are to fix the proportion in certain cases. These same commissions, by Article 372, are, in the event of dispute, to fix the conditions of working in cases when, owing to frontier changes, "a railway connection between two parts of the same country crosses another country, or a branch line from one country has its terminus in another." A special provision in favor of Czecho-Slovakia is found in Article 373.

Within a period of five years from the coming into force of the present treaty the Czecho-Slovak State may require the construction of a railway line in German territory between the stations of Schlauney and Nachod. The cost of construction shall be borne by the Czecho-Slovak State.

The two towns mentioned, Nachod in Czecho-Slovakia, and Schlauney (or Schlanei) in Germany, are about two and one-quarter miles distant from each other in a direct line. The chief purpose of the proposed rail connection is to facilitate the transport of coal from upper Silesia. The road to be built would probably be less than a mile in length, as the existing lines are at one point only about half a mile apart.

At the time of the construction of the St. Gothard Railway, Germany, by agreement with the Italian and Swiss Governments, made a contribution of twenty million francs toward its cost, pursuant to the Convention of October 13, 1909. The denunciation of this convention, after agreement between Switzerland and Italy on the subject, is contemplated by Article 374, and as such denunciation will probably involve the payment to Germany of a comparatively large sum, it is provided that any dispute as to the conditions shall be determined by an arbitrator designated by the United States.

The temporary provisions of Article 375 regarding transport, relate solely to the execution of the treaty and to the restoration of normal conditions.

It has been seen that Part XII of the treaty relates to subjects of a very technical nature, perhaps the most technical of any dealt with in the Treaty of Peace. In view of this, disputes regarding the meaning and effect of the clauses are almost certain to arise and provision for the determination of these disputes is essential.

As

has already been seen, the decision of arbitrators in particular instances is laid down, but, in addition to this, Article 376 in general terms requires all disputes as to the interpretation and application of the preceding articles of Part XII to be settled as the League of Nations shall provide.

Article 379 is in part foreshadowed by previous clauses (e.g., Articles 338, 366), but emphasizes the thought that a general régime in international matters is contemplated, not a régime enforced upon Germany as the result of victory, but a régime to which all states, allies, enemies and neutrals shall be parties on an equal footing. General conventions regarding transit, waterways, ports and railways are to be concluded within five years "by the Allied and Associated Powers with the approval of the League of Nations," and to these conventions Germany will adhere.

The final articles of Part XII (380 to 386) relate to the Kiel Canal. This canal remains wholly within German territory and is left subject to German control. Built originally chiefly for military reasons, the regulations here considered for the Kiel Canal relate principally to commerce. The principle is again one of entire equality in regard to "all nations at peace with Germany." A Power at war with Germany will thus have no rights under the treaty, and if Germany is a neutral, vessels of war of the belligerents are on an equal footing by Article 380, subject of course to the rules of neutrality laid down by international law, some of which are codified in Convention XIII of The Hague of 1907.

There is no prohibition or regulation of the fortification of the canal.

The regulations regarding the use of the Kiel Canal are in principle based upon those generally provided for international rivers as to matters of equality, charges, transit and navigation.

A tribunal is to be instituted by the League of Nations to decide questions of the violation or interpretation of the articles relating to the canal, but a local authority is to be established at Kiel by Germany to deal with disputes in the first instance.

Popular interest is not ordinarily concerned with the general problems covered in the Treaty of Peace by the Ports, Waterways

and Railways clauses. The solution of these problems is, nevertheless, very important in the economic life of peoples, and it may well be that the future will point to these clauses as having contributed very materially to the maintenance of the peace of Europe. It may be too much to say that a beginning has been made toward the coöperative organization of Europe's communication and transportation system on a continental basis. During the discussions of the Commission, however, it was not infrequent to hear a comparison drawn between the Europe of the future and the United States of to-day, in the arrangement of interstate commerce. Some steps at least have been taken looking toward the creation in Europe of a kind of coöperation between various European states similar to that which we have achieved in the United States as the result of the interstate commerce clause of the United States Constitution.

DAVID HUNTER MILLER.

THE SHANTUNG QUESTION

IN the great Province of Shantung lies the little village of Chefoo, the birthplace of Confucius, to which hundreds of thousands of Chinese make an annual pilgrimage. It is what Mecca is to the Mohammedan, Jerusalem to the Christian. Shantung is the Chinese sacred province, the place to be protected from foreign intrusion.

The questions raised by the Shantung sections of the treaty with Germany must be considered in the light of America's past relations with China and Japan's general Oriental policy. For nearly a century we have posed as the particular friend and guide of China. The Treaty of Peace, Amity and Commerce between the United States and China, proclaimed January 26, 1860, provided that, “if any other nation should act unjustly or aggressively [towards China] the United States will exert their good offices, on being informed of the case, to bring about an amicable arrangement of the question, thus showing their friendly feeling." China's first serious attempt to enter into voluntary relations with the Western world was under the guidance of American statesmen. For many years John W. Foster, a trained and experienced international lawyer and diplomat, acted as her legal and confidential adviser. We have sent her many devoted missionaries and professors who, in recent years, seem to have supplanted the jurists and statesmen as advisers and diplomatic experts.

The United States took no part in the scramble for territory and spheres of influence and refused concessions voluntarily tendered to her in Canton, Peking and Tientsin. She established the policy of the open door and has consistently refused to recognize the right of any nation to secure preferential trade privileges in any part of China.

When the Chinese rose in blind fury against the foreigners who were carving up their country and commenced to hack and slay indiscriminately friend and foe alike, the United States aided in

restoring order and punishing the guilty, and then used her influence to restrain those who sought vengeance in place of justice. Within a few years she released her share of the punitive indemnities, and China in gratitude appropriated the amount of the unpaid balance for the education of Chinese youth in America. China became a republic, and when the World War commenced she naturally looked to America for guidance. At the request of President Wilson she severed diplomatic relations with Germany and later declared war against the Central Powers and joined in the struggle in the name of democracy. Her war activities were restricted by Japan, and the United States refused her the financial aid so freely granted to other Powers which would have enabled her to make her enormous man power available. Nevertheless, approximately one hundred and fifty thousand of her sons were sent to France where they served principally as laborers back of the lines, thus releasing an equal number of men for use at the front. Distracted by internal dissensions, almost disintegrated by the penetrating activities of her powerful, skillful and aggressive neighbor and humiliated by demands and entangled in treaties signed under moral and physical duress, China sent a delegation to France to present her claims for consideration to the Peace Conference.

I

When it was announced that the world was to be reorganized in accordance wtih the principles of justice, the Chinese very naturally desired to take advantage of the occasion to secure a revision of her treaties and a reconsideration and readjustment of her complicated foreign relations. Upon the advice of her American friends she abandoned this plan and elected to concentrate her efforts on the attempt to save Shantung from the Japanese. The result was a bitter disappointment for the Chinese. The Council of Four recognized the justice of China's claims, but sustained the demands of Japan, and in the treaty, as signed and sent to the Senate, Germany renounces in favor of Japan-"all her rights, title, and privileges—

1 Hearings before the Senate Committee on foreign affairs. Statements of Dr. J. C. Ferguson, T. F. Millard, and C. F. Williams.