893.796 Curtiss/26: Telegram The Secretary of State to the Minister in China (MacMurray) WASHINGTON, April 6, 1929—1 p. m. 121. Your 263, April 4, 8 p. m.99 Department in conversations with representatives of Curtiss 1 project took the position that it had no objection to exportation of commercial planes and it informally approved in principle the Company's cutlined intention to compete for a commercial contract. The Department and the Company did not enter into any agreement. The Department subsequently approved application for license to export four planes for "demonstration of airplanes in China." The proposal now presented amounts to a request that the Department expressly approve rental or sale of planes for what is obviously a military purpose. In view of the Agreement of 19192 and the Executive Order of 1922, the Department can give no approval and cannot allow itself to be associated with this particular proposed transaction. Department is so informing Curtiss Company. You will so inform its representatives. STIMSON 893.796 Curtiss/43: Telegram The Secretary of State to the Minister in China (MacMurray) WASHINGTON, May 15, 1929-6 p. m. 161. Your 365, May 9, 9 a. m.* 1. Department communicated to representative of Aviation Exploration, Incorporated, substance of report by the American Consul at Nanking and has received following written statement from C. M. Keys, Chairman of Board of that company: "It is the intention of our group to use Chinese aviators to the fullest possible extent from the very beginning of this enterprise. We have already had a canvass made which indicates that there will be available a substantial number of such pilots, either completely or partially trained.” 2. Transmit this statement to Price 5 with instruction that he discreetly convey it as from the company to such Chinese authority as he sees fit, but that he is in no way to involve himself with an implication of agency or as a spokesman for the company. se Not printed. STIMSON 1 The Curtiss Aeroplane Export Corporation, Garden City, L. I., and New York, and the Aviation Exploration, Inc. (Del.), New York. See note dated May 5, 1919, from the Senior Minister in China to the Chinese Minister for Foreign Affairs, Foreign Relations, 1919, vol. I, p. 670. See proclamation No. 1621 by President Harding, March 4, 1922, ibid., 1922, vol. I, p. 726. 'Not printed. Ernest B. Price, Consul at Nanking. 893.113 Chance Vought Corp./4 The Secretary of State to the Consul at Nanking (Adams)* WASHINGTON, October 12, 1929. SIR: The Department refers to your telegram of October 5, noon, and the Department's reply thereto of October 5, 6 p. m., relating to the request of the Mayor of Nanking that you obtain from the Vought Chance [sic] Corporation price quotations for ten two-seated bombing planes. In amplification of the Department's telegraphic instruction referred to above, you are informed that the Department commends you for your evident desire to promote the purchase in your district of goods of American manufacture, and that the reason for the Department's preference that messages of the sort involved in this case be sent by the agent of the American firm direct to his principals is to be found in the circumstance that the goods involved are munitions of war. The Department has announced that it will issue licenses for the exportation of arms and munitions of war from the United States to China upon the fulfillment of certain conditions, the basic one being that the Chinese Government shall communicate through its representative at Washington a request for such exportation, but the Department does not desire that the impression be created abroad that this Government is attempting, through its officers, to stimulate the purchase of munitions of war by the Chinese authorities. As you are aware, there is in force a proclamation by the President which forbids the exportation of arms and munitions of war to China, subject to such exceptions and limitations as shall be prescribed by the Secretary of State. 9 The procedure authorized by the Department as stated above constitutes an exception, prescribed under the authority of the proviso. It is as far as the Department is at this time prepared to go. The Department is of the opinion that active participation by its officers in efforts to promote or to effect purchases of arms or munitions of war by the Chinese Government would be inconsistent with the intent of the Proclamation; and the Department desires in no way to be associated with efforts of Chinese Provincial or Municipal authorities, except as these may have the express and properly indicated approval of the National Government, to purchase arms. I am [etc.] For the Secretary of State: * By instruction No. 1380, October 16, the Minister in China was requested to inform American consular officers in China of the contents of this instruction (893.113 Chance Vought Corp. /5). 7 Neither printed. See telegram No. 313, September 20, to the Minister in China, p. 532. i.e., of March 4, 1922. REDUCTION OF AMERICAN ARMED FORCES IN CHINA 893.0146/97 : Telegram 10 The Secretary of State to the Minister in China (MacMurray) WASHINGTON, January 2, 1929-6 p. m. 2. Your 894, December 24, 5 p. m.11 On December 22 Commanderin-Chief Asiatic Fleet 12 was authorized to withdraw the marine forces from Tientsin on transport Henderson latter part of January, first transferring from those forces sufficient men to bring Shanghai regiment and Legation Guard to full strength. Department regrets that you were not informed in due course. KELLOGG 893.0146/108 The Minister in China (MacMurray) to Brigadier General Smedley D. Butler, Commanding Third Brigade, United States Marines, Tientsin 13 PEKING, January 8, 1929. MY DEAR GENERAL BUTLER: It is with very keen regret that I regard the departure from Tientsin of you and of the regiments of the Third Brigade that have been on duty there. There has been at all times the fullest and most helpful cooperation with the Legation on your part; and I am convinced that the presence of the Brigade, particularly during the crises of 1927 and 1928 at Tientsin, was a decisive factor in averting dangers to American and other foreign lives and interests such as might otherwise have arisen in the acute situations existing during those two summers. Not only have the Marines under your command maintained a standard of discipline surprising even to those familiar with the fine traditions of the Corps; but the friendly contacts they have cultivated with the Chinese authorities and people have been such as to make them an asset rather than a necessary liability to the work of the Legation in the maintenance of good relations with the Chinese. I am for my part heartily grateful, as well as proud of the splendid record the Marines under your command have made in the present difficult times in China; and I take this occasion to acknowledge my appreciation and to convey to you and to the Third Brigade my warmest good wishes for the future. Yours, very sincerely, J. V. A. MACMURRAY 10 For previous correspondence, see Foreign Relations, 1928, vol. 1, pp. 309 ff. "Not printed. 12 Admiral Mark L. Bristol. 13 Copy transmitted to the Department by the Minister in his despatch No. 1848, January 10; received February 16, 1929. 893.0146/107: Telegram The Secretary of State to the Minister in China (MacMurray) WASHINGTON, February 7, 1929—8 p. m. 55. Navy Department gives advance information that, subject to there being no objection by the Department of State and subject to conditions in China, it plans to withdraw from China waters the three light cruisers on April 25 and not to replace them. Reply has been made that no objection is at present perceived. KELLOGG 893.0146/117: Telegram The Secretary of State to the Minister in China (MacMurray) WASHINGTON, April 24, 1929-5 p. m. 135. Department's #2, January 2, 6 p. m. Commander-in-Chief Asiatic Fleet is being asked by Secretary of Navy for his opinion as to advisability under present conditions of withdrawing all or part of marines now stationed in Shanghai. Department would like to have your opinion regarding this. Opinion here is that marines should be evacuated unless there is some controlling reason why they should remain. STIMSON 893.0146/118 The Secretary of State to the Secretary of the Navy (Adams) WASHINGTON, April 30, 1929. SIR: I have the honor to refer to a conversation between Admiral Hughes, Mr. Jahncke, Assistant Secretary of the Navy, and Mr. Clark, Under Secretary of State, which took place on April 23, at which there was discussed the possibility of withdrawing the force of United States Marines now stationed at Shanghai, China. In the course of that conversation the Department was informed that the Navy Department was asking the opinion of the Commander-in-Chief of the Asiatic Fleet and it was suggested that this Department should ask the opinion of the American Minister at Peking. I telegraphed to the Minister, asking for his opinion, and I stated that it was felt here that the marines should be withdrawn unless there appeared some controlling reason why they should remain at Shanghai. I have now received from the American Minister, under date April 26, a telegram 14 in which he states that, in view of the 14 Not printed. ATTITUDE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE REGARDING CHINESE COMPLAINTS AGAINST MEMBERS OF THE AMERICAN ARMED FORCES IN CHINA 411.93 Yen Cheng-hsin, heirs of/15 The Secretary of State to the Chargé in China (Perkins) No. 1417 WASHINGTON, December 5, 1929. SIR: With further reference to the Legatior's despatch No. 1086 of June 6, 1927,25 regarding the possible transfer of jurisdiction to the United States Court for China of cases of importance involving charges by Chinese against members of the armed forces of the United States in China and the Department's instruction in reply No. 938, dated July 30, 1928,25 the Department has noted the statement in the Legation's despatch No. 1857 of January 10, 1929,2 regarding the Streinz case, that until some such way is found out of the present unhappy situation, similar cases will continually arise which will further prejudice Chinese-American relations. 26 25 The Department has given further consideration to this general subject in connection with the Streinz case and your comments thereon. It considers that, while the transfer of jurisdiction in this and similar cases to the United States Court for China might possibly prove of advantage, such a transfer of jurisdiction does not seem to be the only method by which an amelioration of the situation may be effected. The Department believes that with greater attention and closer cooperation on the part of the American officials concerned many of the objections felt by the Chinese may be met, even though the present system of trial by courts martial be continued. It may be assumed that the American naval authorities will be glad, if the matter is called to their attention in each instance, to make special effort to afford the least possible ground for criticism by the Chinese of the conduct of trials of naval personnel or of the judgments rendered. To this end it is desirable that the consular officers in China cooperate promptly and fully with the naval authorities, especially in the matter of obtaining the presence of complainants and witnesses. This and related subjects were discussed with Admiral McVay at the Department and it is hoped that you will go into the subject fully with him in order that he may clearly understand the attitude of the Department and the Legation in the matter and may take such steps as may be necessary to ensure the cooperation of American naval officers with the consular officers in China in an endeavor to meet the legitimate desires of the Chinese authorities with regard to the conduct of courts martial in which Chinese interests are involved. 25 Not printed. 20 Death of a Chinese sampan owner resulting from wounds received in altercation with an enlisted man of the U. S. Navy. |