bearing that it had on results in this case International Law might never have existed at all. The attitude of any naval officer so circumstanced would have been the same as that of the Japanese Admiral Uryu, whose prime duty was to destroy the Russians rather than to work out the exact legality of his action. Incidentally it may be mentioned that the exact legal aspect of the question almost defies working out. Korea was a 'neutral state,' but in how far did the landing of Japanese troops make Chemulpo a Japanese harbour? In how far is the question affected by the fact that Eussia had allowed Japan's right to land troops in Korea and specifically mentioned Chemulpo?[1]
As a nation the Japanese have probably more regard for International Law than any other. For instance in their war with China, Professor Takahashi was embarked in the flagship Matsushima as legal adviser to the admiral commanding. Yet that war gave us the Kowshing affair, in which this neutral British vessel chartered by the Chinese Government to convey eleven hundred soldiers to Korea, was sunk by Togo, then captain of the cruiser Naniwa. The Kowshing had left Taku before war broke out and Togo's action in capturing her was quite illegal. But on the other hand what would his action have been had he allowed her to proceed? He would have been an admirable example of a law-respecting citizen, but a
- ↑ Sec Chapter on Kusju-Japanese War.
