The action of the Japanese Consul-General in presenting a memorandum to the Chairman of the Shanghai Municipal Council asking for control of publications indulging in anti-Japanese sentiments serves to draw attention to the whole question of propaganda in Shanghai, arising out of the hostilities. It may be said immediately that the Japanese are within their rights in making protest against the use of the International Settlement as a base from which to disseminate anti-Japanese publicity, for those who do so very definitely infringe its neutrality. As with terrorism, it is absolutely undesirable that the Settlement should be used in any way as a place from which anti-Japanese activities may be conducted with impunity To a very large extent that has been recognized by authorities other than the Municipal Council, as witness the decision of the British authorities to secure control over the Chinese language papers, under British protection, who were engaged in sniping at the Japanese. As it was very cogently remarked at the time, to do such a thing under the protection of Great Britain, would be just as bad as hiding behind the wall of the British Consulate-General, and throwing stones at passing Japanese. Chinese who enjoy the safety, and security of the International Settlement owe it as a duty to themselves, and to all their fellow residents to make quite sure at all times that it neutrality shall not be breached. More than that, there is something contemptible about such people who hide behind others while engaging in practices of which the latter cannot possibly approve, for it indicates a complete absence of courage, and a degree of cowardice comparing very poorly indeed with the hundreds of thousands of their fellow countrymen, who are daily risking their lives on the various fronts.
It would be interesting to learn what evidence there is that these anti-Japanese publications are inspired by Chungking. It is to be hoped that there is none, for, if ther is it indicates a sense of irresponsibility utterly foreign to the common idea of government. To make the point quite clear, it must be remembered that when hostilities broke out in the neighbourhood of Shanghai, the Chinese authorities were ry zealous to see that the International Settlement and the French Concession should maintain complete neutrality. That was, of cours then a neutrality vis-à-vis of the Japanese. It was of service to both sides, for they were able thus to protect one flank, which othe! wise would not have been possible. Of this the Chinese took the fullest advantage There would have been very clamant objection, and protest if the neutrality which it was possible to maintain south of the Soochow Creek had been breached in favour of the Japanese. In their turn the Japanese, having now possession of the whole of the surrounding area, have every right to object if they find that Chinese are using this haven of refuge for the purpose of continuing a form of hostility which cannot have the slightest justification. That is just as true of terrorism as of propaganda. Thus the duty is incumbent upon Chungking to see that the neutrality which they so keenly insisted upon in the early days of the hostilities shall be maintained even now. It would be a betrayal of good faith, if, having received whatever advantages there were that earlier neutrality, Chungking should now cease to recognize the common onus which it imposed upon the authorities of the International Settlement as well a themselves. There is also the question to be considered as to what the Council can do in the circumstances. That their powers would normally be limited in the matter is clear, but unprecedented problems very often require unprecedented solutions, and if the Council find that in correcting the abuses complained of they have to act ultra vires, that should not restrain them from taking whatever action may be deemed to be necessary.
That, however, does not solve the whole question of propaganda. In recent weeks, anti-British sentiment has been sedulously fostered by the Nanking Government, and has also appeared in the local Japanese Press. It may be trite to remark that in this connection what is sauce for the Japanese goose should serve also for the British gander, but the truth of it cannot be for one moment denied. It is not suggested for one moment that the Council should predicate whatever action it contemplates upon similar action by the Nanking and Japanese authorities for the suppression of this form of activity against the British, but it is seriously urged that what the Japanese insist the Council should do, they should also do in this respect. The contention of the Japanese Embassy spokesman that Chinese newspapers in Nanking, and Hangchow were censored by the "Reformed Government" carries no conviction whatever in view of the fact that that government is a creation of the Japanese authorities whose word is law to it. It is not possible to establish different identities for the "Reformed Government," and the Japanese authorities any more than it was to differentiate between the Soviet Government and the Third International. There can consequently be no ques-lion as to where responsibility for the anti-British propaganda which is being spread has to lie. Much has been said in the past of the need for ce-operation: between the Japanese and nationals of neutral Powers. Here is a splendid opportunity of securing that ce-operation by similar action by the Japanese to that which they are requiring of the Municipal Council. True the two are not interdependent, but the fact does remain that if the Japanese have cause to complain of anti-Japanese publication within the Settlement, the British have just as much right to expect that their complaints in a similar connection should receive sympathetic Japanese attention, British Confidence War speculation continued to be one of the main topics of conversation yesterday with some observers profoundly pessimistic in view of Mediterranean developments, and many others, sensing the real spirit of calm determination for peace engendered by Mr. Neville Chamberlain's speech in the House of Commons on Thursday, confidently asserting the unlikelihood of any outbreak, One important indication transcending the cabled reports of developments was found in the position of the marine war risk insurance market. Shanghai is deeply involved in this for most of the water-borne cargo to and from Shanghai and the Far East passes through the Mediterranean which is the potential area of conflict. It was reported yesterday that Lloyds had ceased accepting war risk insurance under open covers and that the Continental companies, already committed to a similar decision, were looking to London for a Jead. It was learnt in Shanghai insurance circles that the British Government had taken the bold step of guaranteeing marine war risk insurance at a fraction of the existing market rate fort: to and from the United Kingdom (with option of deviation to other ports) for all companies incorporated in the United Kingdom, which means that, whatever happens, the British Government is prepared to back the business to its fullest extent in its traditional policy of keeping the world's sea trade routes open. The implications of this action, which was also taken during the Great War, are important and are worthy of examination at this critical period. Does it mean that it is a Go ernment gesture to instill confidence into the mercantile world at a time of great uncertainty which increases the anxiety of shippers and ping companies, or does it indicate the vernment's confidence in the unlikelihood of war which makes such an action an automatic correction of the alarm now disturbing the world's business centres? It may conceivably be a reply to Italian activities in the Near East and the German decision to hold manceuvres off the coust of Spain—a decision open to apprehension in view of the difficult Mediterranean situation—but it has been received with con-relief by business circles. Not only doe: provide for contingencies in case of t worst happening but it has given the necessary assurance that the British Government is wor! ug for peace and the maintenance of the lines of communications and supplies which make national existence possible.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.