Office of the Historian

494.11/30: Telegram

The Ambassador in Japan (Grew) to the Secretary of State

Tokyo, September 29, 1937—1 p.m.
[Received September 29—6:55 a.m.]

430. Department’s 205, September 14, 6 p.m.;73 and our 371, September 15, 4 p.m.,74 reference reservation of rights.

1. Yoshizawa called Dooman75 to the Foreign Office this morning and referred to our note of September 15. He said that a similar second note had been received by the Foreign Office from the British Ambassador. The bureau in the Foreign Office dealing with relations with Great Britain did not share Yoshizawa’s view that no reaffirmation [Page 360] of the Japanese Government’s position with regard to indemnification for damages resulting from Japanese military operations in China was called for, and yesterday a reply was sent to the British Embassy. Yoshizawa then gave Dooman in confidence a copy of the reply of the Foreign Office to the British Ambassador and stated that it was to be understood by us that the Japanese Government had not altered the views expressed in the Foreign Office note of August 25 [31] (see our 337, September 2, 4 p.m. [a.m.]76).

2. The Foreign Office note to the British Embassy, tendered in Japanese, reads in translation as follows:

“Excellency: I have perused Your Excellency’s note number 141, dated September 9, in which it is stated that the British Government maintains the position set forth in the note, dated August 21, of Mr. Chargé d’Affaires Dodds that the British Government reserves the right to claim indemnification in respect of injury to the persons and property of British nationals caused by operations of the Imperial forces in China.

The Imperial Government, for its part, adheres to the view which is set forth in its note in reply No. 149, dated September 3.

I avail myself, et cetera.”

Repeated to Shanghai.

Grew
  1. Foreign Relations, Japan, 1931–1941, vol. i, p. 497.↩
  2. Not printed; it reported delivery of note to Foreign Office.↩
  3. Eugene H. Dooman, Counselor of Embassy in Japan.↩
  4. Not printed; It quoted Japanese note of August 31, Foreign Relations, Japan, 1931–1941, vol. I, p. 492.↩