793.94/8982
The Ambassador in China (Johnson) to the Consul General at Shanghai (Gauss)40
Subject: Joint Commission established under the 1932 agreement for the cessation of Sino-Japanese hostilities at Shanghai.
Sir: I have your despatch No. 864 of June 24, 1937,39 in reference to the above subject, with which you enclose a transcript of shorthand [Page 124] record of proceedings at meeting of Joint Commission held on June 23, 1937.44 I approve of the action taken by you at this meeting.
There were no official minutes of the meetings held by the representatives of China and Japan and the neutral Ministers and the Military Attachés before the agreement of May 5, 1932, was signed; but I did on my own account keep notes from day to day, and have here in the Embassy a copy of the record which I made.
I may say for your confidential information that Article II of that agreement was the subject of a great deal of discussion, and that the Chinese refused point-blank to accept the text as it now stands without it being understood that it was not intended to restrict the right of the Chinese to move troops in Chinese territory as they wished. I quote the following from my longhand record of the proceedings on the morning of Thursday, March 31, 1932; we spent that morning on Article II, and after some discussion the following colloquy occurred:
Mr. Quo Tai-chi: “I want to make an official declaration along the lines of my original text quoted in Draft B.”
Mr. Shigemitsu: “How will it then stand?”
Sir Miles Lampson: “It will stand as drafted: paragraph I with the suggested addition; the second paragraph will then become an official declaration to the Conference. Thus:
‘Article II. The Chinese troops will remain in their present positions pending later arrangements upon the reestablishment of normal conditions in the areas dealt with by the agreement. The aforesaid positions are indicated in Annex I to this agreement.
‘Official declaration to Conference by Mr. Quo. It is understood that nothing in this agreement implies any permanent restriction of the movements of Chinese troops in Chinese territory.’”
Mr. Shigemitsu. “This is acceptable to Japan.”
Thus you will see that Mr. Yui was technically correct in the statement which he makes at the top of page 4 of your transcript of the proceedings of January [June] 23, 1937. The effect of the proceedings in March and April of 1932 may have been to demilitarize the area between the International Settlement and Woosung; certainly the Japanese intend to insist that this is the effect; and I suppose there is no way in which their contention can be successfully combated as long as they appear to be prepared to back up their contention by force of arms. The Chinese will, I think, be well advised to refrain from attempting to militarize that area in the face of Japanese opposition. But it seems to me that it is no part of ours to compel the Chinese to yield to the Japanese contention.
I gather from the statements made by Mr. Yui that, generally speaking, the Chinese have no intention of militarizing this area.
Very truly yours,