24th Sept 'THE reference in our correspondence from Nanking, published in another colunin to the removal to Shanghai, of the coffins of the two Japanese who were beheaded in Nanking two years ago on the charge of being spies, brings again to lew the case which has caused much jomatic correspondence and some dispute as' to the interpretation of international law. On the 13th of August, 1894, two Japanese named Kusuwuchi and Fukuhara were arrested at the instance of. the Shanghai magistrate. It has been supposed by some that the Chinese were allowed to make the arrest themselves, but this is a gross mistake, for the men were taken into custody by the French Municipal Police on a warrant issued' by the French Consul-General. At that time war had already been declared, and: on the request of the Japanese and Chinese Governments the United' States' Secretary of State, under date of the 26th of 'July, had instructed' the American Charge, Mr. Denby, to." afford friendly offices for protection of Japanese subjects in China, either directly or through Consuls acting under your instructions." Although this despatch had been published in all the local papers and had become a subject of general discussion, the French Consul-General signed the warrant for the arrest of the men and detained them in gaol for twenty-four hours before he made the U.S. Consul-General officially aware of his action. This was an -unintentional error for which M. Dubail afterwards expressed. his regret, but it made the quiet escape of the young men impossible. After having been. sheltered in the US. Consular Gaol for more than two weeks, and the importance of due deliberation, being. thus impressed upon the Chinese. Government, on- the Ist of September the men were delivered to the 'l'aotai by the U.S. Consal-General ander. the special instructions of his Government, Thus, it is clear that in this case thera was no breach of the extra-territoriality clause -of the Treaties, since the men. were arrested and were also delivered in the usual manner by the orders of foreign officers, China having no authority whatever in the. matter. In: the event of any future. war this incident cannot be quoted as a precedent for invading the rights of concessions which. are not under Chinese domain, The action of the American Govern ment in delivering the men to the Taotai has been severely criticised. This is a just criticism in some respects, but fairness to the late Secretary Gresham demands that it should be stated that he did not give the order to deliver the two Japanese until he had consulted with the Japanese Legation in Washington and received the answer from the Japanese Minister that there was nothing else todo, Even then he received promise from the Chinese Minister at Washington that there would be no foal disposition of the case' until the arrival at Peking of Col. Denby who was at the time absent. However, it eight also to have been stipulated as the U: 8. Consul-General, Mr, Jernigan, advised, when the. men were delivered to the Chinese authorities, that the U.S. which' was exercising "friendly offices" would expect to have a.representative present at the trial of the men, and in this it would have been acting within a reasonable interpretation of this term. Such a right is plainly given in the 'I'reaties in cases where the citizen of a foreign country is concerned and ought always to be insisted upon in dealings with China, which is not recognised by Western nations as.a civilised Power, and has'no jurisdiction over foreign citizens resident, in her country. he case would hav been different if the frietidly mediation had been between two civilised Powers, Daring the Franco-German war of 1870 the American Minister, at Paris received instructions similar to those sent to Mr, Denby. But the case was entirely different, as pointed out by the New. York Sun, between delivering a suspected spy to: China which has no judicial procedures approved by 'I'reaty Powers, und delivering one during '70-71 to. Germany, "whose courts are known to treat accused or convicted persons in a just, equitable, and humane way." 'This is the very reason why the 'l'reaties provide for representation in Chinese. Courts which are trying case in which foreign citizens are involved; and' it ought not to have been lost sight of by
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.