793.94/9631: Telegram
The Ambassador in France (Bullitt) to the Secretary of State
[Received August 23—4:45 p.m.]
1192. The Chinese Ambassador called on me today and said that he and Dr. Kung could not understand a telegram received from the Chinese Ambassador in Washington asserting that the Secretary of State had said to him that if China should invoke the Nine Power Pact the United States would have to declare at once that a state of war exists and put in force the provisions of the Neutrality Act.55
I expressed doubt that the Secretary of State had made such a statement to the Chinese Ambassador in Washington.
The Chinese Ambassador went on to say that the great question for China today was the maintenance of a free flow of war supplies. His Government was intensely anxious that the Neutrality Act should not be brought into play and that the flow of supplies from the United States to China should continue to be as uninterrupted as at the present [Page 460] time. He asked me if I could give him the position of our Government with regard to this matter and I gave him the substance of your 436, August 18, 7 p.m.
In the course of our conversation the Chinese Ambassador said that the Soviet Government had informed the Chinese Ambassador in Moscow that it would supply planes to the Chinese Government; but would refrain from taking any active part in the conflict at the present time. He said that the Soviet Government had explained that Maisky, Soviet Ambassador in London, had asked Eden how Great Britain would view Soviet intervention in the present conflict and that Eden had replied he believed the Soviet Union could only make matters worse by taking any action whatsoever.
In the course of a conversation this afternoon Leger said to me that the French Government was in a most difficult situation with regard to shipment of military supplies to either of the parties in the Far Eastern conflict because of the fact that the manufacture of munitions and airplanes is now in the hands of the State. He asked me if in spite of our position with regard to the Neutrality Act which I had explained to him in accordance with the terms of your 436, August 18, 7 p.m. our Government was not by indirect pressure attempting to persuade all manufacturers of arms, munitions, and airplanes in the United States to refrain from any shipments to belligerents. I replied that I had no exact information with regard to this matter.
- The Secretary replied (telegram No. 448, August 24, 6 p.m.): “No such statement made to anyone.” For memorandum of August 20, see vol. iv, p. 3.↩