persisted that the Japanese Government could not promise us a better position than third powers and equal treatment with Japan regarding taxes, revenues, duties, traffic fees, etc. In answering I declared to him again and again that, in view of our support of the Japanese action in China rendered with considerable sacrifices, we felt entitled to a better position than such powers which not only did not support Japan but laid, wherever they could, obstacles in her way. In any case I did not have the right to leave off from this demand in view of the binding in¬structions of the Reichsminister. Still the Ambassador asked me to again obtain the opinion of the Reichsminister and also referred to the fact that VON RAUMER had promised him another examination, from the legal standpoint, of the suggestions which differed from our version. At last I declared myself ready to report to him the final attitude of the Reichsminister and the eventual outcome of this legal examination. "4) Finally the Ambassador told me that he had been empowered by his government to give the planned Pro Memoria .a legally more binding form by a mutual provisional signing. I responded that I would bring this to the notice of the Reichsminister but pointed out that the Reichsminister, as was known, had proposed through VON RAUMER the form of an exchange of notes. The Ambassador was of the opinion that his government considered the form of an exchange of notes impractical on account of the necessary but difficult and time consuming consent of the Privy Council. Signed WIEHL”