90 years ago today.... (9-18-31)

103

Brooklyn Eagle (September 26, 1931)

Tokyo vetoes plan for independent Manchuria states

Denies seeking land – Canton student in anti-Japanese meeting

TOKIO (AP) – Tokio officials said today two separate movements had been proposed for independent states in Manchuria, but that neither was countenanced by Japanese authorities.

The Chinese delegation was represented as desirous of making Mukden the capital of a state independent of China and of assuming the political power of Chang Hsueh-liang, governor of Manchuria and high official of the Chinese Nationalist regime at Nanking.

Authorities said the Mongolians would like to make Khailar, a small city near the convergence of the Manchurian, Siberian and Mongolian borders, as their capital, such as was proposed in 1929 after the Russian penetration of western Manchuria during the Chinese Eastern Railway dispute with China.

Tokio officials said both the Chinese and Mongolian delegations had been informed that Japan would not support the movements under any circumstances. Japan disclaims any territorial aspirations toward Manchuria.

Students stage protest

CANTON, China (AP) – At an indignation meeting here yesterday Canton students advocated the severance of all relations with Japan as the result of recent events in Manchuria. The students asked that all Japanese leave the country and that was be declared on Japan.

Briton charges attack

PEIPING, China (AP) – J. G. Thomson, British general manager of the Peiping-Mukden Railroad, reported today that Japanese airplanes had fired on a passenger train on which he and his family were riding.

104

The Pittsburgh Press (September 26, 1931)

League spurns China’s appeal

Feels Manchurian dispute should be settled by Oriental countries

GENEVA (UP) – China’s appeal to the League of Nations council to intervene in Manchuria due to a threat of war remained unanswered today as the council adjourned to allow private discussions of the Manchurian situation.

Lord Cecil of England said the council had fulfilled its duties under Article XI of the League covenant, by which the League may be asked to intervene to prevent “war or the threat of war” between League members. He agreed with Kenkichi Yoshizawa, head of the Japanese delegation, that the duty of settling the dispute rested with China and Japan.

Diplomatic circles regarded the League’s efforts so far as favorable to Japan. If it is impossible for Japan and China to settle their differences, however, China may appeal to the League under Article XV of the covenant, by which League members may submit for settlement disputes which are not settled by arbitration or judicial means.

Alejandro Lerroux, Spanish foreign minister and president of the council, appealed to Japan to withdraw her troops within the South Manchurian Railway zone as rapidly as possible. Yoshizawa told the council earlier that withdrawal was virtually complete.

Dr. Alfred Sze, head of the Chinese delegation, in an impassioned speech, told the council that in view of the Japanese military invasion of Chinese territory “direct negotiations are absolutely impossible.” Sze was visibly moved. China, he said, had not resisted the Japanese invasion and had hoped to avoid conflict by placing her trust in the League.

It was obvious that neither China nor Japan would retreat from their respective positions. Japan continued for settling the dispute by direct negotiations, while China sought advantage of her membership in the League council, achieved after three years for the primary purpose of using membership to settle disputes with Jaapn.

105

U.S. State Department (September 27, 1931)

793.94/1902: Telegram

The Consul General at Nanking to the Secretary of State

Nanking, September 27, 1931 — 5 p.m.
[Received September 27 — 3:20 p.m.]

73.

  1. Dr. Lee, Vice Minister for Foreign Affairs, called this morning to tell me that reports from Chinese official sources at Geneva were to the effect that the wording of the communications of the American Government to the Japanese and Chinese Governments came as a surprise to some members of the League Council and that whereas there had been marked enthusiasm for an attempted adjustment of the Sino-Japanese controversy through League agency this enthusiasm noticeably waned when the attitude taken by the United States became known.

  2. Lee also said that Chinese leaders have been taken aback by lack of any specific reference in the partial note to the Washington Conference treaties or the Kellogg Pact.

  3. Lee referred to Japanese official assurances published in the press that Japanese troops were being withdrawn and military offensives had ended. He said that official Chinese reports from Manchuria were that the scope of Japanese military occupation was being extended and that activities such as the bombing of trains were being continued if not intensified.

PECK

106 
793.94/2141

The Chinese Chargé to the Secretary of State

Washington, September 27, 1931.

Sir: I have the honor to inform you that I am instructed to communicate to you the reply of the Chinese Government to the note of the American Government dated September 24, 1931, as follows:

The Chinese Government received yesterday afternoon the communication from the American Government regarding the present situation in China, transmitted from Peiping by the American Minister to China.

The Chinese Government and people are gratified to learn that the Government and people of the United States, feeling themselves much interested in the situation created in China by the action of Japanese troops, desire that principles and methods of peace, instead of armed force, should be used in the relations between China and Japan, as between any other civilized states. It is the conviction of the Chinese Government that, in addressing its notes to the Chinese and Japanese Governments, (that) the American Government has been prompted by the earnest desire to uphold, as one of the signatory powers, the sanctity of those international treaties, particularly the Treaty for the Renunciation of War signed at Paris in 1928, which bind the parties not to have recourse to war but to use pacific means in their relations with one another.

As a result of the aggressive movements of the Japanese troops, our territory has been invaded, our cities and towns have been occupied, and in certain cases ransacked, our public officers and innocent citizens have been injured, insulted and murdered. Even on the very day when the American Government dispatched its identic notes to the Chinese and Japanese Governments, advising restraint from further hostilities, Chinese passenger trains carrying refugees on the Peiping-Liaoning (Peking-Mukden) Railway were attacked by bombs and machine gun fire from Japanese military aeroplanes, which resulted in many casualties. Thus, while the Japanese Government declares that it has taken all measures to prevent the aggravation of the situation and that the troops will be forthwith withdrawn from the occupied areas, (and) free acts of war are still being committed by the Japanese troops. In spite of such circumstances, the entire Chinese nation has been exhorted to maintain a dignified calm, in the belief that the delinquent party will render a full account for its wanton acts to all the civilized states, under the principle of the sanctity of international treaties for the maintenance of peace.

The Chinese Government can conceive no other way to satisfy the requirements of international law and international agreements, when international law and international agreements have already been trampled under foot, than for Japan to withdraw her troops immediately and completely from the occupied areas and to give full redress to the aggrieved party, the Chinese Government and the Chinese people.

It is the earnest hope of the Chinese Government that most effective means will be promptly taken for maintaining the dignity and inviolability of the international treaties above referred to, so that all efforts heretofore made by the various powers, especially by the United States for the preservation of peace, might not be in vain.

Accept [etc.]

YUNG KWAI

107

The Pittsburgh Press (September 27, 1931)

Chinese flee ‘war’ zones

Thousands of destitute refugees escape from Manchurian front

map.manchuria.927

PEIPING (UP, Sept. 26) – Thousands of refugees streamed into Peiping from the “war” zones of Manchuria today. Hundreds were destitute. They roamed the narrow streets of the ancient capital seeking shelter and food.

Railways and roads leading from Manchuria were filled with fleeing men, women and children. Renewed clashes were feared between Japanese and Chinese forces. Peasants and small shop owners deserted their stores and sought safety within the Great Wall of China.

Tense anti-Japanese feeling here was heightened by reports that Japanese Army planes had bombed three passenger trains south of Mukden. A communique from Chinese Army headquarters said Japanese airplanes flew low over the trains and opened fire with machine guns, endangering lives of non-combatants.

Marshal Chang Hsueh-Liang, youthful ruler of the three provinces in Manchuria, remained calm and refused to permit his men to resist.

The northeast arsenal outside Mukden was ablaze today, flames threatening to destroy the plant, one of the largest in the world.

Thousands of Chinese are employed in the arsenal, which turns out shells, mortars, field guns, bombs and other modern war equipment.

Simms: U.S. alarmed by war threat in Manchuria

By William Philip Simms, Scripps-Howard foreign editor

WASHINGTON (Sept. 26) – Washington and other world capitals are watching the Far East with grave apprehension, unrelieved by what, for the moment, appears to be signs of peace.

Three nations have locked horns over Manchuria, the cockpit of Asia, and another bloody conflict seems inevitable before the question of supremacy is finally settled.

China possesses the province, rich in farm lands and minerals, but Russia and Japan already have fought one war over it and today another is in prospect as China stubbornly opposes Japan’s encroachments.

Japan, holding all South Manchuria, is steadily pushing northward. The South Manchurian Railway is owned by the Japanese government. Other lines, also owned by Japan, branch out from it, and Japanese control goes with them.

With an angry frown, China is watching this process of penetration. She is convinced Japan intends to stay, and Japanese spokesmen admit that, having fought Russia for a foothold at a cost of 100,000 lives and a billion dollars, she will fight another to hold it.

It is merely a question of time before it comes to a head. China, growing stronger all the time, some day will attempt to oust Japan and Japan will resort to force to prevent being ousted.

Meanwhile, in Tokio, a strange conflict is taking place inside the Japanese government. by constitution the ministers of war and navy are responsible directly to the emperor, not to the premier. They represent the militarists of the country and advocate “strong hand” methods in China.

On the other hand. Premier Wakatsuki and Foreign Minister Shidehara want a policy of peaceful penetration and trade with China. These two factions are battling for the upper hand.

Beyond a doubt the present Japanese aggression in China violates the Kellogg pact, the nine-power treaty to respect China’s territorial integrity and other international obligations. But as it may have been committed by the military leaders without knowledge of the cabinet itself, the United States and the League of Nations prefer to wait to see if the situation will be clarified before resorting to strong language.

Japanese-American relations, moreover, have been delicate in recent years because Congress passed a law excluding Japanese immigrants. There is always a latent hostility in Japan against this country. A stiff note from Washington, while the Japanese cabinet is still fighting to see whether the policy is to be one of peace or war, might tip the scales in favor of the militarists.

Doubtless this situation has influenced both Geneva and Washington in dealing with the Manchurian crisis. There is much at stake. If the military faction wins out, the Kellogg pact, nine-power treaty and all the world’s efforts since the armistice to create an anti-war machine will go by the boards. Mankind will be right back where it was in 1914.

Russia, likewise, has its eyes on the Far East. With China she owns the Chinese Eastern Railway across Northern Manchuria and a spur running southward from Harbin to Chang Chun, where it connects with the Japanese line.

108

U.S. State Department (September 28, 1942)

793.94/1907: Telegram

The Chargé in Japan to the Secretary of State

Tokyo, September 28, 1931 — 3 p.m.
[Received September 28 — noon.]

162.

[Paraphrase]

Your 169 of September 24.

  1. It is not likely that the Japanese Government will now consent to an investigating commission from a third party. Baron Shidehara said as much to me at the time I delivered the note. I believe the Japanese are ready at any time to negotiate with the Chinese directly.

  2. What is in the minds of the Japanese, or at least of those in control in Manchuria, appears to be a settlement there of a number of outstanding issues. Some of these issues are claims, such as the Nakamura case; other issues are broader, such as the status of Koreans in Manchuria, land rights and taxation, and railway construction, and still other issues are borderline questions, such as alleged boycotts, interference with legitimate business of Japanese, etc. It is claimed that seldom have the Japanese been able to arrive at definite understandings concerning any of these matters and that the Chinese in many cases are either unwilling or unable to execute the agreements actually made.

  3. It is believed by many Japanese that the South Manchuria Railway must have extraordinary protection and that at times the property and even the lives of Japanese are endangered. They think the recent Chinese action in destroying, or trying to destroy, a part of this Railway is a sample of what may be expected in South Manchuria. The military authorities and at least part of the Japanese public are convinced that at this time a demonstration was needed of Japan’s will and ability to protect Japanese rights.

  4. The Japanese are determined not to have any contending factions of Chinese in Manchuria. A great many Japanese believe Manchuria would without Japanese troops be given over to bandits, since the Chinese lack public spirit or military discipline. This notion is borne out somewhat by the fact of a small Japanese force being able in a few hours to take charge of Mukden and its famous arsenal despite the alleged proximity of 20,000-odd crack Chinese troops. There were supposed to be more than 60,000 Chinese troops in the Changchun-Kirin area, yet both places were occupied by the Japanese with less than 5,000 soldiers. The Chinese at Mukden and Kirin had many more men than the combined Japanese contingent in Manchuria. My best military information bears out the statement by Japanese that they have not gone beyond the 15,000 men permitted as railway guards. Many Japanese feel that this incident indicates such a degree of indiscipline as to be dangerous if others had to rely upon it, and they intend to make the Chinese realize that legitimate Japanese interests cannot be interfered with by them with impunity. The Japanese wish to obtain assurance, by fear if no other way is open, that Japanese rights will be respected.

  5. To what extent the conservative elements in Japan share this attitude I do not know, but I know Shidehara was in dread of such an incident. I do not believe the Tokyo Foreign Office approves using force now, and I think the big business leaders deem it as a mistake. My information is that Japanese business has already been affected in other parts of China through the cancellation of contracts. This may be due also to a fear of war and to the fact that since the fall of the British pound many lines of goods may be bought in Britain.

  6. If a joint Chinese-Japanese conference can be arranged, I am inclined to think the Japanese delegates would be conciliatory, particularly if the Foreign Office directs them. So far as I can see, there is little chance in any case of getting for the time being any other arrangement from Japan.

Above repeated to Peiping.

NEVILLE

109 
793.94/1904: Telegram

The Minister in China to the Secretary of State

Peiping, September 28, 1931 — 4 p.m.
[Received September 28 — 7 a.m.]

675.

Following two telegrams have just been received from American Consul General at Nanking:

September 28, 10 a.m. I have received eyewitness report that crowd of students from Shanghai and Nanking aggregating more than 2,000 are mobbing the Foreign Office demanding resignation of the Minister of Foreign Affairs because of alleged friendship for Japan, end of policy of nonresistance, and war with Japan.

September 28, 11 a m. My September 28, 10 a.m. Reliable report that the Minister for Foreign Affairs has been so beaten by students and cut with broken glass that he may not live. Presumed to be now with President Chiang. C. T. Wang ignored warning of danger and insisted on remaining at his duty.

JOHNSON

110 
793.94/1905: Telegram

The Chargé in Japan to the Secretary of State

Tokyo, September 28, 1931 — 5 p.m.
[Received September 28 — 9:15 a.m.]

163.

My telegram No. 161, September 25, 7 p.m.

I have just received the following note from the Minister for Foreign Affairs:

I have the honor to acknowledge receipt of your note of September 25 in which you were so good as to convey to me the views of the American Government on the subject of the actual condition of affairs in Manchuria.

The Japanese Government is deeply sensible of the friendly concern and the fairness of views with which the American Government has observed the recent course of events in Manchuria. In common with the hope expressed by the American Government, it has already caused the Japanese military forces in Manchuria to refrain from any further acts of hostility, unless their own safety as well as the security of the South Manchuria Railway and of Japanese lives and property within that railway zone is jeopardized by the aggression of Chinese troops or armed bands. Every care has been, and will continue to be, exercised by the Japanese forces to observe all the requirements of international law and international agreements, and to avoid any action that is calculated to prejudice an amicable settlement of the differences between Japan and China.

The Japanese Government is confident [that] by frank and unimpassioned discussions between the two parties in conflict, in the light of their true and lasting interests, an adjustment will be found to set at rest the existing situation of tension in Manchuria.

The Foreign Office told me that they had communicated it to the Japanese Minister at Washington. It has also been released to the press. Repeated to Peiping.

NEVILLE

111 
793.94/2359

The Consul at Dairen to the Chargé in Japan 

Dairen, September 28, 1931.

Sir: As of possible interest to the Embassy, I venture to make certain observations on the recent Japanese coup in Manchuria.

Circumstances of occupation

Nobody here, not even the Japanese themselves, appears to credit the Japanese claims that the Chinese provoked hostilities and that the Japanese forces acted in self-defence. The very nature of the Japanese measures, punitive from the outset, precludes belief in their self-defensive character. Outside of stereotyped statements for foreign consumption, the local Japanese authorities, residents, and press seem to have forgotten the original charge of Chinese aggression, and look upon the occupation of South Manchuria as a political measure to settle international disputes of long standing.

Anyone familiar with the low level of intelligence and initiative of the Chinese soldier dismisses as absurd the claim that he mined and blew up a railroad bridge and attacked the Japanese soldiers guarding it. Such an enterprise could only have originated and been directed by the high Chinese command, but this theory too cannot be supported with logic. Why would the high Chinese command, knowing the temper of the Japanese Army over the murder (or irregular shooting as a spy) of Captain Nakamura in Eastern Inner Mongolia, challenge Japan and yet be so absolutely unprepared to fight? There appears to be no question about the completeness of the surprise of the Chinese. On the other hand, the evidence that the Japanese had a carefully laid plan of action is overwhelming.

The recent propaganda regarding Japanese injuries in Manchuria conducted by the War Office, the urgent conference in Tokyo of the Supreme Military Council just prior to the occupation, the reported opposition of the Japanese Foreign Minister to the War Office’s “plan for dealing with the Manchurian situation”, the coincidence of the coup with the arrival in Mukden from Tokyo of Colonel Doihara, the special representative in Mukden of the General Staff, the precision and suddenness of military movement, the simultaneous occupation of so many strategic centers, in fact every phase of the incident points to careful preparation in every detail.

Causes of occupation

The cause of the Japanese occupation of South Manchuria is not believed to lie in military men’s indignation over the murder of a fellow officer, or in any one or a cumulation of disputes with the Chinese, although the recurrence of such disputes and their exaggerated publicity made Japanese public opinion favorable to extreme action. The cause is unquestionably of more fundamental character: the growth of Chinese economic and political independence in Manchuria and Japan’s declining influence there. Regarding Manchuria as her special field for capital investment and economic exploitation, Japan has viewed with envy and concern the exclusive economic activity of the Chinese, some of it reserved to her by treaty and some of it actually competitive with her own enterprises. Particularly has she been dismayed over the declining receipts of the South Manchuria Railway in contrast to the prosperity of the new Chinese railroads, and over the dullness of cargo movement in Dairen compared with the relative activity of Newchwang and Chinwangtao. Having a forward political policy also, Japan has with difficulty concealed her displeasure at the increasing liberty of action of the Chinese, such as their adoption of the Nationalist flag and union with Nanking over Japan’s opposition, the construction of railways and harbors to compete with Dairen and the South Manchuria Railway system, and finally the isolation of Dairen from domestic trade by Customs legislation. The occupation of Manchuria is believed to be an effort to halt Chinese control before it becomes absolute, and to establish Japanese political and economic mastery in the region. To sum up my views, the recent coup was deliberately planned to shear the rising Northeastern Government of all power as well as to crush the increasingly dangerous and hostile Northeastern Army, and to clear the way for renewed Japanese economic activity.

Effects of occupation

While it is idle to speculate on the outcome of the Japanese occupation of Manchuria, it is reasonably certain that the Northeastern Government for some time to come will be devoid of any real fiscal, constructive, or administrative power. An important buyer of American construction material and equipment will thus be lost for the time being. American and European firms and banks which have supplied the Northeastern Government with credits may lose sums of money besides. Forwarding agents in Dairen state that up-country import business, which was improving somewhat in anticipation of the winter season, has come to a standstill as a result of consignees’ and dealers’ anxiety over future political developments. The question of specie cover for Northeastern Government banknotes in circulation with the Northeastern Government no longer functioning is also a disturbing thought to merchants. There is no doubt that the Japanese coup has dislocated, for some time at least, well-established and smoothly running economic arrangements in a wide area, and added a small measure to the world’s distress at the moment. On the other hand, the severity of the Japanese Government at this time may give the Chinese authorities a greater sense of responsibility in foreign relations, with ultimate benefits to foreign trade and residents in China.

Respectfully yours,
Wm. R. LANGDON

112

The Pittsburgh Press (September 28, 1931)

Students urge war on Japan

Foreign Minister Wang hurt by group demanding immediate action

NANKING, China (UP) – Foreign Minister C. T. Wang was attacked and seriously wounded today by a group of students demanding war with Japan.

The attack occurred while the foreign minister was en route to his office. Students jumped on his auto and injured him before his chauffeur was able to escape.

The students appeared to hold Wang responsible for China’s policy of appealing to the League of Nations to intervene in the Japanese occupation of Manchuria rather than opening hostilities. Chinese troops in Mukden, on orders of the government, offered no resistance when Japanese troops occupied the city 10 days ago.

The attack on Wang climaxed a week of student demonstrations demanding action against the Nanking regime. Two thousand Shanghai students went to Nanking last night and demanded immediate war against Japan. The city was thrown into confusion before police and troops dispersed the demonstration.

Five thousand students were in the crowd which attacked Wang. The diplomat’s personal servants came to his aid and succeeded in getting him out of the crowd.

Wang was under treatment at the home of Gen. Chiang Kai-Shek, head of the Nationalist government and Wang’s brother-in-law.

Wang is a graduate of the University of Michigan and Yale University. He is the son of an Episcopal clergyman, and one of the most modern of China’s statesmen. His education in the United States made him popular among the large foreign colony in China.

He returned to China in 1911, after receiving an A.B. degree from Yale. He at once became active in the original revolution which overthrew the “Son of Heaven” in Peking. The rebel regime at Canton in 1918 sent him to Washington to seek American recognition – his first assignment in foreign affairs.

He was a member of the Chinese delegation at the Versailles Conference. He then remained out of the limelight until 1928, when he succeeded Dr. C. C. Wu as foreign minister.

113

9 killed in riots against Japanese

HONG KONG (UP) – A state of emergency existed in Hong Kong today after rioting in which six Japanese and three Chinese were killed.

In declaring the existence of an emergency, the government called out British troops to aid the native police.

Trouble started here Saturday when several Japanese shops were stoned and Japanese were attacked. Placards were distributed, urging attacks on Japanese at sight.

114

Japanese resume train bombings

WASHINGTON (UP) – Further hostilities in Manchuria have been reported in official dispatches to the Chinese legation here.

These advices stated a train was derailed late Saturday by Japanese agents south of Mukden with a loss of 30 lives. Among the dead, the messages said, was an Englishman, a Russian and an Indian. The dispatches said the Japanese looted the train and were continuing aerial bombardment of Chinese forces.

115

Editorial: Save the treaties

Unless the U.S. government acts soon to restore the integrity of its treaties in the Manchurian crisis, the peace machinery built up after the travail of the World War will be worthless junk. If that happens, the international situation will indeed be grave.

Settlement of Japan’s war of aggression against China is in itself a serious enough problem. But it is insignificant compared with the larger issue of rescuing the world’s machinery. The State Department, apparently, sees only the first and is partly blind to the second.

For the policy of the State Department seems to be to preserve at all cost the friendship and cooperation of the Shidehara peace group in the Tokio cabinet. That Tokio peace group is trying to curb the Japanese war lords, who have made war against a defenseless neighbor. Under the Japanese system, the war lords are not responsible to the rest of the cabinet, but only to the emperor.

The American public doubtless will appreciate the State Department’s effort to strengthen the hands of the Japanese peace group and to take no unnecessary action which the war party could use to inflame war sentiment. But it is leaning on a very weak reed, when it trusts all to a Tokio government which has proved to be powerless for six days, and which is thus a government more in name than in fact.

The best that the State Department could achieve, under this policy, would be Japanese withdrawal of troops. Meanwhile, there is danger that the worst may happen, that a massacre may occur and give the Japanese war lords their long-sought opportunity for complete and permanent occupation of Manchuria.

Even assuming success of the State Department policy and withdrawal of Japanese troops, that alone will not save the peace treaties.

Japan has violated the nine-power Pacific treaty and the Kellogg pact – not to mention her League of Nations obligations. The only way to keep those treaties alive is for one or more of the signatories, who guarantee those treaties, to take action under those treaties for neutral mediation and settlement.

Otherwise, a precedent has been set by which any nation in the world can violate those treaties without fear of international intervention to preserve peace.

If the United States government cannot make these peace treaties operate – by diplomatic demands, or by economic boycott if necessary – how does it expect the American people or the world to retain any faith in peace treaties and disarmament? We believe these treaties can be made to work. At least, the State Department can try.

116

U.S. State Department (September 28, 1931)

793.94/1904: Telegram

The Secretary of State to the Consul General at Nanking

Washington, September 28, 1931 — 6 p.m.

80.

Please deliver to Minister for Foreign Affairs as from me the following message:

Reports of attack on you have shocked me and I hasten to express my earnest hope for your speedy recovery.

STIMSON

117 
793.94/1918a: Telegram

The Secretary of State to the Chargé in Japan 

Washington, September 28, 1931 — 6 p.m.

175.

[Paraphrase]

This afternoon I had a talk with Debuchi, in the course of which I said to him that at the present moment our great difficulty lay in the fact that the Department had no adequate information from American representatives regarding the Manchurian situation. With the Consul General at Mukden absent, only a Vice Consul is there. I explained to Debuchi that I must have authentic, full information on the situation in order to answer questions adequately. I told him I should like the Consul General at Harbin, Mr. Hanson, who has long been in and is familiar with Manchuria, to proceed to Mukden and to other places occupied by Japanese troops and to report to me, and I should like Mr. Salisbury of the Tokyo Embassy to join him. The Ambassador responded that he would telegraph immediately to the Foreign Minister and urge that this should be done, once more emphasizing the American Government’s friendly attitude. Debuchi remarked that it would not be an international investigation and that under these circumstances it would appear to be most natural for the American Embassy to request that a member of its staff be allowed to visit Manchuria. Accordingly, I should be glad for you to request Baron Shidehara for permission to send Salisbury there to obtain information for you. You might at the same time tell Shidehara that we wish Hanson to join Salisbury in Manchuria and that it is your hope the Japanese authorities will afford all facilities to Hanson and Salisbury to look into the situation. As to this request you may tell Shidehara there will be no publicity, and it may well be regarded as a routine measure, since there is no trained officer of ours in Mukden at present to report.

Before you see Shidehara, it is important that he receive Debuchi’s telegram, but Debuchi promised to send it immediately and to urge the granting of facilities. If this is to be done, it should be done very promptly.

STIMSON

118

U.S. State Department (September 29, 1931)

793.94/1915: Telegram

The Minister in China to the Secretary of State

Peiping, September 29, 1931 — 10 a.m.
[Received September 29 — 3:30 a.m.]

677.

Your 349, September 28, 11 a.m., received September 29, 9 a.m.

  1. Best available estimate Japanese troops in Manchuria as follows: Regular troops, Second Division: 1 brigade at Changchun, 1 brigade at Kirin, 1 battalion at Tunhua, 1 battalion at Chengchiatun, 1 company at Yinglingkan. Total of Second Division: 7,000 men (Japanese figures); 2 air squadrons, strength unknown. Independent Korean brigade of 3,000 stationed at and near Mukden. Railway guards of 5,000 men (6 battalions). Japanese claim above units on peace footing and figures as above, but Legation’s advice is that 8, 432 men and officers form peace strength division.

It is generally believed that the headquarters of the heavy artillery brigade at Port Arthur and 8 guns entrained for Mukden. Total number of guns not known. Heavy artillery personnel figures not included in above estimate.

  1. With reference to Reservists please see Military Attaché’s report dated June 22, 1931, number 8048, which is believed to be substantially correct. Military Attaché’s estimate is that Japanese Reservists in Manchuria number approximately 30,000. It is now impossible to estimate number of Reservists being used. They were used in the beginning and it is believed that they are still being used although as [sic] they are now [not?] in regular uniform.

JOHNSON

1 Like
119

Good collection of information. You got to wonder in 1931 how many Americans were really concerned about this.

1 Like