File No. 819.55/68.

Minister Price to the Secretary of State.

No. 422.]

Sir: Referring to my despatches Nos. 400 and 415 [414] of the dates respectively of February 5 and 18 last, regarding additional anti-Chinese legislation, I have the honor to report that the National Assembly of Panama, before which same was pending, adjourned on yesterday without the amended bill being passed.

For the purpose of properly expressing appreciation to Sr. Lefevre, Secretary of Foreign Affairs of Panama, for his services in checking said legislation, and the further purpose of making a record of the assurances given to me and the Chinese Consul General that certain severe provisions of Law 50 of 1913 would be continued in suspense as they have been in the past, even if this last Assembly should fail to ratify the agreement heretofore made by the Panaman Foreign Office regarding same, I have transmitted a Foreign Office note to Sr. Lefevre, a copy of which I enclose.

I have [etc.]

Wm. Jennings Price.

Minister Price to the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs.

No. 142.]

Excellency: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of the valued note of your excellency No. S–5672 of February 12 last, respecting the proposed [Page 1270] legislation amending Law 50 of 1913, affecting the Chinese, and to express appreciation for your kind services in the whole matter, resulting in the National Assembly of Panama adjourning without enacting the restrictions proposed, which seemed to be of a character that would work unnecessary hardship and injustice, though it is conceded that your excellency entertained no such intention with reference to the suggestions submitted by your excellency’s office, but had in view the purposes stated in said note.

It is a pleasure, too, to express gratefulness for the assurance of your excellency on February 2, 1915, to the Chinese Consul General and myself while acting in the capacity of extending the good offices of my Government in this matter, that certain severe provisions of Law 50 of 1913, would continue unenforced as in the past.

Judging from your excellency’s response that there has been a misconception of the purport of the reference by me to the applicability of treaty provisions in this matter, the phraseology of that portion of my note is called attention to as containing the expression of hope that measures might not attain the sanction of law the practical carrying out of which might bring into question treaty rights and obligations.

I avail [etc.]

Wm. Jennings Price.