Although to the man in the street, especially on a dusty day, the Chinese situation may seem at times a little vague, few difficulties present themselves to the trained mind, such as the writer's, who, though he is very seldom on the street, knows from hearsay and keen observation what the man in the street may or may not be thinking about a problem that may seem confused or defused, or something (it doesn't matter) but is really quite lucid when tersely and clearly explained, for, in the present instance, the problem is really as simple as A B C, because, if you will clear your head of all other matter, including the grey, and simply regard A as representing foreign concessions, B as the fundamental objective of Chinese nationalism, and C as almost anything you like (provided it is good for you, and not too expensive), you have only to divide the result by the number you first thought of, and add the square root of its least common multiple, to arrive at the fact that despite M Litvinoff's ultra red views saxaphonically speaking, the red, red robin will continue bobbin' along, although, mind you, the northern or chop suey influence has to be reckoned with, in light of what Sun Yat Sen said in 1910, when, entirely disregarding Napoleon's dictum that an army should march on its stomach, the general of the other, or Ching, forces, at that time, much preferred to march on the enemy's stomach, which, after all, merely proves the topsy turveydom of all Chinese psychology, or something which, in the long run, really goes right back to the earliest Ming dynasty, and makes the whole thing, as Mr. Eugen Chen points out, a Hankow of a problem any way you look at it, because, as Governor of Wuhan remarked at the time, it would be quite futile for Marshal Chan Tso-Lin to march within a stone's throw of Pekin, and then fail to find any stones to prove it, although, ridiculously enough, the specific gravity of long soup in the Canton district, however, bolstered by the secret Tongs, can have no bearing whatever on the main issue, or on that great secular principle which will keep bobbing up on the old cart road to Pekin where negotiations have now been help up or down (it is immaterial) for several years, or even days, solely, because, as Sir Austen Chamberlain said in his great speech, it simply cannot be done, and in this he was more or less (I think rather less) backed up by Mr Wellington Coo (or was it), when he said quite definitely and without reservation, "Well, what do you think about that!" In the circumstances we think so.

"C.J. Dennis"
Sun, 24 February 1927, p7