burden of proof to justify so grievous an infringement of the rights of exclusive territorial jurisdiction which international law as well as a general sense of international comity and justice, recognize as attaching to the status of sovereignty and independence.

In behalf of my Government and the people whom I represent, I therefore ask that the Conference give its approval to the following proposition:

"Each of the Powers attending this Conference hereinafter mentioned, to wit, the United States of America, Belgium, the British Empire, France, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, and Portugal, severally declare that, without the consent of the Government of China, expressly and specifically given in each case, it will not station troops, or railway guards or establish and maintain police boxes, or erect or operate electrical communication installations, upon the soil of China; and that if there now exist upon the soil of China such troops or railway guards or police boxes or electrical installations without China's express consent, they will be at once withdrawn."

66

Upon request of the Committee, the Chinese Delegation, at the ninth meeting, held November 29, submitted a Memorandum showing, according to its information, the foreign troops, police, railway guards" and electrical installations upon the soil of China without the consent of the Chinese Government.

This information (the Memorandum declared) is furnished simply in order to show the extent to which China's territorial and administrative integrity is now being violated, and not as implying that the Chinese Government will be contented with the abatement of these specific violations of her sovereign rights; for China, as declared in the resolution which it has proposed, desires that there should be a general or comprehensive declaration upon the part of the powers represented in this conference that, without China's consent, expressly and specifically given in each case, they will not maintain troops or police boxes, or railway guards or electrical installations upon China's soil, with the result that upon the powers will lie the

burden of establishing their right to do so in each case in which they may assert a right or claim to maintain upon China's soil such troops, police boxes, railway guards, or electrical installations.

The resolution proposed by the Chinese delegation will not affect the rights of the powers obtained under the protocol agreement of 1901, nor their right to maintain police forces in their various municipal settlements and concessions. If, as to these matters, any revision should be desired, separate discussion or negotiation may be had.1

Japanese Statement. In rejoinder to this statement upon the part of the Chinese Delegation, the Japanese Delegation submitted a rejoinder in which it was said that the draft resolution which the Chinese had proposed was, in effect, embodied in the first of the Root Resolutions that had already been adopted, and therefore, that its adoption would be repetitious. The Japanese Delegation, the statement said " is further persuaded that the withdrawal or abolition of the foregoing troops, railway guards, police stations, and telegraph and wireless installations should not be immediately decided simply because the Chinese authorities have not given them their express consents. There are specific reasons for the existence of such institutions in each special case. We are prepared to explain these specific reasons which have brought about the existing conditions in the cases in which Japan is concerned."

Mr. Sze replying, in behalf of the Chinese Delegation, said that No. 5 of the Chinese Ten Points had used the term "immediately" as well as the phrase

66

as soon as circumstances will permit," and that the

'The matter of electrical installations will be separately considered in the next chapter.

matters of troops, railway guards, etc., furnished instances in which immediate relief was properly demandable, and, therefore, that the Chinese had asked that they be at once withdrawn. He added that the Chinese Delegation would be glad to have the Japanese Delegation furnish the data which it claimed to have in substantiation of its view that immediate withdrawal should not be provided for. Mr. Hanihara, of the Japanese Delegation, then read the following statement:

The Japanese Delegation wishes to explain, as succinctly as possible, why and how the Japanese garrisons in various parts of China have come to be stationed there. At the outset, however, I desire to disclaim most emphatically that Japan has ever entertained any aggressive purposes or any desire to encroach illegitimately upon Chinese sovereignty in sending or maintaining these garrisons in China.

(1) Japanese railway guards are actually maintained along the South Manchuria Railway and the Shantung Railway.

With regard to the Shantung Railway guards, Japan believes that she has on more than one occasion made her position sufficiently clear. She has declared and now reaffirms her intention of withdrawing such guards as soon as China shall have notified her that a Chinese police force has been duly organized and is ready to take over the charge of the railway protection.

The maintenance of troops along the South Manchuria Railway stands on a different footing. This is conceded and recognized by China under the Treaty of Peking of 1905. (Additional Agreement, Art. II.) It is a measure of absolute necessity under the existing state of affairs in Manchuria-a region which has been made notorious by the activity of mounted bandits. Even in the presence of Japanese troops, those bandits have made repeated attempts to raid the railway zone. In a large number of cases they have cut telegraph lines and committed other acts of ravage. Their lawless activity on an extended scale has, however, been effectively

checked by Japanese railway guards, and general security has been maintained for civilian residents in and around the railway zone. The efficiency of such guards will be made all the more significant by a comparison of the conditions prevailing in the railway zone with those prevailing in the districts remote from the railway. The withdrawal of railway guards from the zone of the South Manchuria Railway will no doubt leave those districts at the mercy of bandits, and the same conditions of unrest will there prevail as in remote corners of Manchuria. In such a situation it is not possible for Japan to forego the right, or rather the duty, of maintaining railway guards in Manchuria, whose presence is duly recognized by treaty. (2) Towards the end of 1911 the first Revolution broke out in China, and there was complete disorder in the Hupeh district which formed the base of the revolutionary operations. As the lives and property of foreigners were exposed to danger, Japan together with Great Britain, Russia, Germany, and other principal Powers, dispatched troops to Hankow for the protection of her people. This is how a small number of troops have come to be stationed at Hankow. The region has since been the scene of frequent disturbances; there were recently a clash between the North and South at Changsha, pillage by troops at Ichang, and a mutiny of soldiers at Hankow. Such conditions of unrest have naturally retarded the withdrawal of Japanese troops from Hankow.

It has never been intended that these troops should remain permanently at Hankow, and the Japanese Government have been looking forward to an early opportunity of effecting complete withdrawal of the Hankow garrison. They must be assured, however, that China will immediately take effective measures for the maintenance of peace and order and for the protection of foreigners, and that she will fully assume the responsibility for the damage that may be or may have been done to foreigners.

(3) The stationing of the garrisons of foreign countries in North China is recognized by the Chinese Government under the protocol relating to the Boxer revolution of 1900. Provided there is no objection from the other countries concerned, Japan will be ready, acting in unison with them, to withdraw her garrison as soon as the actual conditions warrant it.

(4) The Japanese troops scattered along the lines of the Chinese Eastern Railway have been stationed in connection with an interallied agreement concluded at Vladivostok in 1919. Their duties are to establish communication between the Japanese contingents in Siberia and South Manchuria. It goes without saying, therefore, that these troops will be withdrawn as soon as the evacuation of Siberia by the Japanese troops is effected.

The Chairman of the Committee, Secretary Hughes, asked Mr. Hanihara if his Delegation relied upon Article II of the Additional Agreement to the Sino-Japanese of December 22, 1905. Mr. Hanihara said that it did.2

With regard to Police or " Police Boxes," as distinguished from Troops, Mr. Hanihara, in behalf of the Japanese Delegation, made the following statements:

In considering the question of Japanese consular police in China, two points must be taken in account.

(1) Such police do not interfere with Chinese or other foreign nationals. Their functions are strictly confined to the protection and control of Japanese subjects.

(2) The most important duties with which the Japanese police are charged are, first, to prevent the commission of crimes by Japanese, and second, to find and prosecute Japanese criminals when crimes are committed.

2 This Article is as follows:

Article II. In view of the earnest desire expressed by the Imperial Chinese Government to have the Japanese and Russian troops and railway guards in Manchuria withdrawn as soon as possible, and in order to meet this desire, the Imperial Japanese Government, in the event of Russia agreeing to the withdrawal of her railway guards, or in case other proper measures are agreed to between China and Russia, consent to take similar steps accordingly. When tranquillity shall have been reestablished in Manchuria, and China shall have become herself capable of affording full protection to the lives and property of foreigners, Japan will withdraw her railway guards simultaneously with Russia."