600.939/236a: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Ambassador in Japan (Grew)
265. Reference your 479, July 21, 7 p.m., and 482, July 22, 11 a.m., Tientsin’s 141, July 26, 5 p.m.,54 and other telegrams in regard to the north China embargo on hides and skins.
On July 21 the Minister for Foreign Affairs informed you orally that the north China embargo on hides and skins had been lifted “except for the lowest classes of hides and skins which are of immediate necessity to the Japanese Army”. On July 22 the Japanese Foreign Office informed you in writing that “the Provisional Government has issued an order, that, for the time being, the export of first-class articles which are not suitable for military use should be allowed.”
The Department desires that you approach the Japanese Foreign Office and, choosing the method which you think best adapted to the case, point out forcefully that notwithstanding statements made to you, as outlined in the foregoing paragraph, the embargo on hides and skins in north China remains in force. Please emphasize the fact, as described in Tientsin’s telegram under reference, that it has been approximately 1 month since the sudden imposition of the embargo and that the season for the timely arrival of the hides and skins from China is already so shortened as to endanger their market.
With reference to the explanation of the Japanese Government that it is military necessity which has prompted the imposition of the embargo and which may result in certain types of hides and skins being excepted from the order which may be issued lifting the embargo, please point out emphatically that in the opinion of the American Government the argument of military necessity cannot be applied in the case of the embargo on hides and skins in as much as there would appear to be no reason why if there were no embargo the Japanese military authorities might not enter the market and purchase the hides and skins which they require in open competition, and that the chief value of the embargo to the Japanese military authorities would seem to be that it will bring about a stifling of competition and a [Page 36] driving down of the price, thus enabling Japanese authorities to purchase their requirements at lower prices than would otherwise be the case; and that the embargo thus imposes a serious financial loss upon American dealers and consumers.
In conclusion you may say that the Foreign Minister’s assurances in regard to the maintenance of equality of treatment in China have been complete and unqualified and that should the embargo be left either wholly or partially in effect the American Government could not but consider this action as inconsistent with the Foreign Minister’s repeated assurances that equality of treatment in China will be maintained.
- Telegram No. 141 not printed.↩