Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1895-05-02

II seems unnecessary to argue this sub
ject further.
The next proof of the badness OF
Democratic diplomacy" is described
as "thc delivery to China by this gov.
eminent of the two Japanese students
at Shanghai, and their decapitation al
Nankin." We are told that 1.-THE blood
OF these youths il on our hands" In
deed, Senator Davis says ait is difficult
to discuss this abominable transaction
with moderation" Perhaps plain aud
simple presentation of the law and the
facts, will show that the distinguished
Senator has found it not only difficult
but impossible to do so.
In July last when hostilities between
China and Japan became imminent, our
diplomatic representatives at Pekin and
Toxic were instructed respectively to
afford their friendly offices for the
protection of Japanese subje in China
and OF Chinese subjects in Japan. The
function with which they were thus
clothed, in accordance with the wishes
as well as with tho consent of both
those Governments, presented no new
question. Our representatives In Mexico
had discharged similar function in
behalf of Frenchmen and Belgians, in
peace IS well as in war; and our min
lister in France had assumed the protec-
ton of Germans during the Franco
German war. Moreover, our diplo-
matte and consular representatives had
for many years extended protection to
citizens of Switzerland in various coun-
tries, including China; and on July
25th, 1879, the Department of State in
structed our Minister at Pekin that "the
protection referred to must necessarily
be confined to the personal and unotfi-
cial good offices of such functionaries,
that even this could properly be done
only with the consent of the Chinese
Government" and that such consent
must not be allowed to imply an obi
CATION on the part of a diplomatic or
| consular officer of the United States in
that country to assume criminal or civil
4 jurisdiction over swiss citizens, or to
make himself or his government ac-
countable for their acts"
The extra territoriality-ore exemption
from the local law-which the citizens
of certain foreign powers enjoy in
China and Japan, rests solely upon the
| treaties and is measured by their terms
By the treaty between China and Japan,
signed at Tientsin September 18th, 1871.
it was provided that citizen of the one
country, charged with an offence
within the jurisdiction of the other,
should, If at port, "'e tried by the
local authority and the consul together"
but that he should, if in the interior,
"be tried and dealt with by the local
authority" Thus Chinese in Japan and
japanese in China, did not possess the
complete exemption from the local law,
which Americans and certain other for
eigners enjoy in those countries.
The war, which was declared by
Japan on August LIST, having abrogated
tie treaty of Tientsin, the Japanese
CONVENIENTLY an Imperial ordinance of
August 4th. declared that Chinese in
Japan, should thereafter be wholly sub
| iect to the jurisdiction of the Japanese
civil and military authorities. 1t is
superhuous to say that, as the provisions
of the treaty of Tientsin were strictly
reciprocal, the effect of its abrogation on
the status of Japanese subjects in China,
was necessarily the same as that upon
the status of Chinese subjects in Japan.
They became wholly subject to the
jurisdiction of the local authorities.
On August 18th the Chinese minister
complained to Secretary Gresham that
Mr.. Jernigan, the consul-general of the
| United States at Shanghai, was protect
ing Japanese spies. Inquiry of our
Charge d'Affaires at Pekin ELECTED the
fact that on the 18th of the month the
consul-general of France at Shanghai
had, at the instance of the Chinese
authorities, caused two Japanese SUBJ
| jects to be arrested in the French con.
cession, and, not deemiug himself
authorized to hold them, had delivered
them over to the consul-general of the
United States; that, at the time of their
arrest, they were wearing Chinese
clothing" and that "plans were found
upon them;" and that, though they
were charged with being spies, the
| United States consul-general had re-
fused to deliver them up. These cir
cumstances, as well as the suggestion
made by the Charge d'Affaires, that the
consul.general should be ordered to
examine the case with "Chinese of
fetal present." seemed to indicate that
our representatives in China were labor.
ing under the impression, that they
were somehow authorized to exercise
criminal Jurisdiction over japanese sub
| jects in China, according to the forms
of the abtogated treaty of Tientsin,
even where such subjects were charged
with offences against the laws of war.
| The Secretary Of State, therefore, in.
structed the legation that "lending good
| Offices" did mot invest japanese with
Intentionally" and that neither
the legation nor the consulates should
be made asylums "for Japanese who
violate local laws or commit belligerent
acts" that protection must be 'exer.
cised uuofficially and consistently with
neutrality" and that the consul-general
should not have received the two
japanese and was mot authorized TO
hold them" On September list the
Charge d'Affaires at Picking directed
the consul-general to deliver the alleged
spies to the Chinese authorities. With
a view, however, to prevent any sum.
mary action, Secretary Gresham OBJ
tanned from the Chinese minister
voluntary assurance-there being no
authority to demand any other-that
the men would not be tried till Col.
DENLY, the minister of the United
States at Picking, who was then absent
on leave in the United States, should
return to his post. While this assur-
ance was not kept, the trial OF the men
was postponed, and they were not exc
cuted till six weeks after their sur
render.
On the 9th of September, the Legation
of Japan in Washington declared, that
the action of the consu!-general in de-
| livering the men up twas entirely in
conformity with the japanese interpre-
tation of the authority aud power of
neutral consuls in a beliigerant country"