740.00119 Control (Korea)/2–2346:
Telegram
The Chief of Staff, United States Army
(Eisenhower), to General of the Army
Douglas MacArthur, at
Tokyo
secret
[Washington,] 23 February 1946.
War 98337. Reference Cax 57461 and Tflig 669, CinCAFPAC please pass to CG
USAFIK.
Sale of Jap property to Koreans is
subject. The following proposed directive to you is up for urgent
consideration by State, War and Navy. All agreed except on matter of
legality of “Sale” of property as against “Transfer”. State Department
Legal Adviser54 is
objecting to use of word “Sale”. Here is proposed directive to you
quoted in full:
- “1. Your Cax 57461 approved except insofar as in conflict
with policy outlined below. Japanese still in Korea will not
be permitted to sell property but such property may be sold
or leased by the Military Government in accordance with
approved policy below.
- 2. Reference Tflig 669 from Commanding General USAFIK. You may authorize
military Government in US Area of Korea to sell and give
title on Japanese-owned property of the following classes:
- a.
- Farmland
- b.
- Urban residences
- c.
- Small business holdings.
- You should, in your public statement announcing
availability of property for sale, state that all sales are
outright so far as Military Government is concerned but of
course will be subject to subsequent confirmation by the
Korean Provisional Government (to be established pursuant to
the Moscow Communiqué) in participation with the Joint
Commission. View here is that action by Provisional
Government will be general confirmation with such exceptions
by category as may be found necessary.
- 3. Authorization to make sales does not at present extend
to industrial property or large wholesale businesses.
- 4. For your information only, it is now contemplated that
United States members of the Joint Commission will not be
authorized to give final approval of such sales:
[Page 639]
- (a)
- Until agreement has been obtained from other
members of the Reparations Commission to support the
United States view with respect to the disposition
of such property (steps have already been initiated)
and
- (b)
- Until you have required the Japanese Government to
divest its Nationals of property in Korea, if the
Far Eastern Commission determines such a procedure
to be necessary.
- 5. Plans suggested in Paragraphs 2 and 7 of Tflig 669 are
agreed to for small business holdings as well as farms and
urban dwellings subject to qualifications above. All sales
should be screened to prevent cloaking transactions and
transfers to undesirable persons. General policy
announcements suggested in Paragraph 4(a) and 9(a) may be drafted
and announced in Korea at an appropriate time.
- 6. This message is not to be construed as an over-all
policy statement referred to in War 96606 which is still
under consideration.55 This message is sent to give at once
necessary authorization to make certain land reforms with
respect to Japanese-owned property.
- You will note from Paragraph 4 above that there are
certain legal questions to be finally surmounted with
respect to passing clear title to these properties. In
placing your program into effect, you should give
consideration to the possible attacks on it from the Soviets
should your plan conflict with that which they may have
already instituted in their area. Desirability of prior
consultation with or notification to the Russians will be at
your discretion.”
State Department Legal Adviser’s objections and proposed amendments are
as follows:
“The proposed directive to General Hodge should not be issued
unless:
- 1.
- The word ‘Transfer’ be substituted throughout the
proposed directive for the word ‘Sale’.
- 2.
- US Military Government, Korea, purport to act
vis-à-vis the Korean people, and the specific recipients
of the land in particular, on the basis of administering
some kind of possessory interest rather than
ownership.
If these changes were made, General Hodge might be advised to
take local Korean legal advice, and to proceed with his program
of transfer by issuing ‘Certificates of transfer’ or by means of
rental agreements but always without assertion of US title to
the property or its out-right sale.”
Request comments earliest. Are proposed amendments satisfactory?56
[WARCOS]
