The Japanese could not conceal their wrath. Not only was their press furious, but statesmen of high position were bitter in their criticism. Kurachi, assistant minister of foreign affairs, said in a public interview: 'America's retirement does not surprise us. The United States has no ambitions beyond its official statements. Nevertheless, its retirement is a stroke of politics that will not help China. No doubt the Americans have withdrawn from the group in order to form an independent all-American syndicate, which will compete with the international syndicate.' Hochi declared: 'America has taken sides with China in opposing the just demands of the powers, and to get the only thing Americans care for dirty dollars.'

About this time, the Webb Land Act was passed in America, directed expressly against the Japanese and prohibiting foreigners, not eligible to citizenship, from acquiring title to land, or from leasing it beyond a certain period. This was a signal for a violent antiAmerican campaign throughout Japan. Political associations were organized on every hand to protest against the California law. One of these was received by the Prime Minister, Count Yamamoto, demanding ‘a revision of the treaty, or war.' The Premier approved the protest, which he said was a justifiable expression of outraged national sentiment on this subject. The situation was very tense for several days, and the fact that it did not produce a break is to be attributed to Japan's financial embarrassments, which were at that time very acute. Up to the date of the Portsmouth treaty, the relations between Japan and the United States were most cordial. Since then, the situation has changed completely. The Japanese

Roosevelt's intervention, and although they said little knowing that protests were useless-they felt that their interests had been sacrificed to save Russia's face, and, indirectly, the prestige of the White race, which was humiliated at having its brothers defeated on land and sea by a Yellow nation.

The Japanese felt their victories put them, unquestionably, on an equal footing with other nations. They covered up their disappointment, but it was bitter. The restrictions placed upon Japanese immigration, naturalization, and acquisition of property are not confined to the United States. They prevail, likewise, throughout the British dominions. On account of their alliance with England, the Japanese have not considered it expedient to lay much emphasis on that fact, but they have been restrained by no such considerations in the case of the United States. The California question has been the subject of acrimonious discussion between the two nations, and the dispute is now more bitter than ever before.

Japanese laborers are good workers and will accept lower wages than the Whites. They are skilful and intelligent, and are feared by American workingmen as competitors. They are remarkable agriculturists. The 100,000 acres which they control in California are better tilled than the rest of the state. The Japanese demand the right to naturalization in case they desire to make their permanent homes in America. The argument against this is that the Japanese are not assimilable. Americans are practically unanimous in the opinion that the Japanese cannot be assimilated. They point out that the laws of Japan do not recognize a change of allegiance, and, consequently, that Jap

anese subjects cannot foreswear their allegiance to the Mikado and become 100 per cent American. It is an argument, however, which would apply with almost equal force to Germans, and to Irishmen in the United States, both of whom show how difficult it is for immigrants, even of the second and third generation, to forget completely the land of their fathers. However, though the Japanese government is very desirous of settling the immigration question, the naturalization issue is relatively unimportant in its eyes.

But all these issues, immigration, land ownership, assimilation, are merely secondary. The great question which lies behind all the rest is whether or not the Japanese are to attain their purpose, which is mastery of the Pacific, and political dominion over Asia through bringing China under their sway.

Since Japan has defeated China and Russia, the Asiatic races certainly regard that nation as the chosen people, destined eventually to liberate them from the Whites. But the Japanese military party, strengthened by two successful wars, has done much to undermine this sentiment. Its measures in China, Korea, and Formosa have disillusioned the Asiatics with these new liberators, and greatly lessened the hopes they based upon them. If Japan wishes to become a real leader in the Orient and to extort from the White races a recognition of the right of the Asiatics to rule Asia a dream which every intelligent native of that continent now cherishes it must content itself with being a leader among equals, and cease trying to dominate its neighbors by intrigue and violence.

Recently, there occurred at Washington a conference between representatives of Great Britain and the United

States upon Far Eastern affairs, at which the Japanese ambassador to Great Britain was present. That meeting, and Secretary Colby's visit to the Pacific coast indicate the preoccupations of the American authorities. While the diplomatic relations between the two countries are unchanged on the surface, the sentiment of mutual distrust is constantly growing.

Japan views with suspicion certain recent actions of the Americans, which it considers evidence of their hostility. National pride has been deeply wounded already by the California laws, which are considered a direct insult to the race. The people are irritated by the way America has interfered with Japanese designs in China, Manchuria, and Siberia. Viscount Kaneko, until recently one of the strongest advocates of friendship with the United States, declared that if the radical measures adopted in California were applied literally, 'they would inspire in the Japanese a bitterness of hatred against America which time will not efface.' He added, "The English speaking races must treat the Chinese and Japanese on a footing of absolute equality.'

America, on its side, has many grievances against Japan. It is disturbed by the growth of militarism there. It protests vigorously against the manner in which Japan repudiates, in both letter and spirit, the open door doctrine, and against its policy of imperialist expansion. When Japan proposed to send troops to Siberia, the Americans were greatly disturbed, and President Wilson, already suspecting that the Japanese designed to annex the country, suggested that the other Allies participate in the expedition. When Japan took possession of Northern Saghalien, and vast territories in Eastern Siberia, the United States frankly and openly expressed its displeasure. We have already referred to

the attitude of the Japanese troops toward the English forces operating with them in these territories. It was the reverse of friendly. They were still less friendly toward the Americans. Such things do not promote good understanding, but, after all, they are but secondary. The Americans fear most of all, Japanese attempts to exclude their trade from Siberia, and the extension of Japan's control in China.

In November, 1917, in the midst of the war, the American and Japanese governments tried to smooth over the situation by concluding an agreement relative to China. The United States recognized that Japan had special interests there, 'particularly in those portions contiguous to its possessions,' and that the government of the United States has every confidence in the repeated assurances of the Imperial Japanese government that it does not intend to discriminate against the trade of other nations, or to withdraw commercial privileges already granted by China in its treaties with other nations.'

At the time this so-called 'LansingIshii agreement' was signed, Mr. Lansing predicted that it would join the two nations in a friendly commercial union. That gentleman was mistaken. Instead of removing the causes of the friction, the treaty only aggravated them. All that Japan saw was a recognition of its privileged situation in the Far East, and its predominance in China. America never interpreted the understanding in that sense, and protested against such an interpretation.

America's naval programme is a matter of much debate in Japan. We should observe that even to-day America is, next to England, the greatest naval power in the world, and that in view of this, 'its exorbitant naval ambition is, in view of its professions of pacifism, a paradox.' Nichi

Nichi considers it remarkable that the country which promoted the League of Nations, and championed the reduction of armaments, is manifesting a chauvinist spirit so out of date. Other papers regard America's pacifism as a subterfuge to deceive those whom it plans to attack, and recall that Russia was preaching world peace at the very time it was augmenting its own armaments. Japan has recently adopted a policy which is sure, sooner or later, to bring it into conflict with the Bolsheviki in Northern Asia, and, simultaneously, it is opposing a vast concession given by the soviet government to a Mr. Vanderlip and a group of powerful American financiers whom he represents. Japan bases its objections to this concession upon a treaty which it had with the former government of the Tsar, granting it certain important fishing rights in the same regions.

Late last August, the 'Japanese Association for the Study of Foreign Politics' held a great meeting in Tokyo, to discuss the anti-Japanese agitation on the American side of the Pacific. The lukewarmness of the foreign office in the California question was severely criticized, and an anti-American campaign began, supported by nearly all the press.

There are exceptions, though they are not numerous. On August 25, Yomiuri, one of the principal independent journals of the country, stated editorially that friendly relations between the two countries were indispensable for their mutual prosperity, and that hostilities between them would only lower the prestige of both powers in world affairs. Mr. Gary, director of the United States Steel Corporation, speaking at a meeting of the Japan society in New York, condemned vigorously the vicious and deliberate efforts to promote friction between the Japanese and the Ameri

can people. He concluded his remarks by saying: 'Are we not the principal offenders? Let us judge Japan by ourselves,' and asserted that the Japanese desired the friendship of the United States.

The war has left the whole of Europe on the verge of ruin. The two years since the armistice have plunged it into only deeper bankruptcy. The authors of all the extraordinary treaties which the implacable logic of historical and economic laws is forcing them to tear up, almost before the ink is dry, have advertised their utter incompetency to the world. To govern is to foresee; they have foreseen nothing, and they were incompetent to foresee anything.

European policy in China, before the war, was as absurd as it was dishonest. The policy it pursued there during the war, and at Versailles, since the peace, has been a negation of common sense. The United States, where pro-leaguers and anti-leaguers competed in advocating disarmament, and Japan, one of the signatories of the Covenant which requires disarmament, are both busily constructing vast navies, as if they had never heard of any sort of a league for preserving peace. Baron Hayashi, addressing the representatives of the press at Geneva last September, told them: 'People talk of reducing armaments while certain governments, including my own are strengthening their navy. It is ridiculous, but I feel sure that none of these countries has warlike intentions.' Baron Hayashi may find it ridiculous, but many thinking people do not agree with him there.

Japan's population to-day is about 60,000,000. It is increasing at the rate of almost 800,000 annually. These people, sober, industrious, energetic, enterprising, and brave must have room in which to expand.

They are cut off from the West coast of the Pacific by the opposition

of the United States to Asiatic immigration. The same barriers meet them in the British dominions. The Monroe Doctrine prevents their establishing colonies in Central or South America. Mexico and Japan have always been very friendly. The secretary of Japan's Legation in Mexico has even told us that the Mexicans fancy that they and the Japanese are descendants of the same ancestors; and, certainly, there are many common traits in the Mexican peon and the Japanese coolie. This gentleman believes that an alliance between the two nations would be useful to both.

I cannot go into the history of the relations between Mexico and Japan, and between Mexico and the United States, except to say that Washington will inflexibly oppose an alliance between any American nation and Japan. On the other hand, the United States is also hostile to Japanese expansion in China. The immense concessions which soviet Russia has granted Mr. Vanderlip, who is merely another name for 'big business,' are regarded by Japan as a trespass upon its own commercial preserves. Japan sees every outlet for its enterprise and its growing population closed. It is a question of life and death for that country to find some field of expansion. Dispensing with diplomatic phrases, and getting down to hard facts, the conclusion is, that unless Japan does succeed, it must fight the United States, and win or perish in the conflict.

Naval rivalry in Europe ceased the day the last German war ships sank at Scapa Flow. England remains the only naval power of our hemisphere; and yet in spite of its financial embarrassments, in spite of the growing opposition of the English people to the prodigality of the Lloyd George cabinet, the present government is pre

budget.

The reason is clear. England will inevitably be drawn into a war between Japan and the United States. Which side, is a secret of the future; for one would have to be 'intoxicated with the exuberance of his own verbosity,' as Disraeli said of Gladstone, to talk seriously of the sacredness of treaties and alliances, after what the world has recently witnessed. But England would find itself in a very difficult position. The people of India are restless and their sympathies would be proJapanese. The Dominions are more and more determined to have their opinion count in the councils of the Empire, and they are equally antiJapanese.

On the ninth of last December, Baron Sakamoto, a very eminent member of the Chamber of Peers, advocated renewing the Japanese alliance, but he insisted strongly that

ditions of the earlier stipulation in the matter of possible hostilities between Japan and the United States. His words were received with general approbation. Public sentiment in Japan knows exactly what it wants. It wants to renew the Anglo-Japanese alliance, subject to the condition that England engage to join it, in case of war with the United States. On the other hand, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, which are to-day nations and no longer colonies, are in full accord with the United States in favoring a convention relating to Asiatic immigration as recently suggested by Senator Lodge.

It will take all of Lloyd George's suppleness to convince the White race and the Yellow race that he is the devoted friend of each. If he succeeds in getting the alliance past this Charybdis and this Scylla, he will have indeed won his title as the Celtic

sorcerer.

A CHAMBER filled to suffocation, humming with rumors, swarming like an ant hill, crowded benches, a public of professionals and amateurs, all equally impatient to see the curtain rise. Briand, with his Cabinet in battle line behind him, mounts the platform to read his declaration of policy.

The new head of the Ministry for the seventh time, leader of a cabinet

is conspicuously unperturbed. He

reads with his expressive voicethrilling when it vibrates in its lower notes notes clearly, with care, evidently intent only upon performing well a necessary duty. Article follows article; one by one he takes up the great questions which confront us. The Chamber applauds some passages and lets others pass in silence. Now and then, some impatient group audibly murmurs. A voice interrupts, another voice protests; whereupon the presiding officer