Evening star., 1940-02-04
By LLOYD A. LEHRBAS,
Associated Press Stan Writer.

A "gentleman's agreement" con-
trolled Japanese immigration into
the United States in 1924. But there
were those in Congress who de-
manded a Japanese exclusion act"
putting into law new limitations on
the visits Of Japanese to the United
States.
To the Japanese, such move
seemed an assault on their national
honor, such that the acts passage
would make them "lose face" in the
world.
Masanao Hanihari, the Japanese
Ambassador, visited Charles Evans
Hughes, then Secretary of State, on
March q. 1924, and they discussed
the "gentleman's agreement" and
the bill in Congress to exclude jap
anese.
Mr.. Hughes suggested to Mr.. Hani-
hari that he write letter addressed
to Mr.. Hughes Which would clarity
several points at issue, summarize
the "gentleman's agreement" and
set forth the japanese position.
WanLe0 CldT1HCdtIOH.
Mr.. Hughes memorandum on the
meeting said:
"The Secretary said that he had
an idea-he did not wish to make
a definite proposal-that possibly
the Ambassador could write let
ter to the Secretary referring to
these points and stating that the
gentleman's agreement was con-
tanned in a considerable correspond
ence, but that the Japanese gov
ernment understood its intent and
effect to be as stated"
Through such letter, Mr.. Hughes
said, there was an opportunity to
take the gentleman's agreement out
of obscurity and of voluminous cor
respondence and put the matter in
q simple and direct form"
On April 10, 1924, Mr.. Hanihari
followed Mr.. Hughes advice by writ
ing letter summarizing the gen
tleman's agreement" pointing out
that Japan was living up to its
terms, and protesting against dis
criminatory legislation" (the exclu-
sion bilD which would wound the
national susceptibilities of the jap
anese people," and Offend the ma
tional pride OF friendly nation"
Proper Consideration.
After emphasizing that Japan did
not question the sovereign right Of
any country to regulate its immigra-
ton, but simply asked for that
proper consideration ordinarily given
by one nation to the self-respect
of another" Mr.. Hanihari con-
cluded:
Relying upon the confidence you
have been good enough to show me
at all times, have stated or rather
repeated all this to you very candidly
and in a most friendly spirit, for
I realize, as I believe you do, the
grave consequences which the en-
actment of the measure retaining
that particular provision would in
evitably bring upon the otherwise
happy and mutually advantageous
relations between our countries"
Some members of Congress read
"veiled threat" in this paragraph.
Congress ignored the "gentlemans
agreement" and passed the exclu-
sion bill which was signed into law
by President Coolidge.
Not Considered "Veiled Threat"
Mr. Hughes correspondence shows
that he assured Mr.. Hanihari and
the Japanese government that he
did not consider grave conse-
quences" a "veiled threat" An
other memorandum by Mr.. Hughes,
dated April II, said:
The Secretary said that he had
not any idea that the Ambassador
had intended threat by the Ian
guage used. The Secretary said
that, when he received the note
and read the last paragraph, for
a moment his attention was at
once arrested by the use of the
words grave consequences, but as
he read the context he thought he
saw clearly what the Ambassador
meant felt quite sure that
the Ambassador did not intend any
threat and was very sorry such