ever, of the subsequent Austrian Treaty made China a member of the League.

The effect on the Chinese people of the Shantung decision was of the greatest significance. It caused the Chinese to realize that the world had not yet attained a stage of development when right would always win on the merits of right only, but that the right to win must. be backed by might. It also caused the Chinese to realize that it was useless to look for help from friendly Powers, but they must find salvation among themselves. It further impressed on the Chinese mind that the source of weakness was due to the corruption and incompetency of the Chinese Government, rather than to the inherent weakness of the people themselves. As a result of these painful realizations, the Chinese nationalism, cut to its quick, burst out in magnificent exuberance. When the Shantung decision reached China, the students commenced a strike, and drove out of office several most notorious pro-Japanese officials, who were believed to have betrayed China. Then followed a nation-wide boycott against the use of Japanese goods. On the other hand, the effect of the decision on Japan was not salutary. While victorious at the Peace Conference, she lost the confidence and admiration of many of her friends.

As the war was over, the Powers, maimed but not entirely disabled, returned to China again as their sphere of action in the Orient. Will they follow the policy of an international struggle for concessions, or of international coöperation and control? This is the question that every earnest student of the foreign relations of China would wish to know. Hitherto all indications point to the conclusion that the Powers returning to China would adopt the policy of international coöperation and control. The United States, the champion of the Open Door policy, has abandoned her policy of aloof

ness, and is ready to participate in the affairs of China, and exert her influence for the principles of the Open Door doctrine. Besides, the Powers were too much injured by the war to be able to enter into another heated contest for concessions, at least for the near future. Further, the close coöperation which they have experienced during the war will enable them to follow the policy of international coöperation and control rather than that of international struggle for concessions.

To give concrete effect to this policy of international coöperation and control, the banking groups of the Allied Powers, France, Great Britain, Japan and the United States,-at the invitation of the United States Government, met at the Paris Peace Conference on May 11 and 12, 1919. The step for such an international banking conference relating to China had been previously determined at a conference of a number of American bankers at the Department of State in June, 1918, which was convened in consequence of the request of the Chinese Government for a war loan. The Conference of May 11 and 12, 1918, at Paris, resulted in the tentative formation of a New International Banking Consortium. The qualification for membership is the relinquishment in favor of the Consortium of all prior options to make loans in China. The bankers of the four Powers are to be organized into national banking groups, each participating in full partnership, and on a basis of equality. The Consortium is not to invade the field of private enterprises, but is to limit its sphere of action to public undertakings of a basic character. All agreements of the Consortium must be subject to the approval of the Governments of the national groups concerned. The final agreement of the Consortium was signed on October 15, 1920, in New York City.

It soon developed, however, that Japan was not in perfect accord with the agreement of the Consortium. Prior to the final agreement of 1920, the Japanese Gov

ernment qualified its assent by the reservation that South Manchuria and Eastern Inner Mongolia should be excluded from the operation of the New Consortium. such a reservation would be contrary to the principles of the Open Door doctrine, and would put Japan in a special status in the Consortium, it was not accepted by the other Powers. Japan, however, insisted, and that caused delay in the formation of the Consortium.

Finally, to settle the difficulty, Thomas W. Lamont was requested by the American banking group, with the approval of the French and British groups, and the concurrence of the Department of State, to visit Japan, which Mr. Lamont did in March, 1920. As a consequence, a compromise was reached, whereupon Japan withdrew the reservation in toto, and authorized her banking group to enter into the Consortium without any qualification.69

Viewing this period as a whole, in recapitulation, we can say that this was a period of international coöperation and control. The opening of this period saw the conclusion of the reorganization loan, which was a clear evidence of international coöperation and control. The close of the Great War witnessed the creation of a new international banking Consortium, which is a physical embodiment of the policy. This policy was interrupted first by the withdrawal of the United States in 1913, which was followed by a temporary revival of the international struggle for concessions, and then by the interposition of the World War, which drew all rival nations to the battlefields of Europe, leaving Japan alone, supreme and untrammeled in the Far East, the opportunity of which she had fully availed herself.

But during this period we may also notice that new forces have come into the life of China. The first is the Japanese effort to gain the control of China during the World War. In order to forestall the exigency of

the international control of China, Japan made the abortive attempt by the presentation of Group V of the 21 demands. The other is the full awakening and maturity of Chinese nationalism, which was touched to the quick by the Shantung decision and which promises to be the savior of Chinese independence in the days to

come.

This completes our sketch of the diplomatic history of China. Viewing the four periods as a whole, we clearly discern that there are definite tendencies and forces at work.

First, we have seen that the Chinese did not welcome Western intercourse in the first and second periods, and, in fact, they were hostile to the unwarranted interference with their isolation and tranquillity. During the first period they were haughty, feeling themselves superior to western barbarians. During the second period, while they had abandoned the conceit of superiority, they were still antagonistic to the west. This hostile attitude culminated in the Boxer Uprising of the third period. in 1900. Thereafter, however, the Chinese attitude underwent a radical change. Instead of feeling superior, they regarded themselves as inferior; instead of being hostile, they welcomed Western contact, and were anxious to learn the best of Occidental civilization.

On the other hand, the attitude of the Western nations, during the first period, was one of struggling for equality, and during the second period, that of treating China more or less on a basis of equality; but when the third period came, it distinctly changed for the worse and they regarded the Chinese as an inferior and downtrodden race destined to be ruled by the West. After, however, the Chinese Revolution took place in 1911, it began to change for the better, and when China joined the Allies in 1917 and subsequently proved herself to be worthy of respect and admiration at the Paris Peace

Conference and in the League, Western states began to assume more and more an attitude of equality.

Second, the method and nature of Western aggression have undergone a radical change during the four periods of Chinese diplomatic history. In the first period, the Western states were merely bent on opening China for trade and intercourse. In the second period, having opened China, they deprived her of one dependency after the other. In the third period, when protection from the dependencies was eliminated and the weakness of China was revealed by Japan's easy victory, they entered into an international struggle for concessions, victimizing China and threatening her very integrity. In the fourth and present period, however, they have changed their policy from struggle to coöperation, and from partition to control.

On the other hand, the Chinese were determined to preserve themselves in the face of Western aggression. In the first period, while China was being opened up, they were fast asleep. In the second period, when the outlying dependencies were being taken away one after the other, the Chinese were still asleep. In the third period, when Western nations began to threaten the very existence of China, they speedily woke up. They first resorted to the fanatical attempt to expel all "foreign devils" from China, as was shown in the Boxer Uprising, and having failed in that endeavor and being humiliated, they directed their efforts at the reformation of their government, as manifested in the Chinese Revolution of 1911. In the fourth and present period, Chinese nationalism was wide-awake, determined to save their land and independence from the encroachments of either the West or Japan.

With this sketch of Chinese diplomatic history, let us now turn to the policies of the Great Powers in China, which will be treated in Parts II and III.70