793.94/8824: Telegram
The Ambassador in China (Johnson) to the Secretary of State
[Received July 18—9:38 a.m.]
257. With reference to my 256, July 18, 3 p.m. The French Ambassador has just sent to me the following draft of a letter which he proposes that the British, French, Italian and American Embassies address identically to the Japanese Ambassador and to General Sung Che Yuan. The following is a translation from the French:
“Project of an identical letter to be addressed simultaneously to His Excellency Mr. Kawagoe and to General Sung Che Yuan. Mr. Ambassador or Mr. President: As you are aware, the freedom of communication between Peiping and the sea constitutes one of the principal provisions of protocol of September 7, 1901.
It goes without saying that any hostilities in the region extending between Peiping and the sea and in the neighboring zones would be of a nature to destroy the freedom of communication or to place it in serious danger.
In bringing these facts to Your Excellency’s benevolent attention I have no doubt that you will be good enough to intervene with the interested Japanese-Chinese authorities in order that they will abstain from taking any action which might directly or indirectly affect the freedom of communication between Peiping and the sea, which freedom is indispensable to the safety of the diplomatic corps, the occupation corps, the guards of the embassies, the foreign colonies.
The same communication has been addressed to His Excellency Mr. Kawagoe, Japanese Ambassador in China (or ‘to General Sung Che Yuan, President of the Political Council of Hopei and Chahar’).
Accept, Excellency, etc.”
It is his belief that such a letter might serve to prevent fighting and open the way to some further action in the interests of peace.
[Page 202]It is my opinion that Japanese reply would be that their aim is within the Protocol to keep communications open. Chinese reply would be that they have no desire to interrupt but that the railway is being used by Protocol power with hostile intent and entirely outside the scope of the Protocol. I doubt whether note will accomplish purpose he has in mind. Nevertheless I promised to communicate it to you and ask for instructions as to whether I could join in such action if the other powers agreed. I may add that French Ambassador has referred this matter to Paris which replied that it was action not to be taken at the capitol but with local authorities.