"ripe fruits" it has produced, or even to any sure and reasonable hope of its growth in usefulness as the result of these fifty-two months. Professor Oppenheim's work, however, in its new edition, will be everywhere welcome, His first edition took almost at once the place of an accepted classic in the great branch of law with which it dealt.

It seems to this reviewer, however, that we must gratefully value it more as the work of a remarkable scholar, of untiring research and vast and varied learning, lucidly presented, than as the creation of a constructive thinker in advanced lines as to the reconstruction of international relations.

Oppenheim's volumes, in a measure, replaced the older work of Hall, always so compendious and satisfactory, except where American views or interests were discussed. There a hostile bias always appeared from which Oppenheim is wholly free. In one respect the present edition falls far short of its predecessors. The paper on which it is printed is vastly inferior, which must be laid to the changes in the paper market, and not to the niggardliness of the publisher.

CHARLES NOBLE GREGORY.

Histoire Diplomatique du Traité de 1839 (19 Avril, 1839).

By Alfred de Ridder. Bruxelles et Paris: Vromant & Co. 1920. pp. 399. At a time when the whole world is absorbed in discussing what happened during the negotiations of the Peace Treaty, it is à propos to consider the diplomatic history of that famous treaty which proved to be something more than a scrap of paper, Von Bethmann Hollweg to the contrary notwithstanding. M. de Ridder has given us a very readable and careful study of the incidents and negotiations preceding the signature of the treaty of April 19, 1839, and at the same time portrays the character of Count Barthélémy de Theux de Meyland who, as M. de Ridder remarks, clearly reveals himself in all these incidents in which, as Minister for Foreign Affairs, he took so prominent a part. A preceding volume, entitled La Belgique et la Prusse en Conflit, covered the early years of the ministerial career of M. de Theux, when Belgium by the aid of France and England was established as an independent state. But in the two or three years preceding the signature of the treaty of 1839 de Theux was himself responsible for the direction of the negotiations which definitely settled the terms of separation from Holland. After we have read the recital of how he carried out this office, we must agree with M. de Ridder that it would have been impossible to have obtained from the Powers terms more favorable to Belgium (p. 9).

The work is particularly valuable because M. de Ridder as a high official of the Belgian Foreign Office has had access to the documents deposited there. He was also fortunate enough to be supplied with others, especially the archives of the Count de Theux for the period in question. The

policies and characteristics of Leopold I, Palmerston, Metternich, and others are disclosed in the account of the conferences and in the interchange of notes. The Skrynecki affair is a particularly instructive episode of diplomacy. King Leopold of Belgium was sufficiently ill-advised and inconsiderate as to appoint General Skrynecki to a high command in the Belgian army, without consulting his Minister for Foreign Affairs (p. 312 f.). Skrynecki was a Polish refugee established at Prague, and Metternich at once took umbrage and peremptorily demanded his dismissal. With dignity and firmness de Theux refused to humiliate his country, yet was careful to do nothing to irritate Metternich or the Prussian Government, which supported the Austrian statesman at every move. Who after reading this account will assert that Metternich showed himself the equal of de Theux in the art of diplomacy? Preeminent for integrity of character and practical judgment, Count de Theux stands forth nobly portrayed in this his fitting monument.

ELLERY C. STOWELL.

The Truth about the Treaty. By André Tardieu. Indianapolis: BobbsMerrill Co. 1921. pp. 473. $4.00.

"France has taken the Treaty of Peace seriously, just as she took the war. If others have done otherwise, is France to blame?" (Page 431).

"If France is not to doubt England, she must feel that England does not attach less importance to the enforcement of the peace than she herself." (Page 452.)

Casual phrases often reveal an author's real preoccupations more clearly than formal and deliberate argument. M. Tardieu is apprehensive as to the durability of the fabric woven by the Parca of Versailles. He seems to feel that in the United States the emphasis on nonparticipation in European affairs may, after all, have been something more than a reaction from the strain of the war; while Great Britain, he fears, is slipping back to her tradition of favoring the second rate, and distrusting the first rate European Powers. The "Anglo-Saxons," therefore, have to be spoken to frankly and resolutely. M. Tardieu has, consequently set himself the task of counteracting these tendencies in the United States and Great Britain. He has prepared a detailed analysis of the treaty, not so much from the juridical point of view, as from that of the circumstances surrounding the adoption of its chief provisions. After stating the origin of each principle upon which the treaty was drawn, he traces its fate throughout the Conference. His narrative is interesting and at times absorbing. There are many picturesque personal details. A number of documents are published, and the existence of even more valuable ones revealed. Much statistical matter is presented, not often, however, with adequate bibliographical appar

atus, while in some instances statements, and even whole tables, fail to indicate clearly which of the various statistical values is intended to be understood,-cost, intrinsic or replacement.

M. Tardieu vigorously repels the enemies of the treaty in France. He is, however, more concerned with the state of opinion in the English-speaking countries. He appeals for their political, financial and moral unity with France in enforcing the treaty. Each of them,-France, the British Empire and the United States,-was an indispensable factor in winning the war, he contends; each is equally indispensable in enforcing the peace. Each sacrificed life and property and happiness to an incredible extent to preserve law and order, the sanctity of treaties, and the rights of small nations. Neither the British Channel nor the Atlantic Ocean, but the Rhine is the "frontier of freedom." Neither England nor the United States can be secure unless France is secure; and France cannot be secure unless Germany is compelled to repair the damage she has done as far as it can be repaired. Enforcement of the treaty, then, is the paramount task of the three democratic Powers for their own safety. But it is also their solemn duty, because of the moral obligations of each to the others arising from the trusteeship for the law and peace of the world, which they were forced to

assume.

Why, then, in the face of both duty and interest, do the United States and England fail to give evidence of the political, economic and moral unity which is M. Tardieu's ideal? Is it because they interpret their duty and interest differently? Is it because both, perhaps one particularly, of them regard their interests as not preeminently European, but Asiatic, American, African,-anything else first, and then European? Can it be that the persistence of the policy analyzed more than a generation ago by Sir John Seeley with such refreshing frankness is based on a settled conviction on the part of the British Government as to what is really the British interest on the continent of Europe?

M. Tardieu shows himself a most discerning and astute student of politics. He applies with equal dexterity the methods and approaches of the journalist, the lawyer, the financier, the diplomatist. He must, therefore, have long since perceived that nations are actuated by convictions as to their interests, no matter in what formule those convictions are expressed, if expressed at all, and no matter how mistaken their comprehension of the real nature of their interests.

Whatever may be the extent to which M. Tardieu perceives this fundamental principle at work in determining the policy of England toward the enforcement of the treaty, he will certainly realize its force in the case of the United States, especially if his own book is given any widespread circulation. The chief effect of his volume will be precisely to reinforce the attitude of non-participation in European affairs, which he correctly believes to have been greatly strengthened. It will not be because his argument

lacks force, sincerity or eloquence, but because it leaves a very vivid impres sion of the hopeless and ever more bitter economic and political involvement of Europe. While his appropriate and gracious appeal to sentiment may stir sympathy and gratitude, his picture of the financial situation of Europe will terrify our people and defeat any hope of enlisting their determined support of a policy of participation in the "guarantees" of treaty enforcement. Just as M. Tardieu remarks that France is not to blame for having been fifteen centuries exposed to the invasion of the lawless millions of Germany, and having now to enforce peace in Europe, so will the people of the United States be likely to declare that they are not to blame for having been happily isolated from Europe, and not having now to underwrite the financial fulfillment of the Treaty of 1919. The conviction that non-participation is the correct policy admittedly is strong; it will be strengthened rather than diminished by M. Tardieu's brief.

C. E. MCGUIRE.

Foreign Rights and Interests in China. By Westel W. Willoughby. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press. 1920. pp. xx, 594.

The purpose of Dr. Willoughby's volume as stated in the preface is "to provide a statement of the rights of foreigners and the interests of foreign States in China as they are to be found stated in treaties with or relating to China or in other documents of an official or quasi-official character. That there was a pressing need for such work as the author remarks, few will question, despite the valuable work covering portions of this field which had been previously done by such publicists as H. B. Morse, V. K. Wellington Koo, and M. T. Z. Tyau, to whom Dr. Willoughby gives due credit.

Dr. Willoughby is eminently qualified as a scholar, publicist, former Legal Adviser to the Chinese Government at Peking and experienced traveler in the Orient for the task to which he set himself. The result of his work is, in the judgment of the reviewer, worthy alike of the subject and the author. Dr. Willoughby has prepared a well-balanced, accurate, and thoroughly useful and usable volume which no one who seriously deals with the subject with which he treats can afford to be without. The scope of the work embraces such topics as Extraterritoriality, The Rights of Foreign Merchants, Patent Rights, Foreign Corporations in China, Settlements and Concessions, The Open Door, Spheres of Interest, The Japanese in Manchuria, Shantung, etc., Opium, China's Foreign Debts, and Railway Loans and Foreign Control.

The volume is expository, not argumentative. It is a law book, not a work of political science. As the author states in his preface, the "volume makes no claim to describe present political conditions in China, nor, upon

the side of international law and diplomacy, to estimate the ethical character or practical wisdom of the policies which the several Treaty Powers have pursued in their dealings with China." It must have cost the learned author much self-denial to adhere to the policy thus laid down and to refrain, as he has almost always succeeded in doing, from comment upon the story told by the documents. It is to be hoped that Dr. Willoughby will in the near future find time for the preparation of the further volume suggested by his preface which will comment upon the documentary evidence which is collected and arranged in the present work. However, the old adage that a case well stated is more than half won applies to the present volume. The documents are so well arranged and summarized that in large part they state their own case and assist the reader to draw his own conclusions even with respect to questions of policy.

An especially interesting chapter, and one in which the learned author comes measurably near to overstepping the limitations against comment which he has placed upon himself, is the chapter dealing with "Japan's 'Special Interests' in China,-The Lansing-Ishii Agreement. The facts and circumstances surrounding this interesting diplomatic document which give it color are set forth in detail, and Secretary Lansing's testimony regarding it before the Committee on Foreign Relations of the United States Senate is fully and fairly summarized. While the whole chapter should be carefully read by anyone interested in understanding the LansingIshii Agreement, the general conclusions of the author appear to be fairly inferable from his statements that "giving to the agreement the construction which the Secretary [Mr. Lansing] has given to it there would, in fact, appear no reason why, upon the part of the United States, it should not have been signed," (p. 438) but that "the terms of the agreement are so indefinite as to lay the basis for, rather than to prevent future suspicion and discord," (p. 436) and finally "thus a certain amount of mystery still surrounds the Lansing-Ishii Agreement" (p. 437).

In his introduction the learned author says "the writer has not deceived himself nor does he wish to mislead his readers with the idea that he has made a complete statement of the situation." Such a statement would in any event disarm criticism as respects a matter here and there which the reader would like to see more fully treated, but bearing in mind the limitations imposed by Dr. Willoughby's plan, there is in fact only one chapter which in the opinion of the present reviewer is fairly open to criticism on the ground of inadequacy of treatment, and that is the chapter on "Mongolia and Tibet." This remark applies particularly to the discussion of Tibet, which is treated in less than four pages, or at considerably less length than the same subject is dealt with in Dr. C. C. Wu's memorandum on "The Leading Outstanding Cases Between China and the Foreign Powers" contained in the appendix to B. L. Putnam Weale's The Fight for the Republic in China. Probably this slender treatment is due to the difficulty