Help me solve a historical riddle: What unjust American foreign policy did Henry Stimson refer to in his January 7, 1932, note to Japan and China?

by myWitsYourWagers

I was recently reading the next of Stimson's note to Japan and China and found this puzzling passage:

I am not forgetful of the fact that the foreign policy of every nation is devoted primarily to its own interest. It also rises and falls with the character and wisdom of the individuals or groups who from time to time are in power. I do not close my eyes to the occasional dark spot which have been charged to that record, particularly seventy-five or eighty years ago.

But the actions which were the foundation for the most serious of these charges were directly attributable to the influence of slavery in this country, then at the height of its political power, and that influence has long since been wiped out in the blood of a great Civil War. They have no more reflected the democratic idealism which has generally characterized our foreign policy at its best than the fugitive slave act has fairly reflected our domestic social policy.

The note was published in 1932, so it seems he's referring to an event or policy from 1852-1857. What injustice is he talking about?

Gadsden Purchase, Indian Removal?

chinastevo

You're mixing up your 'notes' and things. Stimson did write his note to Japan and China. However the notes do not include the text you included in the post. The note to the governments was short and was written to the respective governments to demonstrate .. well read it clearly for yourself:

...the American Government deems it to be its duty to notify both the Imperial Japanese Government and the Government of the Chinese Republic that it cannot admit the legality of any situation de facto nor does it intend to recognize any treaty or agreement entered into between those Governments, or agents thereof, which may impair the treaty rights of the United States or its citizens in China, including those that relate to the sovereignty, the independence, or the territorial and administrative integrity of the Republic of China, or to the international policy relative to China, commonly known as the open door policy.

Now. For the text you posted.. the "i am not forgetful.." That is not from the note he sent to Japan and China. That is from the NY Times. Now, i'll admit it's been a little bit since i've studied up on this, so bear with me....

The Stimson doctrine is essentially applying ex injuria jus non oritur. In this piece in the Times.. Stimson is discussing the practice of American foreign policy, and generally praising it for assisting in the development of smaller Latin America countries; and contrasting that to the more hostile actions taken by European states over history.

However, he's recognizing that the US hasn't been completely innocent in that situation. From what I remember, the most likely candidate of what he's referring back to (though slightly further back than his 75-80 year estimate) is the Mexican American War - as this was a war that the US initiated mostly and resulted in a large territorial loss of Mexico that was seized by the US government. Being that that is exactly what he's criticizing on the part of Japan in regards to it's seizure of Shen Yang and other districts, he's conceding that no countries foreign policies are completely innocent, and alluding to the greater good of what the US has achieved on it's foreign policy front.