New-York tribune., 1921-06-20
The British Conference

discuss many questions Of imperial
policy. American interest in the pro-
ceedings centers in the discussion
over the renewal of the present
Anglo-Ja apanese alliance, dating back
to the treaty signed by those two
powers on January 80, 1902. The
situation as the conference begins is
reported by The Tribune's London
correspondent to be this: "South
Africa and Canada opposing renew
al of the treaty on any basis; Aus
tralia and New Zealand favoring a
renewal with amendments, and India
maintaining silence while being hos
tile to the pact"
The treaty of 1902 resulted from
the joint action of Russia, France
and Germany in depriving Japan of
most of the fruits of her victory over
China in the war of 1894-'95 and
from subsequent Russian exploita-
tions in the Far East. 1t bound the
contracting powers to maintain the
status q'to and general peace in the
extreme Fast, and, specially, to
maintain the independence and terri
torial integrity Of Corea. In case
either should, in defense of it's in
terests, become involved in war
with third power, the other was to
maintain strict neutrality and to en-
deavor to prevent other powers from
joining in hostilities against its ally.
In case of attack by other powers the
neutral ally would be obliged to
enter the war.
Under this agreement Great Brit
ain remained neutral in the Russo
japanese War of 1904-'o5. On Au-
gust II, 1905, while the peace con-
ferees were still in session at Ports
mouth, the alliance was renewed. 1t
was broadened so as to apply to
India. The neutrality provision was
eliminated. Article 2 stipulated that
eff, by reason of unprovoked or ag-
gressive action, wherever arising, on
the part of any other power or
poWers, either contracting party
should be involved in war in defense
of its territorial rights or special in
terests mentioned in the preamble
i. G., in the regions of eastern Asia
and Indial, the other contracting
party will at once come to the assist
ance of its ally"
The treaty is thus defensive in
character and leaves it open to the
ally not at first involved in the war
to decide whether the war was or
was not due to unprovoked and ag-
gressive action on the part of an OUT
side belligerent. Italy exercised a
similar judgment in 1914 under the
terms of her defensive alliance with
Germany and Austria Hungary. The
revised treaty also recognized ia
pans paramount rights in Corea.
On June 13, 1911, the alliance was
again renewed, for a term of ten
years. 1t was then modified by the
insertion of this clause: Should
either high contracting party con-
clude treaty of general arbitration
with third power, it is agreed that
nothing in this agreement shall en-
tail upon such contracting third
party an obligation to go to war
with the power with whom such
treaty of arbitration is in force"
The United States has no general
arbitration treaty with Great Brit
ain. According to a statement made
IN the japanese Diet last February
by Viscount Uchida, Japan and Great
Britain have agreed to regard the
Bryan one-year-copling-off treaty
which we have with Great Britain as
the equivalent of general arbitra-
ton treaty.
The British dominions, however,
take the view that the language Of
the treaty ought to be made to con-
form explicitly TO this non-literal in
depreciation of its meaning. Their
interests in the Pacific are largely
identical with ours. So far as jap.
anese immigration is concerned, they
+. sympathize strongly with our policy
of exclusion. Canada is understood to
favor a conference Of Pacific powers
as prerequisite to the renewal OF
the treaty. Some approval of this
idea has been expressed recently in
the British Parliament.
Premiers Hughes of Australia,
SHUTS Of the South African Union,
Meighen of Canada and Massey Of
New Zealand have all insisted that
cooperation with the United States
III maintaining peace in the Pacific
is just as important as cooperation
with Japan. Mr. Meighen would
rather have no alliance with Japan
than a renewal of the present ALI