New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1900-10-06
AGREEMENT IN CHINA.

AGREEMENT IN CHINA.
The practical agreement of the United States
Germany and Great Britain upon a definite
policy marks the beginning of new and hope
full stage of the Chinese question. Especially is
such the case since there is reason TO believe
that Japan is in substantial agreement with
these three Powers. 1t is true that there are
some radical differences between this policy and
the one proposed by France and Russia. These
six great Powers seem to-day. however, nearer
TO being in accord than at any former point in
the whole case, and it is a positive concert OF
action which they are approaching. and not
negative one of idleness. Which Power is the
leader of the concert it would be difficult 10
say. Indeed, it seems doubtful whether any
one of them is entitled to that distinction. There
can however. be no question as to the Power, or
Powers. which took the effective initiative in
organizing the concert The simple recital of
facts shows, we believe, the credit of that
achievement to be pretty equally divided
among the three Powers first named as now
being in substantial agreement. These, it is
fitting to say, are the three which, with Japan,
are most directly and weightily interested in
the reimbursement of Chinese affairs; and it is
pleasant to be able to add that they have all
along been on terms of marked friendship and
confidence in the matter.
States when it reported to the other Powers the
proposition and announcement made to it by
Russia. 1t will be remembered that Russia had
told this country practically that she meant to
withdraw from the concert and 10 act indie
pendently. The United States, while seeming
to agree in measure with Russia, reported the
situation TO the Powers, and suggested the de-
STABILITY of finding if possible, a common
ground upon which all could continue to act
far as there community of interests That
suggestion marked a new departure in the nego-
tiations The next move was made by Ger
many in the declaration that the leaders of
the Boxer outrages, such Of them the
Powers might designate, must be given up for
punishment, and that this must be done a
sine qua non essentially precedent to all other
intercourse with China. From this somewhat
extreme attitude the United States dissented
1t pointed out that while no Power could
be more resolute for punishment of the guilty
than the United States had consistently been
from the outset. yet in the view of this country
for the Chinese Government itself to execute
judgment, at least Ostensibly upon its own
initiative, would far better the purposes Of
the Powers than for the intervening and venge-
full Powers themselves to do With this
divergence of opinion developed between Ger
many and the United States, the British Gov
eminent appears to have played the important
part Of harmonizer. The net result is that
the American view of this particular detail
seems TO have been accepted by Germany, while
in turn the German view prevails to the effect
that judgment upon the guilty must be the
prelude to whatever other negotiations are to be
conducted. There is proviso that the list of
culprits punished and the measure of punish
ment inflicted shall be made satisfactory to the
Powers. On the theory-which is the only one
to be entertained-that the Powers ask only
justice and that China means TO do justice, that
must be regarded as reasonable and practicable.
We have said that comparison of this plan
with that proposed by France with, as is under
stood. the concurrence of Russia reveals some
radical differences. The first Of the Franco
Russian items is that the principal culprits
designated by the Powers, shall be punished
That is readily to be harmonized with the Ger
man Britsh-American demand. The third item
is that China shall pay equitable indemnities
for injuries done to foreigners. That too we
may regard a matter of course, upon which
all agreed. The other four items are open
TO serious argument. To forbid permanently
the shipment of arms into China would, apart
from other objections, probably prove futile, be-
cause the initiative ingenuity and mechanical
skill of the Chinese would enable them TO SUD-
ply their own wants in that respect The deadly
A1urata rife of Japan is token of what
Orientals do for themselves. Moreover such
prohibition and the dismantling of Chinese forti-
fcatiOns and the foreign military occupation Of
the road from Picking to the sea, demanded in
other items Of the French plan, may be thought
incompatible with Chinese sovereignty and in
tegrity. To require these things would be to
treat the Chinese as though they were savage
tribes in the Congo, or else as though the Chi
nese Empire were hencefOrth TO be subject TO
foreign control and occupation. The remaining
item, concerning legation guards at Picking, is
less open to criticism, since the principle of the
maintenance Of such guards is already estab-
lished; and the only question open is concerning
their numerical size, which is obviously mat
ter for diplomatic consideration.
The radical difference between the two plans
then, is that the practically agreed upon by
Germany, Great Britain and the United States
provides that the Powers shall act together In
requiring China to punish the chief Boxers and
leaves all else for diplomatic treatment after
ward in which the Powers may or may not act
untedly, while the plan OF France and Russia
would bind all the Powers together in many and
elaborate details of the settlement, and apparent
ly, in effect, perpetual suzerainty over China
The former may we'll be acceptable 10 France,
since so far as it goes, 1t agrees substantially