Some Questions of International Law.
375
SOME QUESTIONS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW ARISING FROM THE RUSSO-JAPANESE WAR. II. The Hay Note and Chinese Neutrality. Br AMOS S. HERSHEY, Associate Professor of European History and Politics, Indiana University. THE most important questions which have thus far arisen out of the Russo-Japanese War have been connected with the great problem of maintaining the neutrality and the integrity or administrative entity" 1 of the Chinese Empire. In order to preserve the integrity and neutrality of China proper, as well as to restrict the area of hostilities as much as possible, Secretary Hay, acting, it is said, at the suggestion oi Germany, sent the following instructions to our representa tives at St. Petersburg, Tokio, and Peking on February tenth : "You will express to the Minister for Foreign Affairs the earnest desire of the Government of the United States that in the course of the military operations which have arisen between Russia and Japan, the neu trality of China and in all practicable ways her administrative entity shall be respected by both parties, and that the area of hostili ties shall be localized and limited as much as possible, so that undue excitement and dis turbance of the Chinese people may be pre vented, and the least possible loss to the commerce and peaceful intercourse of the world may be occasioned." At the same time all the Powers interested in the fate of China were informed of this action on the part of our Government and invited to take similar action on their part. 1 The phrase "administrative entity" is said by some to be ambiguous. It is not really so, for it must mean the integrity of that portion of the Chinese Empire which is actually admin istered or governed by Chinese officials. It at least includes China proper, i. e., the 18 provinces south of the Great Wall and east of Thibet, and probably Mongolia. Manchuria and Korea are of course excluded.
The favorable replies which, were received from all the Powers would seem to indicate that similar action was taken by them, and the principles embodied in the Hay Note were also accepted by China, Russia and Japan. China at once issued a proclamation of neutrality; but the acceptance of the bel ligerents, more especially of Russia, was made conditional upon the acceptance of cer tain provisos which may lead to troublesome complications in the future. In its reply of February nineteenth, the Russian Govern ment signified its willingness to respect the neutrality of China on the following condi tions: (i) That China herself "strictly ob serve all the duties of neutrality; (2) that the Japanese Government "loyally observe" not only the "engagements entered into with the Powers," but also "the principles generally rcognized by the law of nations": and (3) that "neutralization be in no case extended to Manchuria." Japan on the other hand, in her reply of February thirteenth, merely stipulated that the "region occupied by Russia" be excluded from the neutral area, and that "Russia, making a similar en gagement, fulfil in good faith the conditions and terms of such engagement." 2 It will thus be seen that both Russia and Japan have made their acceptance of the main principle of the Hay Note, viz., the main tenance of the neutrality of China proper, conditional upon its observance by the other belligerent. This is entirely reasonable and proper; but Russia has, in addition, stipu lated for a strict observance of the duties of "For the texts of these replies, see World's Work for April, 1904.
