UNSATISFACTORY IN SEVERAL RESPECTS

Northern Advocate, 27 December 1937, Page 5

UNSATISFACTORY IN SEVERAL RESPECTS

(Received 10 a.m.) . NEW YORK, December 24. Reports from Washington say, high officials of the administration-indicat-ed that the Japanese Note is unsatisfactory in several important respects. Firstly, it gives no hint that the Foreign Minister, Mr Hirola, has in any way interested himself in what officials at Washington consider the irresponsible act of the military and naval forces operating directly under his authority. Secondly, the contentions that'the act was unintentional and a mistake directly compete with the reports of Commander Hughes and the Naval Court of Inquiry, which have caused the feeling in Washington that the attack was intentional. Future Guarantees. Thirdly, the Note does not mention the machine-gunning of the survivors when making for the shore,, or the machine-gunning of the Panay; Fourthly, the Japanese assurances that American nationals and American property rights and interests in China will hereafter be free from attack, are considered unsatisfactory. Officials point out that the Note admitted that, previously, similar orders given to the Japanese military and naval forces were disregarded, and there is no assurance that the new orders will be more effective. Promise of Indemnification. The Washington correspondent of the “New York Times” states that the reply is satisfactory as regards expressions of regret and promise of indemnification, but it is being particularly studied from the point of view of the third demand, involving guarantees against repetition. The tone of the Note caused general approbation in other quarters in Washington. Several members of Congress said it should be accepted at its face value. They believed the only possible grounds for the State Department continuing its representations would be the wording of the portion concerning safeguards and the conflicts in the versions of the bombing, regarding its accidental phase.