894.85/8–1246

Memorandum of Conversation, by the Assistant Chief of the Division of Japanese Affairs (Emmerson)

Participants: Mr. Graves, Counselor of British Embassy
Mr. Vincent—FE
Mr. Borton—JA
Mr. Emmerson—JA

Mr. Graves referred to the aide-mémoire of August 12, 1946 which he had left with the Department35 and to the Department’s reply of [Page 587] September 3, and presented a memorandum36 on the subject of principles for the division of the Japanese merchant and fishing fleets.

Mr. Graves reiterated what had been expressed in the Embassy’s note of August 12, namely, that the British Government proposed that the allocation of Japanese merchant ships should be made on the same basis as that adopted for the division of German shipping. The principle used in the case of German ships was an allocation in proportion to over-all losses on a gross tonnage basis and regardless of whether losses occurred in the European or the Far Eastern war.

Mr. Vincent inquired what would be the statistical result of such an allocation in the case of Japan. Mr. Graves replied that his Government did not know what division would result but he felt that the British might receive more ships under this principle than if the Far Eastern war alone were taken into consideration. He said that by agreeing to the principle of allocation on the basis of both wars for the division of German shipping, the British had received slightly less than would otherwise have been the case. Mr. Graves said that the method he was suggesting would permit allocation of shipping tonnage to countries not directly participating in the Far Eastern war, such as Egypt, Yugoslavia and others.

Mr. Vincent said that he was under the impression that the agreement in connection with the German fleet was taken without necessarily intending that the same principle should be applied in the case of the Japanese fleet. He stated that the British note would be referred to the appropriate divisions in the State Department and a reply prepared for the British Embassy.

  1. See memorandum of conversation, August 12, p. 561.
  2. Not printed.