of North China. Mr. Lockhart in closing his part of the conversation referred to the responsibility shared with other nations under the Protocol in protecting foreigners in North China and said that it seemed to him necessary to consult the interested powers before taking any definite steps in the direction of withdrawing troops and in conclusion remarked that he hoped no change would be made at this time in the present arrangements. The conversation was closed by a brief discussion between Mr. Hornbeck and General Embick on the relative position of the United States and Great Britain in affairs in the Far East. Mr. Hornbeck expressed the view that the United States has much more ultimately at stake in events that take place in the Pacific Ocean than has Great Britain and General Embick advanced the view that Great Britain's interests exceeded those of the United States but it appeared that this view was based largely on the theory that Japan would ultimately take possession of the Philippines, the Dutch East Indies, the Mandated Islands in the South Seas and then would threaten India and Australia, which ultimately might end in a break-up of the British Empire. Mr. Hornbeck remarked that this was taking the conflict out of the Pacific and into the Indian Ocean and that so long as the question is confined to the Pacific Ocean the ultimate concern of the United States is greater than that of Great Britain in that region. 124.93/333a: Telegram The Acting Secretary of State to the Ambassador in China (Johnson) WASHINGTON, August 22, 1936-1 p. m. 204. 1. Scripps-Howard newspapers printed August 20 a story by Philip Simms which begins "Led by the United States and Great Britain, the great powers are quietly preparing to abandon Peiping and move their embassies to Nanking, seat of China's Nationalist government." The article states "What is happening is that the great powers, as well as China, are retreating before the advancing Japanese." Such is not the Department's view. 2. With reference to recent reports relating to the proposed removal of the British Embassy from Peiping to Nanking, the British Foreign Secretary on July 27, in reply to a question in the House of Commons, stated, inter alia, "I should like to make it clear that the abandonment of the present Embassy at Peiping is not contemplated. There are important British interests in North China which render its retention desirable." This parallels the Department's views. 919456-54-41 3. The Department desires and we are assured that British Foreign Office desires that there be frank and continuous exchange of information relating to contemplated or decided upon changes in our respective diplomatic establishments, also armed forces, in North China. It is important that there be no misconstruction, especially by the British, of our action or intention with regard to our establishments. 4. In light of the foregoing and in view of your impending occupation of residence at Nanking, Department desires that Embassy take special pains to avoid any implications and discourage any inferences that your entry into residence at Nanking has any ulterior or broader significance. Department suggests that you inform British Chargé of this. 5. Inform Nanking and Shanghai. PHILLIPS 124.93/334: Telegram The Ambassador in China (Johnson) to the Secretary of State PEIPING, August 25, 1936-1 p. m. [Received 4:40 p. m.] 415. Department's 204, August 22, 1 p. m. Both Peck and I have carefully kept Cadogan 19 and Counselor Howe informed of every step of our decisions regarding Nanking. We have been particularly careful to keep nothing concealed. I say this because of implication in Department's telegram that we may have failed in some way in this manner. In discussing matter with newspapermen, private individuals, and Chinese authorities, we have been equally scrupulous. I have at all times tried to make it abundantly clear that American Government has never had any idea of abandoning its position here in Peiping. I regret to state that I cannot say the same either for Cadogan or for Howe, although our relations are, and have been, most cordial and they have always been willing to give us information in reply to direct questions. At some time, still unknown to this Embassy, but believed to have been prior to Cadogan's departure, the British Embassy or Board of Works [Consulate General?] at Shanghai began negotiations with Chinese for purchase of a site for British Embassy at Nanking. I learned of this indirectly from third parties, and only accidently, a short while ago. Inquiries have confirmed fact, but have produced little or no personal reasons; however, it would appear from information obtained from third parties that negotiations have proceeded to the point where a site has been chosen on road leading to Ho Ping 19 Sir Alexander M. G. Cadogan, British Ambassador in China. Men north of Central Party Headquarters in Nanking; that the site is a fairly large one and that plans for Embassy buildings have been drawn and are now under consideration. It is understood that check for site has not yet been handed over. It is knowledge of these negotiations which has given rise to reports through both press and statement in Parliament on July 27. Recent statements by subordinate officers of British Embassy to subordinate members of this Embassy indicate that it is not expected that necessary Embassy buildings in Nanking will be ready within 5 years. Before Cadogan left he told me in a conversation which I had with him that it was going to be necessary for him to take most of his staff to Nanking. At that time, however, our conversation concerned the renovation, then completed, of the old quarters of the British Consulate General and Customs owned houses at Nanking which were being made over for the residence and accommodation of the British Ambassador and staff. Cadogan stated that it was his understanding that British Ambassador will continue to use Peiping dwelling from time to time. German Embassy moved to Nanking last fall and is now permanently located there, maintaining a junior staff officer here in Peiping. Japanese Embassy has moved and for some time has been trying to purchase a site in Nanking without success. Japanese Ambassador told me the other day that he expected to continue to use residence in Shanghai at least for the time being. German Government has for some years owned a large plot of land near the present Railway Ministry site at Nanking. They are now negotiating for the purchase of a small plot to connect the old plot with the Chung Shan Road, but they have no immediate plans for building. JOHNSON 123J634/408: Telegram The Secretary of State to the Ambassador in China (Johnson) WASHINGTON, August 28, 1936-4 p. m. 209. Reference your telegram 413, August 24, noon,20 and mail despatch 565, July 6. In the light of 4th paragraph of your despatch under reference and final sentence of your telegram under reference, there arises doubt whether Department's conception and yours regarding Peiping and Nanking establishments, and the question of Ambassador's seat of residence in relation thereto, completely coincide. Toward making Department's conception absolutely clear to you: (a) As to policy: It is felt here that no change should be made for 20 Not printed. the present in our establishments in north China, both diplomatic and military. It has been and is assumed here that you will maintain residences in both Peiping and Nanking and that your periods of residence as between the two will be determined by considerations of policy and needs as situations develop. It is desired that such be regarded the procedure at present intended. It therefore is desired that your entry into residence in Nanking shall not be regarded as constituting or implying in any way an abandonment of your Peiping residence or an altering of the existing status of our establishments in Peiping. (b) As to action: In light of the above and communications that have preceded, Department feels that special pains should be taken by Embassy as is being done by the Department to avoid any implication and discourage any inference that your impending occupation of house in Nanking constitutes a change of the Ambassador's seat of residence from Peiping to Nanking. It should be generally understood that your residing at Nanking for a portion of the year is simply for the purpose of facilitating the performance of your official functions and does not alter the character or location of our Embassy establishment. It seems desirable that nothing be said or done suggesting a distinction between or fixity of the periods of time which the Ambassador will spend in residence in either Peiping or Nanking, for instance, mention of "permanence" or a given number of months or a season in connection with either. HULL 124.93/334: Telegram The Secretary of State to the Ambassador in China (Johnson) WASHINGTON, August 28, 1936-5 p. m. 210. Reference your 415, August 25, 1 p. m. Department's 204, August 22, 1 p. m., was for your information and guidance and should not be construed as implying anything not stated in its text. It gives you in the first three numbered paragraphs new and latest information and was occasioned by the developments reported in its paragraph 1 and in the fifth and following words of its paragraph 3. Please reread carefully, especially first sentence of paragraph 3 and last sentence of paragraph 4, the latter of which sentences applies to all that precedes it in that telegram. See also Department's 209, August 28, 4 p. m. Department is glad to have all the information given in your telegram under reference. HULL 701.4193/83 The Ambassador in China (Johnson) to the Secretary of State No. 704 PEIPING, September 11, 1936. [Received October 5.] SIR: I have the honor to refer to the last sentence of paragraph 4 of the Department's telegram No. 204 of August 22, 1 p. m., instructing me to inform the British Chargé d'Affaires of the Department's views in regard to the changes contemplated in the diplomatic establishment of the United States in China. I have noted that it is the desire of the Department that there be a frank and continuous exchange of information between my British colleague and myself on this subject and in regard to any contemplated changes in the armed forces of Great Britain and the United States in North China. Bearing this in mind I called on September 3, 1936, on Mr. Howe, the British Chargé d'Affaires ad interim, and I enclose a memorandum of my conversation with him." It will be noted that Mr. Howe stated that the British Government had no intention of changing the status of its Embassy in Peiping; that it was their intention to go on as before with the Ambassador and most of his staff residing in Nanking and the Counselor in Peiping, the latter residing in Nanking when the Ambassador was in residence in Peiping; that even when their new Embassy establishment in Nanking was completed, about 3 or 4 years hence, they expected to continue to use the Peiping residence as a summer Embassy. Respectfully yours, NELSON TRUSLER JOHNSON ATTITUDE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE ON THE EXPORT TO CHINA OF ARMS OR MUNITIONS, INCLUDING MILITARY AIRCRAFT 22 893.113 Airplanes/116 The Secretary of State to the Ambassador in China (Johnson) No. 85 WASHINGTON, January 27, 1936. SIR: Reference is made to despatch No. 99 of September 24, 1935, addressed to the Embassy by the American Vice Consul at Yunnanfu,21 which relates in general to the sale of American aircraft in the Province of Yunnan and in particular to the information communicated to the American Consulate by the French Consulate at Yunnanfu to the effect that the Yunnan Railway will refuse to accept American aircraft and aircraft equipment for delivery at Yunnanfu. 21 Not printed. 22 Continued from Foreign Relations, 1935, vol. 1, pp. 711-738. |