893.102S/2210: Telegram
The Consul at Shanghai (Butrick) to the Secretary of State
[Received 9:13 p.m.]
817. Tokyo’s 719, August 20, 11 p.m. The circumstances regarding the meeting of the Defense Committee called by the secretary at the instance of Colonel Peck were reported in my 767, August 12, 6 p.m. The secretary’s notices actually went out on August 10 and all parties, therefore, had 2 days to consider the matter before the meeting. The oral statement of the Japanese Government must be considered at variance with the facts. The meeting of the Defense Committee on August 12 was attended by all interested parties except the Japanese. There was no attempt to adopt any resolution. The meeting took cognizance of the agenda which was the American Marine proposal for taking over both sectors, took cognizance of the Japanese written objection to the holding of the meeting and adjourned without action and without discussion in deference to the wishes of the Japanese. At the meeting on the 15th Colonel Peck stated that in proposing that the Marines take over both sectors he did so as the Marines were a non-belligerent force and in view of the American interest in those sectors Colonel Peck refused to enter into lengthy arguments with the [Japanese?] as to the relative merits of the Marine proposal and the Japanese proposal, stating that all members present were cognizant of all the facts in the situation and that a lengthy defense of the American proposal was unnecessary. The [Page 787] action taken at the meeting on the 15th was reported by the Navy to Washington and by me to Tokyo, Peiping and Chungking in my August 15, 4 p.m. It should be added that at that time Rear Admiral Takeda, the chairman of the meeting appointed a committee to study and clarify the issues in regard to the manner of calling meetings as there seemed to be a difference of opinion whether the secretary had power to call a meeting. Here I may state parenthetically the fact that all parties, except the Japanese, attended the first meeting [which?] seems to indicate that all parties except the Japanese felt that the secretary had full power to call the meeting. I may also add that the chairmanship of the Defense Committee is also in dispute between the British and Japanese commandants and this fact lends more force to the calling of a meeting by the secretary of the Defense Committee. In the meeting of the 15th the matter of who is the chairman was avoided by the non-attendance of the British commandant due to illness.
As regards the action taken by the Shanghai Municipal Council, the Japanese contention would seem to be that no action can be taken by that body when opposed by the Japanese members of the Council—an impossible condition.
The penultimate paragraph of the oral statement may be taken in two ways—if the Japanese “fair and reasonable proposal” was that which they presented to the Defense Committee after 6 days consideration, namely, that they occupy both sectors, it was in fact prevented by American action. The compromise proposal adopted by the majority of the Defense Committee and with the affirmative vote of the American member is evidence in itself of a fair and reasonable attitude of the Americans. The Japanese attitude on the contrary might well be said to be otherwise as they were the only one to vote against the compromise proposal.
As to the Japanese concept of a “spirit of cooperation” we can only judge by future developments but in general I may comment that the word “cooperation” seems to be interpreted by them to mean agreeing to their plans and proposals.
The above telegram has been prepared in conjunction with Colonel Peck who was present at both meetings of the Defense Committee.
Sent to the Department. Repeated to Chungking, Peiping, Tokyo and Tsingtao for the Commander-in-Chief. Department please inform Navy if deemed necessary.