The International Settlement of Shanghai has, from the first, been deeply concerned in the exacerbation of relations between China and Japan over the Manchurian issue. Although the general public, from time to time, has had direct evidence of the anxieties confronting the Municipal Council in the pre~ servation of law and order and the maintenance of the inter~ national principles for which the Settlement stands, it has not, perhaps, fully realised the weight of the burden borne by the Council. The Japanese and Chinese Members have dispel led great public spirit in attuning their natural inclinations to the general interests of the Settlement's administration, There have been discussions in which views have been expressed with no little directness and warmth, On the whole the Council has been able steadfastly to preserve its traditions of impartiality and to vindicate its determination to protect the Settlement against brenehes of the peace, Now that the situation has developed much closer and more critical contact, with Shanghai, the Council's position comes under Ispecial scrutiny. The Japanese authorities are making certain demandy on the Chinese adminis tration, notably for the suppress jon of antisJapanese activities. Similar demands, in less im: perative form, are being put to the International Settlement. The logic of this is recognisable. In theory, the Council has, from the first, strongly deprecated the use of the Settlement for the display of provocative Chinese resentment against the Jo ese; it ha: unwise lose partisanship on the other side. That the theory has been learned imperfectly into practice is due to no fault of the Council. Its actions have had to be dictate led with strict regard to the powers legally at its dishes.) Reference tu the Fecthan Report shows how limited in' certain iniportant. executive. matters those powers are. Actual experience of the refusal of the Chinese Courts, before whom the Council has had to bring eases of illegal boycotting action and other activities to which the Japanese object, to convict or inflict suitably deterrent punishment rev Is a further disability of the Coun of the T have not been dealt with by the Council. Str tion hag been taken to the display of exceedingly—offensive anti= Japanese posters in shops and other places in the Settlement, The answer is that the Council may have been too cautions in certain specified ease but, on the whole, ite action complete as the legal vested in if permits, act that it has had several re= from the Chinese Courts taken to indicate a 1 readiness to test ie competence to the full. Wiseacres who For themselves, as they to the Council, the have roundly asked) why the have not done this or that fin suppression of anti-japanese movements, They have bravely invoked the principle of action first and inquiry afterwards.
Such "Critics may be invited use th wweive me gence "in study of the evert, ta say nothings in an important ease beypellant bench of the preme Court, Thi ome respects, more wwidist than king. It is. hinderstoud th Japanese nisse the inst_private action,—the h ty Japanese nals would be related. Now that veloped to the a ytave emer
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.