Слике страница

imperial authorities, without condition of compensation, the entire leased territory of Kiao-Chau with a view to eventual restoration of the same to China. The terms of that demand have never elicited any protest on the part of China or any other Allied or Associated Powers.

Following the same line of policy, Japan now claims as one of the essential conditions of peace that the leased territory of Kiao-Chau should be surrendered to her without condition or compensation. At the same time abiding faithfully by the pledge which she gave to China in 1915, she is quite willing to restore to China the whole territory in question and to enter upon negotiations with the Government at Peking as to the arrangement necessary to give effect to that pledge as soon as possible after the treaty of Versailles shall have been ratified by Japan.

Nor has she any intention to retain or to claim any rights which affect the territorial sovereignty of China in the province of Shantung. The significance of the clause appearing in Baron Makino's statement of May 5, that the policy of Japan is to hand back the Shantung peninsula in full sovereignty to China, retaining only the economic privileges granted to Germany, must be clear to all.

Upon arrangement being arrived at between Japan and China for the restitution of Kiao-Chau, the Japanese troops at present guarding that territory and the Kiao-Chau-Tsinanfu Railway will be completely withdrawņ.

The Kiao-Chau-Tsinanfu Railway is intended to be operated as a joint Sino-Japanese enterprise without any discrimination in treatment against the people of any nation.

The Japanese Government have, moreover, under contemplation proposals for the reestablishment in Tsingtao of a general foreign settlement, instead of the exclusive Japanese settlement which by the agreement of 1915 with China they are entitled to claim.-N. Y. Times, 7/7.

PRESIDENT Wilson's COMMENT.-On August 6 President Wilson explained his position regarding the Shantung settlement, stating that it was clearly understood at Paris that the restoration of Chinese sovereignty should be in no way contingent upon China's execution of pledges made to Japan in 1915, as might be inferred from Viscount Uchida's statement. Furthermore, the acceptance of the Shantung settlement by the United States was not to be construed as acquiescence in the policy of Japan as expressed in the China-Japanese Notes of 1915 and 1918. The President's statement follows:

The government of the United States has noted with the greatest interest the frank statement made by Viscount Uchida with regard to Japan's future policy respecting Shantung. The statement ought to serve to remove many misunderstandings which had begun to accumulate about this question.

But there are references in the statement to an agreement entered into between Japan and China in 1915 which might be misleading if not commented upon in the light of what occurred in Paris when the clauses of the Treaty affecting Shantung were under discussion. I therefore take the liberty of supplementing Viscount Uchida's statement with the following:

In the conference of the 30th of April last, where this matter was brought to a conclusion among the heads of the principal Allied and Associated Powers, the Japanese delegates, Baron Makino and Viscount Chinda, in reply to a question put by myself, declared that:

The policy of Japan is to hand back the Shantung peninsula in full sovereignty to China, retaining only the economic privileges granted to Germany, and the right to establish a settlement under the usual conditions at Tsingtao.

The owners of the railway will use special police only to insure security for traffic. They will be used for no other purpose.

"The police forces will be composed of Chinese, and such Japanese instructors as the directors of the railway may select will be appointed by the Chinese Government."

No reference was made to this policy being in any way dependent upon the execution of the agreement of 1915 to which Count Uchida appears to have referred. Indeed, I felt it my duty to say that nothing that I agreed to must be construed as an acquiescence on the part of the government of the United States in the policy of the notes exchanged between China and Japan in 1915 and 1918, and reference was made in the discussion to the enforcement of the agreements of 1915 and 1918 only in case China failed to cooperate fully in carrying out the policy outlined in the statement of Baron Makino and Viscount Chinda.

I have, of course, no doubt that Viscount Uchida had been appraised of all of the particulars of the discussion in Paris, and I am not making this statement with the idea of correcting his, but only to throw a fuller light of clarification upon a situation which ought to be relieved of every shadow of obscurity or misapprehension.

WOODROW WILSON. -N. Y. Times, 7/7.

What China Wants.—To satisfy China and induce her to sign the German treaty, Japan must develop or amend her April 30 undertaking by fixing a definite date, not more than a year hence, within which she will restore the Chinese political rights. She must surrender military control of the railway, police, and agree that Kiao-Chau shall be open for international settlement and not held as a permanent, exclusive Japanese settlement.N. Y. Times, 3/7.

HUNGARY Bela Kun RÉGIME OVERTHROWN.-On July 26 the Allied delegates at Paris took definite action toward a settlement of the Hungarian situation by notifying Hungary that no negotiations would be undertaken with the government then in control. Threatened by the advance of Rumanian forces and unable to secure supplies from the Allied Powers, Bela Kun voluntarily resigned on July 31. With promises of assistance from Paris, a new cabinet was set up with Jules Peidll as Premier.

RUMANIAN TROOPS OCCUPY BUCHAREST.–On August 4 the Rumanian Army advanced to Bucharest without opposition, and some 30,000 troops entered and occupied the city and began seizing stores and munitions. Rumania presented an ultimatum to Hungary making demands for food supplies and reduction of the army far in excess of the Armistice conditions.

The advance of Rumanian forces was in defiance of a message sent by the Supreme Council at Paris on August 2 requesting that the Rumanian forces immediately cease their invasion of Hungarian territory. This note was followed by a sharp demand on August 6 that Rumania observe the terms of the Armistice. On August 12 the Allied Military Commission at the Hungarian capital informed Paris that the Rumanian High Commissioner refused to regard instructions from the Peace Conference as orders.

ARCHDUKE JOSEPH SEIZES POWER.-On August 6 the Peidii Cabinet was overthrown by a coup d'état and a new ministry set up under the Archduke Joseph.

News that the Archduke Joseph had set up a new Hungarian government quickly followed that of Peidil's overthrow. The Social Democrats of

Budapest managed to get their appeal through to Paris this afternoon begging the Peace Conference to save the country from both the Rumanians and the reactionary Archduke.

But the Conference is helplessly asking what it can do. The only comment on Archduke Joseph by one of the peacemakers was:

“I fear he has monarchial tendencies."

But that is about the only attempt any one has made at a joke on the present Balkan mess.

The American and British delegates in Paris are furious over the situation, at least as furious as plenipotentiaries ever allow themselves to get. The French, although impressed by the seriousness of the situation, cannot refrain from chuckling a little over the miscarriage of the Hungarian policy, which they disapproved from the start, because it did not agree with their desire to send a large military force, chiefly American, to Hungary. But the Italians are more frankly disturbed than anybody else by this coming to the front of Archduke Joseph. Italy's traditional fear and hatred of Austria-Hungary is associated only with the aristocracy of the old dual monarchy.

Peace Headquarters do not share Italy's fears in that direction. There is much more alarm that the overthrow of Peidll will soon lead to the recurrence of Bolshevism in Hungary, which the Allies thought they had got rid of with Bela Kun.

Regardless of the difference of opinions on various phases of the situation, the delegates in Paris are beginning to wonder if they would not have had an easier task restoring peace in Europe if they had left Austria-Hungary intact, as they might have done instead of cutting up and trying so many experiments at one time in setting up small and independent liberty-loving states.-N. Y. Times, 8/7.

FRANCE CHAMBER SUPPORTS CLEMENCEAU.— Following the vote in the French Chamber of Deputies on July 18, which went against the Clemenceau Government and forced the resignation of Food Minister Boret, attacks on the government were renewed during the following week. On July 22 the Chamber gave the government a vote of confidence by a majority of 272 to 181 and on July 24 by a majority of 304 to 134. On the second occasion attacks were directed against Ministers of Finance Klotz and his policy. M. Klotz expressed faith in the ability of France to emerge from what he described as her difficult but not desperate financial straits.

RUSSIA KOLCHAK GOVERNMENT THREATENED.-Press dispatches during the early part of August mingled reports of the collapse of Bolshevism and the resignation of Lenine with a record of military events of quite contrary significance. On August i it was reported that the morale of the Kolchak forces was low, that they had retreated 200 miles from their advanced lines, and later that the Omsk Government was preparing to remove to Irkutsk, Siberia, a distance of about 600 miles.

Ambassador Morris's Report.-Washington, August 11.-Complete collapse of the Kolchak movement in Siberia was forecast in reports reaching Washington to-day. Kolchak forces have fallen back almost 200 miles from their former advanced lines and Omsk was said to be threatened with evacuation.

Failure of the Allied and Associated Governments to get adequate supplies to Admiral Kolchak, the advices said, had forced him to fall back steadily before the greatly superior Bolsheviki forces composed of veterans,

whose officers include many Germans who fled to Russia when the Armistice was signed.

Officials here are known to regard Kolchak's efforts at an end unless most radical measures are adopted by outside governments and it was suggested that the President might call the attention of Congress to the imminence of Bolshevik control of all Serbia.

The proposition of extending aid to Admiral Kolchak received the support of President Wilson and his associates at the Peace Conference in Paris, but the getting of supplies to him was found to be more of a military than a diplomatic problem.

France, England, and Japan were in position politically to offer supplies, but the position of the United States was not so clear on that point. Some officials in Washington held that for the United States to participate in any extensive support either in supplying the forces or in adding man-power to the army, congressional action would be necessary.-N. Y. Herald, 12/7.

MEXICO BAN ON ARMs EXPORTS.—President Wilson on July 22 issued a proclamation prohibiting the export of arms and munitions to Mexico, on the ground that a state of domestic violence existed in Mexico warranting such action as provided by an act of Congress.

SENATE INVESTIGATES MEXICAN RELATIONS.—During the latter part of July Congress entered upon preliminary examination of the Mexican situation with a view to the appointment of a special investigating committee. Mr. Henry P. Fletcher, American Ambassador to Mexico, in testimony before the House Rules Committee on July 22, presented a list of 217 Americans killed by Mexicans, 137 since the Carranza régime, with no evidence, in the great majority of cases, that arrests or adequate reparation had been made.

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee on August 8 appointed a special committee composed of Senators Fall, Smith of Arizona, and Brandagee, to make an investigation. Senator King, who offered the resolution creating the committee, proposed the following program:

A thorough investigation to uncover the true situation in Mexico, followed by :

A peremptory demand by this government for the immediate adoption and enforcement by Mexico of measures for the protection of American citizens and interests in Mexico, all confiscated or looted property to be returned at once.

Reparation to be immediately assured for all classes of damages sustained, whether through loss of life or through seizure or destruction of property.

Creation of a commission to determine the exact measure of all damages. Senator King suggests a commission of one American, one Mexican and one neutral, or if preferable, a commission of five neutrals.

Negotiation of a treaty providing for Mexican liquidation of the bill as determined by such a commission. In event of failure on Mexico's part a prompt blockade of Mexican ports and administration of the customs until the damages are liquidated.

" It is impossible to estimate the amount of damages that Americans will claim,” said Senator King. Fully ten thousand Americans from Utah and Arizona have been driven out of Mexico and have damage claims. Some run up to $150,000 or even $200,000. These are entirely aside from indemnities for lives lost. They likewise do not include the damages sustained by mining, railroad, oil, sugar, and other big plantation concerns and the like. The aggregate of damage claims will be from $200,000,000 to $500,000,000 and perhaps still larger."—N. Y. Times, 11/7.




"A Report On Medical and Surgical Developments of the War." By William Seaman Bainbridge, Lieut. Commander, Medical Corps, U.S. N. R. F.

A special number of the U. S. Naval Medical Bulletin, January, 1919, comprises this report. The author in his foreword states that the observations were made on the Western Front and in England during December, 1917, and the first six months of 1918, with added data obtained in Germany during the Autumn of 1915. The object of the survey was to record the surgical lessons of the present war, based on the experience of the Allies, for the benefit of the medical officers and hospital corpsmen on active service. Recognizing the temptation to go into detail, with such a wealth of material gathered, the author has satisfactorily adhered to the presentation of the principal points which have a practical bearing on the questions involved. As a trained surgeon of experience he was in a position to know what to look for and decide what would be of value.

The first portion of the report considers the treatment of war wounds by the Allies and the great variation of methods. The two extremes of the use of strong antiseptics or practically no antiseptics are fairly presented, with a chronological study of the evolution of treatinent in the present war. The question of immediate, delayed and secondary wound suture is thoroughly discussed. Considerable space is given to the details of the Carrel-Dakin treatment which has its enthusiastic advocates as well as bitter critics. The results claimed by Carrel are “diminution in the frequency and intensity of general complications; diminution in the number of amputations ; diminution in the length and cost of treatment.” Those who condemn the use of all antiseptics state, “they damage still further the injured tissues and contribute nothing to the healing process or the prevention of infection.” The author accepts the judgment of a number of surgeons “ that while most of the methods have definite fields of usefulness, none of them is a panacea.” The various other antiseptics, their method of preparation and use, are given in detail, with comments by those who advocate them. These include eusol; eupad; salt pack; dichromanine “T”; magnesium sulphate; “bipp "; flavine; crystal violet and brilliant green; hypertonic solutions; sunlight treatment; phenolisation and embalmment of septic war wounds; electricity, oxygen and ozone.

Owing to the German inethod of disregarding humane principles by systematic efforts to prevent leakage of information relating to military medicine and surgery, the author found it difficult to make deductions from

« ПретходнаНастави »