XV, it shall ipso facto be deemed to have committed an act of war against all other members of the League, which hereby undertake immediately to subject it to the severance of all trade or financial relations, the prohibition of all intercourse between their nationals and the nationals of the covenant-breaking State, and the prevention of all financial, commercial, or personal intercourse between the nationals of the covenant-breaking States and the nationals of any other State, whether a Member of the League or not.

"It shall be the duty of the Council in such case to recommend to the several Governments concerned what effective military or naval force the Members of the League shall severally contribute to the armed forces to be used to protect the covenants of the League.

"The members of the League agreed, further, that they will mutually support one another in the financial and economic measures which are taken under this Article, in order to minimize the loss and inconvenience resulting from the above measures, and that they will mutually support one another in resisting any special measures aimed at one of their number by the covenantbreaking State, and that they will take the necessary steps to afford passage through their territory to the forces of any of the Members of the League which are coöperating to protect the covenants of the League.

"Any Member of the League which has violated any covenant of the League may be declared to be no longer a Member of the League by a vote of the Council concurred in by the representatives of all other Members."

While China enjoys these rights and duties acquired through her membership in the League, her territorial integrity and political independence are, by no means, under an absolute, or even effective, guarantee of the League. In accordance with Wilson's interpretation, Article 10 entails no other than moral obligations on the part of the member states. Whatever the recommendation of the Council may be, the state concerned can still decide its own course of action. "The council of the

League can only 'advise upon' the means by which the obligations of that great article are to be given effect to. Unless the United States is a party to the policy or action in question, her own affirmative vote in the Council is necessary before any advice can be given, . . . The United States will, indeed, undertake under Article 10 to respect and preserve against external aggression the territorial integrity and existing political independence of all members of the League, and that engagement constitutes a very grave and solemn moral obligation. But it is a moral, not a legal, obligation, and leaves our congress absolutely free to put its own interpretation upon it in all cases that call for action. It is binding in conscience only, not in law."4

Hence, whatever protection or guarantee of territorial integrity and political independence China may obtain from the League must necessarily proceed out of the willing coöperation and good will of its Members. Meanwhile, she must be prepared to resist sudden invasions, as shown in the recent Russian invasion of Urga, the League having no instrument ready for action in such an emergency. She must also be prepared for war, in case the recommendation of the Council is not unanimous, or in case the report of the assembly is not concurred in by the representatives of all the members of the League represented on the Council and a majority of the other members exclusive in each case of the representatives of the party or parties to the dispute, for, in such cases, the League does not forbid war, but simply delays war for the duration of the time covering the consideration by the Council or Assembly within six months and three months after the delivery of the report or recommendation. It will, therefore, be a great mistake on the part of China to discard her armament or even to neglect it, trusting in the efficacy of the League. It should rather be her duty to be fully prepared for war, just as if there were no League in exist

ence, bending, however, her efforts henceforth to international peace and devoting her military and naval forces to the maintenance of the principles of the League.

NOTES TO CHAPTER XXVI

1. For the Covenant of the League of Nations, see Hearings before the Committee on Foreign Relations, the United States Senate, Sixty-sixth Congress, First Session, Senate Document No. 106, on Treaty of Peace with Germany, pp. 270-276; Treaty of Peace with Germany, published by the American Association for International Conciliation, Sept., 1919, No. 142, pp. 939-959; also American Journal of Int. Law, Jan., 1921, Official Documents, p. 4 et seq.; also Supp. of the Amer. Journal of Int. Law, July, 1919, p. 157 et seq.

2. Cf. Hearings, Conference at White House, Aug. 19, 1919, p. 552, Wilson's testimony before the Committee regarding the possible effect of the League on China.

2A. China was elected to the Council of the League on Dec. 15, 1920. The election is for one year only, subject to reelection. -See New York Times, Dec. 16, 1920.

2B. Also see Article XIX. 3. Hearings, ibid., p. 504. 3A. See Articles 23 and 25. 4. Hearings, ibid., p. 504.

XXVII

THE SHANTUNG QUESTION

THE Shantung Question has become a world problem. Like the Alsace-Lorraine controversy, which has been settled by the World War, it carries the potential germ of another world conflict. As the facts of this question are well known, we shall not attempt to reiterate them, but confine ourselves to an analysis of the problem with a view to reaching a solution, just and equitable to China and Japan.

To refresh the memory, we will recall that shortly after the outbreak of the World War, China declared her neutrality by a Presidential Mandate, dated August 6, 1914. On August 15, 1914, Japan presented an ultimatum to Germany advising unconditional surrender of the leased territory on or before September 15, "with a view to eventual restoration of the same to China," and also advising the immediate withdrawal or disarmament of all belligerent vessels within the Chinese and Japanese waters, asking for a reply by noon of August 23.1 Failing to receive a reply at the appointed time, she declared war on Germany and proceeded to attack the German leasehold of Kiaochow. Meanwhile China did not protest against either the ultimatum or the attack, but on the contrary intimated her intention to participate. in the campaign, which, however, was not received with favor.

During the campaign (on September 3, 1914) Japan landed her troops at Lungkow, Shantung, outside the leased territory. On the same day, China proclaimed a war zone delimiting the belligerent area to approximately one hundred miles west of Tsingtao, including Kiaochow

and Laichow, but excluding Weihsien and Tsinan. On September 26, 1914, the Japanese troops, marching from Lungkow to Weihsien, captured the railway station there belonging to the Tsingtao-Tsinan Railway, and on October 6, 1914, seized the railway station at Tsinan, the capital of Shantung. Soon they took possession of the entire line of the Tsingtao-Tsinan Railway, displacing its employees and substituting Japanese subjects. In addition they also seized the German mines adjoining the railway. Meanwhile the siege of Tsingtao proceeded and on November 7, 1914, the stronghold was captured.

Thereafter, on January 18, 1915, Japan presented the now celebrated Twenty-one Demands, among which was the provision (Group I, Article 1):

"The Chinese Government engages to give full assent to all matters upon which the Japanese Government may hereafter agree with the German Government relating to the disposition of all rights, interests and concessions, which Germany, by virtue of treaties or otherwise, possesses in relation to the province of Shantung."

On May 7, 1915, Japan presented an ultimatum, because of which China yielded. In consequence, the treaties of May 25, 1915, were signed, one relating to Shantung with three exchanges of notes, the other to South Manchuria and Eastern Inner Mongolia with nine sets of exchange of notes.

In return Japan pledged to restore the leased territory of Kiaochow, in an exchange of notes, May 25, 1915:

"When, after the termination of the present war, the leased territory of Kiaochow Bay is completely left to the free disposal of Japan, the Japanese Government will restore the said leased territory to China under the following conditions:

"1. The whole of Kiaochow Bay to be opened as a commercial port.

"2. A concession under the exclusive jurisdiction of