U.S. ACTION AGAINST JAPAN

Evening Post, Volume CXXVIII, Issue 24, 28 July 1939, Page 9

U.S. ACTION AGAINST JAPAN

CONDITIONS FOR FUTURE TRADING

SETTLEMENT OF POLITICAL DIFFERENCES

, {By Telegraph—Pres3 Association—CopyrigUt.) (Received July 28, 12.20 p.m.) WASHINGTON, July 27, With a statement made today by the Secretary of State that there must be a satisfactory settlement of political differences between the United States and Japan before any newtreaty is negotiated, and an intimaion by the Secretary of the Treasury, Mr. Morgenthau, that the Treasury is studying means to follow up the abrogation of the 1911 treaty by action relative to United States purchases of merchandise, silver, and gold, the latter of which have amounted in value to over 400,000,000 dollars during the past 'two yeai*s, the situation created .by the United Statca nullifying the 1911 trade treaty advanced a stage further. ,

Senator Borah declared that he is in favour, of the imposition of an embargo against shipments of arms to Japan, but explained that the idea had nothing to do the abrogation of the treaty, sineo ho advocated a similar embargo against all nations engaged in war in order to prevent United States involvement. . ■ . ,

Treasury action against Japan, it was thought, might come even before the termination of.the six months' notice.

It is believed that alleged Japanese subsidies on cotton cloth exports to the United States may elicit a penalty tariff on duties; here. "We will take a fresh look at the countervailing duties/ said Mr. Morgenthau, but he declined to explain further.

The Washington correspondent of the "New York Times" telegraphs that the Treasury's gold and silver purchases have assisted Japan in large measure in financing its aggressions in China, bullion, being con* verted into dollar balances, which have been used to finance purchases of arms and raw materials cither in* the United States or in Europe.

The Washington correspondent of the Associated Press of America states: "Japanese officials cannot fail to read into the development a plain intimation that the platform planks of both major parties in the Presidential election of 1940 are apt to <;all for firm resistance against any Japanese encroachment on American treaty or other rights anywhere in 'he Far East. . . • Furthermore, the abrogation move tends to offset somewhat the loss of prestige abroad which the President has suffered owing to his failure to obtain revision of the neutrality law in the present session of Congress."