Foreign Relations of the United States Diplomatic Papers, 1935, The Far East, Volume III

793.94/7497: Telegram

The Chargé in Japan (Neville) to the Secretary of State

Tokyo, December 7, 1935—1 p.m.
[Received December 7—9:15 a.m.]

233. Department’s 191, December 5, 5 p.m.

1. The statement of the Secretary of State and the speech of Sir Samuel Hoare of December 5 before the House of Commons were published simultaneously in the Japanese afternoon newspapers of December 6 before the arrival of section 2 of the Department’s telegram. The reaction in Japan so far has been quiet and lacking in belligerency.

2. Replying to questions of the foreign newspaper correspondents yesterday the Foreign Office spokesman is reported to have said that Mr. Hull’s statement was “only a reiteration of the principles of international law” and pointed out that no mention was made in the statement of the Nine Power Treaty or of steps to be taken by the United States. The spokesman whom I met yesterday afternoon talked to me along much the same lines.

3. The Toyko Nichi Nichi yesterday evening published what purported to be an informal statement issued by the Foreign Office to the effect that the Japanese Government sees no necessity to consider any countermeasures to Mr. Hull’s statement; that the Japanese Government regrets that expressions were used in the statement which give the impression that the American Government believes that Japan is backing the autonomy movement; and that friction is bound to occur when old treaties and agreements are applied to shifting conditions such as are found in the Far East.

4. The principal Japanese newspapers this morning published editorials on the subject of the two statements. The tone of the editorials is generally restrained. They usually review the contents of the statements and attribute their issuance to mistaken reports of Japanese connection with the autonomy movement and proceed to a defence of Japan’s aims and purposes in the Far East. The Asahi also draws attention to the indication given by the issuance of the two statements that American and British views are drawing closer together. The Nichi Nichi is somewhat antagonistic to the United States in its editorial and condemns Mr. Hull’s statement because it creates “unnecessary suspicion” of Japan. The Jiji attacks the British statement, which it states has unnecessarily impaired relations between Great Britain and Japan.⁷⁶

Neville

76. The Chargé in Japan, in his telegram No. 236, December 10, 5 p.m., reported that the Japanese press had quietly dropped the subject, “perhaps by official instigation but more likely because overshadowed by news of the progress of the Naval Conference.” (793.94/7505)