793.94/5140: Telegram
The Minister in Switzerland (Wilson) to the Acting Secretary of State
[Received April 30—10:23 a.m.]
92. From the Secretary. My 162 [161 bis], April 29, 9 p.m.5 In addition to reported resumption of General Disarmament Conference, I have during the past week had further most satisfactory interviews in respect to the Sino-Japanese situation. My talk with Hailsham proved unexpectedly satisfactory. Not only is he strong conservative and Minister of War but he has personal knowledge of Far East through representing Britain in the Institute of Pacific Relations in 1929. He is keenly alive to the present situation and sympathetic with our viewpoint. My talk with him was so satisfactory that it seemed to me to eliminate the necessity of my going to London to confer with Baldwin or other conservatives. I have had further talks with MacDonald and Simon together in which we covered the pending situation in Manchuria in every detail. Simon has told me that he is giving directions to the Foreign Office that all decisions respecting the Manchurian [Page 735] state must be brought to him personally so as to avoid danger of their being decided merely by departmental routine. He has told me of a new issue caused by a demand of the Manchurian state for salt revenues which he thinks makes a better test issue upon which America and Britain can base their public [protest?] to Japan and to the world. When this proposal comes to the Department I think we should consider it with the utmost care. On his statement I was inclined to agree with his position that a protest on it would be less open to defense from Japan. I have also talked at length with Drummond so that he would be familiar with our position; also with various members of the small powers represented on the Committee of Nineteen who are the most effective supporters of our policy against Japan in Geneva. This includes Beneš of Czechoslovakia, Ramel of Sweden, Hymans of Belgium, and others. I have also had two talks with Matsudaira and one with Yen. The leaders of the League are fully alive to the seriousness of the challenge which Japan’s attitude has made to the efficiency of their organization. They look forward to a possible crisis in May when the Assembly reconvenes or an almost certain one in September after the Lytton report. They are most anxious to be given all information which we can properly give them saying that our information is better and clearer than any other. I have promised to give them all I properly can. Our position on the mandated islands is thoroughly understood and recognized as one of the possible key points in the controversy. If I had done nothing in regard to the Disarmament Conference I should feel that my conversations in regard to Japan and China had made the trip worth while. [Stimson.]