Manchuria and Eastern Inner Mongolia. See chapter on The Policy of Paramount Influence and on The Twenty-one Demands as an Exponent of Japan's Policies in China.

6. Vide supra, chapter on The Policy of Paramount Influence. 6A. Millard, China's Case at the Peace Conference, Millard's Review, Supp., July 17, 1920, p. 18.

7. Hertslet, Vol. 1, No. 59, p. 353, Sec. 2, Art. 4.

8. The Shantung Question, submitted by China to the Paris Peace Conference, published by the Chinese National Welfare Society of America, 1920, App. No. 1 to Vol. 2, p. 50.

9. MacMurray, 1895/5. 10. MacMurray, 1915/8. 11. MacMurray, 1914/12. 12. MacMurray, 1897/2. 13. MacMurray, 1898/6.

14. Hertslet, Vol. 1, No. 4, p. 16. Art. 3, Convention of April 4, 1846.

15. Art. 5, Convention between Great Britain and China relative to Burma and China, March 1, 1894, Hertslet, Vol. 1, No. 20, p. 104; also Art. 5, Agreement between Great Britain and China modifying the Convention of March 1, 1894, relative to Burma and China, Feb. 4, 1897, Hertslet, Vol. 1, No. 22, p. 116. 16. Hertslet, Vol. 1, No. 23, p. 120, The Tsungli Yamen to Sir C. MacDonald, Feb. 11, 1898.

17. MacMurray, 1906/2. 18. MacMurray, 1906/2. 19. MacMurray, 1898/8.

20. MacMurray, 1915/8.

21. The Chino-Japanese Negotiations, the Official Chinese Statement, 1915, p. 21; China Year Book, 1919, p. 567.

22. The Chino-Japanese Negotiations, 1915, p. 28.

23. MacMurray, 1896/1; Millard, Our Eastern Question, App. V, pp. 515, 516.

24. MacMurray, 1900/5; Millard, op. cit., App. I, p. 444.

25. Hertslet, Vol. 1, No. 102, p. 584, Exchange of Notes between Great Britain and Germany respecting the British Occupation of Weihaiwei, April 20, 1898.

26. Hertslet, Vol. 1, No. 104, pp. 586-587; Russia and Great Britain, on August 31, 1907, again mutually pledged to abstain from any interference or extension of influence in Tibet.Hertslet, Vol. 1, No. 121, pp. 620-622.

But when Russia moved on Outer Mongolia in 1913 and 1915, Great Britain made the similar counter move.-Vide supra, chapter on the Policy of Great Britain in China.

27. MacMurray, 1907/7; Millard, op. cit., App. M., pp. 457-458. 28. MacMurray, 1907/11; Millard, ibid., App. D, p. 424.

29. MacMurray, 1910/1.

30. MacMurray, 1916/9.

31. U. S. For. Rel., 1896, pp. 232, 235, Mr. Olney, Secretary of State, to Sir Julian Pauncefote, British Ambassador, June 22, 1896; J. B. Moore, Internatl. Law Dig., Vol. 1, pp. 268-269.

32. Tyau, Treaty Obligations between China and Other States, p. 90.

33. The Shantung Question, op. cit., p. 71.

34. Ibid., p. 71.

35. The United States Government proposed . . . that not only future options that might be granted but concessions held by individual banking groups in which substantial progress had not been made, should, so far as feasible, be pooled with the Consortium; that working on these two principles, the operations of the Consortium would serve to prevent for the future the setting up of special spheres of influence in the Continent of Asia. Thomas W. Lamont, Preliminary Report on the New Consortium for China, pp. 6-7.

XXII

THE MOST FAVORED NATION TREATMENT

ANOTHER form of the impairment of China's sovereignty is the operation or rather the abuse of the most favored nation clause. It was originally conceived in a spirit to preserve the equality of treatment in her relations with foreign states, but in actual practice, it has become a fruitful source of embarrassment and restraint, resulting in the infringement of her sovereignty.

By the most favored nation treatment is meant that whatever privileges, favors or immunities, with respect to commerce and navigation, granted to a given state, shall be granted to others also. This places the states on a footing of equality so far as the privileges, favors and immunities in matters regarding commerce and navigation are concerned. This further rules out any exclusive or discriminating rights in commerce and navigation that the territorial sovereign may grant. It likewise creates a community of interest among foreign states, inasmuch as the privileges, favors or immunities, in relation to commerce and navigation, granted to one, are, ipso facto, regarded as granted to all enjoying the most favored nation treatment.

The origin of this most favored nation clause goes back to the supplementary treaty signed between Great Britain and China in Hoomun-Chae, on October 8, 1843, following the Treaty of Nanking, August 29, 1842. It was stipulated (Art. 8):1

"The Emperor of China having been graciously pleased to grant to all foreign countries whose subjects or citizens have hitherto traded at Canton, the privilege of re

sorting for purposes of trade to the other four ports of Foochow foo, Amoy, Ningpo and Shanghai on the same terms as the English, it is further agreed, that should the Emperor hereafter, from any cause whatever, be pleased to grant additional privileges or immunities to any of the subjects or citizens of such foreign countries, the same privileges and immunities will be extended to, and enjoyed by, British subjects; but it is to be understood, that demands or requests are not on this plea to be unnecessarily brought forward."

In the Treaty of Peace, Amity and Commerce, between the United States and China, signed at Wanghia, July 3, 1844, the most favored nation treatment was found (Art. 2):

"Citizens of the United States. shall in no case be subject to other or higher duties than are or shall be required of the people of any other nation whatever. and if additional advantages or privileges of whatever description, be conceded hereafter by China to any other nation, the United States, and the citizens thereof, shall be entitled thereupon to a complete equal and impartial participation in the same.'

In the Treaty of Whampoa with France, October 24, 1844, similar most favored nation treatment was granted (Arts. 6 and 35). Thus in practically all the subsequent treaties of commerce, the most favored nation clause was found.

Now there are several forms of the most favored nation provision in the Chinese treaties. The first is the unilateral and unqualified form. That is to say, it provides for unconditional most favored nation treatment by China without at the same time including the reciprocal engagement of the Powers in question to render the same privileges in return to China or her citizens. For in

stance:

"The British Government and its subjects are hereby -confirmed in all privileges, immunities, and advantages conferred on them by previous treaties: and it is hereby expressly stipulated that the British Government and its subjects will be allowed free and equal participation in all privileges, immunities, and advantages that may have been, or may be hereafter, granted by His Majesty the Emperor of China to the Government or subjects of any other nation" (Art. 54).*

In fact, this provision proved to be so efficacious that when Japan, having defeated China in 1895, made the Treaty of Commerce on July 21, 1896, the same provision, mutatis mutandis, was repeated (Art. 25). Again, in the French Treaty of Tientsin, June 27, 1858, it was specifically stipulated that the French, while enjoying the most favored nation treatment, were, nevertheless, not subject to obligations not expressly provided in the convention:

"Il est d'ailleurs entendu que toute obligation non consignée expressément dans la présente Convention ne saura être imposee aux Consuls ou aux Agents Consulaires, non plus qu'à leurs nationaux, tandis que, comme il a été stipulé, les Français jouiront de tous les droits, privileges, immunites et garanties quelconques qui auraient ete ou qui seraient accordes par le Gouvernement Chinois a d'autres Puissances" (Art. 40)."

The second form is the reciprocal, which means that not only China, but also the other contracting party undertakes identical obligations. In other words, it is bilateral and reciprocal, and not unilateral. For example:

"The contracting parties agree that the Government, public officers, and citizens of the Republic of Peru shall fully and equally participate in all privileges, rights, immunities, jurisdiction, and advantages that may have been, or may be hereafter, granted by His Majesty the Em