Srd Feb, In a note in one of its recent issues on an alleged Shanghai telegram which reported that Great Britain, Japan, and Russia had agreed to unite in guaranteeing the independence of Corea, the Seoul Independent says: "As to guaranteeing the independence of Corea by the three Powers, this is such good news that we can hardly believe its authenticity. Will England really substantiate the statement which her Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs made Inst summer in the House of Commons coucernivg Coren?"
It is worth while to put on record again what Mr. Curzon said about our policy in Corea, He declared it to be in the interest of Great Britain, first, "to see that the independence of Corea is maintained, and that it is not terri-tonally or administratively absorbed by the Empire of Russia; second, that Corean territory and Corean harbours are not made the base of schemes for territorial aggrandisement in the Far East, and give to one Power a maritime supremacy in the Exstern seas." This, says the Saturday Review, " seems to be a definite statement of policy as far as words go, but unless it is supported by. decisive action, Russia may be trusted to ignore the covert threat absolutely.".
It is worth while to look at this a little closely. Mr. Curzon laid it down as our interest not to allow Corea to be territorially or administratively absorbed by the Bmpire of Russia; and yet we see an Englishman ejected from the Finance Department to make room for " Russian, who seems to be allowing all the abuses which Mr. Brown rath-Jessly cut down to grow up to their former luxuriance, the Corean army officered by Russians, the Arsenal in charge of a Russian officer, Russians made Commissioners of Customs and acting at the same time as Russian vice-consuls, and a pro-Russian Corean as Foreign Minister. The interest to us in this is, that it obliges us to ask; If Lord Salisbury conceives that this state of things is compatible with Mr. Cnrzon's declaration, can we help having some apprehension that we may hereafter be betrayed by having the recent declarations of Cabinet Ministers as to the maintenance of open markets in China construed with similar elastic city?
The excuse may be made that our eowmercial interests in Corea are so slight that it does not matter. But though there is only one British firm in Corea, our manufactures form a large portion of the imports into the peninsula, and Corea is one of the markets, actually and potentially, that we ought on no account to allow to be closed against us.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.