793.94/16073
The Consul at Nanking (Stanton) to the Secretary of State
[Received July 23.]
Sir: I have the honor to refer to this office’s telegram No. 58 of June 14th72 concerning the joint proclamation issued by the Japanese [Page 357] military and naval headquarters in China on June 11, 1940. There are now enclosed for the information of the Department, copies of the Japanese and Chinese texts (as given in the local press) of the proclamation and the prefatory and explanatory statements appended thereto together with this office’s translation of the proclamation and the statements mentioned.73
As the Department is aware somewhat similar proclamations have been issued by the Japanese military and naval authorities during the course of the present hostilities but it is not believed that it has heretofore been specifically stated in such proclamations that Japanese military regulations were applicable to third party nationals although it is recalled that Japanese military spokesmen at Shanghai have implied that such was the case. However, as regards the present regulations it is declared specifically in the statement prefacing the proclamation that they are applicable to “Chinese, Japanese or nationals of third powers” and that those who violate the regulations shall be punished by “imprisonment, fines or confiscation of property.”
The proclamation lists eight categories of activities which are punishable including: criticism of Japanese policies; the giving of lectures, holding of meetings, publication of books and periodicals and the showing of motion pictures calculated to disturb the thoughts of soldiers and civilians; interference with the work of pacification and propaganda; disregard of orders or arrangements of the authorities in connection with the enforcement of emergency precautions; slanderous attacks on Japanese troops; the receiving, demanding or taking over control of properties or other interests or the agreeing to illegal requests by those working in Chinese government offices or other organizations and by those who are employees or advisors of the Japanese army or the China Affairs Board; and finally the instigation of the people, disturbing order, monopolizing finances and carrying on activities which may lead to the commission of the above mentioned “misconduct.”
It will be noted that a very wide range of activities is covered by the proclamation which is further amplified and extended by the explanatory statement. Of particular interest are the explanatory statements appearing under section II which not only proscribe subversive activities against Japanese troops, military establishments and Japanese military plans and interests but also make punishable “disrupting finance and economy” (1); causing “unfavorable effects on the economic and financial policies” (4); violating orders restricting the “importation of gold, silver or Japanese bank notes from Japan or Manchukuo” [Page 358] (6); engaging in speculation and exchange transactions and obtaining illegal profits (8); and violating the “orders that have been or will be issued in the future by the Japanese troops restricting the transportation of bank notes and commodities and any restrictions placed on economy and finance” (9). Also of interest are the explanatory statements appearing under Section III which, although declaring that Japanese military regulations do not conflict with the orders normally issued by Japanese consulates in China, appear none the less to imply that these military regulations largely supersede Japanese consular jurisdiction inasmuch as violators of consular orders are to be tried by military law. The Department’s attention is also called to the fact that the explanatory statement makes punishable any criticism of the national policies of Japan or the purposes and the program of the Japanese army (II–2), or any speech or activity harmful to the reputation or integrity of the Japanese troops (II–5). The particular regulations referred to would appear to be aimed at those third power nationals who have in the past or who may in future in any way criticise the Japanese policies or the Japanese military.
There may be several explanations for the issuance of this proclamation at the present time. It is not improbable that it was designed to emphasize the determination of the Japanese military and naval authorities to complete the “holy task” of bringing the present hostilities to a speedy and successful conclusion and to stress the fact that those authorities intend to brook no interference by others, not excluding third power nationals. On the other hand so sweeping are the powers, including administrative and judicial powers, which the Japanese military and naval authorities have assumed by the terms of the proclamation and the explanation appended thereto that it is difficult to dismiss the supposition that the proclamation was issued to make clear to occidentals, Chinese puppet regimes, Japanese politicians and perhaps even to the Japanese Government itself exactly where the real authority in occupied China lies. In brief the proclamation appears to indicate a resumption by the Japanese fighting forces of the complete and extensive control exercised by those forces during the earlier stages of the hostilities, but gradually diminished by the creation of such bodies as the China Affairs Board, over all economic and financial policies as well as the thoughts, acts, persons and properties of those residing in the occupied areas. One is led to speculate whether the task of General Abe in the negotiation of a treaty with the Wang regime will not be rendered more difficult by this pointed declaration concerning the real source of authority in occupied China.
Respectfully yours,