A certain amount of protest is reported to have been aroused in Japan at the action of a British warship in removing from the Japanese liner, Asama Maru, 21 German passengers who were endeavouring to return to Germany via Japan and Siberia. On the point of a different interpretation of the provisions of international law under which this British action was taken this protest is based, but it is hoped that there will be no serious diplomatic controversy regarding it. One reason is the similarity of an incident during the Sino-Japanese war of 1894 when Japan was in precisely the same position as Britain is today, and this incident is now accepted as a precedent, According to Viscount Ishii, who contributed an interesting article on the subject in the "East Asia Review" some months ago, information was received by the Japanese Government that three Americans, invited by the Chinese Government and reported to be in possession of some secret for the destruction of the Japanese fleet, had sailed from San Francisco. After a long search of ships arriving from the United States, the trio were found on the Messageries Maritimes steamer Sydney, bound for Kobe. Considering that Japan was at war with China and was entitled to apprehend the men the vessel was boarded at Kobe and the three men were arrested. The French Minister to Japan protested and it was from the lips of Dr. Louis Renault, legal adviser to the French Foreign Office, that the decisive judgment came. Lecturing on the subject of contraband of war, Dr. Renault introduced the Sydney inzident, and, extending it to include the broad question of extraterritoriality, he admitted the measure taken by the Japanese Government was "perfectly just." According to Viscount Ishii, who was then an attache at the Japanese Legation in Paris and, in his spare time, attended the classes at the Paris Law College, Dr. Renault's conclusions were these:
1. In times of extraterritoriality, being recognized for peace-times, should be considered suspended within the scope of operation of belligerents' rights.
2. Japan' action in the Sydney case was nothing more than the exercise of a belligerents" right against a neutral ship.
3. The apprehension of the three passengers, moreover, took place in Japanese territorial waters, While there is a slight divergence of circumstances in the two cases the similarity remains and is strengthened by the fact that British action was appropriately taken outside Japanese territorial waters-
The Balkans' Turn "With the relaxation of tension in the Low Countries comes reports of feverish political activity in the Balkans again, and anxiety is being felt concerning German and Russian intentions there. Germany has not been receiving as much in the way of supplies from Rumania as she at first expected, and that is reported to be due mainly to the poor transport facilities over the railway which connects the two countries, but which also passes through that portion of Poland at present under Russian control. It is reported that the Soviet is prepared to grant Germany, a zone of twenty-six miles wide along the railway, thus ensuring direct contact between Germany and Rumania and permitting the former to bring considerable pressure to bear upon the latter. The alleged occupation of that zone by German troops gives a clear idea of what is contemplated, and the question which must exercise the Italian Government is exactly what Russia is to receive in return. The probabilities are that Germany has agreed to support Russian endeavour to wrest Bessarabia from Rumania That would mean a further incursion by the Soviets into the Balkans, which it has been stated, time and again, it is the Italian intention to resist. If indeed there is such a plan in existence its execution would amount to another betrayal of Italian adherence to the Anti-Comintern Pact. The significance of the reported plan is that it embraces the idea of Russian expansion into the Balkans with the consent and approval of Germany, and the important point which arises is as to whether Italy would resist such an expansion sponsored as it undoubtedly would be by its partner in the Rome-Berlin Axis. Obviously, opposition to Russia is one thing, and opposition to a combined Germany and Russia is an entirely different matter. It has to be emphasized that the plan is only reported, that at present there is no confirmation, but it follows so closely along the lines of other German betrayals of Italy that it is by no means improbable, and in fact extremely likely.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.