American Legation,
Peking, August 9,
1906.
No. 370.]
Viscount Hayashi’s statements are, you will note, in absolute agreement
with those which have at various times been made to me by Japanese
officials or foreigners in whose opinions and judgment I could place
confidence.
[Inclosure.]
viscount hayashi on manchuria.
His excellency, Viscount Hayashi, interviewed by a representative of
the Jiji Shimpo, is reported to have said that Japan intends to
adhere strictly to the policy of equal opportunity for all in
Manchuria, and that she does not contemplate, and never did
contemplate, the granting of exclusive advantage to any nationals
whether her own or other. Of course, during the war Manchuria, being
in military occupation, could not possibly be thrown open to trade.
Even after peace was concluded there remained nearly a million and a
quarter of combatant and noncombatant Japanese subjects in that
region, all of whom had to be supplied with food and other
necessaries from home, and the duty of carrying out such a work
absorbed the means of communication so that free access for
commercial commodities in general was out of the question. This,
however, was an exceptional and temporary state of affairs and
simultaneously with its removal the place would be thrown open. It
might be affirmed publicly that Manchuria, so far as concerned the
parts originally in Japanese occupation, could be completely thrown
open to all nations at about the beginning of September. Only those
that were unacquainted with the facts could entertain any doubt
under such circumstances. The truth was that according to treaty
Japan might have continued in military occupation until next April.
Nobody could have questioned her right to do so. But, on the
contrary, she has employed extraordinary expedition to repatriate
her troops and prepare for the restoration of civil administration,
and if she succeeds in opening southern Manchuria by the beginning
of September that will be seven months earlier than the date
conventionally fixed for evacuation. In the presence of such
celerity the world, instead of doubting Japan’s intentions, ought to
be thankful for her efforts. It is, of course, possible that
Japanese may have sold to the Chinese inhabitants of Manchuria some
of the goods imported nominally for the use of the troops. That kind
of thing is more or less inevitable; no precautions would suffice to
prevent it, especially amid conditions such as accompany the
evacuation of territory by great armies. The Japanese Government’s
desire is not to lose a day in throwing open the whole of Manchuria,
but every one must understand that there are many preparations
necessarily precedent to such a consummation, as, for example, the
organization of civil administration, courts of law, and so forth.
These matters could not be arranged in a day. The
[Page 217]
long and short of the matter is that
if any foreigner entertains a feeling of dissatisfaction about
Japan’s proceedings in Manchuria, his mood must be attributed solely
to ignorance of the real facts of the case.
You may mention in this context that, according to the Yorozu Choho,
a representative of which seems to have interviewed Doctor Morrison
at Antung on the 13th instant, The Times’ correspondent dissents
radically from those who entertain suspicions about Japan’s policy
in Manchuria. Doctor Morrison’s observations lead him to conclude
that Japan is leaving no stone unturned to win the sympathy and
approval of the powers.
