Nov. 19.
The reopening of the Soviet-Japanese Ashery question, by the request made by the Japanese representative in Moscow that the agreement on the subject arrived at between the (we countries last year should be signed, draws attention to one of the most serious Sifferences between them which has disturbed their relations for a number of years. Japanese fisheries in the northwestern waters of the Pacific operate under recogni tion of rights afforded by the Treaty of! Portsmouth, but, despite that fact, they have always been the cause of considerable ickering, the Japanese complaining of the treatment of their vessels in Russian waters, the method by which leases are auctioned, and, by no means the least, the everlastingly vexed question of the rouble-yen exchange in which rentals have to be paid. Last year, when the arrangements under the Treaty of Portsmouth became due for renewal, these differences were negotiated, and the parties reached sufficient agreement to, permit of a new document being drawn up. This was: done and there only then remained the ne-assary process of appending formal signatures. Before that could be done, however, Japan and Germany signed the Anti-Comintern Pact, Up to that time there was 0 reason to believe the Japanese rights! were in danger but the signing of that Pact made Russia reluctant to go any further in the matter, There it rested until the fact of Italian adhesion to the Pact became known, and it is believed that this was the cause of the lukewarm attitude of Moscow recently to the suggestion that the time had come for finally disposing of the agreement. 'Thus' tone of the major causes of friction between the two countries is again revived and a valuable contribution to the harmony of the Pacific at least for the moment postponed. Unfortunately, until it is finally dealt with, it must always prove a source of irritation and therein lies its danger.
It is a cynical thought that despite the repeated disavowals by Moscow of any con-rection with or control over the Comintern, the Russian Government should thus indicate resentment at a pact alleged not to be Jevelled against itself as such. But there another aspect to the matter which is of great importance. The entrance into nego~ tiations on the question ifiplied that agreement could be reached it would be implemented by a formal document. That has now been disregarded, and in any apportionment of blame for future developments it would seem that Moscow would!
Indeed find it difficult to justify its attitude oF to disclaim original guilt in the matter. Wt Is dificult, for example, to see what else Japan can do, especially in the event of a recurrence of old grievances, other than to! take such necessary action as would ensure Ito her those benefits which would have been [derived from the unsigned agreement. It is, of course, to be hoped that she will not, but, if she id, the onus of responsibility would rest fairly and squarely upon the shoulders of Moscow. If, therefore, the Soviet's attitude is regarded as provocative, it should prove no cause for surprise, particularly when it is remembered that ses foods form an important staple in Japan's national dietary, and is, therefore, mot a purely academic' point, but one which very closely concerns her capital existence. And again it has to be emphasized that Japan's:
nis in these fisheries are clearly and de-Anitely established by the above-mentioned Treaty. That being so it is obviously the duty of both countries to see that they are! scrupulously observed, and failure to do this} on the part of Russia undoubtedly calls for severe criticism, if nothing more.
Unfortunately the Kamchatkan coast is not the only fisheries question which is xiving rise to embarrassment. Reference has recently been made to the Alaskan fisheries which are being menaced by the Japanese salmon canneries, American _representations have been made to Japan on the subject, without success. For this the reason is clear. So long as the canneries do not establish themselves in territorial waters no solid complaint can be registered. They can be operated all over the Pacific should: it be desired, so long as they do not! shoot their nets within the territorial limits of other countries. Thus legally Japan doing what she has every right to do, and is strictly standing on the letter of the law. But, when it is remembered that Alaska ducted on the basis of the immediate effects of some catastrophic action, but must _be ordered eventually according to certain! precisely defined principles by which alone nations, like individuals, can securely. mai fain "their relationships. If logic through reality, gives Japan present immunity from correction, it cannot be denied the power—again through reality—to exercise due] influence on the ultimate course of events. complains of the-steady reduction of the stock of salmon, and when the efforts of America at conservation of the salmon and its own huge investment in the fisheries are taken into account, it is not unreasonable to suggest that Japan may be expected to do somewhat more than adhere to conduct of strict propriety, and recognize the peculiar position in which America finds herself, is comtended that a very few more years of unrestricted salmon fishing will mean the end of all fishing in Alaskan waters, and in this connection it is suggested that' Japa own best interests would be served by modified activity. It is to be hoped that when this is effectively brought rome to the Tokyo government, such: considerations will prevail, for in fairness it has to be admitted that with regard to the Kamehatkan fisheries the Japanese have not only not fished excess sively, but have actually suggested the necessity of closing down some of the leases, and have taken other steps to conserve the salmon.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.