102.22/7–1449: Telegram
The Consul General at Shanghai (Cabot) to the Secretary of State
[Received July 14—9:58 a. m.]
2771. Department pass to CNO and ComNavWesPac. Letter comprising résumé entire affair ex-Navy employees requested [by] FAB July 8 (ConGentel 2662, 8th, repeated Nanking 1481) dated 9th was delivered by interpreter 11th. Latter also conveyed oral message urging immediate settlement basis presently authorized or prompt arrangement visit and negotiation claims by Navy team (Deptel 1371, 8th, repeated Nanking 802).
Although written plain bond and signed without title, letter [was] refused after study account (1) use term American Consul General in absence recognition; (2) use term violence describing incident July 6; (3) position Consul General that under uniformly accepted principles international law Consul General as representative sovereign power could not accept arbitration by foreign government.
[Page 1229]Acting my instructions Thomas called FAB 12th asking see female representative who requested letter. Instead was seen by Feng Chih-ho. Feng informed that Consul General at loss how meet objection (1) since letter requested [by] FAB for factual résumé and statement Consul General since Consul General involved only [on] account official capacity and absence Navy and no other name appropriate. Re objection (2), Feng told that Consul General could not find better term describe forcible detention entire staff led by me when angry crowd chained bicycle across gate and held closed with force. Re objection (3), reiterated that Consul General as representative sovereign government could act only under instructions from Department. Furthermore although recognizing Communist wish not recognize Consul General, Consul General bound regard itself as such.
Feng made little comment these points except to insist that letter be rewritten in more acceptable terms. Gave no specific reaction Navy mediation team proposal but stated revised letter would be referred higher authorities for decision.
Interesting sidelight developed when Feng’s amanuensis taking full transcription conversation belligerently asserted that had Consul General admitted employee representatives 6th subsequent events would not have transpired and that barring gate their faces constituted insult Chinese people. He informed no insult Chinese people conveyed or intended, instead determination Consul General not submit intimidation. Feng terminated this discussion abruptly, obviously displeased with intercession subordinate.
Revised letter being delivered FAB today substituting “this office” for term “Consul General”, eliminating term “violence” and using “forcible detention” instead and stating general terms application principles international law and custom to point of arbitration. Also recommending (1) that FAB instruct employees accept settlement presently authorized since this most expeditious and only course open Consul General now authorized; (2) alternately make immediate arrangements airport facilities and safe conduct Navy mediation team which fully authorized negotiate directly employees. Additionally confirming to FAB that actual payment will depend upon availability local currency from Central Bank or appointed banks in exchange for check or draft and requesting assistance this respect at appropriate time. (ConGentel to Department 2659, repeated Nanking 1779, 8th.14)
Meantime Supple has unconfirmed report that mass visitation again being planned for 18th or 19th. See no choice but stand by awaiting FAB reaction letter. Will keep Department and Embassy informed.
Sent Department 2771, repeated Nanking 1557.
- Not printed.↩