Page 4

Parent Examination of Documents Results November 12, 1947
Date 12 November 1947
Language English
Collection Tavenner Papers & IMTFE Official Records
Box Box 6
Folder General Reports and Memoranda from November 1947
Repository University of Virginia Law Library
Memo to Mr. Tavenner (Cont'd) Page 412 November 1947 The reticence of the press here and the Foreign Ministry in regard to the conferences SHIRATORI-OSHIMA and in regard to additional conjectures of the foreign press is <insert>described</insert> correctly in DNB 18 of August 5. I am informed by a confidant of the Foreign Ministry that the meeting in Como had not been suggested by authorities here and that the Foreign Ministry did not participate In the conference of the ambassadors. “The Ambassadors simply gave notice of their intention to have a meeting. After the close of the Como conference, a telegram of the Ambassadors containing urgent advice for early conclusion of the Alliance arrived in the Foreign Ministry, Iam unable to obtain details." C. Item 15 is a telegram from Ott dated 11 August 1939 and has been introduced in evidence as part of IPS Document No. 4047-C being Exhibit 2198 (page 15,744) but has not been read. I believe that some questions in the cross-examination of ITAGAKI were based on this document (Compare my memo dated 6 October 1947, Item 2-R). D. Item 27 is a memo dated 23 August 1939 concerning com¬plaints against the Domei representative ADACHI presented to OSHIMA by Count Urach. In the course of the conversation OSHIMA states that he was greatly disappointed because he had not been taken into confidence regarding the negotiations with the USSR and that he had denied any action to resign since he did not wish to aggravate the situation and follow the instructions of his Government, first of all, to find out the consequences of the treaty. When asked out the rep-resentative of Asahi was able to report that OSHIMA had not been informed about the negotiations, OSHIMA declared that he had not in mind to inform the Japanese public of this regrettable fact but "the arguments did not sound very con¬vincing." I do not believe that introduction of this document would be of value in the case against OSHIMA. 6. IPS Document No. 4048 A.Item 8: This document has not been introduced in evidence but has been used in the cross-interrogatory for Ott as Paper No. 2 (see paragraph 2-D of my memo of 13 August 194-7, subjects OSHIMA's activities between October 1939 and September 1941), B.Item 15 has not been introduced in evidence but has been used in the cross-interrogatory of Ott as Paper No. 3 (see paragraph 2-5 of memo 13 August 1947).