793.94/7154: Telegram
The Second Secretary of Legation in China (Atcheson) to the Secretary of State
192. (Section one). 1. The informant in first paragraph of Section two to follow stated that the New Life magazine on about May 5 published [Page 294] some paragraph of gossip about Emperors in which it was stated that the Japanese Emperor was not the controlling authority of the Government but was a figurehead in the sense that the King of England is a figurehead. The word “puppet” was used. The article passed unnoticed until it was reprinted more than a month later in the Ta Pao, a Chinese vernacular daily published in the French Concession, Tientsin. The Japanese demanded the suppression of both the Ta Pao and the New Life magazine, the punishment of the publisher later and of the author of the offending article, and an apology by the Mayor of Shanghai. These demands were fully acceded to except as regards the question of punishment. The publisher and author were placed in custody and that question is before the courts and will have to be decided according to law. Later the Japanese learned the article had been passed for publication by the Shanghai Censorship Committee of the Central Kuomintang and they not [now] desire to hold the Central Party headquarters responsible for it in addition to insisting that the courts convict the publisher and author, the former being considered an especial enemy because he had at one time successfully competed against Japanese porcelain firms in Mukden and was formerly a friend of Chang Hsueh-liang.
(Section two) 1. Informant cited in section one is a responsible Foreign Office official who spoke with me confidentially this morning.
2. He stated that although the Japanese demands in Shanghai and Tientsin were accepted, the Japanese are dissatisfied because the courts have not yet passed sentence upon the publisher of the magazine and the author of the offending article and the Japanese Embassy yesterday approached the Foreign Office with additional demands including (1) that the Central Party headquarters apologize for the action of the Shanghai censorship committee in passing the article. He was unwilling to describe the demands further. He confirmed the statement in Shanghai’s 368, July 2, 5 p.m.25 that Japanese naval vessels at Shanghai had postponed their departure on account of this matter and said that the Japanese Ambassador had requested them to remain in order to quell any trouble which might be caused by Japanese residents who were being stirred up by the Japanese Military Attaché Isogai. He expressed belief that the matter would be settled between the Foreign Office and the Embassy but remarked that other incidents would occur and that there was some justification for the attempts of some Kuomintang members to cause the impeachment of various officials (see my 189, July 1, 11 a.m., paragraph 2) because each new capitulation to the Japanese merely brought on more demands and there would be no end to this sort of thing. Thus, he added, the Japanese would probably not take any military action in [Page 295] Shanghai over this case but trouble of some kind would be sure to arise there in the future.
3. Suma of the Japanese Embassy also gave me an account of the case this morning which factually was in substantial agreement. He said that some reorganization of the Kuomintang in Shanghai was necessary and he had now been instructed by his Government to present to the Foreign Office certain demands which, he said he could assure me, were of a mild nature. He said it was true that the Japanese naval vessels in Shanghai had postponed their departure because of this case and not on account of rumors of impending changes in the Chinese Government but there was no possibility of trouble in Shanghai or Nanking and he thought the case would be settled in a few days.
4. To the Legation and Department. By mail to Tokyo and Shanghai.