Chapter 382: , Laws of 1889, to read as follows (21)

Relations between the Government and the Papacy were improved
by the breach of the latter with France, which led to the
substitution of Italy for France as the protector of Catholics
and Catholic interests in the Empire of the Turks. This was
not, however, agreeable to Austria, and began a coolness
between these two of the parties to the Triple Alliance which
all the disturbing occurrences in the Near East have tended
since to increase. The Alliance with Austria and Germany had
been renewed in 1902; but there have been several occasions
within the past three years on which Italian ill-feeling
toward the former has flamed out quite threateningly in Press
and Parliament, and sometimes in popular demonstrations.

A disturbing agitation of the question of religious
instruction in the schools occurred in 1908, bringing demands
from anti-clerical parties for its prohibition; but the
Government was upheld in refusing such action. A disturbing
excitement in Sicily was produced that year by the conviction,
after a much prolonged and sensational trial, of Signor Nasi,
ex Minister of Public Instruction, on charges of embezzlement
of public moneys. The convicted Minister was a Sicilian, and
his fellow-countrymen resented the prosecution of him as an
indignity to themselves. To pacify them, Signor Nasi, after a
short detention in his own house, had the remainder of his
sentence of imprisonment remitted.

The Giolitti Ministry came to its end somewhat unexpectedly on
the 2d of December, 1909. It had brought forward, not long
before, a Bill embodying proposals for the reform of taxation,
avowedly to transfer some larger proportion of its burden from
the poor to the rich, especially by death duties and income
taxes. When the election of a committee to deal with the Bill
occurred December 2, the opponents of the Government secured a
majority, whereupon Premier Giolitti and his Cabinet resigned.
A new Ministry was formed, under Baron Sonnino, the leader of
the Opposition. The parliamentary support it must depend on is
said to be made up of extremely contradictory elements.

{340}

ITALY: A. D. 1908.
Falling off in Emigration.

See (in this Volume)
IMMIGRATION AND EMIGRATION: ITALY.

ITALY: A. D. 1908 (December).
The Awful Destruction of Messina and Reggio by Earthquake.

See (in this Volume)
EARTHQUAKES: ITALY.

ITALY: A. D. 1908.
Election of a Jewish Mayor of Rome.

Whether specially significant or not, the election in Rome, in
1908, of Ernesto Nathan, a Jew and an ex-Grand Master of the
Order of Free Masons, to be Mayor of the City, was an event
which excited wide interest and remark. Mr. Nathan’s birth,
and his education partly, were in England, but he acquired
citizenship in Italy, and rose in reputation and influence at
Rome, until he had become the leading figure in the hard
fought municipal election of the winter of 1908, which
defeated the Church party and elected sixty Radical members
out of eighty composing the City Council. The Mayor is elected
by the Council, and it gave the office to Nathan.

ITALY: A. D. 1909.
Church Movement of Agricultural Labor Organization.

See (in this Volume)
LABOR ORGANIZATION: ITALY.

ITALY: A. D. 1909.
Tardy Construction of "Dreadnoughts."

See (in this Volume)
WAR, THE PREPARATIONS FOR: NAVAL.

ITALY: A. D. 1909 (March).
Parliamentary Elections.
Socialist, Republican, Radical, and Catholic Gains.
Conservative Losses.
Large, but Reduced Majority for the Government.

Extensive changes in the representation of the numerous
parties in Italian politics resulted from the Parliamentary
elections held in March, 1909. As finally reported, after
seventy four second ballots had been taken, the outcome was as
follows:

From seven Deputies the Catholics rose to 24. The Socialists
went up from 26 to 42, the extreme Radicals from 32 to 42, and
the Republicans from 19 to 24. The parties of the Extreme Left
had thus risen from 77 to 108. The Moderate Liberals, or
Constitutional Opposition, as they call themselves, declined
the most, numbering between 60 and 70. But the gains made by
the parties of the extreme Left had only recovered for them
the ground they had lost in the election of 1904.

"An interesting feature of the elections is that the Pope’s
supporters are said to have taken a more active part than they
have done since the beginning of united Italy. The Papal
inhibition against going to the polls was removed in
seventy-two constituencies, or one-seventh of the whole number
voting. The result has been no gain in Rome, where the
Anti-Clerical bloc repeated its victories of the preceding
year, and a fairly slight gain in the rural districts. In
general, it may be questioned whether the Papal _non
expedit_ has really kept Catholics out of politics to a
very considerable extent. If we take the enrolled electors in
Germany, we find that they constitute 20 per cent. of the
entire population; in France the ratio is nearly 24 per cent.;
in Italy it is less than 8 per cent. At first sight that would
indicate that an enormous number of Italians boycott the
polls. We find, however, that the Italian franchise demands
not only the ability to read and write, but a certain degree
of additional elementary education. At the same time we find
that in 1901 nearly 44 per cent, of all males over twenty
years of age were illiterate. This at once nearly doubles the
electoral ratio. Add the fact that there are very considerable
property qualifications for the franchise, and we get for
Italy a ratio not far removed from Germany’s 20 percent. It
would follow that the number of Italians who refrain from
availing themselves of their electoral rights is not very
large."

_New York Evening Post,
March 8, 1909._

ITALY: A. D. 1909 (May).
Proposed Payment of Members of Parliament.

A Press despatch from Rome, May 9, 1909, reported:

"Leave was asked yesterday to introduce in the Chamber of
Deputies two Bills for the payment of members of Parliament.
According to the first Bill, proposed by Signor Galli, all
Deputies and Senators would receive £240 a year; the second
Bill, proposed by Signor Chimienti, would make a payment of
24s. for every sitting attended. Signor Giolitti said that the
idea of the payment of members of Parliament was evidently
gaining ground, and that the Government would not oppose the
introduction of the Bills. On the other hand, he deprecated
the contention which had been advanced, that the non-payment
of Deputies was in any way responsible for a scanty
attendance, and earnestly recommended the Chamber to give the
question its very careful consideration before committing
itself either way."

ITALY: A. D. 1909 (November).
Naval strength.

See (in this Volume)
WAR, THE PREPARATIONS FOR: NAVAL.

----------ITALY: End--------

ITO, Prince Hirobumi:
Visit to the United States.
Mission to St. Petersburg.

See (in this Volume)
JAPAN: A. D. 1901-1904.

ITO, Prince Hirobumi:
President of the Japanese Council.
His Party.

See (in this Volume)
JAPAN: A. D. 1903 (June).

ITO, Prince Hirobumi:
Resident-General in Korea.

See (in this Volume)
KOREA: A. D. 1905-1909.

ITO, Prince Hirobumi:
His assassination.

See (in this Volume)
JAPAN: A. D. 1909 (OCTOBER).

J.

JAMAICA: A. D. 1906.
Harmony of relations between the White minority and the
Colored majority of inhabitants.
How explained.

See (in this Volume)
RACE PROBLEMS: JAMAICA.

JAMAICA: A. D. 1907.
Destructive Earthquake.

See (in this Volume)
EARTHQUAKES: JAMAICA.

JAMES, Professor William:
Plan for ending War.

See (in this Volume)
WAR, THE REVOLT AGAINST: A. D. 1904.

JAMESON, Dr. Leander S.:
Premier of Cape Colony.
His Continuance of the Policy of Cecil Rhodes.

See (in this Volume)
SOUTH AFRICA: A. D. 1902-1904.

JAMESON, Dr. Leander S.:
At the Imperial Conference of 1907.

See (in this Volume)
BRITISH EMPIRE: A. D. 1907.

{341}

JAMESON, Dr. L. S.:
In Movement for South African Union.

See (in this Volume)
SOUTH AFRICA: A. D. 1908-1909.

JAMESTOWN TERCENTENIAL EXPOSITION.

The three hundredth anniversary of the first permanent English
settlement in America was celebrated on the site of the
settlement, at Jamestown, Virginia, by an Exposition which was
opened by President Roosevelt on the 26th of April, 1907. The
advantages of the place for naval display tempted Congress to
give that character, in the main, to so much of the
celebration as was organized under national auspices that
other features were quite eclipsed. As an illustration of
three centuries of progress from the beginnings of civilized
life in the United States it cannot be said to have had much
success. But the show, from many nations, of battle ships and
the paraphernalia of naval war was superb.

JANNARIS, Professor, Imprisonment of.

See (in this Volume)
CRETE: A. D. 1905-1906.

----------JAPAN: Start--------

JAPAN: A. D. 1901 (July).
Unveiling of a Monument to commemorate the Advent
of Commodore Perry.

A monument to commemorate the arrival of Commodore Perry in
Japan, in 1853, was unveiled with imposing ceremonies, at
Kurihama, on the 14th of July, 1901, that being the
forty-eighth anniversary of the event. Commodore Rodgers, with
three vessels of the Asiatic Squadron of the United States,
attended to represent the United States officially in the
ceremonies of the day. The monument was erected by the
Japanese "America Association of Japan."

JAPAN: A. D. 1901-1904.
Persistent occupation of Manchuria by the Russians.
Japanese negotiations and demands, without satisfaction.

"In spite of repeated promises to evacuate the points seized
and held by Russian forces when, after the relief of the
Legations, these forces were withdrawn from Peking and Chili,
to be concentrated in Manchuria [see Manchuria, in Volume
VI.], and in disregard of the interests of the other allies,
the policy of keeping all that she had gained, and of gaining
more as far as possible, was steadily pursued by Russia. … It
was the probable effect of a continued occupation of Manchuria
by Russia upon their business interests which led Great
Britain and America to wish that the repeated Russian
assurances of good faith toward China and toward all foreign
nations should manifest themselves in works. The case could
not be wholly the same with Japan. Her interests of trade
were, indeed, if not at the time so large, more close and
vital than those of any other nation outside of China. But her
other interests were incomparable. So that when Russia failed
to carry out her engagements, even under a convention which
was so much in her favor [see, in this Volume, China. A. D.
1901-1902], there was a revival of suspicion and apprehension
on the part of the Japanese Government and the Japanese
people. Manchuria and Korea both pointed an index finger of
warning directed toward Russia.

"It was to further a peaceful adjustment of all the disturbed
conditions of the interests of Russia and Japan in the Far
East that Marquis Ito went, on his way home from his visit to
the United States, at the end of 1901, on an unofficial
mission to St. Petersburg. The failure of the overtures which
he bore discouraged those of the leading Japanese statesmen
who were hoping for some reconciliation which might take the
shape of allowing Russian ascendency in Manchuria and Japanese
ascendency in Korea. It also strengthened the conviction which
prevailed among the younger statesmen that the St. Petersburg
Government regarded Manchuria as not only its fortress in the
Far East, but also as its path to the peninsula lying within
sight of Japan’s shores. ‘The Japanese Government,’ says Mr.
D. W. Stevens, ‘at last felt that the vital interests of Japan
might be irrevocably jeopardized in Korea as well as in
Manchuria, if it continued to remain a mere passive spectator
of Russian encroachments; and in August, 1903, it resolved to
take a decisive step. In the most courteous form and through
the usual diplomatic channels Japan intimated at St.
Petersburg that her voice must be heard, and listened to, in
connection with Far Eastern questions in which her interests
were vitally concerned.’ The answer of Russia was the
appointment of Admiral Alexeieff as Viceroy over the Czar’s
possessions in the Far East, with executive and administrative
powers of a semi-autocratic character. … Negotiations having
in view the peaceful adjustment of the conflicting interests
of Russia and Japan in the Far East, which were begun by the
latter country in the summer of 1903, were further continued.
Mr. Kurino, the Japanese Minister at St. Petersburg, was
informed by Baron Komura, who was then Japanese Minister of
Foreign Affairs, that the recent conduct of Russia at Peking,
in Manchuria, and in Korea, was the cause of grave concern to
the Government at Tokyo. ‘The unconditional and permanent
occupation of Manchuria by Russia would,’ said Baron Komura,
‘create a state of things prejudicial to the security and
interests of Japan. The principle of equal opportunity would
thereby be annulled, and the territorial integrity of China be
impaired. There is, however, a still more serious
consideration for the Japanese Government; that is to say, if
Russia was established on the flank of Korea it would be a
constant menace to the separate existence of that empire, or
at least would make Russia the dominant power in Korea. But
Korea is an important outpost in Japan’s line of defence, and
Japan consequently considers its independence absolutely
essential to her own repose and safety. Moreover, the
political as well as the commercial and industrial interests
and influence which Japan possesses in Korea are paramount
over those of other Powers. These interests and this influence
Japan, having regard to her own security, cannot consent to
surrender to, or share with, another Power.’

{342}

"In view of these reasons, Mr. Kurino was instructed to
present the following note to Count Lamsdorff, the Russian
Minister of Foreign Affairs:

‘The Japanese Government desires to remove from the relations
of the two empires every cause of future misunderstanding, and
believes that the Russian Government shares the same desire.
The Japanese Government would therefore be glad to enter with
the Russian Imperial Government upon an examination of the
condition of affairs in the regions of the extreme East, where
their interests meet, with a view of defining their respective
especial interests in those regions. If this suggestion
fortunately meets with the approval, in principle, of the
Russian Government, the Japanese Government will be prepared
to present to the Russian Government their views as to the
nature and scope of the proposed understanding.’

"The consent of Count Lamsdorff and the Czar having been
obtained, on August 12th articles were prepared and submitted
by the Japanese Government which it wished to have serve as a
basis of understanding between the two countries. The
essential agreements to be secured by these articles were:

(1) A mutual engagement to respect the independence and
territorial integrity of the Chinese and Korean empires, and
to maintain the ‘ open door’ in these countries; and

(2) a reciprocal recognition of Japan’s preponderating
interests in Korea and of Russia’s special interests in
Manchuria.

These demands were not altered in any very important way by
Japan during all the subsequent negotiations. It was their
persistent rejection by Russia, together with her long delays
in replying while she was meantime making obvious preparations
of a warlike character, which precipitated the tremendous
conflict that followed some months later."

_George T. Ladd,
In Korea with Marquis Ito, chapter 10
(copyright, 1908, C. Scribner’s Sons)._

JAPAN: A. D. 1902.
Defensive Agreement between Great Britain and Japan.

An agreement of great importance, in the nature of a defensive
alliance, between Great Britain and Japan, was concluded at
London on the 30th of January, 1902. On the publication of the
Treaty, a few days later, it was accompanied by a
communication from the British Secretary for Foreign Affairs,
the Marquis of Lansdowne, to Sir C. MacDonald, the British
Minister at Tokyo, in which the actuating motives of the
Agreement were set forth, as follows:

"Sir: I have signed to-day, with the Japanese minister, an
agreement between Great Britain and Japan, of which a copy is
inclosed in this dispatch.

"This agreement may be regarded as the outcome of the events
which have taken place during the last two years in the Far
East, and of the part taken by Great Britain and Japan in
dealing with them. Throughout the troubles and complications
which arose in China consequent upon the Boxer outbreak and
attack upon the Pekin legations, the two powers have been in
close and uninterrupted communication, and have been actuated
by similar views. We have each of us desired that the
integrity and independence of the Chinese Empire should be
preserved, that there should be no disturbance of the
territorial status quo either in China or in the adjoining
regions, that all nations should, within those regions, as
well as within the limits of the Chinese Empire, be afforded
equal opportunities for the development of their commerce and
industry, and that peace should not only be restored, but
should, for the future, be maintained.

"From the frequent exchanges of views which have taken place
between the two Governments, and from the discovery that their
Far Eastern policy was identical, it has resulted that each
side has expressed the desire that their common policy should
find expression in an international contract of binding
validity. …

"His Majesty’s Government have been largely influenced in
their decision to enter into this important contract by the
conviction that it contains no provisions which can be
regarded as an indication of aggressive or self-seeking
tendencies in the regions to which it applies. It has been
concluded purely as a measure of precaution, to be invoked,
should occasion arise, in the defense of important British
interests. It in no way threatens the present position or the
legitimate interests of other powers. On the contrary, that
part of it which renders either of the high contracting
parties liable to be called upon by the other for assistance
can operate only when one of the allies has found himself
obliged to go to war in defense of interests which are common
to both, when the circumstances in which he has taken this
step are such as to establish that the quarrel has not been of
his own seeking, and when, being engaged in his own defense,
he finds himself threatened, not by a single power, but by a
hostile coalition."

JAPAN:
Agreement between Great Britain and
Japan, signed at London, January 30, 1902.

"The Governments of Great Britain and Japan, actuated solely
by a desire to maintain the _status quo_ and general
peace in the extreme East, being moreover specially interested
in maintaining the independence and territorial integrity of
the Empire of China and the Empire of Corea, and in securing
equal opportunities in those countries for the commerce and
industry of all nations, hereby agree as follows:

"Article I.
The High Contracting Parties having mutually recognized the
independence of China and of Corea, declare themselves to be
entirely uninfluenced by any aggressive tendencies in either
country. Having in view, however, their special interests, of
which those of Great Britain relate principally to China,
while Japan, in addition to the interests which she possesses
in China, is interested in a peculiar degree politically, as
well as commercially and industrially, in Corea, the High
Contracting Parties recognize that it will be admissible for
either of them to take such measures as may be indispensable
in order to safeguard those interests if threatened either by
the aggressive action of any other Power, or by disturbances
arising in China or Corea, and necessitating the intervention
of either of the High Contracting Parties for the protection
of the lives and property of its subjects.

"Article II.
If either Great Britain or Japan, in the defence of their
respective interests as above described, should become
involved in war with another Power, the other High Contracting
Party will maintain a strict neutrality, and use its efforts
to prevent other Powers from joining in hostilities against
its ally.

"Article III.
If in the above event any other Power or Powers should join in
hostilities against that ally, the other high contracting
party will come to its assistance and will conduct the war in
common, and make peace in mutual agreement with it.

{343}

"Article IV.
The High Contracting Parties agree that neither of them will,
without consulting the other, enter into separate arrangements
with another Power to the prejudice of the interests above
described.

"Article V.
Whenever, in the opinion of either Great Britain or Japan, the
above-mentioned interests are in jeopardy, the two Governments
will communicate with one another fully and frankly.

"Article VI.
The present agreement shall come into effect immediately after
the date of its signature, and remain in force for five years
from that date. In case neither of the High Contracting
Parties should have notified twelve months before the
expiration of the said five years the intention of terminating
it, it shall remain binding until the expiration of one year
from the day on which either of the High Contracting Parties
shall have denounced it. But if, when the date fixed for its
expiration arrives, either ally is actually engaged in war,
the alliance shall, ipso facto, continue until peace is
concluded. In faith whereof the undersigned, duly authorized
by their respective Governments, have signed this agreement,
and have affixed thereto their seals."

In August, 1905, the above Treaty was replaced by a fresh
Agreement of similar tenor.

See, below,
JAPAN: A. D. 1905 (AUGUST).

JAPAN: A. D. 1902 (August).
Success of Prince Ito’s Party in the Parliamentary Election.

"Thus far parties, so called, have been magnetized around men.
They have not crystallized along the axes of principles.
Marquis Ito, ultra-conservative in politics but radical and
reformer in things social, is at one pole. Count Okuma,
radical in politics, sternly conservative of social life and
the traditionary ethics, is at the other.

"The August elections of 1902 show apparently at least that
the day of party government has dawned, for now and for the
first time Marquis Ito leads in the Lower House a host of the
friends of the Constitution (_Rikken Seiyu Kai_) that has
an overwhelming majority of seats and in time of a ‘division’
nearly if not wholly a plurality of votes. The returns are
just in and the table stands about thus:

Seiyu Kai (Constitution Friends) 193
Progressists 106
Independents 56
Imperialists and others 21

"It was a smart stroke of policy for Ito, two years ago, to
unite in one organization [see in Volume VI. of this work,
Japan: A. D. 1900 (August-October)] the Radicals under Hoshi
Toru and his own following of ‘clansmen, capacities and young
statesmen.’ It was the union of the strong and the subtle,
taking the name not of a party but of an ‘Association,’ with a
purpose of upholding the constitution (in the Prussian sense),
in order to control both the educational and the economic
policy of the country, to complete the radical transformation
of the Japanese into a modern man, and ‘to screen Japan’s
Western evolution against all possibility of reaction.’"

_W. E. Griffis,
in The Independent._

JAPAN: A. D. 1903 (June).
The Marquis Ito accepts Presidency of the Council
to strengthen the Government.

To strengthen the Ministry of Count Katsura in the Diet, the
Marquis Ito, powerful head of the Rikken Seiyu-kai
(Association of the Friends of the Constitution, foreseeing
trouble to come from the proceedings of Russia in Manchuria,
consented in June to accept the post of President of the
Council, and was joined in the Council by Marquis Yamagata and
Count Matsukata. The Government was thus greatly reinforced
for dealing with the difficulties that now approached very
fast. A section of the Seiyu-kai seceded from it, however, and
formed the Doshishukai (Assembly of Fellow-thinkers), under
Count Itagaki.

See (in Volume VI.)
JAPAN: A. D. 1900, AUGUST-OCTOBER.

JAPAN: A. D. 1904 (February-July).
War with Russia.
Sudden opening of Hostilities.
Occupation of Korea.
Battles at the Yalu.
The Armies in Manchuria.
Movement of General Nogi on Manchuria.

Simultaneously with the rupture of diplomatic relations with
Russia, on the 6th of February, 1904, the Japanese Government
dispatched from Sasebo a fleet of 7 battle-ships, 18 cruisers,
and flotillas of torpedo boats and destroyers, under
Vice-Admiral Togo, with transports conveying troops, to open
operations of war. The transports were convoyed to Chemulpho,
the port of Seoul, Korea, by 4 cruisers and a number of
torpedo boats, under Rear-Admiral Uryu; while Admiral Togo
proceeded with the remainder of his fleet to Port Arthur. The
troops sent to Chemulpho were landed on the 8th, and Admiral
Uryu, the next day, attacked a Russian cruiser and gunboat in
Chemulpho harbor with such effect that they were destroyed by
their commanders. On the night of the 8th Togo’s torpedo boats
were sent against the Russian fleet at Port Arthur and
crippled it to a serious extent. A second body of 14,000
troops was landed at Chemulpho on the 15th.

The Japanese had now a strong footing in Korea, with Seoul
securely in hand, and the First Japanese Army, under General
Kuroki, was ready to begin its northward advance. Phyangyang
was occupied on the 20th, after which further troops could be
landed at Chinampho, saving a long march. By the end of March
there were about 45,000 men in the force moving toward the
Yalu. The first encounter with the Russians was near Chengju,
where 600 of the latter’s cavalry were driven back. On the 4th
of April the Japanese advance guard reached the Yalu, which
forms the boundary between Korea and Manchuria, and occupied
Wiju, near its mouth, the opposing cavalry having been
withdrawn to the opposite bank of the river on the preceding
day. The main body arrived at Wiju April 20. The Russians, on
the other side of the Yalu, were then concentrating a force of
about 25,000 men, with Liaoyang and Fenghuangcheng for its
first and secondary bases.

For ten ensuing days both armies were busy in preparations and
manoeuvres, the one for attempting to force a crossing of the
Yalu, the other to resist it. How their preparations compared
in effectiveness is described by an experienced correspondent,
David Fraser, who accompanied the Japanese and wrote the story
of the campaign, publishing it subsequently in a book entitled
"A Modern Campaign." The difference that Mr. Fraser saw
between the painstaking, the thoughtfulness and the carefully
acquired knowledge which went into the Japanese preparation
for their attack,—the concealment of their forces, the masking
of their batteries, the obscuring of all that they did,—and
the contrasting carelessness of the Russians in the same
particulars, was the difference that gave success to the one
and brought defeat on the other.
{344}
Before the Japanese moved they knew everything they needed to
know,—the fordable places on the streams they had to cross,
the points of advantage on every mile of the ground to be
traversed, the positions of the enemy,—and the Russians did
not. And the Japanese were able to repeat much of the same
feinting and maneuvering by means of which they had forced the
passage of the Yalu at the same place, against the Chinese, in
1894.

On the 25th of April the Japanese were ready to bring their
preparations into use, and on that and the next two days they
drove the Russian outposts from the islands they needed to
occupy, and began building bridges at night. In the end, ten
bridges were built, some of them invisible to the enemy. Many
signs of Japanese movement down the river were then exhibited
to the Russians. A Japanese battery became busy at a point
some distance below Wiju; gunboats and other vessels were
collected in that direction; troops were in motion in the same
direction; but quiet reigned at and around Wiju, the batteries
behind which had not yet betokened their existence. That quiet
in this part of the Japanese line was broken suddenly at
midday on the 29th, when a pontoon train, with accompanying
troops, was hurried to the river, the pontoons launched,
manned and paddled to the opposite bank. A Russian outpost
which fired on these invaders drew the first revelation of a
hitherto hidden and silent Japanese battery, and fled from its
shells. Possession of the further shore was thus secured for
sufficient time to enable the construction of the pontoon
bridge, which the strong current in the river made a difficult
task. It was ready, however, for the crossing of the river
that night by the infantry of the entire 12th division of the
Japanese Army.

The thrilling episode of the battle of the next two days was
the opening of fire from the hitherto hidden and unsuspected
batteries of Japanese heavy guns. Mr. Fraser tells us that the
Russians had believed it impossible to bring heavy artillery
over the Korean roads, and were in consternation when the
howitzers belched forth their shells in a fairly overpowering
way. "The trees," he says, "screened the flashing of the
Japanese guns from the Russian eyes. There was no smoke to
indicate their whereabouts. The indirect fire of the howitzers
was as deadly as if it had been aimed point-blank. The
Russians, on the other hand, fired at random into the belt of
trees; they had been able to locate only two of the Japanese
guns. Their fire had little or no effect upon the
well-protected Japanese gunners. In ten minutes the Russian
shooting grew wild. … After twenty-five minutes both batteries
were silenced."

It is the testimony of all witnesses of the fighting on both
days of the battle, especially on the 1st of May, that the
Russians showed desperate courage; but every advantage, of
position, of equipment, of numbers, and, above all, of
generalship, was in favor of the Japanese. They drove the
enemy from all his entrenchments, and entered Manchuria, to
pursue there an equally successful campaign, for the same
reasons, of superior ability and more thorough preparation.

The reported loss of the Japanese in the conflicts on the Yalu
was 5 officers and 218 men killed, 33 officers and 780 men
wounded. They captured 22 field guns, 8 machine guns, a
quantity of rifles and ammunition, and took 628 prisoners,
including 18 officers. General Zasulich, the Russian
commander, reported 70 officers and 2324 men killed, wounded
and taken prisoners. Another Russian report of losses gave 28
officers and 564 men killed, 38 officers and 1081 men wounded,
and 6 officers and 679 men missing.

The Russians retreated on Fenghuangcheng, but made no stand
there, and the Japanese, who followed, occupied the place on
the 6th of May. The advance of the latter was halted at that
point until late in June, waiting for operations in other
parts of the field.

Meantime, between the 4th and the 22d of May, the Second
Japanese Army, General Oku commanding, had been landed near
Pitsewo, on the western coast of the Liao-tung peninsula, and
this began a general advance on the 25th. It fought a severe
battle on the following day, at Nanshan, or Kinchou, from
which the Russians fell back. The victory of the Japanese cost
them heavily, their reported loss being 739 killed and 5455
wounded; while General Stössel, the Russian commander,
reported a loss of 30 officers and 800 men killed and wounded.

On June 6th this Second Army was divided into two, one of
which, passing to the command of General Nogi, became the
Third Japanese Army, and was marched presently toward Port
Arthur, to open the famous siege of that stronghold. General
Oku, retaining about 50,000 men in the Second Army, and
starting northward on the 15th, was opposed by Russian forces
under General Stackelberg. The first important conflict was on
June 15 at or near Telissu station, which gave the battle its
name. Again the Russians were forced back, with a loss of 103
officers and about 2600 men, killed and wounded, besides a
missing list of 764. The Japanese loss was 50 officers and
1113 men killed and wounded. Hard fighting occurred again
between the 6th and 9th of July, on the approach of the
Japanese to Kaiping and the Kaiping River, beyond which their
opponents were driven. "The occupation of Kaiping and the
country immediately to the north placed General Oku’s army on
the edge of the Liao Valley, opened the way to the Yingkon and
Newchwang, and facilitated his further advance to the north by
allowing supplies to be received from the sea, thus shortening
his line of communications."

A Fourth Japanese Army, under General Nodzu, had now been
landed at Takushan, on the eastern coast of the Liao-tung
peninsula, and was reconnoitering toward Oku’s forces, as well
as toward the First Japanese Army, which had remained in the
vicinity of Fenghuangcheng until the 24th of June, waiting for
these cooperative masses of troops to be got into place. It
was now being moved in three columns, one of which was soon in
touch with the Fourth Army (Nodzu’s), and the two began
working to the west and northwest. The Russians gave up
Fenshuiling, and by the 9th of July, when Oku, with the Second
Army, occupied Kaiping, the three Japanese armies in the
northern part of the Liao-tung peninsula—the First, Second,
and Fourth—"were united on a front from Kaiping east to
Fenshuiling, thence northeast through Motienling, with
covering detachments of Kobi troops eastward at Saimachi,
Hsienchang and Huaijen.
{345}
The Russians were concentrated in the Liao Valley at
Tashihchiao, Haicheng, Anping and Liaoyang." On the 6th of
July Field Marshal Oyama had left Tokyo to take active command
of this united army, and the great operations of the
Manchurian campaign were about to begin.

_Epitome of the Russo-Japanese War,
United States War Department,
Second [Military Information] Division,
General Staff, Number 11._

At this time General Nogi, with the Third Japanese Army, was
fighting his way slowly toward Port Arthur, against obstinate
resistance, not arriving at the front of the land defences
proper until the 14th of August.

The Russians had evacuated Dalny (formerly called Talienwan),
with its fine harbor, on Talienwan Bay, thirty miles distant
from Port Arthur, and the Japanese had occupied it on the 30th
of May. This was an acquisition of great importance to them.

JAPAN: A. D. 1904 (February-August).
The War with Russia: Siege of Port Arthur.
The Naval Surprise.
Unreadiness of the Defence.
Naval operations of the six months.
Fate of the Russian fleets in the East.

Mr. E. K. Nojine, "accredited Russian War Correspondent," who
went through the whole experience at Port Arthur, from first
to last of the war, and who wrote what he entitles "The Truth
about Port Arthur," opens his severely critical narrative with
the following statement:

"When, one hour before midnight on February 8, 1904, our
warships began to belch fire from their many steel mouths, and
the seaward batteries suddenly thundered forth their angry
death-dealing tidings, no one dreamed that the noise was War,
for no one had taken the constant rumors of the rupture of
diplomatic relations and of approaching hostilities at all
seriously. … Although the sky in the East had for weeks been
blood-red with the menace of immediate war, yet when it came
the surprise was absolute, its horror intensified by our
complete unreadiness."

What this writer tells of the unreadiness, and of the slowness
with which the serious need of more readiness was comprehended
by the controlling authority at Port Arthur, during the weeks
that passed before the stronghold was fully invested, goes
almost beyond belief. He writes bitterly and contemptuously of
General Stössel, who held command of the district, and
admiringly of General Smirnoff, Commandant of the fortress,
whom Stössel could overrule. He seems to have been sustained
in his judgment by the court-martial which subsequently
condemned Stössel to death.

The sound of midnight battle on its sea-front (February 8-9)
which announced a beginning of war to the surprised garrison
of Port Arthur came from the attack of Admiral Togo’s torpedo
boats on the Russian fleet in the harbor. Three of the Russian
ships were crippled, but not seriously. The next day Togo made
a general attack with his whole fleet of fifteen vessels,
including five battle-ships, and did some damage to four more
of his enemies’ vessels; but a fortnight is said to have
repaired them all. The general result of the two operations
was "to insure the at least temporary immobility of the Port
Arthur fleet," so that "the transport of the army from Japan
to Korea might go on without fear of molestation." A squadron
was then detached to look after four cruisers at Vladivostock,
and that harbor was cannonaded for the same purpose on the 6th
of March. Meantime, on the 9th of February, a Russian cruiser
and a gunboat, attempting to leave Chemulpho harbor, were
driven back, and were then destroyed by their Russian
commander.

The main Japanese fleet hovered constantly near Port Arthur,
not only maintaining a strict blockade, but making frequent
close approaches, to sink vessels and plant mines in the
entrance channels of the harbor; to harass the Russian fleet
with torpedo attacks, or to come boldly within range of its
shore defenses and give battle to them, as well as to bombard
the fortress and town. There were heavy bombardments on the
10th and the 22d of May. The Russian fleet, commanded by
Vice-Admiral Makaroff, made retaliatory sorties, in returning
from one of which, on the 13th of April, the admiral’s
flag-ship, the Petropalovsk, struck and exploded a line of
floating mines. The huge battle-ship was so shattered by the
explosion that she sank in two minutes, carrying down the
admiral, the famous painter, Verestchagin, who was his guest,
and 550 other officers and men. Of all on board only 85 were
saved.

In the course of the next month the Japanese suffered several
of the same disasters, two of their battle-ships, the Hatsuse
and the Yashima, and two other vessels of less importance,
being blown up by the explosion of mines. Of the crew of the
Hatsuse nearly 500 perished, while all on board the Yashima
were said to have been saved. By collision in a fog one of the
Japanese cruisers was sunk, with all but 90 of her crew. And
the three most calamitous of these happenings, to the two
battle-ships and the cruiser, occurred on the same day—the
15th of May. Admiral Togo’s fleet was weakened very seriously
by these losses. Somewhat later the same fate befell a number
of Russian ships, but the loss in them was less.

Though watched by a Japanese squadron under Vice-Admiral
Kamimura, the Russian war-ships at Vladivostock were able to
slip out for occasional cruises, in which they captured or
destroyed Japanese transports and merchant ships. In more than
one instance—notably that of the Kinshu-Maru—the soldiery on
captured transports refused to surrender and committed
"hara-kiri" in a body, or were engulfed by the sea. "It is
quite true that the work done by the Vladivostock squadron was
not great in amount, but they must have caused some
inconvenience to the military forces of Japan engaged in the
campaign."

On the 23d of June Rear-Admiral Vithöft, who had succeeded the
late Admiral Makaroff in the naval command at Port Arthur,
sailed out of the harbor with six battle ships, five cruisers
and ten torpedo boats, apparently intending to offer battle to
the Japanese. The Russians had repaired their damaged vessels
and now seemed to have a fleet that was equal to Togo’s in
strength, since he opposed only four battle-ships to their
six. Nevertheless when the Japanese approached them they
withdrew, returning to Port Arthur, pursued by torpedo-boats,
and nearly losing the battle ship Sevastopol, which struck a
mine and was disabled for six weeks.

{346}

Little occurred during that period on the naval side of the
Port Arthur campaign. Then, on the 10th of August, it was
reopened startlingly, to be ended with practical completeness
within the next few days. On that morning the Port Arthur
fleet and the Vladivostock squadron put to sea from their
respective harbors, evidently attempting a junction. The Port
Arthur fleet was the first to encounter its enemy, which it
did the same day, when no more than 25 or 30 miles out from
the port. Admiral Vithöft now had with him only five battle
ships, having left one, probably disabled, behind. With these
were the four cruisers, two gunboats and a number of torpedo
craft. Admiral Togo brought against this force four
battle-ships and four armored cruisers in the battle that
ensued. It "took the form of a long-range engagement between
the fleets, steering nearly the same course towards the east.
… At a time which is variously reported, but probably about
6.15 p. m., a 12-inch shell … burst near the conning tower of
the Cesarevitch [the flagship], killing Admiral Vithöft and
wounding the captain of the ship. At the same time the
Cesarevitch’s steering gear was damaged, the helm jammed, and
she made a sudden sheer to port. This threw the Russian line
into confusion. … The Russian formation was now broken up, and
the ships fell into a confused group at which the Japanese
directed a hot fire at the comparatively short range of 3500
yards. At times the Russian ships were hidden by the smoke of
exploding shells, and about 7 p. m. their fire slackened
perceptibly. One report states that a second-class battle-ship
and two coast-defence vessels had joined the Japanese, besides
another ship of a class not certainly known. The whole twelve
Japanese ships concentrated their fire on the six Russian
battle-ships and four unarmored cruisers till 8 p. m. Prince
Ukhtomsk, who had succeeded to the Russian command on Admiral
Vithöft’s death, then signalled to the fleet to follow him,
and turned toward Port Arthur. All could not follow, and some
made for shelter in other ports, harassed by torpedo attacks,
but not otherwise pursued.

The result of the Russian sally from Vladivostock was much the
same. The three armored cruisers from that port were not
intercepted by the Japanese until the morning of the 14th,
three days after the defeat of the Port Arthur fleet which
they had hoped to join. They were then attacked by four
armored and two unarmored cruisers. They fought obstinately
and suffered frightful losses in officers and men,—415 wounded
and 251 killed. One of the ships, reduced to helplessness, was
sunk by its own surviving crew, most of whom were picked up by
the Japanese. The other two escaped to Vladivostock in a
wrecked state.

These engagements "really ended the naval campaign of 1904. Of
the ships [from Port Arthur] that got through the Japanese
fleet, one battle ship, the Cesarevitch, and three destroyers
were disarmed and interned at Kiachow (Tsingtau); one cruiser,
the Askold, and one destroyer had the same fate at Shanghai,
and another cruiser, the Novik, was destroyed … at Korsakovsk.
A third cruiser, the Diana, was disarmed and interned at the
neutral French port of Saigon. One destroyer had been seized
at Chefoo by the Japanese for disregard of Chinese neutrality,
and one was wrecked on the coast of Shantung. The rest of the
fleet which got back to Port Arthur remained there only to be
destroyed in nearly every case by their own crews, to save
them from the fate of being surrendered to their enemy on the
fall of the fortress. … The grand total of the Russian loss
[of officers and men] in the six battle-ships and four
cruisers amounted to 81 killed and 420 wounded. … The total
Japanese loss, as reported at the time, was 61 killed and 124
wounded." Later statements brought the total loss up to 225.

_Admiral Sir Cyprian Bridge,
The Naval Annual, 1905, chapter 7._

JAPAN: A. D. 1904 (July-September).
The War with Russia: Campaign in Manchuria.
Japanese advances; Russian retreats.
The great battle and Japanese victory at Liao-Yang.

On the 4th of July the Russians, who had given up Motienling
to the Japanese five days before, made an attempt to recover
it, but failed. They repeated the attempt on the 17th, and
again without success. On the 10th a force from the Fourth
Japanese Army (Nodzu’s), advancing from Fenshuiling toward
Tomucheng, met with a repulse. The right column of Kuroki’s
army (the First) fought a considerable engagement with the
Russians at Hsihoyen on the 19th. Oku’s army (the Second),
advancing from Kaiping, fought them at Tashinchiao on the
24th. Nodzu was engaged with them again on the 31st at
Tomucheng, and Kuroki’s right column at Yushulingtzu on the
same day; while the left column, simultaneously, expelled them
from Yangtzuling. On the 2d of August the Russians retired
from Haicheng and the Japanese occupied it the following day.
The Russians had been steadily forced back to the vicinity of
Liao-Yang, where they had prepared themselves for a determined
stand.

"The front of the Russian forces at and in the vicinity of
Liao-Yang extended from Anshantien through Lantzushan and the
mountain range east of Anping to the Taitzu River. The
Japanese front extended from Haicheng through Tomucheng and
Yantzuling to Yushulingtzu."

_Epitome of the Russo-Japanese War,
United States War Department,
Second [Military Information] Division.
General Staff, Number 11._

Both sides were now making ready for the first of the two most
terrific battles of the war; but the month of August was near
its close before the Japanese began their assault on the
formidable works behind which the Russians awaited their
attack. In the "Epitome" cited above the effective Russian
force taking part in this struggle is estimated at about
140,000, commanded by General Kuropatkin.

Lord Brooke, Reuter’s special correspondent in Manchuria, in
his book entitled "An Eye-witness in Manchuria," describes the
battle of Liao-Yang as "the biggest artillery battle of which
history has record." The Russians occupied a line of rocky
hills south and east of Liao-Yang. Oku opposed their right and
center; Nodzu the center and left; Kuroki was farther east,
intending to force the passage of the Tai-tze-ho and reach the
rear of their main body. Artillery on both sides opened the
battle at dawn, August 30, and a terrible duel was fought for
five hours.
{347}
Then, at half-past eleven, General Oku delivered the first
infantry assault, which cost a fearful loss of life, and
failed. Late in the afternoon a resolute turning movement on
the Russian right was attempted by the Japanese and pressed
until darkness came, with success only to the extent of
driving the enemy from one village. Then a night attack on the
Russian center was made, and that, too, was repelled.

The morning of the 31st brought a renewal of the artillery
duel, followed by assault after assault from Oku’s indomitable
troops on the Russian right flank, with the result of driving
it back to the cover of the railway embankment. Meantime
General Kuroki, whose army was on the extreme right of the
Japanese line, had forced the passage of the Tai-tze-ho River,
at a ford 26 miles east of Liao-Yang. This compelled
Kuropatkin to withdraw some of his troops from the outer
fortifications south and east of Liao-Yang and send them
against Kuroki. The crisis of the struggle was now in the
battles fought on the next two days with Kuroki, in vain
attempts to cut him off from the river ford and crush his not
large army. At the same time the Japanese were making a direct
attack on Liao-Yang and endeavoring to cut Kuropatkin’s
communications with Mukden. Neither Russians nor Japanese had
success in these attempts, but the former were brought to a
situation which compelled retreat. On the fourth of September
they evacuated Liao-Yang and withdrew from the surrounding
works. "As soon as the evacuation began," wrote Lord Brooke,
"the Japanese guns opened fire on the Russians, who had for
line of retreat only the railway bridge and the two pontoons
across the Tai-tze-ho. Nevertheless the retirement was carried
on with great coolness, and the loss sustained in crossing the
river was comparatively small in view of the difficult
position from which the Russians had to extricate themselves.
All the artillery was got away. But if the evacuation of
Liao-Yang was cleverly effected, the army of Kuropatkin was
still in great danger, and the Commander-in-chief seemed
really afraid that a large part of his force would be cut off.
It was a reasonable apprehension, for General Kuroki’s army
began the day with renewed vigor. … In a melancholy frame of
mind the whole army marched northward, with Kuroki continually
pressing its flank and the fear that Oku would ere long be on
his heels."

Pursuit by the Japanese was given up on the morning of
September 6th.

In the "Epitome" of the war, prepared and published by the
American Army Staff, the total Russian loss in the Liao-Yang
battles is given as reported to have been 54 officers and 1810
men killed; 252 officers and 10,811 men wounded; 5 officers
and 1211 men missing. The Japanese reported a total loss of
17,539 officers and men, without details.

JAPAN: A. D. 1904 (October).
War with Russia: Quiet Aspect of Life during the War.
Spartan Discipline of Japanese Feeling and Conduct.

"For all industrial civilization the contest is one of vast
moment;—for Japan it is probably the supreme crisis in her
national life. As to what her fleets and her armies have been
doing, the world is fully informed; but as to what her people
are doing at home, little has been written.

"To inexperienced observation they would appear to be doing
nothing unusual; and this strange calm is worthy of record. At
the beginning of hostilities an Imperial mandate was issued,
bidding all non-combatants to pursue their avocations as
usual, and to trouble themselves as little as possible about
exterior events;—and this command has been obeyed to the
letter. It would be natural to suppose that all the
sacrifices, tragedies, and uncertainties of the contest had
thrown their gloom over the life of the capital in especial;
but there is really nothing whatever to indicate a condition
of anxiety or depression. On the contrary, one is astonished
by the joyous tone of public confidence, and the admirably
restrained pride of the nation in its victories. Western tides
have strewn the coast with Japanese corpses; regiments have
been blown out of existence in the storming of positions
defended by wire-entanglements; battle-ships have been lost;
yet at no moment has there been the least public excitement.
The people are following their daily occupations just as they
did before the war; the cheery aspect of things is just the
same; the theatres and flower displays are not less well
patronized. The life of Tokyo has been, to outward seeming,
hardly more affected by the events of the war than the life of
nature beyond it, where the flowers are blooming and the
butterflies hovering as in other summers. Except after the
news of some great victory,—celebrated with fireworks and
lantern processions,—there are no signs of public emotion; and
but for the frequent distribution of newspaper-extras, by
runners ringing bells, you could almost persuade yourself that
the whole story of the war is an evil dream.

"Yet there has been, of necessity, a vast amount of
suffering—viewless and voiceless suffering—repressed by that
sense of social and patriotic duty which is Japanese religion.
… The great quiet and the smiling tearlessness testify to the
more than Spartan discipline of the race. Anciently the people
were trained, not only to conceal their emotions, but to speak
in a cheerful voice and to show a pleasant face under any
stress of moral suffering; and they are obedient to that
teaching to-day. It would still be thought a shame to betray
personal sorrow for the loss of those who die for Emperor and
fatherland."

_Lafcadio Hearn,
A Letter from Japan
(Atlantic Monthly, November, 1904)._

JAPAN: A. D. 1904-1905 (May-January).
War with Russia: Operations against Port Arthur.
Preliminary battles.
Investment and Siege.
The Defences.
Desperate assaults in August.
Story of Lieutenant Sakurai.
The assault on 203 Metre Hill and its capture.
Surrender of the Fortress.
Trial and condemnation of General Stössel.

As stated heretofore, the Japanese began landing their Second
Army, under General Oku, at Petsiwo, for operations against
Port Arthur, on the 4th of May. Very quickly thereafter the
railway was cut and Port Arthur was blockaded by land as well
as by sea. On the 8th the last train from the north was
brought in. By the 25th Oku was ready to advance, and on the
following day he attacked the Russians at Kinchou (the battle
bearing sometimes the name of Nan-shan), and expelled them
from that position, the loss of which, according to the
correspondent Nojine, sealed the fate of Port Arthur.
{348}
He accuses General Stössel of having boastfully assumed that
the Japanese could never take Kinchou, denouncing as traitors
all who questioned the sufficiency of its fortification and
urged the strengthening of the works. The expulsion from
Kinchou necessitated the abandonment of the important port of
Dalny, which was done with great haste on the night of the
26th. "In Dalny," says Nojine, "there were numerous buildings,
docks, and the most splendid breakwaters running out into
the sea for a distance of one and a half miles. … Owing to
want of time nothing except a few of the railway bridges was
blown up. … Besides the numerous town, harbor and railway
buildings, there was an immense amount of private house
property, as well as large warehouses, stocked with food and
stores of all sorts, both public and private. The enemy got
possession of them all undamaged, just as they were. After the
capture of Arthur the Japanese confessed that by not
destroying Dalny we had assisted them enormously in their
difficult task of disembarking their siege-train, and that the
railway had enabled them easily to get it into position in the
investing lines. …