102.22/7–1049: Telegram
The Ambassador in China (Stuart) to the Secretary of State
[Received July 10—1 p. m.]
1470. [To Shanghai:] Embassy following difficulties with ex-Navy employees [with] closest attention and sympathy and has been endeavoring devise some helpful course action (Contel 2643 to Department [Page 1224] July 7). Embassy offers following suggestions for Consulate General’s reference wherever they may appear useful. Following points should be impressed on authorities:
- (1)
- Members Consulate General as individuals have no responsibilities either to Navy or to Navy employees.
- (2)
- Consulate General as organization is merely channel for transmission requests to US Government and agency to execute Government’s instructions.
- (3)
- Claims of Navy employees must be presented in orderly and proper form if Consulate General is to receive and transmit them. Mob action neither orderly nor proper, particularly if bonus is requested as gratuity.
- (4)
- If bonus is demanded as obligation, Navy employees have 2
conceivable avenues approach:
- (a)
- Court action, which, however, not available since Consulate General as agency US Government exempt for jurisdiction and claims against US Government likewise outside jurisdiction.
- (b)
- Approach by local authorities on behalf Chinese nationals.
If Consulate General’s attempts settle directly with claimants are finally unsuccessful and it becomes evident that bonus is demanded as US Government obligation, claimants’ only lawful recourse is to request local authorities act their behalf in pressing claims against US Navy as agency foreign government. Therefore if authorities consider these claims factually and legally justifiable it is their duty to Chinese nationals to act as their sole representatives and not as mere mediators.
Finally it should be presented most clearly and forcibly to highest available local authorities that obligation to prevent violence rests on them and not on Consulate General. If they should permit violence to occur it would demonstrate unequivocally that they do not intend fulfill their oft-repeated pledges protect property persons foreigners.
Sent Shanghai 819, repeated Department 1470.