The New York herald., 1921-11-21
Writer Shows London Is
Not Bound to Aid Toxic
in War on u. S.
FOGGY WORDS CONDEMNED
Cooperation in Far East, With
Fewer Clashes, to Follow
Abrogation of Treaty.
by wICKHAM sTEED.

BY WICkHAM STEED.
editor of the London Tinaes.)
Copyright, 1921, by United Netrs.
WASHINGTON. Nov 20.-In a recent
despatch I pointed out that American
opinion is disposed to make the re-
fention or abrogation of the Anglo
Japanese alliance test question of
the reality of British good will toward
the United States.
With all Difference to American feel
ings. urge that this is not the most
tfactful way Of putting the matter, and
that the future Of the Angio-Japanese
alliance should be determined in the
light of the advantages or drawbacks
which, from the standpoint of the high
est interests Of the British Empire, it's
continuance might involve.
) Upon mature consideration the bal
ance of advantages, which include the
prospective influence Of the British EN-
pire as whole for the maintenance Of
peace in the Pacific and throughout the
world. seems. / added, clearly to in
dicate the association of the alliance
irrespective of any agreement for the
Limitation of armaments, erninently
benefcent though such an arrangement
would be as an additional pledge of
tranquility.
Notwithstanding this somewhat point
ed hint-which has been widely repro
duced in he United States-some well
known American writer's continue to
force the issue of the Anglo-Ja panese
alliance r1Ih1ir
writer says:
II am in a position to state author
ftatively that. despite official reassur-
snces given last December by the British
Foreign Office. the United States Govern
ment considers, on the face of the
known texts. that in case of war between
Japan and the United States, involving
las it inevitably would--some third
nation. Britain. SO long as the present
Anglo-Japanese alliance continues in
effect. is in honor bound to go to the
assistance of Japan against the United
States This consideration, as has per-
haps been often said. but not sufficiently
realized, Is one of the gravest matters
that has now to be threshed out here in
Washington"
Another U. 8. Writer Quoted.
Another writer, who obviously is not
out OF touch with the views OF some
official quarters. suggests that before
entering into any agreement for the
Limitation of naval armaments the
United States may ask for the definite
abandonment of the Anglo-Japanese aIli-
ance. He argues that for the United
States to pledge itself not to build war
ships for ten years and to leave the
other two naval Powers bound together
In defensive alliance. with their COM
LINED navies approximately double the
naval forces Of the United States, would
scarcely be regarded as reasonable.
the idea that a triparite Anglo
Japanese-American agreement might be
substituted for the Anglo-Japanese AL
lance. he continues. is not popular with
the American Administration and would
probably never be ratified by the Sem
ate. Interpreting the reference in the
Chinese memorandum to international |
commitments" affecting China which
ought to be examined by the confer
ence, the writer concludes that the
Anglo-Ja Japanese alliance Is one of the
commitments referred to.
In view OF this campaign. which many
TEND 10 confuse American public opin-
Ion or IL 1t foreshadows official action
may create a delicate situation. II
seems expedient to state frankly the
real position Of the British Empire in
regard TO the Anglo-Japanese Alliance
ana thus 10 obviate the impression that
pressure or dictation from any foreign
quarter Is requisite or that IL could or
would affect the decisions Of the peo-
pies of the British Empire.
There are some facts In the later his
tory OF the Anglo-Japanese Alliance
which, even If known to the American
state Department, are certainly not an
DreCfated hH ia
such fact is that. In 1911, when viscount
tthen Sir EdwardD Grey was negotia ting
tne renewal of the alliance with Baron
Nato, the Japanese Ambassador In Lon
ooh' ne Informed him that a clause
must De inserted removing from the
possible scope OF the alliance apy Power
with which the British Government
might conclude treaty OF general
arbitration.
kato's View ON Treaty,s Renewal,
Baron Kato replied that he would ad-
wise his Government to accept this re-
strictive clause Japan. he added. knew
mat England would probably conclude n
treaty Of general arbitration with the
United states but the Japanese Govern-
ment had long been convinced that aIIi.
ance or no alliance, the British En,pire
would never in any conc-jva BILE circum-
Srances fight alongside Japan against tho
United States Therefore Japan would
lose nothing by accepting the proposed
clause.
Thus the restrictive clause was en-
bodied in the renewed treaty Shortly
afterward treaty OF general arbitra-
tion was negotiated between the British
Government and the United States. The
Senate. in its wisdom. declined to ratify
it--a proceeding for which the British
Government with all its faults. cannot
fairly be held responsible. Technically.
therefore, the United States Senate null
hned the exclusion of the United States
from the scope OF the Anglo-Japanese al
lance, until In September, 1914, what IL
known as the Bryan-Spring- Rice Peace
Commission Treaty was negotiated and
duly ratified. On his own initiative Sir
Edward Grey then informed the Japanese
Government. through Baron Inouye, that
in the British view and for purposes of
the Interpretation of the Anglo-Japanese
Alliance, the Peace Commission Treaty"
would be equivalent 10 the general arbi-