893.102 Tientsin/326: Telegram
The Ambassador in France (Bullitt) to the Secretary of State
[Received June 30—5:37 p.m.]
1229. Chauvel said to us this morning that the instructions of the British Government to Craigie for the negotiations at Tokyo concerning the Tientsin affair were rather vague and left considerable latitude to Craigie. The gist of the instructions was that Craigie was to seek to maintain the distinction between questions of a general character and local questions, and that if questions of a general character affecting the rights of third powers should be raised by the Japanese he was to consult with the representatives of such powers.
Chauvel said that he was uneasy over these negotiations. For one thing no agenda had been agreed upon: It was understood that Arita was to draw up an agenda and submit it to Craigie in the next few days; no one knew as yet what Arita would propose.
For another thing the negotiations would take place under the constant threat of renewal by the Japanese of their highhanded tactics at Tientsin. It was true that some relief had been granted at Tientsin in that the stripping of British subjects had ceased momentarily but the blockade continues in force, the barbed wire barricades around the Concession are still electrified and it is obvious that if during the negotiations the Japanese feel that they are not getting satisfaction they will bring pressure on the British by tightening the blockade.
Chauvel showed us a note which he had drafted to the British Embassy and which he said would go forward today or tomorrow. This note refers to the instructions given Craigie and in particular to the section relating to consultation with representatives of third powers. It points out that while questions directly affecting the British [Page 211] Concession might be regarded as local questions, nevertheless the decision reached in such questions might well affect the rights of other powers. For example, a diminution of authority in a British Concession would immediately have its repercussions on the situation in the French Concession.
The note refers to the demands of the Japanese for measures against the use of Chinese national currency and for delivery of reserves of Chinese banks deposited in the Concessions. (Chauvel said that acceptance of such demands would bring about the collapse of the Chinese currency and facilitate efforts of the Japanese to obtain absolute control over exchange and trade matters throughout China.) The note refers to the notes of March 10th and 11th in which the American,96 British, and French Governments stated their point of view to the Japanese Government regarding monetary questions in China and makes the suggestion that if such questions should be raised by the Japanese during the negotiations there should be consultation between the American, British, and French Governments.
Chauvel said that he feared that the British Government in its eagerness to reach a settlement with the Japanese Government might be tempted to go far and to accept conditions which inevitably would weaken the position of other powers in China. The French note to the British was prepared therefore in the hope of stiffening the British attitude.
- For the American note No. 1207, of March 11, see Foreign Relations, Japan, 1931–1941, vol. i, p. 831.↩