893.50 Recovery/7–148: Telegram
The Ambassador in China (Stuart) to the Secretary of State
[Received July 1—7:53 a.m.]
1197. Reference Deptel 962, June 30. Embassy did not fail to consult Lapham on June 30 as promised Embtel 1178, June 29. His views reflected in Embassy’s continued unyielding stand re last sentence paragraph 1, article IV as reported in Embtel 1183, June 30.
Authorization delete crucial sentence which was transmitted to Embassy in Deptels 950 and 951 of June 29 in Embassy’s belief had confirmed authority accorded Embassy in Deptel 938, June 28 to which no similar condition had been attached.
Embassy has been fully aware of necessity keeping Lapham closely informed progress negotiations both as matter of right and in interest of future harmonious relationship.
As result further discussions and in agreement between Lapham and Embassy today, Lapham this afternoon saw Prime Minister alone and reiterated to him vital importance attached to retention disputed sentence. Prime Minister gave no definitive answer but promised discuss with Foreign Minister. Foreign Minister has just now repeated refusal to accept.
Embassy unable to construe final sentence Deptel 962 otherwise then [than] as clear revocation authority Embassy had understood Department had conferred on it this matter successively in Deptels 938, 950 and 951. Obviously Embassy will seek and expect to arrive at amicable agreed decision with Lapham re conclusion or collapse of negotiation. Presumably Department is aware that if due to Lapham’s possible decision insist on retention disputed sentence and Chinese continue refusal to accept, then there will be no agreement on or before July 3 and the responsibility for negotiating it or failing to negotiate it, as the case may be, will rest in fact on Lapham and not on the Secretary of State which latter Embassy understood was required by section 405 of the act.
Lapham has seen this cable.
Sent Department 1179; repeated Shanghai 561.