merous gunboats of the various Powers ready at all times to give prompt assistance and protection to foreign nationals should sudden emergencies arise. For these reasons it seems evident that the continuance of the Japanese troops at Hankow furnishes a conspicuous instance in which Japan has shown, and still shows, her unwillingness to respect the rights of China. Aside, however, from the inequity of her conduct in this respect, one finds it difficult to determine the grounds upon which Japan defends it even as matter of Realpolitik.

Other questions of international law involved in China's relations with the other Powers, which would be worthy of discussion if there were time, are those relating to the scope and operation of the most-favored nation doctrine; the propriety, or rather the impropriety, of maintaining" police boxes," as is done by Japan in connection with the exercise by her of her consular jurisdiction in China; and the operation of inter-Power agreements relating to China but to which she is not a party.

The PRESIDENT. The last speaker of the evening is Mr. Frederick Moore, Foreign Councillor to the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

THE FAR EASTERN SETTLEMENTS OF THE CONFERENCE

OF WASHINGTON

ADDRESS BY MR. FREDERICK MOORE

Foreign Councillor to the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Mr. President, ladies and gentlemen: I had not intended to speak without my notes as I have what I am going to say carefully prepared, but I made a couple of notes with regard to some of Mr. Willoughby's statements. The first one that struck me as rather peculiar-and I might ask him for an answer was this point: He brought up the question whether treaties or agreements between some other state and China were proper and could be enforced if they were not ratified by the parliamentary body according to the constitution. I have not followed China's affairs for some years very intimately in detail, for I have been away from there since 1916, but prior to that time I was in China for five years, and I believe I am right in saying-I would like to be corrected if I am not-that the constitution of China does not function. There is no parliament in China. In fact no parliament in China has ever been able to ratify the original constitution. And, therefore, does Mr. Willoughby mean to contend that any agreement or understanding that is entered into by the Government of China cannot operate unless or until some parliament is established and some constitution is ratified?

Professor WILLOUGHBY. I merely asked the question. I did not answer it.

Mr. MOORE. In Mr. Willoughby's statement he raised points of legal justification. We can go far in basing questions here in the United States

on matters of legality, or pure ethics, or justice; but what is the use of making a great case out of the fact that the Japanese had maintained soldiers at Hankow? It is not a very serious number. We ourselves maintain ten gunboats on the Yangtze River for the protection of missionaries. You would have believed from discussions with regard to Shantung that the Japanese had at least 60,000 troops in Shantung. As a matter of fact they had 2800 troops in Shantung. We never heard a word about the section of the railway which in effect the British control, or the section of the German railway which the Japanese did not take over and which the Chinese themselves were able to take over.

There are a great many points which we hear very little about with regard to Far Eastern matters. It has been the habit for some time in this country to pick upon the Japanese and not to perceive the other side of the case; and while I am judicially minded generally, I think that much has been said against the Japanese unfairly with regard to their position in the Far East. In the twenty minutes that are given to me I shall present something in the way, not of justification of all they have done, because they are human and they have their difficulties, and their temptations also,-but some mitigation of the charges that have been made against them. I am going to deal with some other things also in this paper.

It seems to me that to understand any situation, the best thing to do is to begin by getting down to first principles or basic facts, and in considering other peoples to regard them as ordinary human beings in somewhat differing stages of progress. Now, to understand all the complexities of Far Eastern affairs is a very serious business, perhaps beyond the capability of any one man. But any American who is seriously interested ought to be capable of understanding such facts as are available to the high-school boy, and these facts can be got out of a good geography, out of the World Almanac, and out of the Statesmen's Year Book; and especially out of our recent observation of history. I am going to deal with some such facts this evening, even before this educated audience.

By a fast boat, as we all know, Europe is approximately a week's sailing away from our eastern coast, and the history of the last hundred years has shown us, I think conclusively, that no Power in Europe and no possible combination of Powers is capable of safely assaulting the United States. The continent of Asia is approximately twice as far away, and there, too, there is no Power, nor possible combination of Powers, that is able to menace us without the gravest danger to itself. Moreover, this situation will remain as it is for scores of years to come, for while Great Britain, Japan and other nations are progressing, our development is proceeding, because of natural room for development, infinitely more rapidly.

Before I go into Far Eastern matters, which is the principal subject I have to deal with, I want to read to you a statement made by Admiral Baron Kato, in order to show you that that ranking Japanese delegate to the

Washington Conference understood this situation much as I do, and wanted to show the American people that he understood it. In a public speech in New York on January 14, he made the following very clear statement,-he I was speaking in the midst of the Conference,

In a few short weeks we have dissipated the clouds that marred the naturally clear and happy skies of the Pacific. Two months ago we heard loose talk of possible war. Today, we are contemplating an established peace. Early in November the newspapers frequently used such phrases as "Conflict of interests," "Supremacy of the seas," and Menacing aggressions"; today, they are talking more in terms of "understanding," "accord" and "coöperation." . . . Nor is this, my friends, only phraseology. Critics may say that such declarations as we have been making at Washington were made a hundred years ago at Vienna, and subsequently at The Hague, and therefore, will amount to nothing. But that is not the case, for very definite reasons. In the first place, the several nations represented in Washington have given, by the concessions they have made to the views of others, tangible demonstrations of the earnestness of their intentions. Unless the spirit that actuates the people of these nations were deep-rooted in sincere desire, these concessions would not have been possible. Fortunately, the interests and the desires of the greater nations of the world are in accord; otherwise, the scrapping of hundreds of thousands of tons of fighting ships would not be practicable or acceptable. That is unmistakable evidence of unmistakable agreement and logic.

I want particularly to draw your attention to one fact. An effort has been made for a number of years to present Japan to you as a military nation designing to dominate the Pacific. Some of us Japanese have tried to disabuse the minds of those who were wont to believe this calumny, but with many the charge remained unrefuted up to the present Conference. Within these recent weeks, Japan, by accepting the 5-5-3 ratio, has given evidence which only the weakminded will in future dispute; and at the same time this ratio is also assurance that you have no intention of assaulting us. We have never aspired or intended to challenge the security of America or her far-ranging possessions; we have sought only security for ourselves.

I want to stop here because I had another idea. Admiral Knapp spoke, it seemed to me, about the boxing gloves, so to speak, of three possible contestants, rather than the physique of the three possible contestants. If we look at the physique of the United States, the physical power of Japan, and the physical power of Great Britain, we find one Power will stand like a super-state above the other two first-class states. [Continuing Baron Kato's statement]:

Never have we desired war,-certainly never a conflict with the nation that is the greatest purchaser of our goods and at the same time the most powerful factor on the Pacific.

I think that affects 40 per cent. of the Japanese, because the Japanese live by their overseas' trade as we do primarily by our selling from one state to another.

You have a saying in English that "Whom the Gods would destroy they first make mad." The history of our country shows very clearly that neither the Gods nor the Japanese themselves have any intention of destroying Japan but are determined to let her live and prosper for her own happiness and for the benefit and progress of other peoples.

So much for the naval side of the situation as it affects the United States. If any American, after hearing that statement, believes that the Philippine Islands are likely to be attacked, it is needless for me to labor the argument any further.

Now, with regard to the policy of Japan in China, I want to quote from the final statement of the Japanese Delegation, made by Baron Shidehara at the Washington Conference:

It has been found that we are all striving for the same goal of life, and that goal is now perceptibly within sight. Take, for instance, the Chinese problem, which, it was often asserted, would one day lead to world-wide conflagration. What has the Conference revealed? No sooner had Mr. Root formulated and presented the four great rules of international conduct with regard to China than those proposals met a ready, spontaneous, and whole-hearted approval on all sides. They laid the foundation of the work of the delegations and of friendly understandings among nations.

No one denies to China her sacred right to govern herself. No one stands in the way of China working out her own great national destiny. No one has come to the Conference with any plan of seeking anything at the expense of China. On the contrary, every participating nation has shown readiness at all times to help China out of her present difficulties.

Japan believes that she has made to China every possible concession compatible with a sense of reason, fairness, and honor. She does not regret it. She rejoices in the thought that the sacrifice which she has offered will not be in vain, in the greater cause of international friendship and good will.

We are vitally interested in a speedy establishment of peace and unity in China and in the economic development of her vast natural resources. It is, indeed, to the Asiatic mainland that we must look primarily for raw materials and for the markets where our manufactured articles may be sold. Neither raw materials nor the markets can be had, unless order, happiness and prosperity reign in China, under good and stable government. With hundreds of thousands of our nationals resident in China, with enormous amounts of our capital invested there, and with our own national existence largely dependent on that of our neighbor, we are naturally interested in that country to a greater extent than any of the countries remotely situated.

To say that Japan has special interests in China is simply to state a plain and actual fact. It intimates no claim or pretension of any kind prejudicial to China or to any other foreign nation.

Nor are we actuated by any intention of securing preferential or exclusive economic rights in China. Why should we need them? Why should we be afraid of foreign competition in the Chinese market provided it is conducted squarely and honestly? Favored by geograph-

ical position, and having fair knowledge of the actual requirements of the Chinese people, our traders and business men can well take care of themselves in their commercial, industrial, and financial activities in China without any preferential or exclusive rights.

We do not seek any territory in China, but we do seek a field of economic activity beneficial as much to China as to Japan, based always on the principles of the open door and equal opportunity.

Such recent history, as every well-informed man knows, together with these statements regarding Japan's foreign policies, ought to make clear the two vital interests of Japan in international affairs,-first, the necessity of seeing that no other great Power shall so lodge itself in China that it will become a menace to Japan; secondly, the necessity for Japan to obtain raw materials and agricultural supplies from the neighboring mainland and of marketing her manufactured goods there. Japan is not as richly endowed as America with wealth, expanse of territory and supplies of raw materials. Here we have practically everything we need. We are self-sustaining. But they are less well-endowed than the British Isles. The Japanese people cannot exist without foreign supplies and foreign markets.

Now, I will get down again to some fundamental facts! Japan proper has a population of about 60,000,000 people. Her territory is approximately the size of the State of Montana. The population of Montana is approximately 500,000. While most of the ground of that state is arable, in Japan most of the territory is composed of rocky, non-arable land, less than a fifth of it being capable of yielding crops. Taking Japan proper as a whole, there are nearly 400 people to the square mile, while in the United States we have but 35,-less than one-tenth of Japan's congestion. In view of such circumstances as these, it seems remarkable that the Japanese have been able to make the individual sacrifices necessary to advance their country to its present position among the great Powers. It seems to me that instead of criticism, the Western world ought to be magnanimous enough to say to them, "Bravo! You have your faults, like other human beings, but your virtues are conspicuous."

Japan ought to be able to accomplish her objectives in this regard without war or danger of war, for no fair-dealing nation would deny her people the right to exist. The danger is only in the method by which she obtains the supplies and the markets which China, and, to a minor extent, Siberia, afford. If, in their zeal, her enterprising people observe two important principles, they ought to encounter no serious opposition from either the Chinese or the Western Powers. The first of these principles is fair dealing with the Chinese,-who will greatly benefit by Japanese enterprise, and who in the mass will welcome it. The second of these principles is that there shall be no attempt at exclusion of other foreign traders in China,-in other words, no closing of the door to Western merchants or investors.

We have generally been hearing of the way in which the Japanese fight