J
+
346
THE CHINESE PREJUDICE.
(Daily Press, 8th November.)
Now that the native Press of Canton is simmering down, it may be more amenable to argument. Of course the murder of the Chinese compradore Ho T801-YI at Shameen was a very shocking affair; but bad na it was, there was nothing in the incident to justify the clamour for revenge that the Cantonese scribes raised, even after the inquiry was over. For some of the remarks made, we should have had considerable
! sympathy, if they had been couched in a less incendiary fashion. There was, how. ever, nothing excusable, nothing defensible, in the sly suggestions tending toward more lawlessness that the native editors were wicked enough to publish; and it was a most mistaken and highly reprehensible course to insinuate that the American officials could have discovered the culprits if they had wished to do so.
Very naturally, the Chinese were quick to raise the odorous comparison, and to point out the strong action usually taken when a foreigner is murdered by Chinese. They pictured for their readers how in such case the mandarins are bullied until they produce the culprit. They might have said scapegoat, without being far amiss; but for their immediate purpose, it was not neces- sary to remind their readers of any of the scandalous tricks resortel to so often to vade the justice of the "foreign devil." They said that in the case of murders by Chinese, the culprits were summarily exe. cuted. It has been so in some instances, but then, Chinese law and procedure is altogether responsible for that. Foreigners do not exe- oute anybody-
-even Chinese-without deli- beration and a fair trial. Moreover, so far as
THE HONGKONG WEEKLY PRESS AND
[November 14, 1904.
peg on which to hang the red rag of those | how far would neutral trawlers have been bad feelings that seemingly spring eternal in the Chinese breast.
THE LAW OF CONTRABAND.
(Daily Press, 9th November.
The interesting discussion which was pro- ceeding at the Supreme Court yesterday and the day before draws attention to a subject upon which we have frequently, made comment-the question of inter national law, and particularly a definition of contraband. Fortunately for his peace of mind, perhaps, SIR HENRY BERKELEY was not called upon to give a decision upon the broad issue; but upon three questions, the terms of which had been narrowed down to meet the exigencies of a charter party as between the Osaka hosen Kaisha and the owners of the steamship Prometheus. Even then, the nut which His Lordship was asked to crack was sufficiently hard. The prin. cipal question, tersely put, was this:
Was the particular cargo contraband according to the Russian definition, and if so, did the Russian definition bind neutrals? That latter clause should, it seems to us, have come first; and, certainly, upon its answer the crux of the case appears to depend. His Lordship male one ramark about International” Law — that no one Power could make it—which is in accordance with much that we have had to say in the past, and which has considerable bearing upon the issue of how far Russia's declarations as to contraband are binding, and how far they are ultra vires. Everybody knows the three classes into which contraband is by common consent divided, ie, articles useful only for war, articles not useful for war, and articles ancipitis usus, which the failure to produce the American sailors may, that is to say, be useful both in who caused the Canton compradore's death war and peace, such, e.g., as provisions, is concerned, it is as a drop in the bucketships, horses, and the like. All the difficul- to the number of Chinese criminals who ties arise out of that third classification, ought to have been executed and are still and the authorities, both old and modern, at large, and who, in some cases, enjoy the have been unable to make any hard and favour of those in high places. Again, the fast rule Distinguendus erit belli status Canton editor alludes to the fact that large they say; it depends upon the sort of war. indemnities have been paid. This must be Russia has declared provisions contraband: admitted; but, on the other hand, it must our Home Government has declared the also be admitted that they were rather contrary. If the decision depend upon the large murders. When our Chinese friends particular circumstances, as when an go in for slaughter, they prefer to do business authority points out: "Sometim s things wholesale. In this Shameen case, the of the very smallest importance be- Americans are paying an indemnity; and come all important, if the enemy be dis- there was
no question of malice in the tressed by the lack of them, and unable matter. Some sailors, apparently, got drunk, otherwise to procure them," then the and while acting like drunken brutes, a curious position seems to be established fatal accident happened. That is really all that what is contraband for one side is not it amounts to, although there is no desire for the other. For instance, while the to deny the stern debt owing by those Japanese could justly declare provisions for responsible sailors if they could be identified. Port Arthur contraband, in face of the It is wrong to describe it as a deliberate blockade and that fortress's dire need, murder, however. The further suggestion Russia has not the same right to declare thut on account of similar occurrences, in that neutrals carrying provisions to Japan which foreigners were the complainants, are carrying contraband, for Japan is not large pieces of Chinese territory have been in straits, nor can Russia be said to be seized, is absurd. If the editors of our blockading Japan. This view commends veruacular contemporaries do not know why itself, at any rate, to our lay mind, although China has had to yield ground to the the lawyers would doubtless be prepared to foreigner, they are certainly not fit to be argue it at much greater leugth. moulding public opinion in Canton: But they do know, probably, and it is no use attaching too much importance to their rabid denunciations, which have a much more ancient incentive than this recent regrettable incident. Where we ought to protest, perhaps, is in the cases of such foreign commentators as one who wrote from Canton to a contemporary that" these episodes leave a sediment of ineradicable hatred." That is not the way to put it. The hatred already there seems inera licable, and such incidents may fan it into flame. In the present case, the incident has been made a
It is not with such points, however, that we have any need to deal. We would con- fine our observations to the question of how far the Russian declarations are binding upon neutrals, as being the most important. As His Lordship has pointed out, and as it is quite easy to appreciate, a Russian pro- Douncement is not international law. How, then, can it be binding upon any neutral? A Russian officer has recently decided that any fishing boat that in the dark looks something like a torpedo-boat may be fired upon and sunk. Supposing Russia had supported this view officially,
|
bound by the official decision? Obviously, no more than the possible weakness of their own Government permitted them to be. If, as is possible, we have presented à false analogy, the reasoning may be discounted; but that is the light in which most ordinarily minded people will be inclined to view the matter, and the way they will answer the question. The cargo of provi- sions of a neutral ship is contraband, and the vessel confiscate, if its owner's Government permit Russia and her Prize Courts to act on that supposition, and not otherwise.
This equivocal position of affairs affords quite sufficient justification for our previous- ly expressed contempt for international law
as an institution. As a collection of intelli. gent opinions, the result of centuries of study by generations of great intellects, it is entitled to respect. As a world force, it is a dead letter. The deadlock in which the world now stands on this one question of contraband proves that. Russia, which promotes Hague love-feasts, and is ready to make any number of pie-crust promises, has by uttering declarations in defiance of the views of the majority demonstrated the ineffectualnes of international law as it at prese it stands. No international agree. ment 28 to principles has more than academic value so long as there is no international agreement as to penalties for breach. The essence of effectual law lies in its penalties, and in its power to enforce them. To-day it is open to any Power, entering upon a war, to reconsider any principle of international law, and to re- pudiate it. Our idea of practical politics would embrace, first, an international con- ference of jurists to codify international law; and second, an international agreement to enforce its provisions upon the potential minority that might wish to act in defiance thereof. This is big, but possible. The Hague Tribunal vas as big, and it was constituted; but its decisions bind nobody. As we have seen, its participants may dis- sent from any of its conclusions. In such cases as that of Russia, there is no guarantee that, with circumstances to make it desir able, she would not at any time put forward her own interpretations to suit herself. With all the Powers, or the majority of then, pledged to enforce international law,.. there would be no dissentient. Until that legal millennium arrives, the very phrase "international law " must sound tiresume to rational ears.
CHINA AND TIBET.
(Daily Press, 10th November.) That Germany and Russia should each in its own way attempt to make political capi- tal out of the recent treaty between Grent Britain and Tibet is, of course, quite in the nature of things. That China should have sufficient strength of mind to reject their interference is the oue satisfactory outcome of the affair. As a fact, though for suffi- cient reasons China is not mentioned in the Br.tish treaty, China has politically been the greatest gainer thereby. For the last ten or twelve years China had been rapidly losing ground in Tibet, and her Amban has found his hold on the Government of the Dalai Lama gradually slipping away. All along the Peking road right up to Batang Chinese influence ha come to be persistently ignored, and the Chiffese officers find petty obstacles thrown in the way of their free circulation, and every exertion, short of actual insurrection, made to frustrate their measures. Nominally the Amban at Lhassa has extensive control in the`administration
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.