Foreign Relations of the United States Diplomatic Papers, 1937, The Far East, Volume IV

394.115 Panay/170: Telegram

The Secretary of State to the Ambassador in Japan (Grew)

Washington, December 22, 1937—4 p.m.

368. Your 668, December 22, 11 a.m.

1. Department has not yet received report of findings. We have, however, reports and accounts by various survivors, both officers and civilians, which are in accord regarding important facts although showing some discrepancies in regard to minor and unessential details. None of these casts doubt in any way on the statement of essential facts made in the first sentence of the second paragraph of the note which you delivered under instruction of Department’s 342, December 13, 8 p.m.,⁹⁵ and all of them support and confirm the view supplementarily expressed in Department’s 350, December 16, 1 p.m.⁹⁶

2. It is evident that the Japanese authorities in the course of their investigation have discovered that the essential facts are as this Government has stated them; that they have encountered great diversity of testimony by their own people with regard to certain details; that they have been distracted from the main issues by a controversy over the question whether Japanese Army surface craft did or did not machine-gun the Panay; and that they are having contention among themselves, in view especially of that controversy, over the question of action which they should take by way of punishment and by way of giving assurances. But, this Government’s statement of what it requests and expects was made and will stand without regard to the question of the machine-gunning; it was based on the essential facts. Before either they or we had the later details, the Japanese Government had admitted fault and had promised appropriate action.

3. We have already what to us is conclusive evidence that before the attacks were ended some of the bombing planes should have known that they were bombing American vessels; that at least one and probably two Japanese Army launches approached the Panay and engaged in some firing; that personnel from at least one such launch boarded the Panay after its abandonment; and that planes machine-gunned survivors. We believe that, notwithstanding conflicting testimony and contentions by their own people, the Japanese authorities must be fully aware of these facts.

4. We have proceeded on the principle of not entering into controversy with the Japanese Government over the details. Such controversy would tend merely to obscure the main issues, with regard to which the substantial facts are clear and undisputed. Among these facts are: our ships were on the river by right; Japanese military authorities knew that they were there and knew their approximate location; the ships were clearly marked with American flags both in horizontal and in vertical positions; Japanese naval planes bombed them at, ultimately, low altitudes; Japanese surface craft approached them, fired upon something, boarded the Panay and found her abandoned; and Japanese planes machine-gunned survivors. Both in the whole incident and in its parts Japanese armed forces committed offenses warranting the representations which this Government has made and calling for prompt making of full amends by the Japanese Government.

5. Information has just come that report of findings of Court of Inquiry will be sent soon from Shanghai in clear. Upon receipt thereof, Department will send you comments.⁹⁷ Meanwhile, in case you receive a copy direct, please have in mind Department’s view and suggestion as to procedure, namely, that in pressing this Government’s contention, while and although we should not refuse to talk about details, we should avoid argument thereover and should base our case on the undisputed essential facts, which facts by themselves more than suffice in warrant of our position.

Hull

95. Foreign Relations, Japan, 1931–1941, vol. i, p. 523.
96. Ibid., p. 527.
97. See Department’s telegram No. 371, December 23, 7 p.m., to the Ambassador in Japan, Foreign Relations, Japan, 1931–1941, vol. i, p. 541; for the findings, see telegram of December 23 from the Commander in Chief of the U. S. Asiatic Fleet, ibid., p. 542.