793.00/101: Telegram
The Minister in China (MacMurray) to the Secretary of State
[Received July 27—4:38 p.m.]
292. 1. Your telegram No. 165, July 23, 3 p.m. received with texts too garbled to submit formally to colleagues until corrected.
2. I nevertheless took occasion this morning to read it to my Japanese colleague who expressed himself gratified by the fact that despite somewhat different distribution of emphasis our draft seems to represent substantially the views of his Government save insofar as it refers to tariff autonomy in the concluding sentence of fourth [fifth] paragraph of your draft.
3. I had myself intended to suggest that that sentence be revised to read “My Government is also willing either at the Tariff Conference or at a subsequent time to take up the subject of a renewed consideration of the treaties with a view to the possibility of ultimate further relaxation of the provisions restricting the rates of duty leviable upon imports and exports.” The phrase “tariff autonomy” is one of the catchwords of the radical movement and has acquired connotations of a sort that make its use dangerous because we could not control or even foresee the constructions which might be placed upon it by the Chinese public. The same is in less degree true of the phrase “comprehensive revision.”
4. In the following paragraph I also suggest the substitution of the word “safeguards” for “sanctions” in view of the confusion that might arise from the very different significance of this word as used by the French.
5. While asking authority to make these amendments and reserving possible comment upon minor points let me say that in substance and in tone I think this draft is admirably adapted to meet the present situation. I propose to discuss it next informally with British Chargé d’Affaires and the Italian Minister and upon getting a satisfactory reading will communicate it officially to representatives of powers signatory and adherent to Washington customs treaty and resolution on extraterritoriality.
6. Should it prove impossible to obtain almost immediate concurrence of those representatives in an identic note based upon your draft I strongly recommend that we send our own note and let the others send what they see fit in reply to the Chinese note of June 24. It would strengthen my hand in dealing with indecision and petty criticisms which I apprehend on the part of certain of the colleagues if you were to authorize me in my discretion to say that we are prepared to act in that manner. In that event it seems to me that it would be advisable that no two representatives should send [Page 799] notes in identical terms lest we thereby give the Chinese more convincing evidence of incomplete solidarity among the interested powers than if each were to reply separately.
Repeated to Tokyo.