Regest:

Wie Heinrich Jülich bei seinen vorausgegangenen Gesprächen mit Vertretern der japanischen Post- und Telefonbehörde empfohlen worden war, wendet er sich am 16. August 1910 mit der vorliegenden schriftlichen Eingabe an deren Direktor KOMATSU Kenjiro, um nochmals darzulegen, dass es bei der Lieferung von Telefonkabeln zu einem bedauerlichen Missverständnis hinsichlich ihrer elektrischen Leitungskapazität gekommen war und man darum bitte, die Firma Felten & Guilleaume Carlswerk AG wieder auf die Liste der für japanische Regierungsaufträge zugelassenen Firmen, die sog. list of approved makers, zu setzen, von der sie infolge der reklamierten Lieferung gestrichen worden war. Zum den vorausgegangenen Gesprächen sowie dem weiteren Verlauf der Verhandlungen vgl. Dokument Nr. 2.4.1.10, Dokument Nr. 2.4.1.12, Dokument Nr. 2.4.1.13, Dokument Nr. 2.4.1.14.

Formalia:

3 Blätter, maschinenschriftlich einseitig beschrieben, Abschrift.

|1. Blatt, Vorderseite|

C.

August, 16th 1910

His Excellency

Kenjiro Komatsu11Jülich war sich offenkundig nicht bewusst, dass im Japanischen der Nachname, hier KOMATSU, üblicherweise vor dem Vornamen genannt wird.  

Director of the Burau of Communication

Tokyo

Your Excellency,

I now take the liberty of repeating in writing the explanation already verbally given to. Messrs. Dr. Oi, Rico and Kawazumi:

In Europe the electrostatic capacity of a single conductor cable is measured per mile of a single conductor with rest of conductors and lead cover put to earth, - whereas the electrostatic capacity of a double conductor is measured per mile of double conductor (mutual capacity) with rest of double conductors and lead cover put to earth.

The Telephone Cables recently supplied by us being ordered as 50 pairs Cables, we understood the prescription in the specification “average capacity of 1 mile of conductor not to exceed 0.08 microfarad” to refer to 1 mile of double conductor, i. e. the capacity to be mutual capacity. The cables were supplied in accordance|2. Blatt, Vorderseite| herewith, and the measurement took place at our works in the way mentioned above which is in conformity with the rules laid down by the German Government.

When our cables arrived however they were measured per Mile of single conductor with the rest of wires and lead cover put to earth, and in consequence we were informed that they did not stand the required test. We further were informed that this method of measuring was in accordance with the general rules adopted in Japan even with regard to double conductor cables. –

As Your Excellency will see from the above the difference between your and our capacity figures was caused by a different method of testing, as we misunderstood your prescription with regard to this.

I therefore hope that Your Excellency will understand that we acted in perfect good faith and that we have had not the slightest idea that our cables would not be in absolute accordance with your requirements.

As we are since many years suppliers of Telephone Cables to the Governments and private telephone administrations of all parts of the world we consider it of great importance not to have any differences with your Government with regard to such cables. – It was therefore the special purpose of my coming out to Japan to give this explanation and to assure you of our good faith, and I hope that Your Excellency will|3. Blatt, Vorderseite| admit again our firm in the list of approved makers of Telephone Cables, thereby showing us that there is no doubt on your part as to our acting in a bona-fide manner.

I may still mentioned that – although the capacity figures are somewhat higher those limited by your specification, - our aforesaid cables are nevertheless of a very good quality in every respect, and that they are quite suitable for any practical purpose.

Awaiting your kind reply, I am

Your Excellency’s

obedient servant

gez. Heinrich Jülich

special representative of the

Felten & Guilleaume Lahmeyerwerke Akt.-Ges.,

Muelheim on Rhine (Germany)