JAPANESE CLAIMS

Hokitika Guardian, 31 October 1931, Page 6

JAPANESE CLAIMS

INTEREST IN MANCHURIA NOT UNREASONABLE.

SYSTEM OF RAILWAYS'

It has been said, not without justice, that China’s loudly-aired grievances are due in a. large measure to her voluntary derogations from her own sovereignity. The word “voluntary” is used advisedly, for the element of duress that has been present-, in the foreign Powers’ dealings with’ China! has been greatly exaggerated. Japan opened her ports under the menace of Admiral Perry’s guns. China, of her own accord, entered into the engagements to which she is now committed. -

To talk of the' '“unequal’witreaties is wide of the mark. Some of these treaties were concluded after the socalled Opium War, hut some have been renewed and concessions have been granted to nations who are incapable of exerting pressure, states a writer in the “Sydney Morning Herald.”

In the same way China, cannot complain because the two chief railway lines in Manchuria, are subject wholly or in part to Toreign control. This is by virtue </f a contract. The key to the railway system of tin* province are the Chinese Eastern and the South Manchurian railways. Both were built in the first place by Russia, although since the South Manchurian railway came into Japanese hands it lias been greatly extended. A MISLEADING ASSERTION. The assertion tlnyt tlxif|{L railways wore foisted on the guidqfess Chinese by the unscrupulous and impeHalixtic diplomacy of Russia is misleading. No doubt it was an advantage to Russia to have direct communication with Vladivostock. But it would have been possible—as lias since been done—to reach that city with a line on a circuitous route entirely in Siberian territory.

The advantage, however, was mutual, because" it enabled China to exploit the vast puibontia.l but previously undeveloped sources of that region. The contract of 1896 contemplated only the Chinese eastern railway, trie southern branch being added to the project after the lease of Port Arthur to Russia in 1898. A company was formed to carry out the work. Shares might be acquired by subjects of either nation, but the bulk of the money was supplied by Russia. It was provided that the company should hold the line on a lease of 80 years, but that at the end of 36 years China should have the option of purchasing it upon payment of the cost of construction and any debts resulting from its operation. If the option was not exercised, the line was to pa,«s into China's ownership free of charge. It will be seen that the. option date i.s approaching.

ACTION BY THE SOVIET

In 1905, by the treaty of Portsmouth

Riivsja surrendered all interest in the South Manchuria railway to Japan. China had no alternative but to acquiesce in this .arrangement. In 1919 the Soviet intimated that it would, without compensation, give China the Chinese eastern railway, “a symbol of imperialistic oppression of the Tsarist regime.’’ However, the Soviet- soon repented of its generosity, and, after negotiations, this railway was, in 1924, constituted a Government enterprise, Co- ducted by a board, on which each country is equally represented. .Meanwhile Japan had not been idle. She had been digging herself in with characteristic pertinacity. Japan asserts that hv the Treaty of Pekin, which was subsidiary to tire Treaty of Portsmouth, and, again, under the twenty-one demands, China promised not to construct railways parallel to and competing with the South Manchurian line, and now alleges that tin's undertaking has been broken by China.

JAPAN A CONCESSIONAIRE.

Japan’s role in Manchuria is technically that of a concessionaire. She does not claim sovereignity oyer Manchuria, although she is reluctant to acknowledge that China is sovereign; it is not without significance that the Govern merit railway guide books exclude Manchuria from the section devoted to China, and place it in a. separate volume.

Her official status is simply that of a lessee of a public utility who, if the bargain of 189-5 is to stand, is liable to receive notice to quit next year. Nevertheless, -she is turning her control of the railway into an instrumentfor peaceful penetration. This, with the restrictions imposed on Chinese construction, explains why the railway question in Manchuria has political aspects.

The monopoly of transport over a large area, the troops, with headquarters at Mukden, who protect the railways and maintain order; the everI increasing number of Japanese and Chinese employed in Japanese businesses and Government posts—all these tend constantly to expand Japan’s sphere of influence. MANCHURIA HA$ PROSPERED. Whatever hie the eights and wrongs of this veiled hegemony, it has from the material point of view been a good tiling for Manchuria, which has made amazing progress, and is the most prosperous province in the whole of China. Chinese peasants and artisans, literally by millions, have fled from their congested homes and exchanged the terrors of brigandage and the turmoil of civil war for tlie tranquility of Manchuria. .Japan, moreover, is resolved that this tranquility shall not be disturbed. After the collapse of the Northern

armies in -.1928 they were denied access to Ma nchuria; the latter was not to become the stamping-ground of the retreating host. While it was most desirable that the country should be spared the devastation that an undisciplined rabble leaves in its train, there wa s paradox in the spectacle of Chinese being refused admission ito their own territory by n foreign Power. But that Japan should have thus barred the door indicates that she is well aware of the strength of hei position in Manchuria.