793.94 Commission/654: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Acting Chairman of the American Delegation to the General Disarmament Conference (Gibson)
53. For Wilson. Your 68, December 14, 11 p.m.
1. Before receipt of the above, I had prepared and signed but not sent the following:
“Your 66, December 13, 10 p.m. As I have repeatedly stated, action by the League in the nature of an affirmation of findings of principle is a desirable, in fact I think imperative, condition precedent to any effort to create and instruct a committee or commission of conciliation. I therefore feel that, until the League has acted in that sense, discussion of the question of possible American participation, under invitation from the League, in the work of a body constituted for purposes of conciliation, is misdirected and futile.
Furthermore, I feel that any approach by us either to Japan or to the League, by way of encouraging the formulation on their part of [Page 429] an invitation to us to join in procedure of conciliation, before a foundation for such procedure has been laid by the League, would inevitably create a complete misunderstanding of our views and probably suspicion of our motives.
Therefore, while carefully watching developments both at Geneva and in Japan and China, I am taking no action and desire that you take none beyond the limits of the instruction which I have given in telegrams 42,68 48, 49 and 51,69 especially 51. You may do your utmost to make clear my view that action on the Lytton report by the League is a necessary precedent to efforts at conciliation and that it is not a proper function nor is it the intention of the American Government to participate in the formulation of the League’s decision with regard to disposal of the Lytton report. When questions of principle and procedure have been adequately dealt with by the League under its own constitution, the time will have arrived for discussion of participation by the American Government in machinery and processes which may be suggested by the League for conciliation as such. Until that is done there should be no manifestation whatever of eagerness on our part. Stimson.”
2. The above still constitutes my view on all points to which it relates.
3. In express reply to your 68 under present reference, and confirming what I have said to you this morning by telephone, I feel that, as I have repeatedly and definitely made known this Government’s position and policy and as I assume that you and various influential individual members of the League are fully cognizant of my views, both you and they will appreciate that I cannot express a view on behalf of this Government before the full text of the contemplated resolution is available to me and I am informed adequately with regard to the procedure intended in relation to its various parts. Therefore, you may state that I must reserve all decision until I see the text and am clearly informed with regard to contemplated procedure.