conclusion of new treaties, a treaty of commerce and navigation was signed on July 21, 1896, virtually placing Japan on a par with the other treaty Powers. Consular jurisdiction for the Japanese subjects was provided (Articles 20, 21, 22).60 The most favored nation treatment was accorded to Japan and her subjects "in all privileges, immunities and advantages that may have have been or may hereafter be granted by his majesty the Emperor of China to the government or subjects of any other nation" (Article 25).61 A subsequent protocal was signed at Peking on October 19, 1896, respecting the Japanese settlements in the newly opened ports and also other matters.62 This concludes the second period of the diplomatic history of China. In recapitulation, it may be said that it witnessed two general tendencies or forces at work. First, it witnessed the further opening of China which was a continuation of that of the first period. Additional treaty ports were opened to trade; more commercial treaties were concluded; and other Western states arrived to enter into treaty relations with China. As a reaction against this unwelcome intercourse and aggression, hostile feeling was engendered among the Chinese which manifested itself in spasmodic murders of missionaries and finally culminated in the Boxer Uprising, which we shall discuss in the next chapter. Second, this period witnessed the initial onslaught of Western aggression resulting in the loss, on the part of China, of a large number of her dependencies. It witnessed the loss of the western part of Ili to Russia, of Annam and Tonkin to France, of Burma and Sikkim to Great Britain, and of the Liuchiu Islands, the Pascadores, Formosa and Korea to Japan. The attack on the integrity of China did not, however, occur until the next period when we shall note the general scramble for leases and concessions. NOTES TO CHAPTER II 1. Hertslet's China Treaties, Vol. 1, pp. 331-350. 2. Ibid., pp. 249-258. 3. Ibid., pp. 407-414. 4. Ibid., pp. 512-522. 5. Ibid., pp. 522-527. 6. Ibid., pp. 223-234. The Belgians were granted the privilege of trade by an Imperial letter dated July 25, 1845, which, however, did not assume a treaty form. 7. Ibid., pp. 354-361. 8. Ibid., pp. 215-223. 9. State papers, Vol. 62, pp. 321-329. 10. Hertslet, op. cit., pp. 415-420. With a special agreement of the same date respecting Chinese immigrants in (Hertslet, Vol. I, pp. 420-422). 11. Ibid., pp. 234-240. 12. Ibid., pp. 423-434. 13. Ibid., pp. 434-435. Peru 14. Ibid., pp. 435-436. A treaty of friendship, commerce and navigation was signed between Portugal and China on Aug. 13, 1862, but it was not ratified because of the dispute over the Sovereignty of Macao-state papers, Vol. 55, pp. 790-800; Hertslet, ibid., p. 422. 15. For a full account see H. B. Morse, The International Relations of the Chinese Empire, Vol. II, pp. 239-261. 16. Ibid., Vol. II, pp. 257-258. 17. Hertslet, No. 12, pp. 73-80. 18. Ibid., p. 77. 19. Also see No. 14, pp. 84-88; Hertslet, No. 16, pp. 90-91; No. 18, pp. 94-96. 20. Morse, op. cit., Vol. 2, p. 189. 21. Hertslet, No. 96, pp. 554-557. 22. Ibid., p. 556, Art. 5. 23. Ibid., pp. 556-557, Arts. 6 and 7; also see No. 97, pp. 558560, Hertslet, p. 561, Art. 2; p. 562, Art. 4; No. 99, pp. 563-565; p. 563, Art. 1. 25. Morse, op. cit., Vol. II, p. 275. 26. Ibid., Vol. II, p. 332. 27. Ibid., Vol. II, p. 332. 28. State papers, Vol. 72, pp. 1143-1150; Hertslet, No. 85, pp. 483-499. 29. State papers, Vol. 72, pp. 1150-1151. 30. State papers, Vol. 72, pp. 1151-1157. 31. State papers, Vol. 72, p. 1144; Hertslet, p. 483, Art. 1. 34. Hertslet, p. 488, Art. 12. 36. Ibid., Vol. 2, p. 341. 37. Ibid., Vol. 2, pp. 341-342. 38. Ibid., Vol. 2, p. 351. 39. Hertslet, No. 44, pp. 293-294. 40. Hertslet, No. 46, pp. 296-300. 41. State papers, Vol. 76, p. 246, et. seq. 42. Encyclopædia Britannica, 11th edition, Vol. 4, p. 843. 43. Hertslet, No. 15, pp. 88-90. 44. The Burmese sent her usual mission of tribute in 1895, but after that year the tribute missions stopped. 45. The boundary between Burmah and China was later determined by a subsequent convention of March 1, 1894 (Hertslet, No. 20, pp. 99-109). Kulong was given to Great Britain and Kokang to China (Art. 3). Munglem and Kiang Hung were ceded to China, for which China pledged not to alienate them without the previous consent of Great Britain. This convention of 1894 was modified by a subsequent agreement of Feb. 4, 1897 (Hertslet, No. 22, pp. 113-119), by which China, in consideration of the consent of the British Government "to waive its objections to the alienation by China, by the Convention with France of June 20, 1895, of the territory forming a portion of Kiang Hung" (Hertslet, Vol. 1. p, 113), was to compensate Great Britain by territorial cessions including the State of Kokang and perpetual leases of certain tracts south of the Namwan River. The non-cession of Munglem and Kiang Hung without the previous consent of Great Britain was reiterated. A special article opened, as treaty ports, Wuchow, Sanshui and Kong Kun, and as ports of call, Kongmoon, Komchuk, Shuihing and Takhing. The convention of September 6, 1894 (Hertslet, pp. 110-113) affected the junction of the Chinese and Burmese telegraph lines. 46. Hertslet, No. 17, pp. 92-94. 47. To this convention was later appended a set of regulations signed on Dec. 5, 1893. Hertslet, No. 19, pp. 96-98. 48. State papers, Vol. 67, pp. 530-533. 49. State papers, Vol. 67, p. 531. 50. Hertslet, No. 61, pp. 361-362 51. State papers, Vol. 76, pp. 297-298; Hertslet, Vol. I, p. 362. 52. Morse, op. cit., Vol. III, p. 19. 53. Kölnischer Zeitung, July 25, 1894, cited in North China Herald, Sept. 7, 1894, quoted in Morse, op. cit., Vol. III, p. 29. 54. State papers, Vol. 87, pp. 799-804; Hertslet, pp. 362-369, No. 62. 57. Hertslet, p. 365, Art. 6. 58. Hertslet, pp, 368-369. 59. State papers, Vol. 87, pp. 1195-1197; Hertslet, Vol. I, No. 63, pp. 370-373. 60. Hertslet, p. 379; cf. State papers, Vol. 62, pp. 322 and 323, Arts. 8 and 12. 61. Hertslet, p. 381, Art. 25. 62. Hertslet, No. 65, pp. 382-383. III THE INTERNATIONAL STRUGGLE FOR CONCESSIONS (1895-1911) THE third period of the diplomatic history of China dates from the close of the Chino-Japanese War (1895) to the beginning of the Chinese Revolution (1911). It is a period characterized by the international struggle for concessions. The first period (1689-1860), as we have seen, opened China to the trade and intercourse of Western nations. The second period (1860-1895), while continuing the first in the process of the opening of China, was chiefly characterized by the loss of dependencies. The third period, which is our present theme, witnessed the international struggle for concessions, which is probably the most interesting in our study of the foreign relations of China. The last period, by the loss of her dependencies, had exposed China to the attacks of the West. For centuries China had surrounded herelf with a cordon of dependencies which were to protect her from assault from the outside world. But now a large number of these dependencies were taken away and China was exposed to the onslaught of Western Powers. Further, the Chino-Japanese War revealed to the world the relative incompetency of the Chinese Government. Hitherto China had fought with Western Powers, and although she had been beaten several times, she was nevertheless not considered so weak as to attract the unscrupulous aggression of the West. In fact, during the Chino-French War of 1884-1885, the Chinese army stood her own ground very well. But the war with Japan changed the opinion of the world. Japan was consid ered a secondary power in Asia. By one stroke she brought the giant to the ground. This was a victory. of one Asiatic state over another. The world became convinced that China was following in the wake of Africa and that the nations should lose no time in taking what they could. Thus, during this period, China's integrity was exposed to Western aggression, first by the loss of dependencies and then by the disastrous defeat suffered at the hand of Japan. From this time on, until checked by the Chinese Revolution of 1911, the diplomatic history of China was marked by a series of unscrupulous attacks on the sovereignty and integrity of China. And this onslaught could not but produce the most strenuous reaction on the part of the Chinese, which manifested itself in the rise of Chinese nationalism. In its first blind reaction, it took the form of the Boxer Uprising, by which the Chinese, and especially the Manchu rulers, thought that they could liberate themselves from the deadly intrusions of the West. Finding this impossible, as evidenced in the disaster of 1900, the next reaction took the form of the Chinese Revolution of 1911, by which the Chinese wrested the reins of government from the incompetent hands of the Manchus and sought to find shelter in their own republican form of government. Besides Chinese nationalism, this international struggle for concessions brought into existence another condition of affairs, which is commonly called the sphere of interest or influence. In the heat of contest, the aggressive states carved out the various spheres of influence for themselves, Russia in North Manchuria and Outer Mongolia, Japan in South Manchuria and Inner Mongolia, Germany in Shantung, Great Britain in the Yangtze Valley, Thibet and Szechuan, France in Kwangtung, Kwangsi and Yunnan. And to create these spheres of influence the Powers em |