
Powers are merely laying up wrath
against the day of wrath. He argues that
il the Empire had the men and arms to-
day il would instantly reject the demands
recently agreed upon at Pekin and trans
mitted to the court. In his opinion they
will be resented bitterly, the Chinese win
go on turning out arms and munitions OF
war at their arsenals, and in a decade or
two will he ready for revenge. Aside from
the political view OF the question he holds
that China will never be able to raise the
indemnity which viii be required Of her,
and in despair may turn TO Japan for as
sistance. Then he says s'the Yellow Peril
would exist, and in its most dangerous
form
TIE economic advantages which western
Europe and America believe are capable
of being reaped in China NJ. de Bloch
declares to be almost entirely lima ginary.
He is convinced. that the attempt of the
richest nations in the world 10 exploit
the poorest VIII only result in loss and
damage TO the former; and that the OBJ
vioas course for the civilized States to
pursue is to be generous and forgiving
10 China. and thus avert evils and dis
asters which he sees in preparation for
the future.
So far. in the abstract at least. we are
prepared to agree generally with NJ. de
Bloch: but not with his proposition that
the Chinese Government was innocent OF
the attack upon the legations. II it had
been guilty. he reasons. the legations
would not have been able to hold out
until help arrived. Our own deductions
from the facts of the siege ere different
1t IS not to be disputed that on the day
OF Baron Won Ketteler's murder the En-
press Dowager had ordered a general mas
ssere of the diplcmatists when they should
arrive al the Tsung- Ysmen for a pre-
arranged conference with the Chinese
Board of Foreign Affairs. 1t Will not be
denied that Prince Tuan, father to the
heir 10 the throne, exerted himself to
secure the destruction of the legations
and butchery of the Ministers, their fam
lilies and suites. 1t has been completely
proven that before. during, and after the
siege the Empress Dowager continually
issued secret edicts to Yiceroys, Gov
errors. and generals to rise against and
kill all foreigners in the country. NJ. de
Blochs acquittal OF the imperial authori-
ties tends to render one suspicious of the
value IL not the bona fides OF his position
The Chinese problem at best is sad
mystery which only time, and a good deal
or it, can unravel.