The New York herald., 1921-04-19
Toxic Bluntly Refuses to
Yield and Denies Reser-
vatiOn on Island.
HINTS AT BAD FAITH
Note Given Out Which In
spired Hughes's Stand on
Americas Interests.
NEW REPLY rs AWAITED
MikadO's Position Difficult, as
France Favors Position
Of Washington.
'EW REPLY rs AWAITED
Special Despatch 10 THE NEW Yoxx HE,ALp
Now York Herald Burenu,
Washington, ID. c., April 1S.

SPecSdt Despatch 10 THE NEW YORK HEnALD.
Now York Herald Bureau,
Washington. ID. c.. April 1s.
Release to-day OF the text of recent
correspondence between the United
States and Japanese Governments
concerning the island of zap is a plain
revelation Of deadlock. Japan not only
refuses to meet the United States half
way but rather truculently intimates
that the American argument was con-
ceived in bad faith.
The spirit and tenor OF the Japa-
nese replies obviously are disturbing
and displeasing to this Government.
This blunt phrasing has aroused COM
ment.
On the one hand is the American
attitude laid down by Secretary Colby
and greatly broadened and strength
ened by Secretary Hughes that not
only was the supreme council OF the
Allies without authority to hand over
the former German possession of Yap
10 Japan without the consent of the
United States but that an express
reservation actually was made by
President Wilson and Secretary Lam
sing looking toward international con-
troll OF the island and that the United
States will maintain both fact and
principle.
on the other hand, Is the Japanese
attitude contradicting the American
assertion and maintaining the stand
that the supreme council made final
decision on May Z. 1919, to give 10
Japan the mandate over all German
islands north OF the equator and that
Japan would not be able to consent TO
any proposal reversing the decision OF
tho supreme council. which would ex-
c,ude the island of Yap from the terri
tory committed to it's charge.
Japan's Reply n AstonishfnE.
To this argument japan adds
comment that has produced astonish-
ment here: !.
.Jt rnnst also be remembered that u
aao;s,on IN favor OF the exclusion OF
The island Of Yap--a question OF sraNe
concern to Japan. and one on wnicn tiie
,.>o,ose delegates invariably main
tanned q firm attitude-had really oeen
made az is implied By the argument ot
The United States Government. at the
meeting OF May :. 1919, at Which Japan
was not represented. It could not out
hava been regarded as an act OF en-
tireiy bad faith"
~
note sent by the American state De-
partment on December theories ad-
vancsd by the United states are referred
70 as Extraordinary. even unreason-
able. in which no one would De nkeiy
10 concur" And similar ueno oi
American argument In the same note is
characterized as wholly at variance
with the facts. and cannot be thought
hy any one 70 be convincing"
II was to this Reputation Of the Amer
lean position TO which Secretary Hughes
replied on April in the note which de-
yeloped the American situation far be-
yond the question OF zap and asserted
that the United states would not ac-
cede TO mandates that involved the ex-
,inction Of rights that were not aban-
doned az Paris.
IN the whole correspondence there are
.p-o basic points One Is a question OF
.act-did or did not President Wilson
make reservation in the case OF fap'
reservation which supports the post
ton Of the United states to-day The
second is question OF principle-Was
II in the power OF the supreme counci
10 turn over TO japan or 70 any otner
country the absolute title 70 territory
i mere American rights are involved
without the consent OF the United states
Government? The entire controversy
boils down to these two things.
ou..,,op Of Fact Eliminated.
AZ regards the first Il Is authorita-
lively stated that the present Govern
ment does not recognize there is any
fact 10 be determined. In It's point of
view all questions Of fact was settled
when the President OF the United States
iuet before he gave way TO his successor
made the unqualified statement that
reservation in the case OF zap had been
entered with the Supreme Council That
closes the question OF fact 50 Tar as this
Government Is concerned. II VIII not
argue the matter. The testimony OF
PreEideni w llbDI anu GNNA'A1As 1shS'@
meets the point squarcly.
A regards the two Mr. Hughes ~ the
only one note OF his authorship. the
last OF the series. the note now referred
10 as new bill OF American rights,
sent simultaneously 10 all the Allies,
stands squarely and entirely. Hts po-
sition ia founded solely upon principle
and legality. He Ignores the question
OF fact. emphasized by japan, whether
a reservation actually Was mads IS
having been settled by the former Gov.
ernnient and az ~ no real conesequence
IN the controversy.
lie takes the stand that there could
be no valid disposal of former Germsr
territory without the assent Of the
Uni'ed states as one Of the victors Over
Germany: that the United states never
vested the Supreme Council with au-
thority 70 bind tho United states on any
decision whatever; that IN attempt TO
Corft,,ned on Second Page.