RUSSIA AND PORT ARTHUR.
[To TEl EDITOR OF TEl " SPECTATOR:]
may fairly be claimed, I think, for persons living abroad, even in British dependencies, that political events soften appear to them in truer focus than to their brethren at home. This must be my excuse for addressing you on a subject which, so quickly are events moving just now, may be for the moment half-forgotten by the time this reaches you. All those who have at heart the reputation of English- men for fairness and ability to look on more than one side of a question, should be grateful to you for refusing to join in the howl which has gone up at the supposed supineness of our .Government in relation to Russia's acquisition of Port Arthur. It amuses me to see that men who have no good word to say for those who devote themselves to the expansion of the Empire think that we should have shown a stronger front in China, and somehow or other have prevented Russia's aggrandisement. It is sad, no doubt, to be beaten by Russia in the game of grab, but I really don't see what more we could have done unless we grabbed a part of China somewhere else. I don't see how Russia could possibly have submitted to be dictated to by us unless she swallowed her pride entirely, and carried the principles of the peace party to an extreme which would hardly be -advocated under similar circumstances in England. Suppose we had determined to annex Yunnan, would not all the world laugh if France ordered us to desist It seems to me that to require Russia to keep her hands off Manchuria would be to challenge her either to fight us or to admit herself our inferior. I don't even believe in the 1‘ open door" policy. If we want to keep a door open we must take charge of it ourselves. As a matter of fact, now that we are to have Wei-hai-wei, I think Russia is in a worse position than she was before. Germany forced her hand. Until the Kiao-chow incident Russia had a fair chance of becoming absolute in Northern China. What she wanted to :avoid was having to seize a definite point which would give ma an excuse for seizing another before she had brought the rovinces completely within her sphere of influence. Indeed, if it had not been for the peculiar circumstances of Wei-hai- wei, I fancy we should have had some difficulty in appro- priating a port in Northern China. The fact is, that if we want to keep the nnannexed parts of the world open to our trade (which is pretty much the same as taking the bulk of their trade to ourselves), we must make up our minds to annex those parts. If that is beyond our strength, we must submit to have our trade curtailed. Personally, I think we should annex China,—if we could. I believe with you. Sir, how- ever, that the task of ruling such an Empire would be beyond our strength. As for the morality of the question, it is quite as immoral to force on China intercourse with foreigners which she does not want, and which must inevitably lead to the dis- integration of the Empire, as it would be to annex the whole country at once. It is said that such intercourse would benefit her as well as ourselves. But so, and that to a far greater degree, would annexation, if made by a Power able to enforce peace and an even-handed justice. Here, at any rate, is a clear principle to act upon. Let us expand our Empire to the utmost of our strength ; I think it is only right that we should do so. But let us abstain from irritating other Powers by a dog-in-the-manger policy of denying to them that which we cannot consume ourselves, more especially as our attempts are pretty sure to be unsuccessful. Nothing exasperates an opponent so much as unsuccessful opposition. —I am, Sir, &c.,
Bassein, Burmah, April 29th. I. C. S.
Previous page
