TLS, four pages, 8 x 10.5, General Headquarters, Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers letterhead, April 24, 1940. Letter to Mrs. Edward Fiess, written from American-occupied Tokyo, Japan. In part: “From the reference…in your letter…on the subject of Mrs. Sanger’s desire to lecture on birth control in Japan, it seems apparent that you are uninformed concerning the circumstances leading to the decision not to issue an entrance permit for that purpose at this time. In the first place, it must be understood that because of Japan's international status and extremely limited facilities, only those are permitted to enter who can definitely further the objectives of the Occupation—political, economic or social. This places the burden of decision as to this point upon the Occupation authorities in the consideration of every entrance permit for which application is made. Approval of any such application necessarily implies, particularly to the Japanese mind, that the Occupation objective is directly involved and that the entrant is fully accredited by the Supreme Commander.
I have yielded to pressure from neither the group in advocacy nor that in opposition to birth control, but have consistently and publicly taken the position that the subject matter is a social problem for solution by the Japanese people themselves without interference, directly or indirectly, by the Allied Powers. In support of this position, I have refused to authorize the protagonists of either viewpoint to make of Japan a battleground upon which to inject and then to fight an issue…which Americans themselves have by no means found uniformity of opinion.
Unfortunately neither has been content to accept this position of neutrality but both have made repeated efforts to insinuate the Occupation directly into the controversy in seeming advocacy of one position or the other. Finally, last June, I publicly reiterated my position to the local Catholic Women's Club, ending with the conclusion that, ‘Birth control, with its social, economic and theological sides, is…for individual judgment and decision. The more basic problem of population is long range and world-wide and certainly not within the purview of prescribed Allied policy or the defined scope of the Supreme Commanders executive responsibility or authority.’
I am by no means unmindful of the potentialities of the Japanese population problem, but demography fully supports my view that the solution in final analysis rests in individual judgment and decision, which…apart from theological teachings, finds its major influence in economic need. Thus, the traditional urban Japanese family, with children viewed as an economic liability, has been limited to an average of two, while the rural family with children viewed as an economic asset has been increased to an average of four. It is…noteworthy that preceding the war, under the influence of industrialization with the consequent expansion of urban areas, the Japanese birth rate declined by one-third. This decline so alarmed the militarists that in 1939 they sought by edict and propaganda to reverse the process, with only the limited and temporary success history records of every such effort. With the post-war industrial rehabilitation there has been a return to the previous pattern of decline, accelerating in degree during each successive year despite the repatriation to Japan of over six million Japanese from abroad in implementation of post war Allied policies. Studies in this Headquarters reveal that based upon past as well as expected future trends the Japanese population will stabilize in twenty to twenty-five years with the death rate then equal to the birth rate and no further population increase thereafter indicated.
During the past, birth control in Japan has been effected by the practices, repugnant to us, of infanticide and abortion. Toward the correction of these evils, in June 1948 a modern Eugenics Law was devised and enacted by the representatives of the Japanese people. This law provides standards for the legalization of both voluntary and compulsory abortion and sterilization, for the manufacture and distribution of contraceptives under standards prescribed in the Pharmaceutical Law, and for the establishment of government-supervised birth control clinics in each of the 675 government-operated health centers throughout the country, as well as the licensing of trained private consultants. Those advocates of birth control who fear that the Japanese may not avail themselves of the methods provided by this law without outside counsel and advice should be encouraged to know that already the recorded sale of contraceptives in Japan is in excess of fifteen million per month.
There is thus no existing unresolved issue appertaining to birth control measures insofar as the Japanese are concerned. Two years ago they solved such issues in the manner indicated. By what sophistry of reasoning…can it be contended that non-Japanese protagonists of either one viewpoint or the other, each of whom has been raising straw men to dramatically knock down, should be permitted to come to Japan for the purpose of re-injecting the problem as an active issue in Japanese life?
The argument of those who champion the planned parenthood concept that Mrs. Sanger‘s personal lecture to the Japanese people would advance that concept in Japan, is of but very doubtful validity. For the Japanese Eugenics Law now under vigorous implementation, product exclusively of Japanese thought, in many respects goes further toward the objectives they advocate than do the laws thus far enacted by the legislatures of many of our own states. Indeed, that Massachusetts only recently rejected a proposal to legalize birth control clinics, now firmly established in Japan by operation of law, leaves one to ponder whether there is not a more fertile field of activity at home than abroad for those who espouse this movement. On the other hand, the entrance of Mrs. Sanger for the purpose indicated could not fail to invite propaganda attributing responsibility to the Allied Powers for that which had already been done by the Japanese themselves toward birth control and with it the charge that the Allied Powers in the exercise of supreme authority through coercion had imposed measures upon the conquered Japanese people leading to genocide.
It may rightfully be regarded as a tribute to the progress Japan has made since the surrender and to the peace and tranquility which prevail in this defeated land, despite the violence dominating the mainland, that as in the instant case little thought is given to the sensitivity inherent in the situation arising from military occupation. But that progress and peace and tranquility directly result from the full and deep appreciation of such sensitivity which throughout has guided Occupation policy. Thereunder the Japanese have been left the untrammeled right and dignity to evolve their own domestic social decisions in line with the philosophic approach which has accorded Japan free exercise of the sovereign power except where Allied objectives or policies were directly involved—an accentuation of leadership rather than direction. The existing situation…does not mean that latent forces of restiveness and discontent might not be aroused were past policies to be reversed and the Japanese at this late date held incompetent to make their own social decisions without being harassed by well meaning but misplaced advice imported from abroad.
In point is the position just enunciated by the Editor of the Tokyo Nippon Times. In a column headed ‘Readers in Council’ this newspaper has been reproducing letters received from local non-Japanese readers giving both the pros and the cons of the birth control issue. So ill-tempered and extreme have been many of the arguments thus reproduced that in the issue of the paper of February 22nd the Editor was moved to close the column to further discussion of the subject matter with the published note that, ‘Unfortunately this (reproduction of the letters on birth control) has stirred up a religious controversy and for this reason and this reason alone we believe it to be in the best interest of all to publish no more letters on the problem of birth control after today unless some new or non-controversial developments are taken up.’ This disgust, politely expressed by a Japanese editor, would be mild indeed compared to that which would find expression throughout Japan were we to permit the issue to be joined by opposing protagonists from abroad over the heads of the Japanese people, who have calmly and with deliberation already arrived at their own decision.
Contrary to what has been publicly intimated, no agency of the Japanese Government has requested Mrs. Sanger to come to Japan for consultation. As far as I know the only question of her admissibility is based upon the application by an editor of a Tokyo newspaper last July to be permitted as a publicity move to bring her to Japan for a lecture tour. There is no question of personality involved as none will fail to recognize the distinguished ability of Mrs. Sanger to counsel, support and defend the cause she has so long espoused. It is purely a question of principle, for the approval of such an application could not have been justified for the reasons I have herein set forth. Moreover, apart from this, such action would have been indefensible in view of previous action taken to exclude protagonists of the contrary viewpoint under the identical reasoning.
While I have no intention of entering into an argumentative discussion of Dr. Ackerman’s report, which dealt not with birth control but with natural resources, I can assure you you have been as completely misinformed in this case as in that of Mrs. Sanger. I trust from the foregoing you will better understand the circumstances which have prompted my decision not to disturb existing policy, leaving the Japanese people free to evolve their own social pattern of life without being harassed by undue Allied pressures.” In very good to fine condition, with moderate creasing and small edge tears to the last page. Accompanied by the original mailing envelope.
This item is Pre-Certified by PSA/DNA
Buy a third-party letter of authenticity for
$50.00
*This item has been pre-certified by a trusted third-party authentication service, and by placing a bid on this item, you agree to accept the opinion of this authentication service. If you wish to have an opinion rendered by a different authenticator of your choosing, you must do so prior to your placing of any bid. RR Auction is not responsible for differing opinions submitted 30 days after the date of the sale.
