Evening star., 1922-01-04
That Guaranty to Japan.


Japanese Homeland" was definitely
included in the geographical range VI
the four-power treaty started an
editorial barrage all over the coun-
try, and even the Presidents plea
"to rejoice over things accomplished
rather than "to dwell on dlherlns
views which can be of no conse-
auence," failed to check the protests
against the territorial guaranty
which, it was discovered. had been
granted Japan. Later reports came
that this protection was not desired
by the japanese people. ,,a ana thse se
made BY which Japan proper would
be specifically excluded from the op-
Grafton Of the treaty. Pending sucn
an outcome, however, Americans are
expressing their opinions freely. ana
editorially, at least the guaranty
idea has more opponents than friends.
1t has been supposed, says the New
York Times independent democratic),
that the protection, or let US say
benefits, of the fcur-power treaty
were made to include the 1apanese Iansn n
for abandoning her treaty with Greas
such an exchange?" the Chattanooga
News (democratic) asks. But Amer
lea and Japan. the News coatimues. I'M
traditional opponents and rivals and
an obligation on our part to protect
and defend Japan" is not what Amer.
leans either expected or desired.
The Columbia Is. CO state loemo.
cratic) finds it small wonder that the
Japanese were ready ito scrap the
Anglo-Jap alliance in return for this
blanket protection of herself from
all the world. even against call
fornia."
pendent) replies, '1t was not japan
that insisted on the inclusion OF her
mainland in the island sphere. On the
contrary, she didn't want II, cohteh3
ing that the Japanese people mlsnt
feel sensitive about it." Agreeing tnat
1.-The Japanese don't ike IT,. tne
Milwaukee Journal (independenD is
at loss to understand why Japan
was given protection she did not
seek and which is repugnant to her
national sentiment" Possibly, 1t sur
misses, "the purpose was to make the
terms Of the treaty strong strong enough eu sa,e 10
guard the British countries In the
Pacific" but it feels that this could
have been done without Undertaking
to protect the homelands Of any OF
the four nations" The Brooklyn
Eagle (independent democratic) does
not think ''that Japan requires guar.
antees affecting her home coasts" and
since, as the Cleveland News (repub-
lican) suggests, it contains an ele-
ment of definitely fixing Japan's
minor rating. with Japan's consent.
the Eagle holds that "the Toxic gov
ernment should speak out ana repu
diate the idea"
ii the agreement stands, however:
Japan will receive "a place Of special
preference and advantage, to when
the Detroit Free Press (fndependentl
asserts she is "in nowise entitled ana
which is repugnant, ana 9.n.s. more OF OF tgss ths
arrangement is quite plain TO tne
Ynnngstown (Ohio) vindicator (demo-
oratic), which holds that:
1--WE guarantee to protect japan
against outside aggression. But
Japan makes no sucn aeree%ens .s,nh Srse- S
mant regarding Great Britain, which.
iika Japan, is an island empire. we
maize no such agreement regarding
E.ra nee. which feels itself in more I'M
mediate danger than any one OF US
Japan alone Is ACCORDED tnis preief
Thus I've give to the Land Of the
p,s;n1 Sun. objects the Norristown
pa Times independently. with
which we have been on the verge OF
war a half dozen times, in the last
fifteen years, something which we
denied to France, our pest irleno IN
tha world" And If this is to be the
outcome. the Raleigh News and OBJ
server idemocratic) wants enlight-
enment as to why Japan should not
be equally bound to come to the re-
Her Of the United States, or Of Eng
land, or Of France"
But in the opinion Of . number Of
writer's tho distinction between japan
and her islands has not much prac-
tical value" a. the Adrian (Mich.)
Teieeram independently puts 1t, for.
the New York Post (fndependent) ex-
niains. "there certainly is as much
danger of war when Japan feels her
homeland threatened as when she
feels her possessions threatened.
That the pact covers Australia and
New Zealand the New Bedford (Mass.)
Standard (republican). considers 'ob-
yious." and it would be strange II 1t
did not also include JAPAN" for ito
restrict its terms to such Islands as
Japan has acquired outside the homo
Country would be a. absurd as IL q
treaty TO which the United States was
a party and which aimed at respect
inF her rights In North America
should be held to apply only to the
Virein islands and Porto Rico"
The New York World (democratic)
Certainly has no objections" to
bringing Japan within the provisions
of an agreement in which Australia
and New Zealand are plainly includ-
ed, along with the Philippines and
Guam" and feels that mo injustice
is done" Admittedly the effect Of the
treaty 'is to safeguard Japan from