Conferences and Declarations: Their Effect on the Status of Formosa

Abstract

Between 1894 and 1942, China lost a considerable amount of its territory to Japan as a result of the latter’s expansionist policies. Among the territories lost was the island of Formosa. Although it was ceded to Japan in accordance with the terms of the Treaty of Shimonoseki, the Chinese Government had considered the island as territory wrested from it under duress. Following this line of argument, the Chinese considered the island as stolen territory and, therefore, as never having left Chinese sovereignty. The argument of the Chinese Government does not appear to be valid in this instance.¹ In this connection, international lawyers such as Fenwick² and Hyde³ are agreed that the enforced cession of territory confers a valid legal title to the recipient. However, these authorities also agree that there is a moral objection to the recognition of title to a territory acquired in such a manner.⁴ In discussing treaties of cession concluded under duress, Brierly declared:

that the latter (enforced cession) has in the past conferred a valid legal title is undeniable... So long as war continues to be used as an instrument of national policy, it will continue to produce the same results as it has in the past, and one of those results will be the annexation of territory.⁵