Senator SWANSON. The general principle does not create any more interest in one than in the other.

Mr. FERGUSON. As a statement between Great Britain and France, for instance, it would be a perfectly harmless statement. As a statement between a strong nation and an adjoining weak nation, it can have only one significance as far as my judgment would go, and that is a threatening influence.

Senator McCUMBER. How would it be between the United States and Mexico?

Mr. FERGUSON. I should say it would have a very threatening influence there.

Senator MCCUMBER. That we have a special interest by reason of

our

Mr. FERGUSON. Of our territorial propinquity.

Senator MCCUMBER. That we have a special interest in Mexico, would you think that would be a harmful declaration or one that would be anything but in accord with the facts?

Mr. FERGUSON. Well

Senator SWANSON. Do we claim special interest in Mexico on account of its geographical position to us?

Mr. FERGUSON. I do not know what is claimed by the United States Government in that respect.

Senator SWANSON. You know, do you not, that it has been one of our principles under the Monroe doctrine-nearness to us?

Now, let me ask you, further, do you not think the Lansing-Ishii agreement gives to China territorial rights in that regard? Mr. FERGUSON. No more than she had.

Senator SWANSON. But it is a reiteration of that, made by the United States.

Mr. FERGUSON. They made that reiteration, but in the same note the other, "special interest" comes in the first time.

Senator SWANSON. That is the only addition that was made in this, above what was included in other notes?

Mr. FERGUSON. Yes.

Senator SWANSON. In that Japan also reiterates her adherence to the open door policy?

Mr. FERGUSON. Yes, sir.

Senator SWANSON. Ás I understand, in the Root-Takahira agreement we agree that if there is any change in the affairs in China, the United States and Japan shall consult before taking any action? Mr. FERGUSON. Yes.

Senator SWANSON. Did that include also that they should consult China at the same time, or was the consultation limited to those two nations?

Mr. FERGUSON. It was limited to those two nations.

Senator SWANSON. That is, there was an agreement that they should consult each other, without any agreement that China should

also be consulted?

Mr. FERGUSON. Yes; but that was to protect her interests.

Senator SWANSON. Not to consult China was to protect her interests?

Mr. FERGUSON. No; but the purpose of that note was the protection of China's interests.

Senator SWANSON. Do you not think that, if Senator Johnson was right about that, China should have been included as a third party to the consultation?

Mr. FERGUSON. It would have been a very courteous thing on the part of both Governments; but as both Governments were simply promulgating a benevolent policy toward China, which did not affect China's interests except favorably, such lack of consultation did not at the time give any offense to China.

I may point out, Senator, in reference to this Root-Takahira agreement that you are questioning me upon, that it is very clear to my mind that the presentation of the 21 demands upon China by Japan, without any consultation with the United States, was in direct violation of the Root-Takahira agreement. That I feel perfectly free to say.

Senator SWANSON. Those 21 demands were in violation of the

Mr. FERGUSON. They directly affected the interests of China. Japan promised, under the Root-Takahira agreement, to consult with the United States before taking action. I should say that that was in direct contravention.

Senator BRANDEGEE. The Root-Takahira agreement, if I understand your position, was an agreement to treat all nations equally with reference to China, and to give them all the same privilegesto keep the door open-was it not?

Mr. FERGUSON. Yes, sir.

Senator BRANDEGEE. Was there anything in the Root-Takahira agreement that intimated that Japan had any special interests in China?

Mr. FERGUSON. Not a suggestion of it.

Senator BRANDEGEE. And is it your opinion that because this agreement, made subsequently to the

Mr. FERGUSON (continuing). The Root-Takahira agreement being on our initiative and the Lansing-Ishii agreement being on the Japanese initiative.

Senator BRANDEGEE. The Lansing-Ishii agreement having been preceded, according to the testimony of the Secretary of State which is in the record here, by a demand on the part of Viscount Ishii that we should not only recognize their special interest, but their

Mr. FERGUSON. Influence.

Senator BRANDEGEE (continuing). Influence, taking all these things into consideration, and that we recognized Japan's special interest, does it not, in your opinion, precipitate a question as to what that special interest is above and apart from all other nations? Mr. FERGUSON. Certainly, sir.

Senator BRANDEGEE. And it must be construed to mean something different from the interests of other nations in China, must it not?

Mr. FERGUSON. Certainly, and it must be construed in reference to the question which Japan has considered of paramount interest to herself; that is, the Shantung question.

Senator BRANDEGEE. And also, whether it shall be construed so or not, at least it must be considered as to the effect which the Japanese put upon it and the way in which they interpret it, must it not?

Mr. FERGUSON. Yes, sir.

Senator BRANDEGEE. That is all.

Senator MCCUMBER. Now, I would like to ask you, Doctor, just what rights are given to Japan, in the Lansing-Ishii agreement, that are withheld in the Root-Takahira agreement?

Senator BRANDEGEE. That is the question. Nobody knows.
Senator MCCUMBER. I know, but he must have an idea.

Mr. FERGUSON. I can answer that question, I think, Senator McCumber, by stating that the Root-Takahira agreement provides for the open door and equal opportunity for all nations. The LansingIshii agreement states as follows:

The United States recognizes that Japan has special interests in China, particularly in the part to which her possessions are contiguous.

Senator BRANDEGEE. What part would that be, Doctor?

Senator MCCUMBER. But what is there there about the open-door policy?

Mr. FERGUSON. It goes on and states "the open door."

Senator MCCUMBER. It goes on and reiterates what is in the RootTakahira agreement.

Mr. FERGUSON. But you asked what, in addition to that, there was, and I was just quoting.

Senator MCCUMBER. I know the words. I know that the wording declares "interests" and "special interests;" but what I am trying to get at is what you conceive that "interests" to be, different from what is in the Root-Takahira agreement?

Mr. FERGUSON. The Root-Takahira agreement recognized no special interests of any nation.

Senator MCCUMBER. It recognizes the equal right of every nation? Mr. FERGUSON. Of all nations.

Senator MCCUMBER. Does this recognize that Japan has any right that is not accorded, in trade or in any other way, to all the nations? Mr. FERGUSON. To my mind it does, sir. It distinctly recognizes Japan's special interests in Manchuria, which are contiguous, and Korea; and it probably recognizes Japan's interest in the coast opposite Formosa, which is the coast of the Province of Fukien.

Senator MCCUMBER. This country has often declared its special interest, for instance, by reason of our contiguous territory. That declaration that we have a special interest in Mexico by reason of our geographical situation does not carry with it, does it, any right, commercially or in any other respect, with Mexico that is not accorded to all other nations of the world?

Mr. FERGUSON. No; but we have not American soldiers in Mexico. guarding American concessions railways. We have no military rights in protecting mines in Mexico. The situation is not on all fours, sir, in my opinion.

Senator KNOX. We have no extraterritoriality there.

Mr. FERGUSON. No extraterritorial privileges and no establishment of special courts.

Senator MCCUMBER. Have we soldiers in any other one of the South American Republics?

Mr. FERGUSON. That is not a matter that is within my knowledge. Senator MCCUMBER. Have we had any kind of a protectorate over Haiti, where we have our American soldiers?

Mr. FERGUSON. I think the Senator can answer his own question, can he not?

Senator MCCUMBER. Yes; I asked it only to connect the matter up with the theory that the fact that we claim a special interest does not carry with it a commercial or other interest antagonistic to other countries; and that we ought to construe the Japanese special interest exactly in the same way as we would construe a declaration of special interest to the United States. That was all.

Senator SWANSON. Doctor, have you any special knowledge that these negotiations were begun at the instance of Japan?

Mr. FERGUSON. You mean the 21-demand negotiations?

Senator SWANSON. No. I mean the negotiations in connection with the Lansing-Ishii agreement.

Mr. FERGUSON. Oh.

Senator SWANSON. Mr. Lansing, on page 223 of part 7 of these hearings, when he was testifying before the committee, said this:

I suggested to Viscount Ishii that it would be well for the two Governments to reaffirm the open-door policy, on the ground that reports were being spread as to the purpose of Japan to take advantage of the situation created by the war to extend her influence over China-political influence. Ishii replied to me that he would like to consider that matter, but that, of course, he felt that Japan had a special interest in China, and that that should be mentioned in any agreement that we had; and I replied to him that we, of course, recognized that Japan, on account of her geographical position, had a peculiar interest in China, but that it was not political in nature, and that the danger of a statement of special interest was that it might be so construed, and therefore I objected to making such a statement.

Mr. FERGUSON. Yes, sir.

Senator SWANSON. Now, it would seem from that that Secretary Lansing

Mr. FERGUSON. Did not agree to the agreement which

Senator SWANSON. That Secretary Lansing suggested these negotiations in order to protect the sovereignty of China and the open-door policy that he thought was being threatened by the conduct of Japan in China, and he thought this would be a protection to China, considering the troubled conditions existing in the world at that time. Mr. FERGUSON. That would not be my interpretation of Secretary Lansing's remarks. My interpretation of the Secretary's remarks is that when Viscount Ishii came to America on his special mission and had a consultation with the Secretary, he considered, in view of what Japan had been doing in Shantung, the large number of petitions which had been sent to this country by the people of Shantung, that it would be well for Japan to reaffirm her policy of nonaggression in China; and that Viscount Ishii countered him by saying that they would be quite willing to do that, but would like also to add a new statement, that on account of geographical position Japan has special interests there; to which Secretary Lansing objected. But in the final agreement, to which whether or not the Secretary was a party I do not know, that was included; and I judge from this statement that the Secretary made that it was included contrary to his advice in the matter.

Senator SWANSON. What I wanted to know is, if you know, if Ishii came here personally with the purpose of opening negotiations, or whether, when he came here, these negotiations were initiated by our Government?

Mr. FERGUSON. He came to make negotiation.

Senator SWANSON. You are satisfied of that?

Mr. FERGUSON. Yes, sir; I think that is without doubt.

Senator MOSES. On page 193 of this record you will find that Secretary Lansing apparently acquiesces in that view. I read as follows from page 193 of our record:

Senator BORAH. And just before Ishii came over here to get his agreement with this country.

Secretary LANSING. No; Ishii

Senator BORAH. No; it was in November, 1917.

Secretaty LANSING. 1917.

Senator WILLIAMS. That what took place-oh, that Ishii made his agreement?

Evidently Secretary Lansing acquiesced in that assumption.

Senator JOHNSON of California. The matter to which I was endeavoring to direct your attention in Senator McCormick's address in the Senate was this. [Reading:]

The Russian minister at Tokio sent his Government a confidential report on the Japanese view of the agreement. That was also published by the Russian revolutionaries, and in part is as follows:

"To my question whether he (the Japanese minister of foreign affairs) did not fear that in the future misunderstandings might arise from the different interpretations by Japan and the United States of the meaning of the terms, 'special position' and 'special interests' of Japan in China, Viscount Motono replied by saying that (a gap in the original). Nevertheless, I gain the impression from the words of the minister that he is conscious of the possibility of misunderstandings also in the future, but is of the opinion that in such a case Japan would have better means at her disposal for carrying into effect her interpretation than the United States."

Do you know anything of the remarks of Motono concerning the interpretation that might in future be put upon the Lansing-Ishii agreement?

Mr. FERGUSON. I have seen that same statement quoted in the press of Japan, and I have a copy of it, also.

Senator JOHNSON of California. Can you enlighten us as to what is the "better means" referred to in that statement?

Mr. FERGUSON. Japan is nearer China. It is much easier for her to move troops, to move ships, than it is for the United States, in China. I do not know of any other.

Senator JOHNSON of California. That is all, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Does anyone else desire to ask any questions? Senator MOSES. What means was China permitted to employ in presenting her case at Paris?

Mr. FERGUSON. She had free opportunity, so far as I understand. I speak there only from reports given me by returned Chinese delegates. So far as I know, she had every opportunity of presenting her case.

Senator MOSES. Was she limited in any way in her choice of counsel, by suggestion or otherwise?

Mr. FERGUSON. Not officially; no official suggestion, so far as I know.

Senator MOSES. Do you know of any unofficial suggestion?

Mr. FERGUSON. Yes; I think there were unofficial suggestions.
Senator MOSES. Of what character?

Mr. FERGUSON. That it would be inadvisable to have foreign advisers there with her, in view of the complicated situation.

Senator MOSES. Do you know of any other delegation that was limited in respect to its advisers in presenting its case before the peace conference?

Mr. FERGUSON. No, sir.

Senator MOSES. What argument was employed in making this unofficial suggestion?