894.628/162
The Ambassador in Japan (Grew) to
the Secretary of State
No. 1930
Tokyo, July 7, 1936.
[Received July
28.]
Sir: I have the honor to refer to the
Department’s telegram No. 87 of July 3, 5 p.m., 1936, and to the
Embassy’s reply thereto, No. 148 of July 6, noon, 1936,94 and to enclose a copy
of a memorandum of conversation between the Counselor of the Embassy and
the Chief of the American Bureau of the Foreign Office in regard to
fishing in the
[Page 945]
Bristol Bay
region. The discussion on this subject took place during an informal
talk which covered a number of other matters.
The Department will note that Mr. Okamoto brought up revision of the Fur
Seal Treaty in the course of the conversation. This lends some force to
the idea that the Japanese Government may wish to use our apprehensions
of Japanese pelagic salmon fishing in Bering Sea to bring about an
alteration in the Fur Seal Treaty, a possibility to which the Embassy
has previously invited attention.
Respectfully yours,
[Enclosure]
Memorandum by the Counselor of Embassy in
Japan (Neville)
I told Mr. Okamoto that the Embassy had received information from
Washington that a Japanese vessel named Chichibu
Maru had been observed fishing for salmon with gill nets in
Bristol Bay, and asked him whether the Foreign Office had any
information in regard to this vessel. He sent for the file and the
Section Chief in charge of it, and after some conversation with him
and an examination of the dossier, Mr. Okamoto said that there was
no information on file at all, and that the Foreign Office knew
nothing about it. This statement was confirmed by the Section Chief
who was emphatic that the Fisheries Bureau had given the Foreign
Office no information in regard to this vessel. Mr. Okamoto said
that the Foreign Office would investigate the report and give the
Embassy what information it could obtain.
Mr. Okamoto then stated that he had first become acquainted with this
question when he was Consul at Seattle. He said that the Japanese
Government was under some pressure from time to time to grant
licenses to fish in Bristol Bay, but so far had refused, because in
the first place such action would irritate the Americans and
secondly it was doubtful whether such fishing would be profitable.
He said that one object of the investigation which the Fisheries
Bureau was making was to ascertain the commercial feasibility of
fishing off Alaska.
He then said that another question which was brought up from time to
time was the problem of fur seals. He said that the Japanese
Government had first raised the question of revision of the fur seal
treaty some ten years ago, but that the American Government had been
unable to consider the matter because it had no diplomatic relations
with the Soviets at that time. I told him that I was unable to
discuss that question because I had no instructions to that end, and
asked him if the Japanese Government wanted to raise the question
[Page 946]
now. He said that so
far as he knew the Japanese were not ready to do so now, but the
treaty had expired, was in force only from year to year and there
were certain features of it which he understood the Japanese wish
modified. He seemed unable to give more detailed information.
