By the treaty of peace between China and Japan, concluded at Shimonoseki, April 17, 1895, the Liaotung peninsula, including Port Arthur, was ceded to Japan. Russia, however, secured the support of France and Germany in a "friendly representation Japan to the effect that she would not be permitted to retain any increase of territory on the mainland. Japan, on the advice of Great Britain, reluctantly yielded to what appeared to be inevitable, and abandoned her conquest. Subsequently, Russia took possession of Port Arthur under a “lease,” and virtually assumed control of the Liaotung peninsula. This incident and its consequences eventually brought about the war of 1904 between Japan and Russia.

Hall, Int. Law, 5th ed., 295–296.

See, as to the “lease" of Port Arthur, supra, §§ 807, 813.

2. POLICY OF NONINTERVENTION.

(1) DECLARATIONS OF POLICY.

§ 898.

"You are afraid,' says Mr. Oswald to-day,

John Adams.

tools of the powers of Europe.'

of being made the 'Indeed I am,' says

I. What powers?' said he. 'All of them,' said I. 'It is obvious that all the powers of Europe will be continually manoeuvering with us to work us into their real or imaginary balances of power. They will all wish to make of us a make-weight candle, when they are weighing out their pounds. Indeed, it is not surprising; for we shall very often, if not always, be able to turn the scale. But I think it ought to be our rule not to meddle; and that of all the powers of Europe, not to desire us, or, perhaps, even to permit us, to interfere, if they can help it.'

May

Mr. John Adams's Diary, Nov. 18, 1782, 3 John Adams's Works, 316.
"Peace is made between Russia and the Porte, and the definitive treaty
between England and Holland is expected to be soon signed.
the world continue at peace! But if it should not, I hope we shall
have wisdom enough to keep ourselves out of any broil, as I am
quite in sentiment with the Baron de Nolken, the Swedish ambassa-
dor at St. James's, who did me the honor to visit me, although I had
not visited him. 'Sir,' said he, 'I take it for granted, that you will
have sense enough to see us in Europe cut each other's throats with
a philosophical tranquillity.'" (Mr. J. Adams to the President of
Congress, February 10, 1784, 8 John Adam's Works, 177, 178.)

"Our form of government, inestimable as it is, exposes us more than any other, to the insidious intrigues and pestilent influence of foreign nations. Nothing but our inflexible neutrality can preserve us. The public negotiations and secret intrigues of the English and the French have been employed for centuries in every court and country of Eu

rope. Look back to the history of Spain, Holland, Germany, Russia, Sweden, Denmark, Prussia, Italy, and Turkey, for the last hundred years. How many revolutions have been caused! How many emperors and kings have fallen victims to the alternate triumphs of parties, excited by Englishmen or Frenchmen! And can we expect to escape the vigilant attention of politicians so experienced, so keensighted, and so rich? If we convince them that our attachment to neutrality is unchangeable, they will let us alone; but as long as a hope remains, in either power, of seducing us to engage in war on his side and against his enemy, we shall be torn and convulsed by their manœuvres."

"Patriot Letters," 1809, 9 John Adams's Works, 277.
“The principle of foreign affairs, which I then advocated, has been the
invariable guide of my conduct in all situations, as ambassador in
France, Holland, and England, and as Vice-President and President of
the United States, from that hour to this. . . . This principle
was, that we should make no treaties of alliance with any European
power; that we should consent to none but treaties of commerce;
that we should separate ourselves, as far as possible and as long as
possible, from all European politics and wars. In discussing the
variety of motions which were made as substitutes for Mr. Chase's,
I was remarkably cool, and, for me, unusually eloquent. On no occa-
sion, before or after, did I ever make a greater impression on Con-
gress." (Mr. J. Adams to Dr. Rush, Sept. 30, 1805, 1 John Adams's
Works, 200.)

"If I could lay an embargo, or pass a new importation law against cor-
ruption and foreign influence, I would not make it a temporary but
a perpetual law, and I would not repeal it, though it should raise a
clamor as loud as my gag-law, or your grog-law, or Mr. Jefferson's
embargo." (Mr. Adams to Mr. Rush, Sept. 27, 1808, 9 John Adams's
Works, 604.)

"Europe has a set of primary interests which to us have none or a very remote relation. Hence, she must be engaged in Washington. frequent controversies, the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence, therefore, it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves by artificial ties in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics, or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her friendships or enmities. Our detached and distant situation invites and enables us to pursue a different course."

President Washington's Farewell Address, Sept. 1796, Writings of Washington, by Ford, XIII. 277, 316.

As to the French alliance, see, supra, § 821.

Jefferson.

"I have ever deemed it fundamental for the United States never to take an active part in the quarrels of Europe. Their political interests are entirely distinct from ours. Their mutual jealousies, their balance of power, their complicated alliances, their forms and principles of government, are all

foreign to us. They are nations of eternal war. All their energies are expended in the destruction of the labor, property and lives of their people. On our part, never had a people so favorable a chance of trying the opposite system, of peace and fraternity with mankind, and the direction of all our means and faculties to the purposes of improvement instead of destruction."

Mr. Jefferson to the President, June 11, 1823, 7 Jefferson's Works, 287.
See Jefferson's letter of Oct. 24, 1823, to President Monroe, infra, § 933.
See Mr. Jefferson, Sec. of State, to Mr. Morris, min. to France, March 12,
1793, supra, § 43; Mr. Jefferson, Sec. of State, to Messrs. Carmichael
and Short, June 30, 1793, 4 Jefferson's Works, 9.

Madison.

"A participation in it [a congress proposed by Mr. Canning for the settlement of the difficulties between Spain and her colonies] would not be likely to make converts to our principles; whilst our admission under the wing of England would take from our consequence what it would add to hers. Such an invitation, nevertheless, will be a mark of respect not without a value, and this will be more enhanced by a polite refusal than by an acceptance, not to mention that the acceptance would be a step leading us into a wilderness of politics and a den of conspirators."

Monroe.

Mr. Madison to Mr. Monroe, Dec. 26, 1823, Madison's Works, III. 353, 354. "Separated as we are from Europe by the Great Atlantic Ocean, we can have no concern in the wars of the European governments nor in the causes which produce them. The balance of power between them, into whichever scale it may turn in its various vibrations, can not affect us. It is the interest of the United States to preserve the most friendly relations with every power and on conditions fair, equal, and applicable to all. But in regard to our neighbors our situation is different. It is impossible for the European governments to interfere in their concerns, especially in those alluded to, which are vital, without affecting us; indeed, the motive which might induce such interference in the present state of the war between the parties, if a war it may be called, would appear to be equally applicable to us. It is gratifying to know that some of the powers with whom we enjoy a very friendly intercourse, and to whom these views have been communicated, have appeared to acquiesce in them.”

President Monroe's annual message, Dec. 7, 1824, Richardson's Messages,
II. 260.

"Compare our situation and the circumstances of that time [that of Washington's farewell address] with those of the J. Q. Adams. present day, and what, from the very words of Washington then, would be his counsels to his countrymen now? Europe has still her set of primary interests, with which we have

little or a remote relation. Our distant and detached situation with reference to Europe remains the same. But we were then the only independent nation of this hemisphere, and we were surrounded by European colonies, with the greater part of which we had no more intercourse than with the inhabitants of another planet. Those colonies have now been transformed into eight independent nations. [We may therefore say that] America has a set of primary interests which have none or a remote relation to Europe; that the interference of Europe, therefore, in those concerns should be spontaneously withheld by her upon the same principles that we have never interfered with hers, and that if she should interfere, as she may, by measures which may have a great and dangerous recoil upon ourselves, we might be called in defense of our own altars and firesides to take an attitude which would cause our neutrality to be respected, and choose peace or war, as our interest, guided by justice, should counsel.”

President J. Q. Adams, special message, March 15, 1826, Richardson's
Messages, II. 337.

Mr. Macon, from the Committee of Foreign Relations of the Senate, Jan-
uary 16, 1826, referring to the message of the President nominating
Richard C. Anderson and John Sergeant to be envoys extraordinary
and ministers plenipotentiary to the assembly of the American
nations at Panama, said: "By the principles of this policy, incul-
cated by our wisest statesmen in former days and approved by the
experience of all subsequent time, the true interest of the United
States was supposed to be promoted by avoiding all entangling con-
nections with any other nation whatsoever." (International Ameri-
can Conference, IV. 53, 55.)

The government of the United States scrupulously refrains from taking
part in the internal dissensions in foreign states, whether in the
Old World or the New. (Mr. Clay, Sec. of State, to Mr. Revenga,
Jan. 30, 1828, MS. Notes to For. Legs. III. 421.)

Van Buren.

"The President desires that you should not identify yourself with the feelings or objects of either of the contending parties. It is the ancient and well-settled policy of this government not to interfere with the internal concerns of any foreign country. However deeply the President might regret changes in the governments of the neighboring American States, which he might deem inconsistent with those free and liberal principles which lie at the foundation of our own, he would not, on that account, advise or countenance a departure from this policy."

Mr. Van Buren, Sec. of State, to Mr. Moore, min. to Colombia, June 9, 1829, MS. Inst. Am. States, XIV. 12.

"An invariable and strict neutrality between belligerents and an entire abstinence from all interference in the concerns of other nations, are cardinal traits of the foreign policy of this Government. The obligatory character of this policy is regarded by its constituents with a degree of reverence and submission but little, if anything, short of that

which is entertained for the Constitution itself. To enable it to preserve the one, we have penal laws which subject to the severest punishment all attempts, within the scope of their authority, to aid or abet either party in a war prosecuted between foreign nations with which the United States are at peace; and it is made a standing instruction to our ministers abroad to observe the other with scrupulous fidelity." (Mr. Van Buren, Sec. of State, to Mr. Butler, min. to Mexico, Oct. 16, 1829, MS. Inst. Am. States, XIV. 165.)

"One of the settled principles of this government is that of noninterference in the domestic concerns of nations; and as it would not tolerate it in others, so must every act of its own functionaries, which might be construed into a departure from this principle, incur the decided disapprobation of the President." (Mr. Van Buren, Sec. of State, to Mr. Hamm, chargé d'affaires to Chile, Oct. 15, 1830, MS. Inst. Am. States, XIV. 83.)

See, also, President Van Buren, annual message, Dec. 3, 1838, Richardson's Messages, III. 483; and discussion in 2 Benton's Thirty Years' View, 276.

"If, indeed, an attempt should be made to disturb them [the Spanish West Indies] by putting arms in the hands of one portion of their population to destroy another, and which, in its influence, would endanger the peace of a portion of the United States, the case might be different. Against such an attempt the United States (being informed that it was in contemplation) have already protested, and warmly remonstrated in their communications, last summer, with the government of Mexico. But the information lately communicated to us, in this regard, was accompanied by a solemn assurance that no such measures will, in any event, be resorted to; and that the contest, if forced upon them, will be carried on, on their part, with strict reference to the established rules of civilized warfare."

Mr. Van Buren, Sec. of State, to Mr. Van Ness, min. to Spain, Oct. 13, 1830, MS. Inst. U. States Ministers, XIII. 184.

Forsyth.

In the adoption (in 1834-35) by the new South American states of their commercial policy, "the United States, consistent throughout in the disinterestedness of their conduct towards them [the South American states] desire no preferBut they know too well what is due to themselves to be satisfied if a preference be granted to others."

ence.

Mr. Forsyth, Sec. of State, to Mr. Butler, min. to Mexico, Nov. 11, 1834,
MS. Inst. Mex. XV. 42.

"The great communities of the world are regarded as wholly independent, each entitled to maintain its own system of Webster. law and government, while all in their mutual intercourse are understood to submit to the established rules and principles governing such intercourse. And the perfecting of this system of communication among nations, requires the strictest application of