341.115L89/10
The Consul General at London (Skinner) to the Secretary of State
[Received January 29.]
Sir: I have the honor to refer again to the Department’s instruction No. 3463, (341.115L89/6 So), of October 28, 1919,37 in regard to the above matter.38 As stated in my despatch, No. 9013, of the 9th instant,37 the Procurator General considers that in this matter it will be necessary for a further application to be made to the Prize Court for directions as to the disposal of the funds.
As the decision of the Procurator General seems to me not in accordance with the arrangement suggested by Lord Curzon in his note of December 6, 1919,39 setting forth that in proper cases an order would be given for the release of the proceeds of the goods already sold, I wrote to that official as follows:—
“It is my understanding that in the time of the late Sir Samuel Evans when goods in transit to the United States were seized and released against payment into court of varying sums of money, the court at that time satisfied itself as to the fact of American ownership. I venture to hope that having in mind that the obvious purpose of the recent formal correspondence between our two governments is to bring about the prompt settlement of outstanding cases without recourse to legal proceedings, you will be able to reconsider your statement of January 7 that it will be necessary for further application to be made to the court for direction as to the disposal of the funds.”
I have now received a reply dated the 10th instant in which the Procurator General thus expresses his views:— [Page 634]
“I am directed by H.M. Procurator General to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 9th instant, relative to the terms upon which the goods detained under the Order in Council of the 11th March 1915 are to be released to American claimants.
I am to point out, that in the Note addressed by the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to the United States Ambassador on the 6th December last to which you refer, it was specifically stated that His Majesty’s Government would, in proper cases, consent to an Order for release upon such terms as the Court might deem just, from which it was clear that in some cases it would be necessary for application to be made to the Court to decide these terms.
Where a claim has already been the subject of formal argument before the Court, the Procurator General is not in a position to deal with the matter, without the further directions of the President.”
In regard to the foregoing I should like to point out that if the Procurator General contemplates assuming this position in regard to the great number of cases in which goods have been sold after having been seized by the Order in Council of March 11, 1915, it will simply mean recourse to the Prize Court in the old fashioned way by means of Counsel and with all the usual delays dependent upon legal processes in this country. It seems to me that the object of the correspondence between the Department of State and the Foreign Office was undertaken with a view to finding an easy and expeditious method of concluding claims of this character but I am very much afraid that we shall not be greatly assisted by the Procurator General in his present mood.
I have [etc.]