American-Japanese relations

Front matter

- ,0*

A

\ I iV c.

BOOK I The Manchurian Question

I. What the War Conferred Upon Japan

IN Manchuria .... 23

II. The Manchuria of To-Day ... 36

III. American Policy in Manchuria . . 58

IV. Chinese Diplomacy in Manchuria . yS

V. Russo-Japanese Relations in Man-

churia 98

VI. Japan's Commercial Advance in Man-

churia AND the " Open Door " . 113

VII. American Trade in Manchuria and the

"Open Door" . . . 127

BOOK II The Korean Question

VIII. Why Japan Occupied Korea . . . 143

IX. America's Diplomatic Relations with

Korea 157

X. Japanese Enterprise in Korea . .172

XI. What Japan Has Done for Korea . 186 lO

XII.

XIII.

XIV.

XV.

XVI.

CONTENTS

Judicial Reform and Exterritoriality

IN Korea

Japanese " Outrages " in Korea .

The Annexation of Korea .

American Enterprise in Korea .

American Trade in Korea and the " Open Door" ....

XVII. American Missionaries in Korea

214 230

255 266

BOOK III The Immigration Question

XVIII. Japanese Immigration Before the Ex-

clusion Agreement

XIX. Denis Kearnyism Once More — I

XX. Denis Kearnyism Once More — II

XXI. Japanese Immigration After the Ex-

clusion Agreement

XXII. The Japanese in California .

XXIII. The Naturalization of Japanese . Index

343 356

Introduction

LOOKING back over the past several years of American-Japanese intercourse one is struck with the radical change that has come over the sentiment of the American nation towards Japan. It is as if long and tried friendship, for some strange inexplicable reason, suddenly cooled to the point of revulsion.

Fifty years ago the Republic sent to the Sunrise Empire, still shrouded in the atmosphere of a fairy-land, an ambassador of peace and good-will, and lifting the infant nation from the cradle of seclusion, introduced it to the dazzling concourse of powers. From that time the United States fondly looked upon the insular nation as her protege, and guided and guarded it through storm and sunshine as it carried its unsteady steps onward and upward along rough and untried roads.

Meanwhile, the docile youth — for such was Japan — proved also the most strenuous. With amazing rapidity he acquired the arts and learning which were the fruits of centuries of hard labor in the Occident. Thus equipped with weapons of modern civilization which he had imported from the West, he met in the field of battle one of the most formidable gladiators of Europe. As the doughty islander dealt at his giant adversary blow after blow each with an unerring hand, the American public cheered him on with peals of applause, and the plaudits never ceased as long as he occupied the arena.

The combat came to an end through the good offices

II 12 Introduction

of Mr. Roosevelt. Japan was no longer an infant nation to be petted and patted. She had vindicated her right to a place in the comity of great powers, and the world was forced to recognize the fact. Then destiny abruptly adjusted the balance, and the American nation, which had measured out to the Japanese nothing but golden opinions and roseate views, began to look askance at the islanders.

What is the cause of this sudden change ? Can it be attributed to the jealousy of America? Decidedly not. It is impossible to imagine that a great nation like America could be envious of the success of a little nation like Japan, towards which it assumed the attitude of a patron for nearly half a century. Can it be possible, then, that America is fearful of Japan's military prowess ? A country, endowed with unlimited resources, occupying a position which is geographically impregnable, and, above all, noted for the bravery and patriotism of its sons, certainly need not be alarmed by what modest armament an impecunious nation such as Japan is striving to maintain merely to defend the position it has already attained.

And yet some of the American financiers, publicists and officers appear ever and anon in the lime-hght of propaganda and proclaim to the four quarters of the world that America is building dreadnaughts and fortifying the Pacific Coast with an eye on Japan. To add sensation to the chorus of such alarmists, some of the American newspapers, and they are many, hold up before the curious gaze of an unthinking public the spectre of a Japanese invasion. I confess I do not understand what this all means. I have heard some Americans suggest that the root of the trouble lies in the sinister designs

INTRODUCTION I3

concocted by "predatory wealth," as the " muck-raker" calls the great " interests " of the country. When I am almost inclmed to lend ear to this view, I begin to think how opulent this country is, and what great opportunities are in store for American trade and enterprise here on this side of the globe, and I cannot help wondering if my American informants are not, after all, mistaken. How can I believe that American financial magnates and captains of industry, with their coffers overflowing with gold, would conspire to spread war talk so that they may sell their government more war-ships and more guns ? How can I believe that these men, to whom destiny has apportioned nothing but prosperity, would exploit the newspapers and invoke the influence of their government to check Japan's commercial advance in Manchuria so that they may build there their own railroads and sell their own goods ? Ah, that is unthinkable !

Meanwhile, belligerent words continue to be spoken, and alarmist notes continue to be sounded. The average American, by reason of want of unbiased information, is apparently inclined to listen to the counsels of jingoes and alarmists. Thus the cloud of misunderstanding is growing thicker every day, casting its gloom over American-Japanese relations. The stage is reached, it seems to me, where the clearing of this misunderstanding should no longer be delayed, if friends, such as America and Japan have been, are not to be estranged beyond the point of reconciliation. It is with this need in view that this humble volume is presented to the American public.

There are three questions which have been and still are the source of more or less serious misunderstandings among Americans. The first of these is the Manchurian question. During the past half decade Europe and

INTRODUCTION

America have been flooded with hterature denouncing Japan's modus operandi in Manchuria. Thus an impression has been created in this country that the Mikado's Empire is, by surreptitious means, practicing wholesale discrimination against American commercial interests in that region. It is further asserted that Japan is dealing with China in an overbearing manner, encroaching at every point upon the sovereign rights of the Celestial Empire. When the seven chapters in which I shall discuss the Manchurian question are perused, the American public will, I hope, at least understand that such charges are not founded upon facts.

The second question to which I would call attention is the Korean question. Here again Japan is accused of slamming the " open door " and of treating the Koreans in a manner which is an outrage to humanity. Whether or not Japan deserves such accusations I ask the public to judge for itself in the light of the facts which I shall set forth in this book.

The third and last question which I propose to discuss is the immigration question. So far as the governments of the United States and Japan are concerned, this question is a dead issue. Japan is firmly pledged to adhere to the spirit and letter of the so-called "gentlemen's agreement," and will exert all her influence to check the emigration of her nationals of the laboring class to the United States. Nor will this policy of Japan be altered with the change of cabinets, for in all important matters affecting foreign relations a Japanese cabinet always adopts the policy of its predecessor. The administration at Washington fully understands the intentions of Tokio, and is, moreover, satisfied with the results already accomplished by the present arrangement. This sentiment of

INTRODUCTION I5

the American government is indicated by the omission from the new treaty with Japan of all reference to the exclusion of Japanese laborers.

And yet the Pacific Coast continues to agitate against the Japanese. Since 1906 not a year has passed but anti- Japanese bills of one sort or another were introduced in the legislature of California. How long will this state of things be permitted to prevail without disturbing the equanimity of the Japanese ? The enlightened class of Japanese appreciate that America as a nation is friendlily disposed towards Japan, but the masses are beginning to wonder if the Americans are not a sort of people who blow hot and blow cold. And who can blame them ?

Here a few words seem not superfluous with regard to the attitude of the Japanese people, not the government, towards the immigration question. Official opinions, expressed in super-polite terms, may assure you that the people of Japan have Httle to complain about the exclusion agreement now in force. I am constrained to say that such is not the case. On the contrary, the Japanese feel that, viewed in the light of the real status of Japanese immigration, such a drastic measure of exclusion as was adopted by the two governments is not justified. Anxious as they are to maintain amicable relations with America, they will acquiesce in the arrangement as long as it is binding, but deep in their hearts they feel that America is not treating them in a spirit of fairness. Whether this sentiment is justified or not I shall discuss in the proper place. Here I ask attention to the following paragraph in one of Count Okuma's essays incorporated in " Fifty Years of New Japan," edited by the Count himself :

" I am well aware that behind this anti-Japanese sentil6 INTRODUCTION

ment there exist various circumstances which deserve consideration. However, in so far as our people are disliked because they are Asiatics, there is nothing reasonable or logical in this hostile feeling. Such a passion or sentiment arises solely from narrow and biased racial prejudice on the one hand, and from misconceptions born of competition among the laboring classes on the other. To reason against and to remove these prejudices and misconceptions is a mutual duty devolving as much upon our people as upon the Western nations concerned. We have no occasion to be deterred by doubts or to hesitate in pressing for the satisfaction of our just demand. I do not in any way sympathize with the idea that by sending abroad emigrants who become a cause of domestic trouble in the country of their destination, the rights or honor of a great and civilized nation, such as ours claims to be, will be served. But I contend that when a treaty power seeks to enact a law restricting the immigration of our laborers, the terms of such restriction should be analogous and even identical with those applicable to the peoples of other great powers or civilized countries."

Perhaps I am not far from the truth when I say that these words of Count Okuma's voice the general sentiment among his fellow countrymen. Count Okuma is not a mouthpiece for the Japanese government. He has been out of power for a score of years, and has been the most fearless critic of the policy of the government in which he occupied a portfolio at various times. At the same time, it must be remembered that he is far from a jingo, such as the American newspapers represent him to be because of his opposition to the exclusion agreement. On the contrary the Count has been an ardent

INTRODUCTION 1 7

advocate of international peace, and is the organizer and president of the Peace Society of Japan. A man of remarkable magnetic power, he has admirers throughout the Mikado's realm, and his views on the immigration question no doubt exercise great influence among the masses.

I have explained the scope and nature of the following studies. Let it be far from me to claim that these studies are absolutely free from errors and misconceptions, for " we are none of us infallible, not even the youngest of us " ; but I can at least say that they are the result of conscientious and painstaking investigations. My conclusions may not always be correct, my estimates may sometimes be imperfect ; but they will be honestly given, as far as the knowledge and conviction of the author are concerned.

To which it may be added that my absorbing interest is in the furtherance of friendship and good-will between my native country and the country which I have virtually adopted and for which I cherish affection and respect, even though its laws compel me to live here as a pilgrim and an alien. The fact that I have strong confidence in the good sense of the American nation in general makes me regret all the more deeply that some Americans and American newspapers indulge in idle and harmful talk of an American-Japanese war. I fail to understand the mental state of those persons who would link the rushing of American troops to the Mexican border with anything Japan intends or does not intend to do. As well try to connect Halley's comet with this globe of ours by a line of railroad ! It is very well for these wiseacres to speak of " object lessons," but should they not remember that such object lessons as they fancy this country is giving l8 INTRODUCTION

Japan can make little impression upon a nation which attained the position it occupies through fire and blood ? To the Japanese, who have fought two great wars within the past fifteen years, the mere mobilization of troops or the manoeuvres of war-ships are a pastime. Furthermore, you cannot intimidate by " object lessons " a nation which is thoroughly confident of the probity of its conduct in deaUng with foreign nations, most of all with your country.

It is strange that the Americans, sagacious as they are, did not long before this awaken to the fact that their sensational vociferations could only recoil upon them and injure their dignity and prestige. While the jingoes and alarmists of this country have been busy chasing the phantom of an American-Japanese war, the little nation across the Pacific has invariably remained serene and equanimous. Never once have the Japanese press and people spoken to you in bellicose tones, but have borne the indignities, to which your whims subjected them, with perfect dignity and calmness. So far as Japan is concerned, there is absolutely no reason to fear the rupture of amicable relationship between the two countries, for among the forty millions of the Mikado's Empire not a single soul is to be found who even dreams of ever taking arms against America. I, of course, hazard no prophecy that American interests will never conflict with those of Japan, but I believe that any controversy arising out of such conflict can be and ought to be disposed of in an amicable manner, by mutual restraint, tolerance and concession. It is time that America should conduct herself in a manner that becomes the power, wealth, and culture that inhere in her. It is time that Americans should awaken to the grave situation which cannot fail

INTRODUCTION 1 9

to result if they persist in playing the role of a provocateur

unless, forsooth, they are really anxious to create a

casus belli. These are plain words, but I say them in the name of international deportment, peace and amity.

BOOK I The Manchurian Question WHAT THE WAR CONFERRED UPON JAPAN IN MANCHURIA

IT is five years since the Titanic struggle between Japan and Russia passed into history, and it may seem trite to describe at this moment what the war conferred upon Japan in Manchuria. Yet to most Americans the issues of the conflict have been vague and misty — so much so, indeed, that even a writer, who seems to be generally recognized as the greatest American authority on the Far Eastern question, has unwittingly disseminated misleading information on the matter. Nor is this surprising when it is remembered that half a decade ago the American public had not sufficient interest in Manchuria to observe with critical eyes the consequence of the war, and all that it signified. The ** open door " had been declared by Secretary Hay, it is true, but the Far Eastern policy of America did not as yet assume the aggressive nature it now assumes.

With the inauguration of the Taft administration all this has changed. The new cabinet insisted upon the right of participating in the gigantic loan for the Canton- Hankow and Hankow-Szchuen Railways ; Mr. Knox's novel scheme for the " neutralization " of the Manchurian railways aroused mingled surprise and curiosity throughout the civilized world, even as Halley's comet blazoned through the heavens to the awe and wonder of myriad humanity ; and, what is more vital, America proposes to build in Manchuria a line of railway extending over eight hundred miles. Mr. Taft's Shanghai speech of October, 1907, has been disinterred by the press from the obhvion into which it was consigned, and is heralded, as if it were a message of warning, through the country from the shores of the Atlantic to the region beyond the Rockies. Such a radical alteration in the attitude of the Washington government towards the Chinese question could not fail to direct the attention of the American people to whatever is transpiring in the Far East, and even the man in the street, as if awakened from a protracted slumber, now rubs his eyes, and asks " What is the matter with that country Manchuria, anyhow ? What is Japan doing there, and what are we going to do about it ? " These questions cannot be answered without going back to the condition which prevailed in Manchuria in the wake of the war, because that condition must needs form the starting point in our study of the Manchurian question.

Needless to say that the new condition in Manchuria is due to the injection of Japanese influence into the situation. To ascertain, therefore, what Japan acquired in Manchuria as the result of her victorious campaign against Russia is essential to the study of the radically altered situation in the Three Eastern Provinces, as Manchuria is called by the Chinese. For this purpose it is necessary to examine the Russo-Japanese Treaty of Peace, and various other documents bearing more or less important relations to that treaty. Not less important than the peace treaty is the Chino-Japanese treaty concluded at Peking in December, 1905, as well as the protocol to that instrument. The fact that the Portsmouth treaty required China's consent to confirm the transfer to Japan of the Russian railways in South Manchuria, behooved Japan to send an envoy to Peking immediatelyafter the Portsmouth conference in order to obtain the said consent, and to make such other arrangements as were deemed essential to the readjustment of the respective positions and policies of Japan and China with regard to Manchuria. The result was the treaty of December, 1905, which in history is referred to as the Komura- Yuanshikai Treaty after the names of the Japanese and Chinese envoys, who were instrumental in drafting that memorable document. In virtue of this instrument, China indorsed the transfer of properties and privileges made by Russia in favor of Japan. We shall presently see what these properties and privileges are.

In the first place, Japan has secured the lease of Port Arthur, Ta-lien (now Tairen), and the adjacent territory and territorial waters. To the average mind, however* the extent of the lease is anything but clear. Indeed, the popular misconception on this point has been such that even the author of a brilliant book on the Far Eastern question is worried not a little, because in the Russo-Japanese Treaty of Peace the term •' Liao-tung Peninsula" instead of " Kuan-tung Peninsula" is used in describing the territory covered by the leasehold which Russia transferred to her victor.

As a matter of fact, the word '* Kuan-tung " is no less ambiguous a term than " Liao-tung," and needs to be so defined as to admit of no misconstruction. Consequently, Article 5 of the Russo-Japanese Treaty of Peace, wherein the territory in question is defined, deliberately avoids referring to either the one or the other of these terms, but unmistakably indicates that Japan's acquisition in this respect is neither greater nor less than what Russia held in the peninsula before the war.

In order, however, to ascertain the exact ahgnment of the leased territory, it behooves us to go back to the Russo-Chinese Treaty of March 27, 1898, as well as to the convention concluded a little later between Hsu Tajen, the Chinese minister at St. Petersburg, and the Russian government. According to these documents, the leased territory covers the whole of that portion of the Liao-tung Peninsula lying to the south of an imaginary line drawn from Pu-la-tien, at the head of an inlet on the west coast, to Pi-tsu-wo, a village on the east coast of the peninsula. To the north of the territory thus leased there is a " neutral zone " stretching to a line drawn from the mouth of the Kai-chou River to the south of the district city of Kaiping on the west coast, to a point on the Ta-yang River and down its right bank to the sea, and including the village of Ta-ku-shan on the east coast. In the neutral zone, China retains her jurisdiction, but relinquishes the right to quarter troops except with the previous consent of the power in behalf of which the lease is established. Such are the exact limits of the territory affected by the Russian leasehold. The duration of the lease is fixed at twenty-five years, out of which some seven years elapsed under Russian rule. Inasmuch as Japan, in the new treaty with China, is pledged to adhere to the stipulations of the Russo- Chinese treaty of lease, she must withdraw from the Liao-tung Peninsula at the expiration of eighteen years from the time of its transfer to Japan, unless the term be extended by the mutual consent of the high contracting parties.

Next in importance is the acquisition by Japan of the railway between Chang-chun on the north and Tairen on the south, covering some 436 miles, as well as the following three branch lines : Ta-shih-chiao to Yinkow^ fourteen miles ; the branch to the Fushun coal field, thirty-four miles ; Nan-kuan-ling to Port Arthur, twentyeight miles. All told, the railways ceded by Russia to Japan amount to some 512 miles, for the building of which the former expended some 76,222,000 rubles. In virtue of the Russo-Chinese agreement of September, 1896, the cojicessionnaire country for these lines must hand over to the Peking government these railways and their appurtenances without compensation on the expiration of eighty years from the day of the opening of traffic along the main line of the Eastern Chinese Railway, i. e., 1903. Besides, the Chinese government has the right, on the expiration of thirty-six years from the time of completion of the main line and its opening for traffic, to take over the lines entire, on refunding to the concessionnaire country all the outlays made on them.

In addition to the railways ceded by Russia, the Chino- Japanese Treaty of 1905 allowed Japan the right to reconstruct the military railway between Antung and Mukden, amounting to 189 miles, into a permanent Hne to be utilized for commercial purposes, the duration of the concession being fifteen years from the day of the completion of the reconstruction work.

According to an additional clause of the above-mentioned railway agreement between the Peking and the St. Petersburg government, the Eastern Chinese Railway enjoys the right to police a strip of territory extending for fifteen versts on either side of the railway line, as well as the right to exploit any mineral deposits within this strategic area. This latter privilege leads us to the consideration of the much talked-of coal mines at Yentai, Fushun, and Wa-fang-tien. The Yentai coal mines had been worked by Chinese until the Eastern Chinese Railway acquired them by purchase. The coal mines in the Fushun district and the Wa-fang-tien mines were also opened up by Chinese many years before the coming of the Russians. Since the Russians had taken possession of these mines, their poor management of business was responsible for so httle improvement that the coal raised was insufficient to supply even the southern section of the Manchurian Railway. Besides these three mines, the Eastern Chinese Railway worked several seams, but in an aimless and shiftless fashion, abandoning them after a short experience. I shall relate in a following chapter how, under the efficient management of the Japanese, this deplorably nebulous state of things has been readjusted.

Now we come to the question of lumbering concessions, which furnished the world a topic of startling stories immediately preceding the Russo-Japanese war. The semi-official Russian corporation, the Yalu Lumber Company, having an imposing head office in Port Arthur, was concerned with lumbering on the Manchurian as well as the Korean side of the Yalu. This enterprise, political rather than commercial in its aim and nature, did not hit upon a working plan, and was already on the verge of dissolution. In consequence of the Chino- Japanese agreement of 1905, the lumbering industry on the Chinese side of the Yalu River is now being undertaken by a joint-stock company organized by the high contracting parties, dividing the shares equally between Chinese and Japanese subscribers.

Such, in brief, are the rights and properties which the war left, in its wake, in the hands of the Japanese. Important as these material acquisitions are, we must not forget that even more important is the attainment by- Japan of an end, which was the raison d'etre of the war and which is the sine qua iiojt of her Manchurian pohcy — I mean the reahzation of the " open door."

The cardinal point of the Peking Treaty of December, 1905, is the clause in virtue of which Japan obliged China to open the following sixteen cities and towns " as places of international residence and trade " :

Name of port

Province

Population

Feng-huang-cheng

Feng-tien (or Sheng-king) 50,000

Liao-yang -

-

100,000

Hsin-min-tun

-

80,000

Tie-ling

-

100,000

Tung-kiang-tsu

-

Unknown

Fa-ku-men -

-

Unknown

Chang-chun

-

-

Kirin

-

- 250,000

Kirin -

-

-

-

- 250,000

Harbin

-

-

-

- 250,000

Nin-gu-ta

-

-

-

40,000

Hun-chun -

-

-

-

30,000

San-sing

-

-

-

- 50,000

Tsi-tsi-har -

-

Hei-lung-kiang

- 100,000

Khai-lar

-

- n

-

- Unknown

Ai-gun

.

- i(

-

30,000

Man-dju-H -

-

- it

-

- Unknown

In classic, picturesque China it is a sacrilege to speak of statistics, and the above figures, gathered from various native sources, must be taken for what they are worth. This list of towns newly opened to foreign trade has to be enlarged by five additional ports, of which Newchwang and Tairen had practically been marts of international commerce for a number of years prior to the war, while the remaining three, Antung, Tatun-kow, and Mukden were opened in October, 1903, as a consequence of the joint agitation of the United States and Japan. All in all, twenty-one cities and towns in Manchuria have been thrown open to the commerce of the world. A glance at the map of Northern China reveals how carefully these places were selected. Taking the newly-opened sixteen ports, we perceive that their opening is of the utmost importance for the benefit of all nations standing for the maintenance of the integrity and the promotion of the economic prosperity of the Celestial Empire. In persuading China to throw open these ports, Japan no doubt had in view not only commercial, but also strategical considerations. When the smoke of the battle was just cleared away, the insular nation not unnaturally apprehended that the Muscovites, recovering their shattered power, might once again light the hills and plains of Manchuria with the lurid flames of war. Viewed from a strategical point, the Japanese considered, the five frontier or semi-frontier posts, Man-dju-H, Ai-gun, Khai-lar, Hun-chun, and Nin-gu-ta, when converted into marts of international trade, would prove a serious obstacle to Russian aggression upon Manchuria, for, through them, the frontier armaments and military activities of the Muscovite in the Far East would be readily exposed to the world at large.

The remaining eleven towns include most of the important trade entj'epots in the maritime province and interior of Manchuria. Liao-yang, probably the oldest town in the Eastern Three Provinces, lies astride of the railway commanding the fertile Liao valley, which, famous with giant crops of kao-liang, or the tall millet, veritably flows with milk and honey. Tie-ling, Hsin-min-tun, Faku-men, and Tung-kiang-tsu are also situated more or less closely to the Liao River, the greatest trade artery in Manchuria, down which the produce of the far interior of that country and Eastern Mongolia are carried to the port of Nevvchvvang. About half-way between Tie-ling and Harbin is the prosperous city of Chang-chun, which is aptly called the clearing house of inland Manchuria, being the distributing centre for trade to and from Kirin, Hei-lung-kiang, and Eastern Mongolia. Eighty-four miles from this trade depot is the old city of Kirin, the capital of the province of the same name, which, situated in the heart of a splendid timbered country, is so famous for the building of boats and junks that it is well styled the " dockyard." Finally, we come to the famous railway city of Harbin, which is the Russian metropolis of Manchuria.

The opening of these towns was effected immediately after the withdrawal of the armies of the Mikado and the Czar, which was completed before April 14, 1907, in conformity with the evacuation agreement between the commanders of the formerly belligerent forces in Manchuria. The evacuation clause of the treaty of peace did not affect the railway guards in Manchuria, which the high contracting parties reserved the right to maintain to a number not exceeding fifteen per kilometre. As a consequence of the publication at Tokio of the proceedings of the peace conference, it transpired that during the Portsmouth conference Count Witte objected to Baron (now Marquis) Komura's proposal to fix the maximum number of guards, which was very significant in view of the fact that it had always been Russia's policy to utilize the railway as the forerunner of her conquering army. The Russo-Manchurian Railway was a military strategical railway guarded, as no other railway in the world was guarded, with blockhouses every three or four miles, and with garrisons at every important point adequate to quarter large numbers of troops. At the Peking conference of December, 1905, the Chinese plenipotentiaries expressed the desire to have the Japanese and Russian railway guards withdrawn as soon as possible, in deference to which Japan consented to withdraw her guards in the event of Russia agreeing to take a similar step. But until China's internal conditions are so readjusted as to afford ample protection to foreigners and their property within her borders it would be unreasonable for China to expect either Russia or Japan to withdraw her railway guards.