THE FAR EASTERN CRISIS



in the United States, I had observed from London press dispatches
that the press of England was generally critical of this phase of Sir
John's statement. The Ambassador said that that was another mat-
ter which he was not dealing with, but that he was making his inquiry
of me with respect to American sentiment and especially the state of
mind of the State Department. I again told him that all in all the
Department was not and had not been exercised about the matter; that
England being more interested materially in the Orient than the
United States, it was her fullest privilege to treat the Japanese pub-
licity as her judgment thought best; that it was true all of the gov-
ernments signatory to treaties operative especially in the Orient were
in the same boat with respect to their observance; that I myself felt
that since none of the countries such as Great Britain and the United
States were planning pronouncements in any event that would call
for the use of force, unequivocal and clearcut statements from each
government relative to their rights, interests, and obligations, in the
Orient-such statements being made separately and independently by
each of the governments-would offer the best possible method of deal-
ing with these Japanese utterances by arousing the moral sentiment of
the world; that I would have been delighted if each of the govern-
ments signatory to such treaties had thus spoken out, but unfortun-
ately only Great Britain, the United States and France had done so.
The Ambassador said that it was thoroughly justifiable for Sir John
Simon to insert the exceptional clause in his statement about the rights
of Japan. My reply to this was that in stating a broad fundamental
position relating to the rights, interests and obligations of all the na-
tions signatory to the treaties involved, there was not any occasion
whatever for singling out some one of numerous, purely minor or local
conditions for the purpose of making an exception in favor of Japan
and in favor of Japan's alleged rights.
  The Ambassador seemed entirely content when I stated to him that
this government was not exercised or disposed seriously to complain
at the particular or exceptional clause above referred to in Sir John
Simon's statement.
                                               C [ORDELL] H [ULL]

793.94/6685
  The Amnbas8ador in Great Britain (Bingham) to the Secretary
                            of State

No. 686                                     LONDON, May 7, 1934.
                                              [Received May 16.]
  SIR: I have the honor to refer to the Department's telegraphic in-
struction No. 176, May 2, 4 p. m., asking for an analysis of the British



165