Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, With the Address of the President to Congress December 4, 1917

File No. 812.00/20849

The American Commissioners to the Secretary of State

Washington , April 26, 1917 .

My Dear Mr. Secretary: I beg to transmit herewith a copy of my report as Secretary of the American Section of the American and Mexican Joint Commission.

Permit me to add that the delay in transmitting this report has been due to the fact that Secretary Lane desired to have it carefully read by all the members of the American Section. The report has received the approval of Secretary Lane, Judge Gray and Dr. Mott.

I beg [etc.]

L. S. Rowe

[Inclosure]

Report on the proceedings of the Commission

Sir: I beg to submit herewith a report on the proceedings of the American and Mexican Joint Commission, including certain documents hereinafter enumerated.

The Commission first assembled at the Hotel Biltmore, New York City, on Monday, September 4, 1916, in response to an invitation of the Secretary of State. The luncheon tendered to the Commissioners by the Secretary of State was the occasion of a series of brief addresses in which the Secretary of State, the Honorable Robert Lansing; the Confidential Agent of the Constitutionalist Government, the Honorable Eliseo Arredondo; the Chairman of the American Commission, the Honorable Franklin K. Lane, and the Chairman of the Mexican Commission, the Honorable Luis Cabrera, outlined in general terms the international significance of the work of the Commission. (For text of these addresses see Appendix A.)²

On Tuesday, September 5, the Commission proceeded to New London, Connecticut, and on the morning of Wednesday, September 6, the first formal session was held at the Hotel Griswold. The mass of documentary evidence submitted to the Commission by the State Department clearly indicated the close relation existing between the border situation and the disturbed domestic conditions in Mexico, and as the discussions proceeded it became increasingly evident that no solution satisfactory to the Amercian people could be reached unless the international aspects of some of Mexico’s internal problems, such as the protection of life and property of foreigners resident in Mexico, were fully considered by the Commission.

The American Commissioners, realizing the difficulties of the position of their Mexican colleagues, approached the whole situation in a sincere spirit of helpful cooperation, assuring the Mexican Commissioners that it was the desire of the Government and people of the United States to be helpful to Mexico, and that through such helpfulness, the interests both of Mexico and the United States would best be subserved.

At an early stage in the deliberations, the Mexican delegates informed the American Commissioners that their instructions required them first to consider and reach an agreement on the withdrawal of American troops from Mexican soil and the safeguarding of the border before proceeding to the consideration of any other questions. Further discussion brought out the fact that the instructions which they had received required them not only to reach an agreement on the withdrawal of troops before proceeding to the consideration of any other questions, but that the withdrawal must be an accomplished fact before any of the larger questions involved in the relations between the United States and Mexico could be discussed. The American Commissioners endeavored to make clear to their Mexican colleagues that the position thus taken was out of harmony with the intent of the two Governments as expressed in the notes exchanged prior to the appointment of the Commission and with the credentials of the Mexican Commissioners, submitted at the first session of the Commission. (See Appendix B.) They immediately urged upon the Mexican Commissioners the importance of securing additional instructions of a more liberal nature and in closer harmony with the purposes for which the Commission was created.

The early deliberations of the Commission took a wide range, owing to the desire of the American Commissioners to have presented to them a complete picture of domestic conditions in Mexico. The American Commissioners proceeded on the assumption that the border incursions were merely a symptom of the abnormal conditions prevailing in Mexico, and that, therefore, in order to deal with the situation with any degree of thoroughness it was necessary to ascertain the basic causes of the trouble. The Mexican Commissioners continued to urge the immediate withdrawal of American troops on the ground that the presence of these troops aroused considerable feeling in the Mexican people, and that it was necessary, in order to allay this feeling, to maintain large bodies of Mexican troops in a position watchful of American military movements. The withdrawal would, in the view of the Mexican Commissioners, free a considerable body of troops for the much needed service of pursuing and capturing raiding bands.

The discussion of withdrawal naturally led to a consideration of the question of border patrol, and during this discussion the American Commissioners impressed upon the Mexican Commissioners that to the people of the United States the question of the protection afforded to the lives and property of Americans resident in Mexico was quite as important as the safeguarding of the border.

Much of the time during the first three weeks in September was devoted to an explanation by the Mexican Commissioners of the purposes of the Carranza Government. They explained in detail the gradual extension of civil government, the attempted reorganization of taxation, and the future plans of the de facto Government.

While these matters were under consideration, word was received that Villa had captured Chihuahua City. This proved to be the first of a series of incidents which disturbed the proceedings of the Commission. The ease with which Chihuahua was taken, the impotence of the Constitutionalist forces and the manifest incompetence of the military leaders in Chihuahua removed all assurance that the de facto Government would be able to fulfill any promises with reference to the safeguarding of the international boundary. The American Commissioners were, therefore, placed in the embarrassing position of treating with the representatives of a government whose ability to fulfill any obligations that might be inserted in an agreement with reference to the safeguarding of the international boundary, had been placed in serious doubt.

It became increasingly evident, as time proceeded, that the Mexican Commissioners were bound by secret instructions which would prevent the consideration of any questions until an agreement had been reached with reference to the withdrawal of troops and the safeguarding of the international boundary. In view of this fact, the American” Commissioners decided that it would be important to submit a program of work which would clarify the situation and would secure from the de facto Government a clear statement of its position. With this end in view, the American Commissioners drafted a formal communication which was submitted to the Mexican delegates on September 22, This communication reads as follows:

September 22, 1916.

To The Honorable Luis Cabrera, The Honorable Ygnacio Bonillas, The Honorable Alberto J. Pani,

Gentlemen: Would this be a satisfactory program for the Joint Commission: That while the military details of a plan of border control formulated by us are under consideration at Washington, we pass to the consideration of three questions:

1. Protection to life and property of foreigners in Mexico.

2. Establishment of a claims commission.

3. Religious tolerance.

It being understood between us that our effort shall be to reach a tentative understanding upon these questions which the American Commissioners regard as of certainly no less importance than that of border control, and it being further understood that the border control matter shall not be made dependent in any way upon our agreement upon these above-mentioned questions.

We beg [etc.]

Franklin K. Lane

George Gray

John R. Mott

The Mexican Commissioners immediately transmitted this communication to Mexico City, and during the two weeks that followed constant inquiries were made as to whether a reply had been received. Owing to the closing of the Hotel Griswold at New London, it was necessary for the Commission to transfer its sessions to Atlantic City. An adjournment was taken on September 27, the Commission reassembling at the Hotel Traymore, Atlantic City, on October 1.

On October 6, the Mexican Commissioners informed their American colleagues that a reply had been received from Mexico City, but the precise content thereof was not disclosed. They informed the American Commissioners, however, that a formal communication had been drafted based on the instructions received. This was dated October 6, and reads as follows:

Atlantic City, October 6, 1916.

To The Honorable Franklin K. Lane, The Honorable George Gray, The Honorable John R. Mott,

Gentlemen: In answer to your communication, under date of September 22 last, and referring to the matters discussed at the session of yesterday, the Mexican delegates beg to say that after having carefully consulted both the text and the spirit of their credentials, they have come to the conclusion that, in view of the tenor of their instructions, and convinced that they faithfully interpret the feeling of the Mexican people, believe that the following is the program to which the deliberations should conform:

program of work

• First. Withdrawal of American forces from Mexican territory.
• Second. Safeguarding and patrolling of the border.
• Third. Agreement in regard to the pursuit of outlaws at the border.

If happily we should reach a solution satisfactory to both Governments in regard to the questions presented above, the Mexican Commissioners will then be ready to deal with such other questions as the American delegates may wish to submit, provided such questions are of an international character and contribute to establish the most frank cordiality in the relations between the two countries.

While the American Forces remain on Mexican territory the Mexican delegates consider it their duty not to take up any subject other than those immediately connected with the border situation.

It is understood that the conclusions that may be reached in the discussion concerning points one, two and three of the program shall not be made dependent in any way upon the results of the discussion concerning the other questions submitted.

We avail [etc.]

Luis Cabrera

Ygnacio Bonillas

Alberto J. Pani

Juan B. Rojo,
Secretary

Reports received from official and unofficial sources during the early portion of October indicated that conditions were steadily growing worse, not only in northern Mexico but also in many sections of the central and southern portions of the Republic. Some of the despatches received by the American Commissioners were submitted to their Mexican colleagues, but to all the facts presented, the Mexican Commissioners made reply that no marked improvement of conditions could be expected until the complete withdrawal of American troops from Mexican soil. They constantly emphasized the fact that the presence of these troops was undermining the Carranza Government and that not until they were withdrawn could the United States Government expect the de facto Government of Mexico to secure complete control of the situation. On October 25 the Mexican Commissioners presented a proposal which was intended to secure the cooperation of American and Mexican forces in assuring the safety of the northern portion of Chihuahua. This proposal reads as follows:

Comision Unida Mexicana-Americana,
Atlantic City, October 25th, 1916.

To The Honorable Franklin K. Lane, The Honorable George Gray, The Honorable John R. Mott,

Gentlemen: The undersigned, in accordance with opinions interchanged at our last session, and the two previous, have the honor to submit to your consideration the following suggestions:

• First. Whereas, the expedition styled punitive, against the Columbus raiders has actually destroyed the band of outlaws, exterminating them all, or most of them, as may be seen from the corresponding official American despatches;
• Second. Whereas, this was the sole object of the said expedition, according to explicit declaration of President Wilson, the American Senate’s ratification, and instructions to General Funston;
• Third. Whereas, the invasion and permanence of the American forces in Mexican territory has provoked and fostered the organization of new bands of outlaws and rebels, and their union, due to the exaltation of popular sentiment against foreign invasion, and is transforming the bandit who led the Columbus raid into the hero who is defending the national honor;
• Fourth. Whereas, the American forces, without the consent of the Mexican Government, could not continue the pursuit of the new bands of outlaws without occasioning greater injuries than those caused by the outlaws themselves;
• Fifth. Whereas, consequently the American forces in Chihuahua State find themselves restricted to police the rural districts within the zone that they actually occupy, and to protect the corresponding extension of the border, and
• Sixth. Whereas, finally the stay of the American forces in the State of Chihuahua, without the consent of the Mexican Government constitutes a flagrant violation of the sovereignty of a friendly nation, and an unjustified offense to its people.

We trust that the Honorable American Commissioners, animated with a spirit of justice, and resolved to build on a sound foundation real cordiality in future relations between the great Republic of the North, and Mexico and the other Nations of Latin America, will agree to recommend to their Government the withdrawal of the American forces from Mexican territory, in the manner to be agreed upon by the respective military commanders of both Nations, in order to fulfill the two following requirements:

A. That during the withdrawal of the American forces, through the cooperation of the forces of both Nations, the present conditions of safety may subsist in the zone occupied by the American forces in Chihuahua State, and along the corresponding extension of the border.

B. That the complete evacuation of the American forces will have been terminated on or before December 31, 1916.

Awaiting your kind reply and the suggestions which it may please you to make regarding the manner, date, and conditions of withdrawal of forces,

We beg [etc.]

Luis Cabrera

Ygnacio Bonillas

Alberto J. Pani

This plan was not acceptable to the American Commissioners for several reasons, mainly because of the conviction that no effective plan of cooperation between the armed forces of the two countries could be arranged.

Furthermore, the American Commissioners were anxious to secure from their Mexican colleagues an assurance that the larger and more important questions would receive consideration as soon as the question of withdrawal and border control had been disposed of.

It was at this time that the American Commissioners reached the conclusion that it would be well to place before their Mexican colleagues a complete, constructive program involving not only the adjustment of the immediate questions pending between the United States and Mexico, but the establishment of helpful cooperation between the two peoples in the solution of some of Mexico’s most serious problems. This program was submitted to the Mexican Commissioners on October 27, and reads as follows:

Hotel Traymore,
Atlantic City, October 27, 1916.

To The Honorable Luis Cabrera, The Honorable Ygnacio Bonillas, The Honorable Alberto J. Pani,

Gentlemen: We beg to submit, for your consideration, the following outline of agreement, the adoption of which will, we sincerely believe, accomplish the purposes for which this Commission was created:

The Mexican Commissioners have constantly emphasized the importance of arriving at some definite and concrete results with reference to the withdrawal of American troops and the question of border control. The American Commissioners are sincerely desirous of meeting the wishes of their Mexican colleagues with reference to an early agreement on these two questions, as well as of arriving at satisfactory conclusions on other matters of common concern. They, therefore, propose that an immediate agreement be reached by this Commission with reference to withdrawal of troops and border control, and that pending the ratification of such agreement by the respective Governments, the Mexican Government give formal assurance that it will agree, in principle, to the other proposals contained in this memorandum, and which are to be considered an integral part of the agreement, it being understood, however, that no public announcement of any kind whatsoever shall be made either by this Commission or by any member thereof, or by either of the Governments, until the plan of withdrawal of troops and border control has been ratified by the two Governments, nor until the Mexican Government shall have given the above assurance, and which shall be announced along with the plan of withdrawal.

I

the proposal with reference to withdrawal of troops and guarding the border

1. Withdrawal of Troops. The United States agrees to withdraw the American troops from Mexican soil in accordance with the following plan:

(a) Within thirty days after the ratification of this agreement the American forces shall be withdrawn northward as far as Colonia Dublan, provided that within said thirty days no raid within seventy-five miles of the present position at El Valle has taken place.

(b) At the end of a further period of sixty days, or earlier if the Government of the United States deems it advisable, the American troops shall be completely withdrawn from Mexican soil either by marching to Columbus, New Mexico, or via the Mexico Northwestern Railway to El Paso, Texas, or by both methods, as the Government of the United States may elect.

2. Guarding the Border. Each of the Governments parties to this agreement shall guard its side of the boundary line without any zone of pursuit, thereby making each Government responsible for lawless acts committed along the border by persons coming from its own territory into the territory of the other.

II

the additional proposals submitted herewith to the mexican commissioners, and forming part of this agreement, are as follows:

1. Enforcement of neutrality laws. The United States will use every means at its disposal to prevent within its jurisdiction, conspiracies against the de facto Government, or against established order in Mexico.

2. Protection of life and property of foreigners. The Government of Mexico solemnly agrees to afford full and adequate protection to the lives and property of citizens of the United States and other foreigners, and this protection shall be adequate to enable such citizens of the United States or other foreigners to resume the operation of mines or other industries in which they may be Interested, The United States reserves the right to reenter Mexico and to afford such protection by its own military forces, in the event of the Mexican Government failing to do so. In case Americans are killed in the United States by marauders, the United States reserves the right to pursue such marauders until they are captured.

The United States Government agrees to use every means at its disposal to assure adequate protection to Mexican citizens resident on American territory.

3. Recognition of property rights. That all property rights heretofore acquired by citizens of the United States or other foreigners, in accordance with the established constitutional laws of the Mexican Republic, shall be regarded valid. Should any question arise with reference to the validity of such property rights, the Mexican Government agrees that the determination of such lights shall be had through due process of law and adjudication by the regularly constituted tribunals of the country.

4. Claims Commission. The Mexican Government agrees in principle to the establishment of a Mixed Claims Commission, which shall give proper consideration to all claims of citizens of the United States and other foreigners arising out of injury to person or property subsequent to November 20, 1910. A subsequent protocol will determine the constitution of this Commission, the terms of submission, and the rules which shall govern the tribunal.

5. Religious tolerance. The Mexican Government agrees to give effect to the constitutional provision relating to freedom of conscience in a broad spirit of religious tolerance.

6. Elimination of disease and relief of distress and of starvation. The Mexican Government agrees to afford every facility to such agencies in the United States as may wish to combat disease and to relieve the distress and starvation now prevailing in many sections of the Republic.

We beg [etc.]

Franklin K. Lane

George Gray

John R. Mott

The portion of this program, reserving the right on the part of the United States to reenter Mexico in case the de facto Government failed adequately to protect the lives and property of foreigners, elicited an immediate response on the part of the Mexican Commissioners reading as follows:

October 27, 1916.

To The Honorable Franklin K. Lane, The Honorable George Gray, The Honorable John R. Mott,

Gentlemen: Referring to your communication dated October 26, which was submitted, to us at the session of this morning, and which we have read with most careful attention, we beg to say that we deem it our duty not to allow a moment to pass by without informing you of our complete dissent from the proposition that the Government of Mexico could agree that the United States should reserve the right to enter our country in order to give protection, by means of its own armed forces, to the life and property of its nationals.

We do not believe that any nation which considers itself sovereign could consent to a stipulation of this nature. So far as we are concerned, not only are we unable to admit such a proposition, but we consider it necessary to affirm in writing that we cannot even listen to such a proposal.

The purpose of our coming to the United States is precisely to secure the withdrawal of. American troops which are on Mexican soil without the consent of our Government, and in violation of the sovereignty of our country. There has been nothing in our attitude, in discussing the affairs of Mexico, which could give rise to the impression in the Honorable, the American Commissioners, that we were disposed to receive a proposal that implied the abandonment of the sovereignty of our country.

We are, furthermore, surprised to find that in your letter dated October 25, you place an agreement on the points contained in Chapter 2 of the memorandum as a condition to the withdrawal of the American forces. This condition we find in contradiction with the terms of your memorandum of September 22, in which you indicate clearly that the withdrawal of troops would not depend on the discussion of the other questions.

All the other portions of your letter will be given our most careful consideration, and will be made the subject of a reply at the next session. The present letter is, therefore, to be considered simply as the expression of our complete dissent from the points above mentioned.

We beg [etc.]

Luis Cabrera

Ygnacio Bonillas

Alberto J. Pani

The days immediately succeeding the presentation of the proposal of October 27 were devoted to an attempt on the part of the American Commissioners to ascertain whether it would be possible to reach an agreement with reference to withdrawal of troops and border control, which would at the same time be consistent with the safety of the southern border of the United States. During these days the Mexican Commissioners constantly referred to the fact that they were convinced that as soon as they were in a position to tell Mr. Carranza that definite and concrete results had been obtained with reference to withdrawal of troops and border control, he would authorize them to proceed to the consideration of the other questions which the American Commissioners deemed of such vital importance.

On November 2, adjournment was taken until November 10. Immediately after reconvening, the Commission addressed itself to the consideration of several tentative plans relating to the safeguarding of the international boundary. On November 17 the Mexican Commissioners submitted a proposal covering three points:

1. The withdrawal of troops.

2. The safeguarding of the border.

3. The pursuit of marauders. This proposal reads as follows:

Atlantic City, November 17, 1916.

To The Honorable Franklin K. Lane, The Honorable George Gray, The Honorable John R. Mott,

Gentlemen: The present status of our discussions makes it necessary in our opinion to define in writing the provisions of the proposed agreements which the Mexican Commissioners would be disposed to accept.

Withdrawal of troops. Regarding the withdrawal of troops, the Mexican Commissioners would deem acceptable the memorandum drawn up by Messrs. Mott and Pani, in the manner in which it was approved by all the Commissioners at the session of November 13:

Article I. The Government of the United States agrees to begin the withdrawal of American troops from Mexican soil as soon as practicable, such withdrawal to be completed not later than —— (forty (40) days after the ratification of this agreement by both Governments).

Article II. General Pershing shall determine the manner in which the withdrawal shall be effected, so as to comport with the dignity of the United States as a friendly power, and so as to ensure the safety of the territory affected by the withdrawal.

Article III. It is understood that the territory evacuated by the American forces will be occupied and adequately protected by the Constitutionalist forces. The Mexican commander shall determine the plan for the occupation and protection of the territory evacuated by the American forces.

Article IV. The American and Mexican commanders shall deal separately, or wherever practicable in cooperation, with any obstacle which may arise tending to delay the withdrawal. In case there are any further activities of the forces inimical to the de facto government, which threaten the safety of the international border along the northern section of Chihuahua, the withdrawal of American forces shall not be delayed beyond the period strictly necessary to overcome such activities.

Article V. The withdrawal of American troops shall be effected by marching to Columbus, or by using the Mexican Northwestern Railroad to El Paso, or by both routes, as may be deemed most convenient or expedient by the American commander.

Safeguarding the border. With respect to the safeguarding of the border, the Mexican Commissioners would be disposed to accept, in substance, the suggestion made by Commisioner Lane, in his memorandum of October 10, in the final revision given thereto by Commissioner Gray, Articles I, IV, V, VI, VII and VIII:

Article I. For the protection of the border during the period when abnormal conditions exist, there shall be cooperation on the part of the military commanders of both countries, to whatever extent may be practicable.

Article IV. There shall be a full and mutual interchange of information between the military commanders on both sides to the end that such lawless incursions may be anticipated and defended against.

Article V. There shall be a mutual use of railroads on both sides of the border for the carriage of troops or supplies used in the defence of the border or in the pursuit of marauders.

Article VI. Mutual scouting shall be permitted within a distance of ten miles of the border, provided such privilege be given in writing by the respective commanders, but such scouting under no circumstances is to occur within ten miles of any fixed military camp, or within ten miles of any town having more than one hundred inhabitants.

Article VII. The United States will continue to employ such means, consistent with its laws, as will tend to prevent on the American side of the border, the organization of filibustering expeditions or any other hostile conspiracies against the Mexican Government.

Article VIII. This agreement shall remain in full force for a period of four months. If neither of the Governments parties to this agreement shall give notice to the other, ten days previous to its expiration, of its intention to terminate the same, it shall further remain in force until thirty days after either of the Governments shall have given notice to the other of such intention.

Pursuit of marauders. Regarding the pursuit of marauders, the Mexican Commissioners would accept the reciprocal border crossing, provided that it be adequately regulated in order that, without detracting from the efficiency of the pursuit, it may be compatible with the sovereignty of both countries.

In this regard, we would accept, in substance, the suggestions proposed by the Department of State under date of April 4:

Article I. It is agreed that the regular government forces of the two republics may reciprocally cross the part of the boundary line comprised between the Colorado River and Piedras Negras, and within a zone of sixty kilometers in either country counted from the said line, with the object of pursuing bands of armed men that may have entered from one country to the other, committed outrages in foreign territory and escaped across the boundary line.

Article II. The reciprocal crossing agreed to in Article I shall only take place in comparatively uninhabited or unprotected parts of the territory on either side of the boundary line, and in no case at a distance less than ten kilometers from any cantonment or city in the territory in which the pursuit is being conducted, unless the cantonment or city be situated in a mountainous district wherein communication is difficult.

Article III. The commander of the forces crossing the frontier under the terms of this agreement will, at the time of crossing the frontier, or before if possible, give notice of his proposed movement and of the number of troops in his command, to the nearest commanding officer of the civilian authorities of the country whose territory he is about to enter.

Article IV. The Government of the country in which the pursuit takes place will cooperate by every means with the pursuing force to the end that the lawless bands be speedily captured or exterminated.

Article V. The pursuing force will retire to its own territory as soon as it shall have overtaken and overcome within the zone the lawless bands being dealt with. In no case shall the pursing force establish itself or remain on foreign territory for more than fifteen days, unless by special agreement between the two Governments.

Article VI. No pursuit shall be undertaken on the territory of the other country unless begun within three days after the flight of the lawless band across the boundary line.

Article VII. Under no pretext or consideration whatever shall the pursuing forces of either country occupy cities or cantonments situated in the country in which the pursuit is conducted, in accordance with the terms of this agreement. The Government of the pursuing forces shall defray the cost of subsistence of the troops and all other expenses connected with their entry on foreign territory.

Article VIII. All abuses committed by the pursuing forces shall be punished by the government to which they belong, according to the gravity of the offense. The persons directly responsible for such abuses shall be withdrawn from the frontier and indemnities shall be promptly given to all those who may have suffered injury.

Article IX. Should the inhabitants of one country commit outrages on the foreign pursuing forces, the government of the country where the outrages were committed will be responsible to the government of the other country only in case of denial of justice and refusal to punish the guilty persons.

Article X. This agreement will go into effect upon the date of signature, and will remain in force until one of the parties shall give the other in advance two months’ written notice of its intention to terminate the agreement.

In Testimony Whereof, we have signed this agreement, this —— day of —— nineteen sixteen, etc.

If the agreement regarding the reciprocal border crossing is not possible, the Mexican Commissioners believe that the agreements respecting the withdrawal of troops and cooperation to safeguard the border should remain unaffected; but if the American Commissioners believe that not even this last agreement can be maintained, then the Mexican Commissioners would accept the agreement for the withdrawal of troops upon the basis of leaving to each country the care of its own border, in conformity with the principles of international law.

With the assurance [etc.]

Luis Cabrera

Ygnacio Bonillas

Alberto J. Pani

In view of the fact that in spite of repeated attempts no definite assurance could be secured from the Mexican Commissioners that after an agreement had been reached with reference to the withdrawal of troops and border control, they would proceed to the other questions which the Government of the United States deemed of vital importance, the American Commissioners felt it important to hold a conference with the President as soon as possible in order to lay the situation before him. Pending this conference, it was deemed best to withdraw, for the time being, the definite proposals that had been under discussion. On Saturday evening, November 18, Secretary Lane held a conference with the President, the Secretary of State and the Secretary of War, in Washington. On Monday, November 20, the American Commissioners met for the purpose of redrafting a plan for the withdrawal of troops and border control. At the session of Tuesday, November 21, Secretary Lane informed the Mexican Commissioners that he had held a prolonged conference with the President, and had presented to him a history of the negotiations of the Commission. In addition he presented to the President a mass of information, some of which was favorable to the de facto Government, but much of which indicated not only distressing conditions in Mexico, but the inability of the de facto Government to control the situation. Continuing, Secretary Lane said, in substance:

The desire of the President to see the de facto Government strengthened and placed in a position to restore order in Mexico has in no way diminished. In this respect the views of the members of the American Commission are entirely in harmony with those of the President, and it was probably for this reason that they were selected to fulfill this mission. With the President, we are anxious to see a Mexico strong, independent, sovereign, and completely fulfilling her domestic as well as her international obligations. The President’s purpose and our purpose in coming into this conference was to draft with you a constructive program which would strengthen the Carranza Government, and would assist in the restoration of order and prosperity in Mexico. This was our hope and it is still our expectation.

I must inform you, in all solemnity, that the President’s patience is at an end, and that he regards present conditions in Mexico as intolerable.

The plan of withdrawal of troops and border control which we are proposing to you this morning is but a step toward that larger constructive program which we confidently expect you to draw up in the same spirit of helpfulness and cooperation in which we approach these questions. Nothing short of this will satisfy either the Government or the people of the United States, and it is well for you to know this clearly and definitely at the present moment. We do not wish to do anything that will either hurt your pride or diminish your sovereignty. We have no designs on the integrity of your territory or your freedom of action in the determination of your national policy, but we are deeply and vitally interested in the fulfilment of your obligations to protect the lives and property of foreigners who have cast their lot with you, and in the satisfactory adjustment of every question which affects the cordial relations between the United States and your country. This can only be done through a policy characterized by frankness, cordiality, mutual trust and cooperation. If, however, you have reached the conclusion that you do not desire the cooperation of the United States, if you feel that you want to cut yourselves off completely, it is well for us to know this as soon as possible, as it will vitally affect our policy with reference to Mexico.

Mr. Cabrera here made the statement that it was evident from Secretary Lane’s presentation that Mexico would have to follow the road indicated by the United States. To this Secretary Lane replied:

There is no desire on the part of the United States to dictate to Mexico the policy that she should pursue. We have assured you time and again that we desire to respect your sovereignty and independence, but it is evident that many of the problems confronting you cannot be satisfactorily solved unless you have the friendship and the cooperation of the United States. It is up to you three gentlemen to determine whether Mexico is to have the benefit of such cooperation, or whether she desires to pursue a policy of isolation. This latter policy can lead to but one result, namely the downfall of the Carranza Government, with all the consequences that will involve.

At this session the American Commissioners submitted a draft of Protocol of Agreement ad referendun, providing for the withdrawal of American troops from Mexican territory and the protection of the American-Mexican international boundry. It was evident from the discussions that the plan submitted would be acceptable to the Mexican Commissioners, and early in the afternoon a tenative agreement was reached.

At this session the American Commissioners informed the Mexican Commissioners that the plan as outlined covered two points, namely the withdrawal of troops and the safeguarding of the border, but that with reference to the pursuit of marauders the Government of the United States had formulated a policy, concerning the terms of which the American Commissioners were authorized to inform the Mexican Commissioners, and which they might transmit to their Government. This statement took the following form, and was inserted in the minutes of November 21, 1916:

It is essential, as a matter of governmental policy, that the United States reserve the right to deal with any serious hostile incursion from Mexico into American territory as may be deemed advisable at the time, including the right to pursue marauders into Mexican territory when such pursuit is necessary to our own protection. Duly mindful of the obligations imposed upon us by international law, such pursuit will not be intended, and should not be considered an act hostile to the Constitutionalist Government of Mexico.

To this statement of policy the Mexican Commissioners immediately took exception, on the ground that the principles thus formulated were not in harmony with the plan of border control as contained in the proposed agreement. At this session the American Commissioners also submitted to their Mexican colleagues a letter requesting the definite assurance of the de facto Government that upon the ratification of the Protocol of Agreement with reference to the withdrawal of troops and border control, the Mexican Commissioners would be authorized to proceed forthwith to the consideration of the other vital questions. At the session of November 22 this letter, at the request of the Mexican Commissioners, was slightly amended, and in its final form reads as follows:

November 22, 1916.

To The Honorable Luis Cabrera, The Honorable Ygnacio Bonillas, The Honorable Alberto J. Pani,

Gentlemen: Having arrived at an agreement as to the withdrawal of troops and border control, we desire, in accordance with instructions from the President of the United States, to request an assurance from the Citizen First Chief of the Constitutionalist Army entrusted with the Executive Power of the Mexican Nation that when the above-mentioned agreement is approved by both governments, you are authorized to meet at once and take up with the American Commissioners those questions deemed by the American Government of vital importance; such as protection of life and property of foreigners in Mexico, the establishment of an international claims commission, and such other questions as may be submitted by the American or Mexican Commissioners affecting the continuance and strengthening of the friendly relations between the two countries, with a view to arriving at definite conclusions, to be submitted to the two governments for their approval.

We understood from the examination of the notes exchanged between the Departments of State of the two countries that as soon as an agreement satisfactory to both countries with reference to withdrawal of troops and border control was reached, we should immediately pass to the consideration of the other questions deemed vital to the strengthening of cordial relations between the two countries. This view has not been accepted by all of the Mexican Commissioners. It is essential, therefore, for us to know whether the First Chief’s interpretation of the authority of this Commission is such as to empower you to proceed, as soon as the agreement relating to the withdrawal of troops and border control is approved, to the consideration of the other questions which the American Commissioners deem of vital importance. It is, of course, understood, as we have repeatedly stated that the fulfilment of the terms of the agreement as to withdrawal of troops and border control shall not be made dependent in any way upon our agreement concerning the questions referred to in the body of this letter.

We beg [etc.]

Franklin K. Lane

George Gray

John R. Mott

Furthermore, at the session of November 22, the American Commissioners informed the Mexican Commissioners that they would submit the proposed Protocol of Agreement to their Government, for approval, when the assurance asked for in the above letter was given. At the session of Friday, November 24, the Protocol was signed by the American and Mexican Commissioners. (Copy of Protocol follows.)

Protocol of agreement ad referendum. Withdrawal of American troops from Mexican territory and protection of American-Mexican international boundary.

Memorandum of an Agreement signed this twenty-fourth day of November, one thousand nine hundred and sixteen, by Franklin K. Lane, George Gray, and John R. Mott, Special Commissioners of the President of the United States of America, and Luis Cabrera, Ygnacio Bonillas, and Alberto J. Pani, Special Commissioners of the Citizen First Chief of the Constitutionalist Army entrusted with the Executive Power of the Mexican Nation:

Article I

The Government of the United States agrees to begin the withdrawal of American troops from Mexican soil as soon as practicable, such withdrawal, subject to the further terms of this agreement, to be completed not later than ——; that is to say forty (40) days after the approval of this agreement by both Governments.

Article II

The American commander shall determine the manner in which the withdrawal shall be effected, so as to ensure the safety of the territory affected by the withdrawal.

Article III

The territory evacuated by the American troops shall be occupied and adequately protected by the Constitutionalist forces, and such evacuation shall take place when the Constitutionalist forces have taken position to the south of the American forces so as to make effective such occupation and protection. The Mexican commander shall determine the plan for the occupation and protection of the territory evacuated by the American forces.

Article IV

The American and Mexican commanders shall deal separately, or wherever practicable in friendly cooperation, with any obstacles which may arise tending to delay the withdrawal. In case there are any further activities of the forces inimical to the Constitutionalist Government which threaten the safety of the international border along the northern section of Chihuahua, the withdrawal of American forces shall not be delayed beyond the period strictly necessary to overcome such activities.

Article V

The withdrawal of American troops shall be effected by marching to Columbus, or by using the Mexican Northwestern Railroad to El Paso, or by both routes, as may be deemed most convenient or expedient by the American commander,

Article VI

Each of the Governments parties to this agreement shall guard its side of the international boundary. This, however, does not preclude such cooperation on the part of the military commanders of both countries, as may be practicable.

Article VII

This agreement shall take effect immediately upon approval by both Governments. Notification of approval shall be communicated by each Government to the other.

In testimony whereof, we have signed, sealed and interchanged reciprocally, this Protocol of Agreement, ad referendum, in the English and Spanish languages, at Atlantic City, New Jersey, this twenty-fourth day of November, in the Year of our Lord, one thousand nine hundred and sixteen.

Franklin K. Lane, [seal]

Geo. Gray [seal]

John R. Mott [seal]

Luis Cabrera [seal]

Y. Bonillas [seal]

A. J. Pani [seal]

At the time of signing it was understood by the American and Mexican Commissioners that the Protocol would not be submitted to the Government of the United States for approval until the American Commissioners had received the assurance asked for in their letter of November. It was, furthermore, decided that if the Protocol were approved by Mr. Carranza, and the further assurance were given that the Mexican Commissioners were authorized to proceed to the consideration of the other questions deemed of vital importance, the Commission would reassemble on Friday, December 8, 1916, at 10 o’clock, at such place as might be designated by the Secretary of State of the United States, after consultation with Mr. Arredondo. There was a further understanding that if Mr. Carranza’s reply was unfavorable, there would be no necessity for further sessions of the Commission.

On December 8 word was received from the Mexican Commissioners that Mr. Pani was returning from Querétaro with the reply of the First Chief, but no indication was given with reference to the nature of this reply. It was evident from information received from the Secretary of the Mexican Commissioners that Mr. Pani was returning from Querétaro with a number of modifications proposed by the First Chief. On December 12 word was received from the Mexican Commissioners, requesting a preliminary conference in Philadelphia, and it was decided to hold this conference on Monday, December 18.

The Commission assembled at 10:45 a.m. at the Bellevue-Stratford Hotel. Mr. Pani presented verbally and informally an account of his conference with the First Chief. At the afternoon session the Mexican Commissioners submitted a formal communication embodying the views of the de facto Government with reference to the proposed Protocol of Agreement. This communication reads as follows:

Philadelphia, December 18, 1916.

To The Honorable Franklin K. Lane, The Honorable George Gray, The Honorable John R. Mott,

Gentlemen: Reducing to writing the subjects which were treated verbally during our session of today, we have the honor of informing you that the Citizen First Chief of the Constitutionalist Army has not ratified the Protocol of Agreement submitted to his consideration, for the reasons which we briefly give herewith:

The First Chief of the Constitutionalist Army considers that, as the presence of the American troops on our soil constitutes a violation of the sovereignty of Mexico, the acceptance of any agreement for the withdrawal of troops subject to conditions which later might justify a postponement in the withdrawal of said troops, would be interpreted as a tacit agreement on the part of the Mexican Government with the present occupation.

The Mexican Government does not wish to place itself in such a position, that owing to unforeseen circumstances which might later occur, it should seem to sanction a posteriori the presence of American troops on Mexican soil.

From this point of view the Mexican Government would desire that the wording of the agreement should be sufficiently explicit, so as not to occasion future difficulties in its interpretation and execution. The Mexican Government was likewise unable to approve the agreement after having been notified of the declared purposes of the American Government, of reserving to itself the faculty of sending into Mexican territory future expeditions in pursuit of outlaws. Under such conditions, the Mexican Government either could not have signed the agreement, because it would have been tantamount to agreeing tacitly to the policy announced by the American Government, or, in case of signing such an agreement, it would have been compelled to protest against new intentions of violating our territory, and this would lead to an unstable and perilous situation for the preservation of peace between both countries, which is precisely what the Mexican Government has tried to avoid by proposing that these conferences be held.

The Citizen First Chief believes that, the mutual respect for the sovereignty of both countries being the only solid basis for the preservation of peace and good relations between Mexico and the United States, the solution of our difficulties must be sought in the cooperation for the protection and vigilance of the border, thus precluding and avoiding causes of friction, instead of following a line of policy pointed out by the American Government, of sending into Mexico future military expeditions, which would only jeopardize said good relations.

As regards the discussion of the other subjects which the American Commission desires to submit to the Mexican delegates, the First Chief confirms the attitude taken by the latter, that such matters should be discussed after the withdrawal of the American troops will have taken place, if happily some conclusion respecting the vigilance and protection of the border be reached.

In brief, the Constitutionalist Government believes that any agreement regarding the withdrawal of American troops from Mexican soil which may be reached, must be effected without implying consent, either express or tacit, with the present occupation, without sanctioning in the future the said occupation, and without authorizing or tolerating in the future a new expedition of American forces into Mexican territory.

The Mexican delegates consider that it is possible to find a new formula which may fulfill the conditions suggested by the First Chief, in view of the good disposition which they do not doubt exists on the part of the American Commissioners to reach an agreement compatible with the respect for the sovereignty of our country.

With the assurance [etc.]

Luis Cabrera

Ygnacio Bonillas

Alberto J. Pani

At the same time the Mexican Commissioners submitted, in concrete form, the proposed changes in the Protocol, as follows:

protocol of agreement, ad referendum, signed at atlantic city, n. j., november 24, 1916.	changes proposed at session held at philadelphia, december 18, 1916.
Article I. The Government of the United States agrees to begin the withdrawal of American troops from Mexican soil as soon as practicable, such withdrawal, subject to the further terms of this Agreement, to be completed not later than—–; that is to say forty (40) days after the approval of this Agreement by both Governments.	Article I. The Government of the United States agrees to begin the withdrawal of American troops immediately after the ratification of this Agreement, and to effect the same in a continuous manner until the complete evacuation of said troops, either by land towards Columbus, or making use of the Mexican Northwestern Railway to El Paso, or through both routes as the American commander may deem more convenient and practicable.
Article II. The American commander shall determine the manner in which the withdrawal shall be effected, so as to ensure the safety of the territory affected by the withdrawal.	Article II. (Omitted in Proposed Protocol.)
Article III. The territory evacuated by the American troops shall be occupied and adequately protected by the Constitutionalist forces, and such evacuation shall take place when the Constitutionalist forces have taken position to the south of the American forces so as to make effective such occupation and protection. The Mexican commander shall determine the plan for the occupation and protection of the territory evacuated by the American forces.	Article II. (Of Proposed Protocol.) The territory evacuated by the American troops shall be occupied and protected by the Constitutionalist forces. The Mexican commander shall determine the plan for the occupation and protection of the territory evacuated by the American forces.
Article IV. The American and Mexican commanders shall deal separately, or wherever practicable in friendly cooperation with any obstacles which may arise tending to delay the withdrawal. In case there are any further activities of the forces inimical to the Constitutionalist Government, which threaten the safety of the international boundary along the northern section of Chihuahua, the withdrawal of American forces shall not be delayed beyond the period strictly necessary to overcome such activities.	Article III. The American and Mexican commanders shall deal separately, or wherever practicable in friendly cooperation, with any obstacles which may arise tending to bar or interfere with the withdrawal.
No corresponding Article in Protocol of November 24th, 1916.	Article IV. Both Governments bind themselves to cooperate in the protection and vigilance of the boundary line, by means of: (a) Full and mutual interchange of information between the military commanders on both sides to the end that such lawless incursions may be anticipated and defended against. (b) Mutual use of railroad on both sides of the border for the carriage of troops, or supplies, or war material, and (c) Mutual scouting within a distance of ten miles of the border, providing that the corresponding permits, between the respective military commanders, be requested and granted in writing, and that said scouting expeditions shall never proceed further than ten miles from any military camp or village of more than one hundred inhabitants.
Article V. The withdrawal of American troops shall be effected by marching to Columbus, or by using the Mexican Northwestern Railroad to El Paso, or by both routes, as may be deemed most convenient or expedient by the American commander.	Article V. Omitted because included in Article I of Proposed Agreement.
Article VI. Each of the Governments parties to this Agreement shall guard its side of the international boundary. This, however, does not preclude such cooperation on the part of the military commanders of both countries as may be practicable.	Article V. (Of Proposed Protocol.) Until a satisfactory agreement is reached for the reciprocal crossing of both countries over the boundary, in pursuit of outlaws, each of the contracting governments shall guard its own side of the boundary line.
Article VII. This Agreement shall take effect immediately upon approval by both Governments. Notification of approval shall be communicated by each Government to the other.	Article VI. This Agreement shall remain in full force for a period of four months from the date of its ratification. If neither of the Governments parties to this Agreement shall give notice to the other, ten days previous to its expiration, of its intention to terminate the same, it shall further remain in force until thirty days after either of the Governments shall have given notice to the other of its intention to end it.

At the session of December 19, further modifications in the Protocol were submitted by the Mexican Commissioners in the following form:

protocol of agreement, ad referendum, signed at atlantic city, n. j., november 24, 1916.	changes proposed by mexican commissioners tuesday, december 19, 1916.
Article I. The Government of the United States agrees to begin the withdrawal of American troops from Mexican soil as soon as practicable, such withdrawal, subject to the further terms of this Agreement, to be completed not later than ——; that is to say forty (40) days after the approval of this Agreement by both Governments.	Article I. The Government of the United States agrees to begin the withdrawal of American troops from Mexican soil immediately after the ratification of this Agreement, and to continue the same until the complete evacuation of said troops.
Article II. The American Commander shall determine the manner in which the withdrawal shall be effected, so as to ensure the safety of the territory affected by the withdrawal.	Omitted in Proposed Protocol.
Article III. The territory evacuated by the American troops shall be occupied and adequately protected by the Constitutionalist forces, and such evacuation shall take place when the Constitutionalist forces have taken position to the south of the American forces so as to make effective such occupation and protection. The Mexican commander shall determine the plan for the occupation and protection of the territory evacuated by the American forces.	Article II. The territory evacuated by the American troops shall be occupied and protected by the Constitutionalist forces, in accordance with the plan determined by the Mexican commander.
Article IV. The American and Mexican commanders shall deal separately, or wherever practicable in friendly cooperation with any obstacles which may arise tending to delay the withdrawal. In case there are any further activities of the forces inimical to the Constitutionalist Government, which threaten the safety of the international border along the northern section of Chihuahua, the withdrawal of American forces shall not be delayed beyond the period strictly necessary to overcome such activities.	Article III. The American and Mexican commanders shall deal separately, or wherever practicable in friendly cooperation, with any obstacles which may arise tending to bar or interfere with the withdrawal.
Article V. The withdrawal of American troops shall be effected by marching to Columbus or by using the Mexican Northwestern Railroad to El Paso, or by both routes, as may be deemed most convenient or expedient by the American commander.	Article IV. The withdrawal of American troops shall be effected by marching to Columbus, or by using the Mexican Northwestern Railroad to El Paso, or by both routes, as may be deemed most convenient or expedient by the American commander.
Article VI. Each of the Governments parties to this Agreement shall guard its side of the international boundary. This, however, does not preclude such cooperation on the part of the military commanders of both countries as may be practicable.	Article V. Until a satisfactory agreement is reached for the mutual protection of the border and the pursuit of outlaws, each of the contracting Governments shall protect its side of the boundary line. This, however, does not preclude such cooperation on the part of the military commanders of both countries as may be practicable.
Article VII. This Agreement shall take effect immediately upon approval by both Governments. Notification of approval shall be communicated by each Government to the other.	Article VI. This Agreement shall take effect immediately upon approval by both Governments. Notification of approval shall be communicated by each Government to the other.

At this session the American Commissioners presented their reply to the communication of the Mexican Delegates of December 18. This reply reads as follows:

Bellevtte-Stratford Hotel,
Philadelphia, December 19, 1916.

To The Honorable Luis Cabrera, The Honorable Ygnacio Bonillas, The Honorable Alberto J. Pani,

Gentlemen: After careful consideration of the proposals of the Mexican Commissioners as to changes in the Protocol, the American Commissioners are unanimously of the opinion that the proposed changes are impracticable and unwise. Each of the suggested changes was the subject of extended discussion by the entire Commission, and the members of the Commission could not come to an agreement upon them.

There is no reason, in the opinion of the American Commissioners, why this Protocol should not be approved by both Governments. After months of study and discussion, the Protocol was agreed to by all members of the commission. It was the result of their best united effort to compose the differences between the two countries. It was submitted to the First Chief with the request for an assurance from him that, if it were satisfactory to him, the Mexican Commissioners would be authorized to proceed to the discussion of other vital questions.

We have not insisted nor urged that the Mexican Government recognize our right to occupy Mexican territory, even under such novel and necessitous conditions as have existed; and it will not be contrary to the spirit of our discussion for the approval of your Government to be given to this instrument with such expression of Mexican authority and right as to you may be desirable. Such expression could be spread upon the minutes or could be added to the Protocol.

For Mexico to reject the Protocol as unsatisfactory ends the function of this Commission. For Mexico to refuse to give the assurance asked for must have the same effect. If an agreement is reached the United States will withdraw her troops in strict compliance therewith, but the agreement to do this must be taken as equivalent to the fulfilment of the promise. To refuse to recognize this makes an issue of the good faith of the United States.

We would view with keenest regret such an inevitable termination of the work of the Commission, upon which we all entered with high hopes. We earnestly trust that the situation will be so met as to permit us to advance to the constructive consideration of those questions the proper settlement of which will tend to strengthen the ties of friendship between Mexico and the United States.

We beg [etc.]

Franklin K. Lane

George Gray

John R. Mott

The reply thus submitted practically brought the session to a close. It was decided to adjourn, to meet at 11 o’clock on the morning of Tuesday, January 2, 1917, provided that on or before Tuesday, December 26, 1916, the Chairman of the American and Mexican sections of the Commission deemed it necessary to reconvene the Commission. At this session a statement was made to the Mexican Commissioners on behalf of the American Commissioners, and was inserted in the minutes, reading as follows:

It shall be understood that if we meet for the discussion of other questions, the American Commissioners will not ask that any final agreement shall be reached as to any such questions while the American troops are in Mexico.

On Wednesday, December 27, 1916, Mr. Cabrera went to Washington, where he held a conference with Secretary Lane, and submitted the reply of the Mexican Commissioners to the communication of the American Commissioners of December 19. This reply reads as follows:

New York, December 27, 1916,

To The Honorable Franklin K. Lane, The Honorable George Gray, The Honorable John R. Mott,

Gentlemen: We are in receipt of instructions from the First Chief of the Constitutionalist Army in charge of the Executive Power of the Mexican Republic, which enable us to reply to your letter of the 19th instant, and confirm his former decision not to approve the Protocol, ad referendum, dated November 24, 1916. We deem it unnecessary in this letter to dwell upon the considerations which have led the Mexican Government to withhold its approval of the Protocol, inasmuch as they have been clearly set forth in our letter of the 18th instant, and remain unchanged at the present time. The Mexican Government is not willing to agree to the withdrawal of American troops under conditions which, because of subsequent and unexpected circumstances, might be interpreted as legalizing a posteriori the presence of American troops on Mexican soil.

Furthermore, the statement of the American Government reserving to itself the right to send further military expeditions into Mexico in pursuit of outlaws made it practically impossible for the Mexican Government to ratify the proposed Protocol.

In our capacity as members of the Joint Commission, we consider it our duty to exert every effort to the end that the United States and Mexico may find a satisfactory solution of their present difficulties, and we are still confident that it will be possible to reach an understanding, upon the basis of the proposals made to the American Commissioners at the session of Tuesday morning, December 19. We do not doubt that the American Commissioners will be actuated by the same spirit. In any event, we await their decision with regard to future labors of the Commission.

We fail to understand how, in spite of the express terms of the diplomatic correspondence, which led to these conferences, the American Commissioners consider that the functions of the Joint Commission come to an end because of the fact that the Protocol is unsatisfactory to the Mexican Government, or because we are not disposed to discuss the other matters, which the American Commissioners wish to consider as long as the American forces have not left our territory, and no agreement has been reached concerning the protection and safeguarding of the border.

The Mexican and American Joint Commission was created for the purpose of studying and proposing to their respective governments

“an immediate solution to the two points which constitute the real cause of the controversy between the two countries, to wit, * * * the retirement of the American forces * * * and the protection of the frontier” (Notes of the Mexican Government of July 4 and August 2, 1916),

and in case that

“happily a solution satisfactory to both Governments of the questions set forth * * * may be reached, the Commission may also consider such other matters the friendly arrangement of which would tend to improve the relations of the two countries; it being understood that such recommendations as the Commission may make shall not be binding upon the respective Governments until formally accepted by them.” (Note of the State Department of the 28th of July, 1916.)

The Joint Commission after three months of labor was unable to reach any solution concerning the protection and safeguarding of the border, and the Mexican Delegation had to confine itself to accepting an agreement concerning the withdrawal of American troops on the only terms to which the American Delegation would agree. This does not mean that an agreement more satisfactory to both countries could not have been found but rather that the Protocol was accepted with the idea of bringing the discussions to a conclusion and of formulating a concrete proposal for submission to our Government, since, as the American Commissioners may recall, we were not, as they were, in a position previously to consult our Government regarding each of the terms of the Protocol. It was clearly understood, furthermore, that the above-mentioned Protocol was to be submitted to the judgment of the Mexican Government, which Government reserved its freedom of action concerning the same. If, therefore, in conformity with the diplomatic correspondence which led to the appointment of the Commission, with the credentials of the Mexican Commissioners, with the tenor of the discussions of the Commission and with the wording of the Protocol itself; this agreement was to be submitted to the approval of the First Chief, we fail to understand how the mere fact that it has not been ratified by him should be construed as a reason for bringing the conference to an end. It would be incompatible with the above-mentioned facts, to assume that the Protocol must be ratified in the terms formulated by the Joint Commission. This would be equivalent to stating that the Mexican Government was deprived of its freedom of action; a conclusion contrary to diplomatic practice, even in negotiations between plenipotentiaries.

We also wish to call your attention to the fact, that, according to the diplomatic correspondence, the functions of the Joint Commission cannot extend to questions other than those relating to the international boundary until a solution satisfactory to both countries had been reached with reference to this matter. Our Government believes that, under present conditions, we should not discuss these other matters as long as American troops remain on Mexican soil. This does not mean a lack of confidence in the good faith of the United States, but is dictated by a proper regard for the dignity of our country. If, as was stated on several occasions during our recent sessions in Philadelphia, it is possible to effect the complete withdrawal of American forces in one week, the discussion of the other matters would not be deferred for any considerable period.

Awaiting your esteemed reply [etc.]

Luis Cabrera

Ygnacio Bonillas

Alberto J. Pani

On Tuesday, January 2, 1917, the American Commissioners assembled in the private office of Secretary Lane, Department of the Interior, Washington, D. C, to consider the reply of the Mexican Commissioners. It was decided to send a further communication to the Mexican Commissioners, the final form of which was agreed upon at a conference held on Wednesday, January 3, 1917. This reply reads as follows:

January 3, 1917.

To The Honorable Luis Cabrera, The Honorable Ygnacio Bonillas, The Honorable Alberto J. Pani,

Gentlemen: We are in receipt of your favor of December 27, announcing that for the second time the First Chief of the Mexican Government has declined to agree to the Protocol submitted to him by both the Mexican and American Commissioners.

In your esteemed favor there are matters concerning which we think it timely that we should speak, lest there be misunderstanding. It is said, for instance, that the Mexican Government is not willing to agree to the withdrawal of the American troops under conditions, which, because of subsequent and unexpected circumstances, might be interpreted as legalizing a posteriori the presence of American troops on Mexican soil.

It may suffice as expressive of our view to quote from our letter to you of December 19, in which this passage will be found:

“We have not insisted nor urged that the Mexican Government recognize our right to occupy Mexican territory, even under such novel and necessitous conditions as have existed; and it will not be contrary to the spirit of our discussion for the approval of your Government to be given to this instrument with such expression of Mexican authority and right as to you may be desirable. Such expression could be spread upon the minutes or could be added to the Protocol.”

It will be recalled also that during our conferences this preamble to any proposed Protocol was tendered by us as expressive of our friendly attitude:

“Whereas, the so-called punitive expedition of the United States, under the command of General John Pershing, into the territory of Mexico, was undertaken for the sole purpose of pursuing and capturing, if possible, the bandit Francisco Villa and the band under his command, or of dispersing the same, and

“Whereas, the said expedition, from the necessity of the situation, was obliged to start with the utmost promptness, and acted under the tacit assumption of the acquiescence of the Mexican Government, after understood to be informally expressed, and

“Whereas, there is no longer necessity for the presence of American troops on Mexican territory, and

“Whereas, the American Government has no desire to continue that presence against the protest of the Mexican Government, or even to appear to violate the sovereignty of Mexico:

It is therefore agreed” * * *

Again it is stated by you that

“The statement of the American Government reserving to itself the right to send further military expeditions into Mexico in pursuit of outlaws made it practically impossible for the Mexican Government to ratify the proposed Protocol.”

We beg to call your attention to the fact that such statement was not included in the Protocol. It was made in the form of an announcement of the policy which this Government would be compelled to follow if, unhappily, raids such as the Columbus massacre were repeated. The language to which you refer was this:

“It is essential, as a matter of governmental policy, that the United States reserve the right to deal with any serious hostile incursion from Mexico into American territory as may be deemed advisable at the time, including the right to pursue marauders into Mexican territory when such pursuit is necessary to our own protection. Duly mindful of the obligations imposed upon us by international law, such pursuit will not be intended, and should not be considered an act hostile to the Constitutionalist Government of Mexico.”

This was a frank declaration of what our Government considered its right of self-protection, and was worded so that any such action, if found later to be necessary, would be undertaken with due regard for the obligations imposed by international law, and should not be regarded as an act of hostility. So long as Mexico was not able to safeguard its side of the international boundary we do not wish to have a pursuit of our common enemy regarded as an act adverse to your interest, and we gave this notice as a word of caution against a wrong interpretation being placed upon our act either by your people or by our own.

With reference to your proposals of December 19, we would respectfully represent that such proposals called for an unconditional withdrawal of our troops from Mexico, one that should begin immediately and be continuous hereafter, without stating any definite time when the withdrawal should be effected. The provision in the signed Protocol was that the American troops should withdraw within forty days after ratification of the agreement by both Governments, and this was inserted at your request, and not at ours, it being your desire that a definite date should be fixed.

In the same proposals you omitted Article II, of the Protocol which reads:

“The American Commander shall determine the manner in which the withdrawal shall be effected, so as to ensure the safety of the territory affected by the withdrawal.”

Why so reasonable a provision should be eliminated was not made apparent.

Under Article III of the Protocol agreed to it was provided that our tooops abandoned the territory now occupied, such territory should be occupied and held by your troops. This you omit from your proposals, although it was clearly intended to give to the de facto Government the territory abandoned and insure against its occupation by bandits who might threaten our border and harass your own people.

In Article IV of the Protocol, it had been agreed that:

“In case there are any further activities of the forces inimical to the Constitutionalist Government which threaten the safety of the international border along the northern section of Chihuahua, the withdrawal of American forces shall not be delayed beyond the period strictly necessary to overcome such activities.”

This provision which was also omitted in your proposals was manifestly a limitation upon our right to delay our withdrawal for any period longer than necessary to overcome those forces inimical to your Government.

You state that one reason why the Mexican Commissioners have not been disposed to discuss other matters than the withdrawal of troops and the protection of the border is that an agreement has not been reached concerning protection and safeguarding of the border.

Again you refer to this same point in the language: “The Joint Commission, after three months of labor, was unable to reach any solution concerning the protection and safeguarding of the border, etc.”

After repeated efforts to frame a system of cooperative border control, the Commission concluded that the wisest system that could be devised would be one made by the army officers of both Governments stationed at the border. The Protocol signed at Atlantic City recognizes the possibility of such cooperation, and our promise was made that an effort in this direction would be seriously undertaken through the War Department.

While your letter and the proposals made suggest an unconditional withdrawal, it has certainly been our conception of the duty of this Commission that it was to find wise conditions upon which the withdrawal could be made; otherwise there would have been no purpose in the conference. The language of our respective letters of authority gives proof that it was contemplated by both Governments that there were matters of moment upon which agreement was necessary or advisable before withdrawal could reasonably be expected by you or effected by us. Indeed, we recall no proposal during the conference from you that did not contain conditions precedent to withdrawal.

In our communication of September 22 this question was presented:

“Would this be a satisfactory program for the Joint Commission:

“That while the military details of a plan of border control formulated by us are under consideration at Washington, we pass to the consideration of three questions:

• “1. Protection of life and property of foreigners in Mexico
• “2. Establishment of a claims commission
• “3. Religious tolerance

“It being understood between us that our effort shall be to reach a tentative understanding upon those questions which the American Commissioners regard as of certainly no less importance than that of border control, and it being further understood that the border control matter shall not be made dependent in any way upon our agreement upon these above-mentioned questions.”

Under your interpretation of your authority, our conferences were limited to the question of withdrawal and border control, and we asked assurance that if the Protocol regarding withdrawal and border control was signed we could immediately pass to those other questions of vital importance to us. To allay all fear that the presence of American troops would be used to compel an agreement upon these matters that would not be entirely agreeable to you, the American Commissioners spread upon the minutes this statement:

“It shall be understood that if we meet for the discussion of other questions the American Commissioners will not ask that any final agreement shall be reached as to any such questions while the American troops are in Mexico.”

We have read with much interest the portion of your communication relating to the diplomatic correspondence leading up to the appointment of this Commission and we desire to express our complete accord with the views you have expressed as to the reserved right of either Government to withhold its approval of an agreement signed ad referendum. But the exhaustive discussions of the last three months have convinced us that the attitude of the de facto Government as to this Protocol, as well as to the character of the amendments proposed by you at the sessions in Philadelphia, would make such further discussion fruitless and would only delay the solution of the questions now pending between the United States and Mexico.

We are sincerely reluctant to contemplate the closing of our conferences as a Commission. You may perhaps have been under embarrassment, as you suggest, because of your long distance from the seat of your Government. With this in mind we took frequent and sometimes extended adjournment, that full opportunity to consult your home officials might be given. It is not, however, in our mind that mutual effort in the direction of composing the differences between the two Governments should cease. We would suggest the advisability of all further negotiations being conducted under conditions which would make this embarrassment impossible. We trust that you share with us the hope that the prolonged, thorough and intimate conferences that we have had during the recent months may not be without fruit.

We beg [etc.]

Franklin K.

Lane George

Gray John R. Mott

The delivery of this communication was entrusted to Dr. Mott, and he was futhermore, requested to take up with the Mexican Commissioners the question of the desirability of holding any further sessions of the Commission. At the same time the American Commissioners decided to submit a preliminary report to the President. An appointment was made for a conference with the President at five o’clock on the afternoon of Wednesday, January 3, and at this conference a report was submitted to the President in the following terms:

January 3, 1917.

To The President: The Commissioners appointed by you on August 31 last to meet with the Commissioners appointed by the First Chief of the Constitutionalist Army, to consider and if possible arrive at a satisfactory solution of the controversies pending between the Government of the United States and the de facto Government of Mexico with reference to the withdrawal of American troops from Mexican soil, the protection of the international boundary, and such other questions as might be submitted by the respective Governments, beg to present a report regarding the situation which now confronts them.

Your Commissioners have addressed themselves preferentially to the two questions above mentioned, namely, the withdrawal of troops and the safeguarding of the border. From the beginning of our negotiations we have impressed upon the Mexican Commissioners the importance of disposing of these two questions at the earliest possible moment, in order that the Commission might proceed to the consideration of a constructive program which would be helpful to Mexico and at the same time would satisfactory settle those matters which are of vital concern to the United States and profoundly affect the amicable relations between the two countries. Of these, the most important is the protection of life and property of Americans and other foreigners who have taken up residence in Mexico.

After prolonged negotiations, which consumed far more time than we had anticipated, the Commission reached an agreement on November 24, 1916, with reference to the withdrawal of troops and the safeguarding of the international boundary. This agreement was signed by all the members of the American and Mexican delegations, and it was our earnest hope and expectation that we would proceed forthwith to the consideration of the other questions, which we regard as quite as vital to Mexico as to the United States. In this hope and expectation we have been disappointed. At the session of the Commission held in Philadelphia on December 18 we were informed that the First Chief had refused to ratify the Protocol for reasons set forth in a letter of the Mexican Commissioners dated December 18, and which is appended hereto. [Printed ante]

At the session of December 19 the Mexican Commissioners submitted a series of amendments to the Protocol, which received the careful consideration of the American Commissioners, and were found to be unacceptable. Our conclusions were communicated to the Mexican Commissioners in a letter dated December 19, a copy of which is submitted herewith. [Printed ante]

We have now received from the Mexican Commissioners a written communication dated December 27, in which the refusal of the First Chief to ratify the Protocol is confirmed. [Printed ante]

The sessions of the Commission held since the signing of the Atlantic City Agreement, and the careful consideration given by your Commissioners to the amendments to the Protocol proposed by the Mexican Commissioners have forced us reluctantly to the decision that no agreement satisfactory to both parties with reference to the withdrawal of troops and border control can be reached by this Commission.

Because of the urgency of the other questions involved in our relations with Mexico, your Commissioners have reached the conclusion that the interests of both countries require that the question of the withdrawal of American troops be settled directly by the Government of the United States.

We remain firm in our conviction that the Protocol signed at Atlantic City on November 24, 1916, fully safeguards the interests of both countries. We, therefore, beg to suggest that it would be wise for the Government of the United States, voluntarily and of its own initiative, to put the provisions of the Protocol into effect, as far as practicable. This question once disposed of, it may be possible to pass on, through direct diplomatic negotiations with the executive head of the de facto Government, to the grave and serious questions to which we believe that Government cannot refuse attention.

The careful study of the mass of information submitted to us through official and other channels, has created in our minds the deepest misgivings with reference to the course of events in Mexico. We have eagerly searched for indications that the revolutionary government was fulfilling the avowed purposes of its platform, but this has revealed to us most disquieting economic, financial, sanitary and social conditions, which involve untold misery and suffering for the masses of the people. Furthermore, the proceedings of the Constitutional Convention now in session at Querétaro indicate a fixed and settled purpose to place in the organic law of the Republic provisions which tend to make the position of foreigners in Mexico intolerable, which open the door to confiscation of legally acquired property and which carry with them the germs of serious international friction.

It is this grave menace that creates in us the deepest anxiety and a desire no less insistent to have these matters taken up with the least possible delay.

We are deeply sensible, Mr. President, of the confidence which you have reposed in us, and sincerely trust that our prolonged conferences with the Mexican Commissioners may have served to clear the way for the carrying forward, through other and more direct channels, of the negotiations which have so closely occupied us in recent months.

We have the honor [etc.]

Franklin K. Lane

George Gray

John R. Mott

On Sunday, January 6, Commissioner Pani went to Washington to have a talk with Secretary Lane. He submitted to Secretary Lane a letter from the Mexican Commissioners which was intended as a reply to the communication of January 3. This reply reads as follows:

January 6, 1917.

To The Honorable Franklin K. Lane, The Honorable George Gray, The Honorable John R. Mott,

Gentlemen: We beg to acknowledge receipt of your letter of January 3, fully appreciative of the cordial spirit which animates the same.

We believe with you that our association of more than three months has laid the foundation for a closer understanding between the two countries. We are furthermore confident of the happy conclusion of further efforts, if, as we are certain will occur, the obstacles which the Joint Commission encountered up to the present time are removed.

We beg [etc.]

Luis Cabrera

Ygnacio Bonillas

Alberto J. Pani

At this conference, it was decided to hold a meeting in New York on Monday, January 15.

The Commission assembled on Monday afternoon, January 15, at the Hotel Biltmore. At this session a number of proposals were submitted both by the American and the Mexican Commissioners, the purpose of which was to issue a joint statement on the work and recommendations of the Commission. After prolonged discussion no agreement could be reached, and it was decided to adjourn sine die without issuing any formal statement.

On Tuesday, January 16, Secretary Lane submitted to the President, in the name of the American Commissioners, a supplementary report, reading as follows:

“January 16, 1917.

“Dear Mr. President: Your Commission, appointed to act with a like body created by the Government of Mexico to compose the differences between the two Governments, begs to advise that the joint body adjourned yesterday, January 15. At our meeting yesterday the American Commissioners proposed the following resolution:

“Whereas, this Commission was created by the Governments of Mexico and the United States to promote a better understanding between the two peoples, and thus bring about a relationship that would make for their mutual interest and the realization of their ideals as neighboring Republics, and

“Whereas, it is our hope that by the friendly and long-continued consideration of those conditions along our common border and within Mexico, which have given rise to the present difficulties, a door has been opened to such a fuller understanding of the purposes and plans of both Mexico and the United States,

“It is hereby resolved, that this Commission does now adjourn, recommending to both Governments the reestablishment of full diplomatic relations under which may be carried on directly the further negotiations necessary to secure these ends:

• “1. The protection of the life, property and other rights of foreigners in Mexico
• “2. The establishment of an International Claims Commission
• “3. The elimination of the causes that may lead to further misunderstanding, friction or clash between Americans and Mexicans.”

This the Mexican Commissioners would not agree to, unless it was preceded by a recommendation on the part of the American Commissioners that the troops be withdrawn. To this, in accordance with your instructions, we refused to accede. Inasmuch as the Mexican Government had refused to agree to the Protocol signed by the members of the Joint Commission, we told them that the matter of withdrawal was now one which must be left entirely to the determination of yourself, as President.

The Commission having come to an end, we suggest that the United States is now free to follow any course in the matter of such withdrawal which may seem consistent with the protection of our own territory and the friendly relations which it wishes to promote between the two Republics. We would recommend that full diplomatic relations be reestablished between the two Governments for the further consideration of the matters set forth in the above resolutions.

Respectfully yours,

Franklin K. Lane

Appendix B

The Citizen First Chief of the Constitutionalist Army in charge of the Executive Power of the Nation, in view of the merits which distinguish you, has deemed it proper to appoint you as Member of the Diplomatic Commission, made up of Mr. Luis Cabrera, Attorney-at-law, of yourself, and of Mr. Ygnacio Bonillas, Civil Engineer, under the Chairmanship of the first named, and which must proceed to Washington in order to treat with the Commission appointed for the purpose by the American Government regarding the questions which have arisen between Mexico and the United States, respecting the Columbus incident, as well as the other points which may be submitted to your consideration by the American Commission, and such as the Mexican Diplomatic Commission consider proper in order to establish the frankest cordiality in the relations between both countries, with the understanding that the decisions and rulings which may be taken by the Commissions of both countries may be previously submitted to the approval of the Citizen First Chief of the Constitutionalist Army and ratified by him, in keeping with special and specific instructions which have been given you in writing by order of the aforesaid Citizen First Chief.

All of which I make known to you for your guidance, trusting that you will fulfil your mission with the zeal and patriotism that distinguish you.

Constitution and Reforms

Given at Mexico City on the third day of August, nineteen hundred and sixteen.

The Secretary,

C. Aguilar

To Alberto J. Pani,
Civil Engineer, (Present)

2. Not printed.