I have often heard related the misadventures of two Celestials, natives of different provinces, who, whilst travelling in Europe, met one day only to discover that their sole means of making themselves understood was by speaking English. But does not this story recall the recent Slav Congress in Austria, whose debates had to be held in German in order that they might be followed by all the delegates? The existence of patois and dialects results from the inhabitants of certain districts having neither the time nor the money to go beyond their village further than the nearest market-town. Then, again, education in China does not tend, as in Europe, to produce unity of language, since its writing is quite independent of pronunciation, and the innumerable letters of its alphabet represent, not sounds, but ideas. The lack of any spirit of patriotism may be largely attributed to this state of absolute isolation, to which may be added a general and very profound ignorance. But patriotism as we understand it is, after all, a matter of modern sentiment, therefore not to be looked for in so antiquated a nation as the Chinese. It matters little whether there be a common origin or not, since our notions of race are very difficult to define, and modern anthropological and ethnographical discoveries tend more and more towards the acceptance of the theory of the existence of distinct races. Whereas the patois of the ten northernmost provinces are merely dialects of the Manchurian languages, those of the south, especially of Fo-kien and Canton, are totally different, and apparently confirm the theory that the Chinese invaders who came from the north-east found the land already inhabited by a people whom they assimilated, precisely as they are doing in our time in Manchuria, and as did the Romans in ancient Gaul. The entire population of China, excepting a few obscure mountain tribes, the remainder, possibly, of the autochthones of the South, whatever their origin, have for centuries moulded themselves on a civilization that penetrates far deeper into the details of every-day life than any known in Europe. The result is a greater uniformity among the people who have adopted it than will be found among men who follow a less rigid code that permits of greater latitude and affords a freer scope for the exercise of individuality. Many peculiarities in the Chinese character appear at first contradictory, even to those who have lived long in the country, and who assert that no European can ever thoroughly understand a Chinaman because his mind is so differently constituted.