195.2/3757
Memorandum of Conversation, by the Chief of the Division of Far Eastern Affairs (Hamilton)
Mr. Morishima called at his request. He showed me a copy of a newspaper account of what Mr. Welles had said, in reply to inquiry, at the press conference on Saturday relating to the action of the Maritime Commission in granting a charter for a tanker to carry gasoline [Page 593] to Vladivostok and in refusing two charters for shipments to Japan. Mr. Morishima stated that he wished to obtain an accurate statement of the facts. I read to him from Radio Bulletin No. 178, July 27, an account of what Mr. Welles had said, as follows:
“A correspondent said that there had been great deal of speculation in connection with the fact that the Maritime Commission had granted a charter for a tanker to carry gasoline to Vladivostok, while it has previously refused two charters for shipments to Japan, and he inquired whether there might be implications of foreign policy involved. The Acting Secretary replied that there was no implication of foreign policy whatsoever. He said that his understanding was that it was a question as to whether or not danger was involved. A tanker going to Vladivostok was presumably not going to an area where hostilities were involved, while a tanker going to Spanish or Japanese waters was going to areas where hostilities were in progress, and decisions were reached solely on that basis.”
I said that the newspaper report seemed to be in substantial conformity with what Mr. Welles had said.
Mr. Morishima then commented that the Pacific Ocean was of course a safe area. I replied that presumably the Maritime Commission was not attempting to draw fine technical distinctions but was apparently proceeding upon the basis of a broad general rule.