893.00 Nanking/110: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Minister in China (MacMurray)
[Paraphrase]
Washington, April 25,
1927—6 p.m.
187. Your No. 479, April 22 [23], 4 p.m.
- 1.
- In your telegram the conclusions you suggested appear to be based upon deductions which Department’s telegram 176, April 20, 3 p.m., had not intended, as it was solely directed to the question of the draft note you suggested in your No. 440, April 15, 7 p.m., and was not directed to the question of the policy of the United States with regard to the powers and China.
- 2.
- At no time has this Government determined to withdraw entirely from cooperation with other powers with regard to China. [Page 211] It is continuing to abide by the commitments which were made at the Washington Conference respecting cooperation with the other powers in the revision of treaty tariff provisions and consideration of measures contingent upon abolition of extraterritoriality if possible. The fact that this Government is ready to give protection to American life and property in China, where it is possible to give such protection, is demonstrated by the presence of a considerable American naval force at the present time in Chinese waters and the presence of a considerable force of marines in Shanghai, and the United States Government, although necessarily reserving to itself full control of its military forces, is cooperating in joint plans to protect foreign life and property.
- 3.
- At this time the question is not one of relinquishing our leadership in regard to Chinese matters. Leadership inheres in moderation as well as forceful action, and it is the feeling of the Department that at this time you should use your influence in behalf of moderate action. It is not the belief of the Department that the commercial advantage of the United States in China was obtained by reason of forceful action of the powers or that trade and commerce in China is about to be parcelled out through military action to various countries. It believes that the time has passed when foreign countries can take over Chinese territory or maintain by force special spheres of influence in trade. At present the question is whether the United States will agree with other powers to serve upon Eugene Ch’en another note which, in case he fails to comply, will further commit us to the use of force. To me it seems inadvisable for us to send to Eugene Ch’en a less drastic note than the first; and to make demands which would make it impossible for us not to apply sanctions seems more inadvisable. When the Department sent you instructions 176, April 20, 3 p.m., I was trying to avoid further action on the Nanking matter which would commit this Government inevitably to apply sanctions, which, it is the Department’s belief, would both be inefficacious and dangerous.
Kellogg