Press translations [Japan]. Editorial Series 0157, 1945-12-25.

Full Translation:

There prevail two points of view in regard to the future prospects of our economy. JAPAN must pay reparations as a result of the defeat. Also, our economy cannot escape from the Allied Powers' control as long as JAPAN is under control of the occupation forces and remains controlled by the Allies even after we have been permitted to enjoy participation in the economic activities of the world. Up to the present, the Allies' policy toward JAPAN still retrains indefinite, although basically clarified.

From here, one can take an optimistic or a pessimistic view. For instance, the Allies have hitherto often declared that JAPAN's reparation be "severe" as well as "fair". If we stress the meaning of "severe", we are inclined to a pessimistic view, but it is an entirely different matter if we emphasize the meaning of "fair". Furthermore, if we regard somewhat lightly the decline and hardship in our economy as an inevitable outcome of the defeat, we are optimistic, but we can only be pessimistic when we think of our future economy from the standpoint of the war-time economic prosperity.

Apart from such conjectures, what are the prospects of the reconstruction of JAPAN's peaceful economy? As often revealed by AMERICA, her fundamental policy toward JAPAN rests on two points: JAPAN's military and economic potential is to be lowered and JAPAN is to be permitted to reconstruct, by her own hands, a peaceful economy sufficient to sustain the minimum national livelihood of a vanquished nation. But therein lies an obscure margin between war economy and peace economy. Furthermore, it is difficult to decide what standards are to be permitted. [illegible]must decide ourselves what sort on what scale enterprises should be maintained, and what foreign trading is necessary in our future economic activities.

Here too, there lie many ambiguities. In the interim report of Ambassador PAUIEY, head of the UNITED STATES Reparations Mission, our reparations are concretely clarified, but we are still far from knowing the final decision on the part of AMERICA. So, in forecasting the future of our economy, it is necessary not to no[illegible]lect the economic situation of the world, nor the international political situation. JAPAN is now an isolated country from the stand[illegible]t of a international economy. If she remains long in such a state, she is sure to destroy herself. Therefore we must not forget to pay keen [illegible]to the trend of world economy.

We are asking for permission fro Allied Headquarters to import food and other necessities. This is just what [illegible]requires and yet we cannot

EDITORIAL SERIES: 157 (Continued)

ITEM 1 (Continued)

get anything unless another country is willing to export or to accept what we offer in exchange.

AMERICA now is confronted, with the problem of exporting here the raw cotton retained in the hands of her Government. General merchandise is important here as collaterals for imports, which will continue to serve as important exports in our future foreign trade. They are favored, by natives in the southern area owing to the cheap price. The keynote of American policy regarding foreign trade rests, as always, on liberty and reciprocity.

Not only AMERICA, but all the countries of the world, are eager to give and take as much as possible from one another. Needless to say, any economic relations among the nations are controlled by the world political situation, and vice versa. Since JAPAN'S economy cannot remain separated, a from world economy, it is quite natural that it will be controlled by world economy in the future. Therefore, if we want to reconstruct a peaceful economy for post-war JAPAN, without misjudging future prospects, we must try to clearly and correctly realize the trends in world economy.

Full Translation:

The King of ENGLAND has so democratic a position that foreign constitutionalists consider him a sort of hereditary president. Those most sensible of his dignity are the English people, and the most democratic English Minister feels struck with his mysterious dignity when he has an audience before him. Nevertheless, he is as obligated as any ordinary individual to pay taxes.

Imperial properties in JAPAN have not hitherto been inviolate. The civil law may be applied to the Imperial estate. We can bring civil action against the Imperial rights and vice versa. For example, a certain ministry is authorized to fix the boundaries of a crown forest, and an owner of adjacent lands any bring a legitimate action against the Minister of the Imperial Household for an unjust delimitation. Therefore, the imposition of taxes upon the Imperial properties is not a violation of the sacredness of the crown. There may be some doubts from a constitutional point of view. However, the directive issued by Supreme Headquarters is above the Constitution and so we must obey it above all things.

The discrimination of Imperial properties from those which belong to the public was made in the MEIJI Era. Some state forests were transferred in ownership to the Imperial Family, as result of the written opinion by IWAKURA, Tonomi. IWAKURA's opinion, proposed in a Cabinet meeting in 1882, was to the effect that the stabilization of the Imperial Family would necessitate the clarification of the Imperial estates. Under the circumstances prevalent in those days - when the enactment of the Constitution was imminenet, the Diet was about to open, and democracy was becoming rather radical - it was necessary, Mr. IWAKURA supposed, to stabilize the Imperial estates in order to make them rich enough to defray all war expenses, such as Army and Navy expenditures. He was of the opinion that, whatever radical opinion might arise in the Diet, it would be very [illegible]to [illegible]fy so long as the Imperial properties were

- 2 -

EDITORIAL SERIES: 157 (Continued)

ITEM 2 (Continued)

big enough. He further said that once a constitutional Government emerged, the form of Government might become quite different; thus the State estates would accordingly be transformed in quality, and so there was the necessity of clarifying their relation to the Imperial properties.

The one who opposed IWAKURA in this regard was INOUE, Takashi. His opposition was to the effect that there had never been any particular discrimination between the State and the Imperial House and that the Government had been merely another name for the Imperial House, and vice versa, and therefore there was no need to separate the Imperial properties from State properties. In spite of his opposition, however, the Imperial estate was later clarified along the lines of IWAKURA's plan.

DISTRIBUTION "X"

- 3 -