New-York tribune., 1905-08-16
TERMS THEN AND NOW.

Ranorts of tbe nature of four articles
agreed upon by the peace ENJOYS are cohhuehtly
made. and are probably pretty near the truth'
though there is some difference of opinion as
to one of them. IT will be interesting TO com
pare them with the corresponding articles OF
settlement which were proposed by Japan De-
fore the war; especially as stated by Baron
kOmura In his note of October 80 1903. and
rs amended by him on January 49, 190f-prac-
tically his last word before beginning war;
and also with the proposals in RusSias alleged
note of February T. 1904, which never pre-
Sented to Japan.
We are told that the first article at Ports
mouth provides for Russia'S recognition or
Japan's preponderating influence in Corea; Rus
sia to consider Corea as outside her sphere or
influence, and Japan to recognize the soVer-
eighty of the reigning family, but to be tree
to give advice and assistance toward the i'm
provement of the civil administration In the
ante-bellum negotiations both sides were prac-
tically agreed upon this point to this extent
But Japan infiexibly demanded, in addition,
that she should be free to give COrea military
as well civil assistance. and Russia to the
end refused to agree TO that 1t seems scarcely
possible that the ENJOYS at Portsmouth have
ignored that crucial detail. They may be
assumed to have granted the former demands
of Japan.
The second article is said to be a mutual
agreement to eyacuate Manchura and to re-
nounce all special privileges there, and to
include those provinces under the general rule
OF Chinese territorial integrity and the open
door Baron Komura in 1903 willing to
recognize Russias special interests" in Man
churia provided Russia would not infringe
upon the treaty rights already enjoyed there
by Japan and other powers. Russia at first
refused to concede this last point, but is said
TO have done so in the note of February Z, 1904,
though TO the last she refused to agree TO re-
spect the territorial integrity of China in Man
churia If the article agreed upon at Ports
mouth is truly reported, then Japan has gained
what she formerly demanded.
The third article is said TO provide for the
cessiOn 10 China Of the Chinese Eastern Rail-
road, from Hardin to Port Arthur and Dalny-
a purely Russian enterprise. That point was
not raised at all in the ante-bellum negotia-
tions, it being mutually understood then, with
out question, that Japan was willing for Rus
sia to continue in possession of that road under
the terms of the concession from China. The
fourth article is said TO relate TO the Russian
lease of the Kwang-Tung peninsula, and 1t Is
assumed that it provides for the transfer or
that lease TO Japan. That point was not
raised either, in the negotiations before the
war; Japan then being willing for the Rus
sian lease and occupation or those places
10 stand, provided the remainder of Manchuria
was evacuated. These third and fourth Ports
mouth articles must therefore be regarded as
consequences of the war and as setting forth
some of the penalties which Japan is imposing
upon Russia.
In the reported agreement upon Corea and
Manchuria the chief issues which led to the
war are disposed of. They are also the phases
of the whole question in which the rest of the
world is chiefly concerned. The future Of
COrea and Manchuria is a matter of great
international concern If the reports from
Portsmouth are accurate, those issues are being
settled in a manner which should, and doubt
less will, prove satisfactory to the world at
large. There remain the questions of Sag
halien, of indemnity and some others. These
are of direct concern TO only Russia and
Japan, though all the world naturally takes
indirect and benevolent interest in them. If
agreement is reached on them on as just and
reasonable terms as it is said to have been
reached on the first four articles, the Ports
mouth conference will deserve the gratitude of
those who constituted it, and of all mankind.