Tokyo, November 13, 1958

No.31
Dear Mr. President:
As I reported by cable Nos. MTB-044 of November 8, MTB-046 of November 10, and MTB-047 of November 12, respectively, the 7th session of the Sub-committee on Other Claims Regarding Korean Art Objects, the 11th session of the Committee on Legal Status of Korean Residents in Japan, and the 19th session of the sub-committee on Vessels were held at the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs on November 8, November 10, and November 11, 1958, respectively.
I. Sub-committee on Other Claims Regarding Korean Art Objects:
The Japanese side stated that, though it tried to bring up the matter on Korean art objects to the Cabinet meeting for its decision of the basic policy thereon during the preceding week, it was not successful to do so due to the internal difficulties in connection with the Diet proceeding, It, however, continued that the Japanese delegation would continue its efforts to bring about the decision of the higher authorities as early as possible in regard to the matter no art objects, regretting that it was not in a position yet, under the before mationed circumstances, to enter into substantial discussions on the subject problem.
Our side reiterated that the Japanese side should give us a reply regarding our request for the submittance of a complete list of Korean art object, to be returned to Korea, and also demanded that a prompt reply be given to the first gist of art objects our side presented at the previous session. As the Japanese side stated again that the settlement of this matter was related to the works of other various committees our side countered again that this matter should be settled without connecting it with other matters, stating that the settlement of the matter would be very helpful to the expeditious proceeding of other committees. The Japanese side stated that it had no intention to delay the settlement of the matter indefinitely and that it would make effort to bring about an early decision of the basic policy by the higher authorities in this regard.
II. Committee on Legal Status of Korean Residents in Japan:
The Japanese side supplemented its questionnare submitted at the previous session regarding our general proposal, with additional questions on Articles 4,5,6 and 7(3). The Japanese side requested that it be informed of the exact meaning of Articles 4 and 5 in their relations to Paragraph 3 of Article 7 and our Reservation item 3.
With regard to Article 6: (A) The Japanese side said that Paragraph 1 of the same article should be considered on the basis of a limitted period of the time, but not indefinitely. (B) The Japanese side stated that it understood that the question on the amount of money to be remitted was included in the subjects for the separate negotiations mentioned in Paragraph 2 of the Article. (C) The Japanese side viewed it advisable to have an ad hoc working party take up simultaneously the matters refered to in Article 6 for separate negotiation, if our side had any idea in this regard.
Reserving our views on the above questions until the next meeting, our side expressed its views point by point in reply to the Japanese questions put forward at the previous meeting, along the line of the Attachment 1 of the Government instructions OIJONG No.4099 of November 4. 1958.
Any Government instructions regarding the above Japanese questions put forward today would be highly appreciated.
III. Sub-committee on Vessels:
Our side demanded that a prompt reply be given to our request for the delivery of 31 vessels contained in the first list.
The Japanese side stated that it was difficult to give any reply to our request under the circumstances where there existed discrepancies of views on legal basis thereof. The Japanese side expressed its wish that the sub-committee proceed to the discussion of Agenda "B", suspending discussions for the time being on Agenda "A" for its later solution together with the matters under Agenda "B", "C", and "D". strongly opposing to the above Japanese idea, our side repeatedly made it clear that the sub-committee should proceed to Agenda "B" only after the settlement of the problem on Agenda "A".
The Japanese side put forward "unoffioial questions on several vessels in the first list under reference, and our side made reply thereto.
Judging from the proceeding of the discussions made on November 11, 1958, it occurs to this delegation that it is the policy of the Japanese side to make its overall decision regarding vessels problem after discussing all of the four agenda items of the sub-committee. Under the circumstances, it is recommended that an overall list of vessels within the scope of Agenda "A" be presented to the sub-committee at its next meeting with a view to countering at this stage the Japanese idea of proceeding to Agenda "B" and also to expediting the discussions on Agenda "A". Government instructions in this regard would be highly appreciated.
With the sentiment of loyalty and esteem, I remain,

Most respectfully.
Ben C. Limb