Indiana daily times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1914-1922, 1921-04-18

tiOns. 1t was plainly intimated that II
President Wilson had arrived at such an
understanding regarding zap he differed
in that respect from all the other powers
present.
"OPEN DOOR" POLICY
FOR HER TO DECIDE.
This communication also asserted fat
ly that Japan reserved to herself en-
tirely the matter Of deciding whether
the "open door" policy would be pursued
as regards allowing other powers free
and unhampered access to the island
for cable purposes.
Nor is the imperial government alone
and unsupported in their Interpretation
of the decision" said the japanese reply,
for they are in receipt Of authentic in
formation that the governments of Great
Britain and France being of the same
opinion as the Japanese government, the
latter made statements to that effect
in their replies to the Amirecan note in
November last"
The zap controversy rested until the
Harding Administration came into office
a week later Then Secretary of State
Hughes. on April 8, dispatched his now
famous declaration Of the fundamental
principles of American rights" to the four
great pOwers-Japan. Great Britain.
France and Italy. The notes to the four
great powers were practically identical.
The one sent Great Britain was made
public four days ago. That sent Japan
differed only in that it replied to the
Feb 26 communication and referred to
the previous correspondence regarding
zap.
Secretary Hughes followed a slightly
different track. Whereas the previous
American notes had been devoted largely
TO setting forth what had happened at
Paris, the Hughes note was made up en-
tirely of a clear, firm statement Of funda-
mental rights in the controversy, regard
less of what had happened at Paris.
AMERICA ENTITLED
TO FRUITS OF WAR.
After reasserting the fact that Presi-
dent Wilson had made reservations at
Paris concerning zap, the Hughes note
stated with emphasis that without the
war there could have been no mandates,
and as the United States contributed
equally to the winning of that war;
then the United States is justly entitled
to share the fruits Of the victory, re-
CARELESS of any understandings which
other nations may have reached to the
contrary.
This Government, it was pointed out,
has decidedly not delegated to the SUI
preme council, the League Of Nations or
any other power. the right Of deciding
American questions, or to bind the
United States or to act in behalf of the
United States.
The United States, it was emphatically
stated, cannot consider that 1t has lost
its interest in zap through any action
of the supreme council or the League Of
Nations, and cannot recognize the allo-
80
mandate to Japan"
FRENCH SUPPORT
PROMISED Y. 5.
Japan to date has not replied to the
Hughes note France alone Of the great
powers has replied and her reply, con-
trary to Japans claim Of French sup
port, indicates that she is prepared to
support the American viewpoint.
The American note OF Dec 6. after the
exchange of the brief cablegrams in No
vember, cited three specific instances at
! Paris wherein President Wilson had
given notice that America would make
reservations concerning zap. These were
on April q, at a meeting between VIII
son, Clemenceau and Lloyd George; at a
meeting Of the foreign ministers on April
80, and again at meeting in Mr.. Pin
| chons room (the French foreign minis
teri on May 9.
AT the meeting Of May c." continues
the note, lin the dicussiOn regarding the
/ allotment of mandates In the Pacific, Mr..
| Lloyd George expressed his understand
/ ing that the japanese should receive a
mandate for certain islands north OF the
/ equator. According to the record. Presl-
| dent Wilson consented in principle to
1 this, with an explanatory statement that
with respect to mandates, the policy Of
/ the open door would have to be applied
and that there must be equal opportuni-
| ties for the trade and commerce OF other
members of the league. The Island OF
zap, having been previously cited as a
special case for particular future consid-
Grafton, was not Intended to be included
among the certain islands designated as
available to Japan under mandate"
HAS NO KNOWLEDGE
| OF CERTAIN MEETINGS.
The japanese reply Of Feb. &c said:
| 'In the meetings referred to lin the
American nOtel it must be noted that the
/ imperial delegates were not present at
/ the meetings Of the supreme council on
/ April 81, May and May Z, and IN con-
sequence the imperial government. have
no means of ascertaining what views were
expressed by the American delegates at
| those meetings. Assuming, however, that
ex-Presdent Wilson did in fact give ut
| terance to such views as are ascribed to
| him, this can not warrant the imperial
| government in going beyond asserting as
| a fact that President Wilson or Secretary
Lansing gave it as his opinion
that the island Of zap should be interna-
| tiOnalized or that 1t should not pass into
| the hands of any one power.
"In order to maintain successfully,
| therefore, that the island of zap is not
| included in the mandate territories as
| signed to Japan the imperial government
considers it necessary for the American
| government to prove not merely the
fact that the particular line of views
was stated at the meetings, but also that
the meeting decided in favor of those
views.
/ CANNOT AGREE ON
SUCH VAGUE GROUND"
This conclusion Is the more irrefuta-
bic since the imperial delegation never
| expressed their agreement-with the
above stated views of President Wilson
or Mr.. Lansing.
ITO sum- up, the imperial government
cannot agree in giving an extraordinary
and unusual Interpretation to the deci-
sion on a vague ground that certain
thoughts and intentions not expressed
| in the text thereof existed in the minds
| of the delegate of one power only"