740.00119 PW/7–848
Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State for
Occupied Areas (Saltzman) to the United
States Representative on the Far Eastern Commission
(McCoy)
restricted
Washington, July 8,
1948.
With reference to questions raised by various members at the meeting
of the Far Eastern Commission on July 1, 1948 with respect to the
source and substance of articles appearing in Japanese newspapers
and dealing with the deliberations of the Far Eastern Commission on
the subject of a program of replacement of lost cultural objects,
the United States Member is authorized to transmit the substance of
the attached statement to the other members of the Far Eastern
Commission.
[Annex]
Statement of the United States Member
My Government has called to the attention of General MacArthur
the appearance in Japanese newspapers of articles dealing with
deliberations in the Far Eastern Commission on the subject of a
program of replacement of lost cultural objects. General
MacArthur was also informed of the questions raised at last
week’s meeting by various members regarding the source and
substance of these articles. In reply,
[Page 983]
the following message has been received
from the Supreme Commander:
“Following is text of articles in reference appearing in
Japanese newspapers, all under a Washington dateline:
‘Washington, June 14. Far Eastern Commission
sources predicted that the Commission would not
adopt policy of requiring Japan to replace
cultural objects destroyed or lost in Allied
countries as result of Japanese aggression.
‘These sources said indications now were that the
Commission would simply fail to act on China’s
proposal to this effect, thus allowing Supreme
Commander General MacArthur to continue with his
general policy of requiring restitution of looted
objects when identifiable but not requiring
replacement of articles claimed to have been
looted or destroyed. Discussion on the subject is
still in the FEC
reparations Committee, where there is a sharp
division of opinion.
‘The United States and the United Kingdom believe
that adoption of the Chinese policy would lay the
allies open to charges of looting and now opposing
it.’
It is to be noted that these articles attribute their
source to Far Eastern Commission agencies and apparently
are in no way connected with the Crane article.1 It is not believed advisable for SCAP to make any statement
with reference the matter.”
It is the view of my Government that it would be improper for
SCAP, the United States
Government or the Far Eastern Commission to take special
cognizance of the appearance of any of these articles in the
press.
