OTTAWA, ON, June 2, 1998 - A letter signed in the Canadian High Commissioner's office in London, England, in 1955 indicates that the Canadian Government participated in a plan to conceal information which might have led to increased compensation for Canadian prisoners of the Japanese during World War II.

Documents recently obtained by The War Amputations of Canada include a letter dated December 30th, 1955 signed by Mr. P.A. Beaulieu, agreeing with a proposal from the United Kingdom that no attempt be made to pursue additional payments from Japan.

The 1952 Peace Treaty between Canada and Japan resulted in a payment of $1344 to each Canadian who had been subjected to forced labour in Japanese industries, in violation of the Geneva Convention. Since that time, officials of both Japanese and Canadian Governments have insisted that no further reparations were due under the Peace Treaty.

Copies of correspondence now in the possession of Cliff Chadderton, Patron of the Hong Kong Veterans Association, indicate that the Peace Treaty contained an Article 26 under which additional compensation payments could be made. The section states that if Japan were to make more favourable reparations to any other countries, it would be liable to increase compensation for those countries involved in the San Francisco Peace Agreement.

A memorandum prepared by the British Foreign Office dated May 25th, 1955, states that the Peace Treaty with Burma provides greater advantages in respect of reparations than those enjoyed by the parties to the San Francisco Treaty. The Burma Treaty gave that country the right to the services and products of the Japanese to a value of $25,000,000 per annum over ten years.

The British Foreign Office document states further that the War Claims Agreement with Switzerland, provides compensation for maltreatment, personal injury and loss arising from acts illegal under the rules of war. The document states further that the compensation for these illegal acts (quite apart from the higher level of compensation provided) constitutes a greater advantage than those provided in the San Francisco Treaty.

The Foreign Office document contained the recommendation that " . . . we should not invoke Article 26 of the Treaty of Peace with Japan" and "we should not, of course, give any publicity to this decision."

A further letter signed by a Mr. E.R. Coplestone of the UK Treasury Board states that the UK Treasury Board accepted the conclusion reached on general grounds of foreign relations, despite the possibility of domestic political embarrassment in connection with allied prisoners of war.

This position of the UK Government was communicated to Mr. R.E. Collins at Canada House in London, who sent the matter to Mr. R. Ross, an official of the Canadian Government in Ottawa for decision.

A letter from the office of the Canadian High Commissioner in London signed by P.A. Beaulieu to the Commonwealth Relations Office dated December 30th, 1955 states:

"I am now informed that it is the view of the Canadian authorities that Canada should not invoke Article 26 of the Treaty in order to claim the same or similar benefits as those stipulated under Article 5 of the Peace Treaty between Burma and Japan or Article 1 and 2 of the War Claims Agreement between Switzerland and Japan."

The letter states further that the Canadian Government concurs in the "general considerations which are set forth in your letter of October 3rd as being the United Kingdom authorities' reasons for not seeking any change in the Peace Treaty." These reasons, according to the documentation, were as follows:

Comment from Lord Reading:

"We are at present unpopular enough with the Japanese without trying to exert further pressure . . ."

Letter from E.R. Coplestone of the British Treasury Board:

"The Financial Secretary has accepted the conclusion not to invoke Article 26 despite the possibility of domestic political embarrassment or connection with allied prisoners of war," and that "no publicity should be given to the decision."

According to Chadderton, the position taken by the Canadian Government, as indicated in this documentation, indicates a betrayal of the interests of Canada's Far East prisoners of war (including those who were taken prisoner in Hong Kong).

"It is even more sinister," Chadderton stated, "in view of the fact that we have been pursuing the matter of compensation for these former prisoners of war through the Human Rights Commission of the United Nations, and that Canadian Government officials were aware of our claim."

"We find now that, not only did the Canadian Government refuse to support the claim, insisting that the payments made in the early '50's under the Peace Treaty constituted final compensation, but now we find that documents which have obviously been in the possession of the Canadian Government since 1955 indicate that more favourable reparations were made to Burma and Switzerland under Article 26 which would have provided a basis to reopen the question of reparations for Canadians," he said.

A "Backgrounder" for information of the media is available.