An item of news that came along with these decrees seemed to indicate that a hitherto frivolous court has at length become thoroughly in earnest on the subject of education.  A sum of 300,000 taels appeared in the national budget as the annual expense of a theatrical troupe in attendance on the Court.  At the instance of two ministers (Viceroy Yuan and General Tieliang) Her Majesty reduced this to one-third of that amount, ordering that theatricals should be performed twice a week instead of daily; and that the 200,000 taels thus economised shall be set apart for the use of schools.  How much this resembles the policy of Viceroy Chang who, exempted from raising a war indemnity, set apart an equal amount for the building of schoolhouses!  An empire that builds schoolhouses is more certain to make a figure in the world than one that spends its money on batteries and forts.

In addition to adopting the new education there are three items which Chang proclaims as essential to a renovation of Chinese society.  In the little book, already cited, he says: 

[Page 236]
  The crippling of women makes their offspring weak;
  The superstition of Fungshui prevents the opening of mines,
  And keeps China poor.”

How could the man who wrote this fall back into the folly of Fungshui? Is it not possible that he closed that new road in deference to the superstitions of his people?  In either case it would be a deplorable weakness; but his country, thanks to his efforts, is now fully committed to progress.  She moves, however, in that direction much as her noble rivers move toward the sea—­with many a backward bend, many a refluent eddy.

POSTSCRIPT NO.  I

In taking leave of this eminent man, who represents the best class of his countrymen, there are two or three incidents, which I mention by way of supplement.  In his telegram to Vancouver, besides engaging me to assume the office of president of the proposed university, he asked me to act as his legal and political adviser.  In the agreement formally made through the consul in New York, in place of these last-named functions was substituted the duty of instructing his junior mandarins in international law.  The reason assigned for the change was that the Peking Government declined to allow any foreigner to hold the post of adviser.  The objection was represented as resting on general policy, not on personal grounds.  If, however, the Peking officials had read my book on the Siege, in which I denounce the treachery of Manchu government and favour the [Page 237] position of China, it is quite conceivable that their objection might have a tinge of personality.