Learn about the beta

List of Papers

[Unless otherwise specified, the correspondence is from or to officials in the Department of State.]

GENERAL

Conference on the Limitation of Armament, Washington, November 12 1921–February 6, 1922

the four-power treaty relating to insular possessions and insular dominions in the region of the pacific ocean

Date and number Subject Page
1921 Undated Memorandum, in Outline Form, by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with Mr. Balfour, of the British Delegation, November 11, 1921
Discussion of Far Eastern questions; sentiment regarding Anglo-Japanese Alliance; Balfour’s submission of two memoranda of agreements on Far Eastern questions.
1
Undated [Rec’d Nov. 11] Memorandum by Mr. Balfour, of the British Delegation
Proposal of two Far Eastern arrangements: (1) a tripartite arrangement to replace Anglo-Japanese Alliance and to provide for preservation of peace and maintenance of territorial status quo (text printed), (2) an arrangement dealing with China.
2
Undated Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with the Counselor of the Japanese Embassy, November 26, 1921
Counselor’s presentation of memorandum representing Shidehara’s personal views with respect to Anglo-Japanese Alliance, for consideration pending arrival of instructions from Japanese Government.
3
Undated Draft by Ambassador Shidehara, of the Japanese Delegation, of an Arrangement between Japan, the united States of America, and the British Empire
Arrangement for preservation of peace in Pacific Ocean and maintenance of territorial status quo, designed to replace the Anglo-Japanese Alliance.
4
Undated Memorandum by the Secretary to the British Empire Delegation of a Conversation at the Department of State, December 2, 1921, 5:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m.
Discussion by Hughes, Balfour, and Kato: Japanese attitude toward proposed invitation to France to join a four-power arrangement on subject of Far Eastern possessions; Kato’s intimation he would telegraph his country to expedite reply.
5
Undated Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with Senator Schanzer, of the Italian Delegation, December 3, 1921
Italy’s desire to be associated with four powers in agreement relating to matters in Far East; Hughes’ explanation that four-power agreement concerns only those nations having territorial interests in Pacific.
5
[Page XXII]Undated Draft by the Secretary of State of an Agreement between the United States of America, the British Empire, France, and Japan
Agreement for the preservation of general peace and maintenance of rights of High Contracting Parties with respect to their insular possessions and dominions in Pacific.
(Footnote: Drafting of the above after word was received from Japan that a four-power agreement would be acceptable.)
7
Undated Memorandum by the Technical Adviser of the American Delegation of a Conversation at the Home of the Secretary of State, December 8, 1921, 3 p.m.
Discussion by Hughes and Balfour of mandate issue as it affects pending four-power treaty. A decision to complete agreement as soon as possible and announce it to public.
8
Dec. 8 Memorandum by the Secretary to the British Empire Delegation of a Conversation at the Home of the Secretary of State, December 8, 1921, 4:30 p.m.
Discussion by Hughes, Balfour, Viviani, Jusserand, and Shidehara of terms of draft agreement, Shidehara objecting to inclusion of main islands of Japan in agreement, as possibly interfering with domestic rights of Japan. Suggestion for exchange of notes stating that arrangement would not interfere with domestic matters of High Contracting Parties. Draft of agreement prepared by Hughes (text printed).
13
Dec. 9 Memorandum by the Secretary to the British Empire Delegation of a Conversation at the Home of the Secretary of State, December 9, 1921, 10 a.m.
Discussion as to phraseology of draft agreement, Shidehara conceding inclusion of islands of Japan proper in arrangement. Draft treaty as finally agreed upon (text printed). Decision of Hughes to call meeting of heads of delegations of nine powers in plenary session to announce conclusion of agreement after hearing from France, holding U. S. signature conditional upon agreement with Japan regarding mandated islands.
23
Dec. 9 From Jonkheer van Karnebeek, of the Netherland Delegation
Suggestion that Hughes’ statement to next plenary session of conference contain assurance of U. S. cooperation toward insertion in general arrangement of a formal recognition of the territorial status quo of countries like the Netherlands not a party to the arrangement.
29
Undated Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with M. Viviani, of the French Delegation, December 9, 1921, 6:15 p.m.
Assent of France to four-power treaty and arrangements for plenary session of conference.
30
Dec. 10 To Certain Diplomatic and Consular Officers (tel.)
Lodge’s presentation before plenary session of draft treaty and accompanying U. S. reservations. Excerpt from Lodge’s speech giving purport and limitations of treaty.
30
Dec. 12 Statement Issued to the Press by the Department of State
Announcement of conclusion of agreement with Japan respecting Island of Yap and other mandated islands in the Pacific Ocean north of the Equator; discussion of provisions of agreement.
31
[Page XXIII]Dec. 13 Treaty between the United States of America, the British Empire, France, and Japan
Relating to insular possessions and insular dominions in the region of the Pacific Ocean.
33
Dec. 13 Supplementary Declaration
Understanding concerning mandated islands in the Pacific Ocean, with provision that treaty shall not be considered as U. S. assent to mandates nor preclude agreements between United States and mandatory powers in relation to mandated islands.
36
Undated Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with Ambassador Shidehara, of the Japanese Delegation, December 19, 1921
Japanese request for agreement on interpretation of words “insular possessions and insular dominions” in four-power treaty, which would exclude the main islands of Japan.
37
Dec. 20 Statement Issued to the Press from the White House
Difference of views between President Harding and U. S. delegates on construction of words “insular possessions and insular dominions,” the President being of the opinion that homeland of Japan is excluded but having no objection to the construction of the delegates that homeland is included.
38
Dec. 27 From Ambassador Ricci, of the Italian Delegation
Request for Italian accession to four-power agreement relating to Pacific; reasons for participation.
39
Dec. 29 To Mr. Frank H. Simonds
Refutation of press article which stated France was ignored in preparation of treaty and referred to for signature only; recounting of facts in case.
40
1922 Jan. 3 To Mr. Balfour, of the British Delegation
Draft of proposed identic note to the Netherland Government (text printed) announcing conclusion of treaty and giving assurance that rights of the Netherlands in relation to their insular possessions in the Pacific will be respected.
41
Jan. 7 (1) From the Chargé in Siam (tel.)
Siam’s informal expression of support of treaty; suggestion that Siam might welcome U. S. invitation to indicate diplomatic adherence thereto.
41
Undated Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with Ambassador Shidehara, of the Japanese Delegation, January 14, 1922
Discussion concerning form of a supplemental agreement for the exclusion of main islands of Japan from four-power treaty; Secretary’s suggestion that main islands be defined.
42
Jan. 24 To Ambassador Jusserand, of the French Delegation
Draft of proposed note from Shidehara submitting supplementary agreement (texts printed) providing that term “insular possessions and insular dominions” shall include only Sakhalin, Formosa, the Pescadores, and islands under mandate of Japan. Transmittal also of copy of proposed identic note to the Netherlands.
43
[Page XXIV]Jan. 28 To M. Sarraut, of the French Delegation
Transmittal of revised draft of proposed supplementary agreement substituting “Karafuto,” Japan’s portion of island, for “Sakhalin,” to which Shidehara agrees. Request for French text.
(Sent also to Ambassador Jusserand and Mr. Balfour.)
44
Feb. 2 (7) To the Minister in Siam (tel.)
Instruction to express gratification at Siam’s sentiments and to explain that four-power treaty relates only to problems which concern insular possessions and insular dominions in the region of the Pacific.
45
Feb. 3 (3) To the Minister in the Netherlands (tel.)
Note for Foreign Minister (text printed) announcing conclusion of four-power treaty and giving assurances that Netherland rights in Pacific will be respected.
(Sent, mutatis mutandis, to Minister in Portugal.)
45
Feb. 6 To Ambassador Shidehara, of the Japanese Delegation
No objections to making supplementary agreement.
45
Feb. 6 Agreement between the United States of America, the British Empire, France, and Japan, Supplementary to the Treaty of December 13, 1921
Modifying term “insular possessions and insular dominions,” in its application to Japan, to include only Karafuto, Formosa, the Pescadores, and islands under mandate of Japan.
46
Feb. 6 (457) From the Italian Ambassador
Italy’s understanding that the United States will not oppose request for accession of Italy to four-power treaty if assent of other three Governments is obtained.
47
Feb. 13 To the Italian Ambassador
Confirmation of understanding that United States would not oppose Italian request for accession to treaty if Italy obtained assent of other three signatories, pointing out that chief difficulty in way of accession lies in fact that treaty relates to insular possessions of contracting parties and that Italy has no such possessions.
47
Mar. 11 To Senator Oscar W. Underwood
A reply to questions raised in Senate debate concerning the negotiation and authorship of the treaty.
48
Mar. 13 To Senator Medill McCormick
Transmittal, in accordance with request, of copies of treaties analogous to four-power treaty, with regard (a) to provisions mutually to respect rights in relation to insular territories, and (b) to provisions to arbitrate or meet in conference.
51
[Page XXV]

the treaty for the limitation of naval armament

Date and number Subject Page
1921 Undated Proposal for a Limitation of Naval Armament, Presented by the Secretary of State at the First Plenary Session of the Conference, November 12, 1921
Plan based upon four principles: (1) elimination of capital shipbuilding, (2) scrapping of certain older ships, (3) consideration of existing naval strength of powers, (4) use of capital-ship tonnage as measurement of strength and proportionate allowance of auxiliary combatant craft. Elaboration of plan and list of capital ships to be retained by United States, Great Britain, and Japan.
53
Nov. 17 (390) From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Japanese approval of U. S. proposal in its general aspects; delegation, however, instructed regarding some details as to ships to be scrapped and ships to be kept in commission; approval of proportions allotted to three countries, with slight modifications.
61
Nov. 19 (8) Memorandum by the French Delegation
Naval situation of France: reductions due to war and ship scrapping after armistice; contemplated building program calling for light units only for protection of seacoast and colonies; projected replacement of 10 capital ships.
62
Nov. 19 (392) From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Report that Japanese Cabinet in general was satisfied with U. S. proposal but had left details to Admiral Kato, head of the Japanese delegation. Foreign Minister’s opinion that Government would register no objection with Kato, but that there should be slight modifications.
64
Nov. 19 (199) To the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Press announcement of Japan’s alleged objections to 10: 10: 6 ratio. Instructions to do utmost to influence Japan not to change ratio. Claim that on the basis of existing strength of capital ships, including extent of construction of ships in process, ratio would be nearer 10: 5 than 10: 6.
64
Nov. 23 Memorandum by the Under Secretary of State of a Conversation with Senator Albertini, of the Italian Delegation
Italy’s insistence upon naval parity with France. Its desire to be included in consortium, and inquiry whether this and subjects of petroleum and cables could be brought before conference; reply that these subjects should be settled informally outside of conference.
65
Nov. 23 (396) From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Opinion that no great concessions need be made to Kato, as Kato probably would not be supported by Government if he takes extreme position. Request for information concerning status of negotiations.
67
[Page XXVI]Nov. 27 (202) To the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
U. S. and British agreement on all major points. Japanese demand for 10:7 ratio; and stand on premise that ships under construction should not be included in estimating existing naval strength. Instructions to make clear that there is no value in agreement in principle if fundamental principle as to existing strength is not admitted, and that opposition on this point must be taken as refusal of U. S. proposal.
67
Nov. 30 (403) From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Attempt to organize Japanese press demand for fixed ratio of 10:7 evidently inspired by Washington delegates, Navy Department, and interested outside persons, and not by political side of Government. Conversation with Uchida on points raised in Department’s telegram no. 202, November 27.
68
Nov. 30 Memorandum by the Japanese Naval Experts
Opinion that ships under construction should not be included in estimating existing naval strength; conclusion that Japan has naval strength of at least 70 percent.
69
Undated Memorandum by the American Naval Experts
Refusal to agree with conclusions of Japanese naval experts that ships under construction should not be included in estimating naval strength and that Japan has naval strength of at least 70 percent.
72
Dec. 1 Note by the Secretary to the British Empire Delegation of a Conversation between the Secretary of State and Mr. Balfour, of the British Empire Delegation, December 1, 1921, 3:30 p.m.
Hughes’ objections to inclusion of Japanese uncompleted ship Mutsu in list of capital ships, calling attention to advanced stage of certain U. S. ships toward completion, and necessity for British building in order to maintain ratio. Discussion of Kato’s suggestion for cessation of fortifications in Pacific; Hughes’ differentiation between fortifications for defensive and offensive purposes.
74
Dec. 2 Memorandum by the Secretary to the British Empire Delegation of a Conversation at the Department of State, December 2, 1921, 5:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m.
Deliberations by Hughes, Balfour, and Kato on proportion of capital ships: Kato’s indication that cessation of fortifications in the Pacific might possibly aid in his acceptance of the 10:6 ratio, although he believed Japan was entitled to 10:7 ratio and inclusion of Mutsu. Hughes’ insistence upon including actual percentage of construction in estimating naval strength. Balfour’s opinion that Japan would be secure under 10:6 ratio.
75
Dec. 3 (405) From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Press statement obviously official (text printed) calculated to prepare public mind to consider matter of ratio of naval strength as only part of proposed agreement.
83
[Page XXVII]Dec. 3 (209) To the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Interview with Kato: U. S. position on 10:10:6 ratio restated with additional arguments, supported by Balfour; discussion of inclusion of Mutsu in list of capital ships and question of status quo of naval fortifications in Pacific; Kato’s inability to make definite reply without instructions from Government.
84
Undated Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with Ambassador Jusserand, of the French Delegation, December 5, 1921
French desire to be associated with conversations regarding naval armament; Hughes’ explanation that subject first to be determined is naval ratio between the United States, Great Britain, and Japan, after which subject will be taken up with France.
86
Dec. 7 (412) From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Uchida’s adherence to policy of yielding on ratio as part of general agreement regarding Far Eastern questions, including fortifications.
88
Dec. 10 (414) From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Uchida’s denial that instructions had been given delegation to adhere to 70 percent, affirming that Japan cared more about fortifications in Philippines and Guam than about one battleship more or less; Ambassador’s request that Kato be so instructed.
89
Dec. 12 Memorandum by the Secretary to the British Empire Delegation of a Conversation at the Department of State, December 12, 1921, 4 p.m.
Kato’s consent to 10:10:6 ratio, conditional upon understanding in regard to status quo of fortifications and naval bases in Pacific; main islands of Japan, British dominions, and Hawaii to be excepted. His proposal to scrap Settsu and retain Mutsu, which would necessitate rearranging list of ships so as to preserve ratio, and force Great Britain to build. Explanation to Netherland representative regarding Dutch islands in Pacific.
90
Dec. 14 Memorandum by the Secretary to the British Empire Delegation of a Conversation Held at the Department of State, December 13, 1921, 4 p.m.
Deliberation on rearrangement of list of ships to preserve tonnage ratio, permitting Japan to retain Mutsu and scrap Settsu, the United States to keep Colorado and Washington and scrap North Dakota and Delaware, and Great Britain to build two ships of greater tonnage and scrap certain old ships.
99
Dec. 14 Memorandum by the Secretary to the British Empire Delegation of a Conversation at the Home of the Secretary of State, December 14, 1921, 4 p.m.
Efforts to adjust British tonnage to ratio, in view of British desire to build two ships more powerful and modern than any possessed by other powers. Alternative proposals.
106
[Page XXVIII]Dec. 14 Memorandum by the Secretary to the British Empire Delegation of a Conversation at the Home of the Secretary of State, December 14, 1921, 6:30 p.m.
Deliberation on alternate proposals regarding British capital ships; British proposal to use legend ton as basis for calculating tonnage, thus increasing maximum tonnage from 35,000 tons, American calculation, to 38,000 tons.
115
Dec. 15 Memorandum by the Secretary to the British Empire Delegation of a Conversation at the Department of State, December 15, 1921, 11:45 a.m.
Balfour’s decision to accept plan by which Great Britain would build two capital ships of 35,000 legend tons and scrap four King George Vths. Procedure in regard to France and Italy; proposal that they not be asked to scrap any ships, but that auxiliary craft be subject to same ratio as fleets themselves.
122
Dec. 15 Statement Issued to the Press by the Conference on the Limitation of Armament
Announcement of points of agreement reached between the United States, Great Britain, and Japan with respect to capital ships.
127
Dec. 16 (552) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Personal message to Briand (text printed) explaining terms of provisional agreement reached by the three powers, and pointing out that its success is dependent upon appropriate agreement with France and Italy; proposal to limit French capital ship tonnage to 175,000 tons.
130
Dec. 16 (685) To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
Instructions to deliver message to Briand as sent to France in telegram no. 552 and to state that Great Britain, Japan, and Italy also agree that 175,000 tons of capital ships is fair allowance for France, and that French demand for construction of 10 new ships may destroy work of conference.
133
Undated Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with Ambassador Jusserand, of the French Delegation, December 16, 1921
Secretary’s assertion that he had informed Ambassador while Briand was still at conference, that he thought 175,000 tons capital ships would be about right for France.
133
Dec. 17 (689) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Briand’s assurance that agreement will be reached regarding capital ships but that Parliament will never consent to great reduction in small ships, especially submarines.
134
Dec. 18 From the President of the French Council of Ministers
Acquiescence in proposal of conference regarding tonnage of capital ships, but making formal reservation regarding restriction of defensive ships.
135
[Page XXIX]Dec. 18 (984) From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
Briand’s acceptance of proposal regarding capital ships; adherence, however, to his declaration concerning light cruisers and submarines for defensive purposes.
136
Undated Memorandum of a Conversation at the Department of State, December 19, 1921
Discussion by Hughes, Sarraut, and Jusserand of Briand’s acceptance of 175,000-ton limit for capital ships, Hughes holding that acceptance was unconditional and French delegation insisting acceptance was conditional upon retention of tonnage in fight defensive ships; British desire to eliminate submarines.
137
Dec. 20 (690) To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
Message for Briand (text printed) expressing gratification at his effort to reduce naval armament and hope that satisfactory settlement will be made. Information for Ambassador regarding extravagant demands of French delegation for auxiliary craft, their instructions from Paris and from Briand being inconsistent.
141
Dec. 21 (990) From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
Conversation with Briand in which he promised to communicate to Department approximate minimum of submarines and light craft adopted by Parliament.
141
Dec. 22 (991) From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
Briand’s explanation that he must consult President Millerand and Cabinet, and that he will communicate result to Department.
142
Dec. 23 (999) From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
Oral message from Briand, following Cabinet meeting, which reiterates former tonnage estimate for light craft and submarines, but intimates willingness to discuss modification.
143
Dec. 27 From Mr. Balfour, of the British Delegation
British objection to possible French proposal for flat rate of 60,000 tons of submarines for five powers; desire for total abolition of submarines or diminution in number.
143
1922 Jan. 10 Memorandum by the Secretary to the British Empire Delegation of a Meeting of Heads of Delegations Held at the Pan American Union, January 10, 1922, 3 p.m.
Deliberations by Hughes, Balfour, Sarraut, Kato, and Schanzer on provisions of draft treaty (text printed); adoption of majority of provisions; reservation of several for further discussion; reference to Japanese Government, for approval, of article 19 with accompanying map specifying zone within which status quo as regards fortifications and naval bases in Pacific shall be observed.
144
[Page XXX]Jan. 11 Memorandum by the Secretary to the British Empire Delegation of a Meeting of Heads of Delegations Held at the Pan American Union, January 11, 1922, 11 a.m.
Adoption of several articles under discussion; reservation of articles 10, 13, 19, 22, and 23 for further discussion.
177
Jan. 11 Memorandum by the Secretary to the British Empire Delegation of a Meeting of Heads of Delegations Held at the Pan American Union, January 11, 1922, 3:30 p.m.
Adoption of article 13 and tables of capital ships to be retained. Discussion of rules for scrapping of ships; desire of several powers to retain old capital ships for harbor use; consideration of conversion by United States of Lexingtons into aircraft carriers.
188
Jan. 12 Memorandum by the Secretary to the British Empire Delegation of a Meeting of Heads of Delegations Held at the Pan American Union, January 12, 1922, 11 a.m.
Disclosure of conference proceedings to the press. Renewed discussion of rules for scrapping ships: agreement to eliminate rules 2 (c) and (d), and to retain (f) regarding conversion by France and Italy of certain capital ships to gunnery training ships; to amend rule 3 (a) regarding conversion of uncompleted ships to aircraft carriers; and to amend rule 4 (a) providing for immediate scrapping.
200
Jan. 13 Memorandum by the Secretary to the British Empire Delegation of a Meeting of Heads of Delegations Held at the Pan American Union, January 13, 1922, 3 p.m.
Discussion of articles of revised draft of treaty (text printed); adoption of all articles, except article 19, after agreement on certain additions and amendments.
219
Undated Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with Baron Kato, of the Japanese Delegation, January 16, 1922
Kato’s unofficial communication of his Government’s refusal to agree to proposal with regard to fortifications in Pacific, holding that matter has passed beyond that of fortifications to a domestic political question in Japan. Hughes’ restatement of intent of treaty, and Kato’s request for time in which to bring about an understanding in Japan.
245
Jan. 17 From the Secretary to the British Empire Delegation
Question whether Kato included the Bonin Islands in his proposal to Balfour, December 1, concerning fortifications in the Pacific.
246
Feb. 6 Treaty between the United States of America, the British Empire, France, Italy, and Japan
For limitation of naval armament as conducive to general peace and for relieving burdens of competition in armament.
247
[Page XXXI]

the treaty relating to the use of submarines and noxious gases in warfare

Date and number Subject Page
1922 Feb. 6 Treaty between the United States of America, the British Empire, France, Italy, and Japan
Relating to use of submarines, for protection of lives of neutrals and noncombatants at sea in time of war, and to prevent use of noxious gases and chemicals.
267

the nine-power treaties relating to china

Date and number Subject Page
1921 Nov. 7 Draft by Mr. Balfour, of the British Delegation, of a Treaty between the British Empire, China, France, Japan, and the United States of America
Providing for maintenance of peace in Eastern Asia; preservation of independence of China; application of principle of equal opportunity in China for commerce and industry of all nations; substitution of international cooperation for international rivalry in China.
271
Nov. 16 Statement Made by Mr. Sze, of the Chinese Delegation, at the First Meeting of the Committee on Pacific and Far Eastern Questions
Statement of certain general principles which should guide conference in determination of questions relating to China.
272
Nov. 17 (390) From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Prime Minister’s agreement in general with open-door policy in China; his opinion that there will not be much difficulty in finding common policy on Far Eastern problems; his interest in financial aspect of questions.
274
Dec. 7 (319) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Information concerning internal differences within Chinese delegation and uncompromising attitude of certain of its members. Instructions to make clear the danger of such an obstinate policy.
274
Dec. 11 (443) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Conversation with Foreign Minister concerning attitude of certain members of the Chinese delegation; Foreign Minister’s assurance that Government would support Sze and Koo and would insist that delegation play the game.
275
1922 Feb. 6 Treaty between the United States of America, Belgium, the British Empire, China, France, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, and Portugal
Providing for stabilization of conditions in Far East, safeguarding of rights and interests of China, and promotion of intercourse between China and other powers upon the basis of equality of opportunity.
276
Feb. 6 Treaty between the United States of America, Belgium, the British Empire, China, France, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, and Portugal
Providing for revision of Chinese customs duties for purpose of increasing China’s revenues.
282
[Page XXXII]

resolutions adopted by the conference

Date and number Subject Page
1922 Undated Texts of Resolutions Adopted by the Conference
Resolutions regarding—
(1)
Establishment of commission of jurists to consider amendment of laws of war.
(2)
Limitation of jurisdiction of commission of jurists.
(3)
The sale of ships before ratification of the treaty limiting naval armament.
(4)
Establishment of a board of reference for Far Eastern questions.
(5)
Extraterritoriality in China.
(6)
Foreign postal agencies in China.
(7)
Armed forces in China.
(8)
Radio stations in China, and accompanying declarations.
(9)
Unification of railways in China, and accompanying declaration by China.
(10)
Reduction of Chinese military forces.
(11)
Existing commitments of China or with respect to China.
(12)
Chinese Eastern Railway, approved by powers including China.
(13)
Chinese Eastern Railway, approved by powers other than China.
288

message of president harding to the senate, february 10, 1922—report of the american delegation

Date and number Subject Page
1922 Feb. 10 Message of President Harding to the Senate
Report on Washington Conference on the Limitation of Armament, presenting series of treaties negotiated and signed by delegates, with request for Senate advice and consent to ratification.
298
Feb. 9 Report of the American Delegation
Lists of delegates; U. S. advisory committee; organization and resolutions; discussions on limitation of armament and on Far Eastern questions; general summary.
306

ratifications during 1922 of treaties signed at the conference

Date and number Subject Page
1922 Mar. 31 To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
Instructions to inform Government to which accredited that Senate has advised ratification of four treaties signed at Washington Conference, February 6, 1922; also the four-power treaty signed December 13, 1921, and supplementary treaty, but with reservations and understandings.
(Sent also to Belgium, China, France, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, and Portugal.)
378
[Page XXXIII]Apr. 4 (454) To the Ambassador in Great Britain
Senate reservations and understandings (texts printed) concerning four-power treaty and supplementary treaty. U. S. readiness to ratify treaties, subject to reservations and understandings.
(Sent, mutatis mutandis, to the Ambassadors in France and Japan.)
379
May 5 From the Chinese Minister
Notice of ratification by China of nine-power treaty relating to principles and policies concerning China, treaty relating to Chinese customs tariff, and treaty with Japan for settlement of outstanding questions relative to Shantung.
380
July 27 (125) From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Foreign Minister’s intention to secure Japanese ratification; opinion that U. SI ratification should come first. Request for information as to when the President will ratify.
380
July 28 (80) To the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Instructions to inform Foreign Minister of U. S. approval of treaties and readiness to deposit ratifications as soon as other powers are ready.
381
Aug. 6 (129) From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Note to Foreign Minister, August 1 (text printed) conveying information that President is ready to deposit ratifications, upon being advised of readiness of other powers to do likewise. Foreign Minister’s reply, August 5 (text printed) that, treaties having been ratified, instruments are being forwarded to Washington.
381
Aug. 10 (351) From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
Approval of treaties by British Dominions, as well as by British Government, and expectation that King’s ratification on behalf of Empire will be sent to Washington immediately.
382
Aug. 24 Memorandum by the Under Secretary of State
Notice from British Embassy that British ratifications have been received. Reply advising that ratifications should be held in Embassy until appointed time for joint deposit.
383
Dec. 14 To President Harding
Information for the Senate, indicating which powers have ratified treaties, with dates of ratification.
383

Decision by the United States Not To Participate in the Genoa Conference, April 10–May 19, 1922

Date and number Subject Page
1921 Dec. 27 (697) To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
The President’s desire that Ambassador attend meeting of Supreme Council at Cannes as observer.
384
[Page XXXIV]Jan. 6 From the Unofficial Observer at Cannes (tel.)
Supreme Council resolution (text printed) calling for a conference to be held in March to discuss economic reconstruction in Central and Eastern Europe; desire for U. S. participation in conference, which will be held at Genoa.
384
Jan. 12 From the Assistant Secretary of State
Summary of remarks of Russian Ambassador deploring fact that Bolshevik Government has been invited to send representatives to Genoa Conference and desiring that U. S. policy and position not be abandoned.
386
Jan. 16 From the Italian Ambassador
Invitation to U. S. Government to participate in Genoa Conference.
387
Jan. 20 From the Consul General at London (tel.)
Effort of head of Soviet delegation in London to elicit indication of U. S. willingness to receive sympathetically formal proposals for recognition of Government.
388
Jan. 23 From the Italian Ambassador
Transmittal of proposed agenda of conference.
388
Jan. 23 From the Italian Ambassador
Notification, by Russian request, that Pan-Russian Executive Committee has been called to elect Russian delegation, with full powers, to the Genoa Conference.
389
Jan. 30 (19) From the Ambassador in Italy (tel.)
Evidence that Italian enthusiasm for Genoa Conference has cooled, as it is clear that economic agenda will be overshadowed by political interests. Profound effect of proposals made in the United States that certain nations conserve and disarm before requesting financial favors.
389
Feb. 3 From the Italian Ambassador
Request for U. S. opinion regarding sending of 15 Russian delegates to Genoa Conference, some of whom are from countries not recognized and outside of Europe. Proposal to request Russia to reduce number of delegates.
390
Feb. 26 From the Italian Embassy
Postponement of Genoa Conference; purpose to consult Allied Governments in order that they may choose a new date.
391
Mar. 1 (30) From the Ambassador in Italy (tel.)
Russia’s reply to Italy’s announcement of postponement of conference, which may forecast Russia’s attitude at conference.
392
Mar. 8 To the Italian Ambassador
U. S. decision not to participate in Genoa Conference, on ground that conference appears to be primarily political rather than economic in character.
392
Mar. 13 From the Italian Ambassador
Announcement of April 10, 1922, as date set for Genoa Conference,
394
[Page XXXV]Mar. 24 (33) To the Ambassador in Italy (tel.)
The President’s statement that the Ambassador would be the only U. S. observer at Genoa. Instructions.
394
Mar. 27 (44) From the Ambassador in Italy (tel.)
Information that Italian Foreign Office officials will be present at Genoa, making it possible for him to continue to function as Ambassador while attending conference. Request for instructions.
394
Mar. 31 (41) To the Ambassador in Italy (tel.)
Arrangements as to assistants, expenses, etc.; consideration of sending Logan to Genoa to gather financial and economic information. Instructions to avoid impression of participating in any capacity at conference and to forego all comment.
395
Apr. 5 (151) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
From Boyden: Suggestion for sending Logan on vacation trip to northern Italy, where he might pick up useful information and call on Ambassador Child at Genoa.
396
Apr. 8 (109) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
For Boyden: Authorization for Logan’s visit to Italy, as suggested; his instructions.
396

Negotiations on Behalf of the World War Foreign Debt Commission for the Settlement or Refunding of Debts Owed the United States by Foreign Governments

Date and number Subject Page
1922 Undated [Rec’d Mar. 18] From the British Embassy
Request for information concerning character of conversations to be held on funding of war debts.
396
Apr. 18 From the Secretary of the World War Foreign Debt Commission
Resolution of commission (text printed) to request Hughes to inform world-war debtors to the United States that commission is ready to receive proposals for settlement of obligations. List of such governments and statement of indebtedness (text printed).
397
Apr. 21 To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Instructions to present to Government to which accredited resolution of commission, text of Funding Bill, and statement that commission desires to receive proposals for settlement or refunding; and to inquire whether Government desires to send to Washington financial representatives for direct dealing.
(Instructions to repeat, mutatis mutandis, to Brussels, Prague, Helsingfors, London, Budapest, Rome, Warsaw, Bucharest, and Belgrade.)
399
Apr. 27 (654) From the Belgian Ambassador
His designation to negotiate with commission for settlement of Belgian war debts.
400
[Page XXXVI]May 25 (P. 189) From the Minister of the Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes
His appointment to negotiate with commission for settlement of Yugoslav war debts.
400
June 3 To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Instructions to repeat to Prague, Helsingfors, London, Budapest, Rome, Warsaw, and Bucharest, the Department’s request for report whether Governments have appointed delegates, and when they may be expected to arrive in Washington; desirability of early negotiations.
401
June 9 (59) From the Minister in Poland (tel.)
Appointment of Gliwic, Commercial Counselor of Polish Legation, to represent Poland in negotiations with commission.
401
June 15 (167) To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
Instructions to express informally the hope that the British Government name representatives at an early date so that negotiations may proceed.
402
June 30 From the French Ambassador
Appointment of Parmentier, Director of General Handling of Funds of Ministry of Finance, to represent France in negotiations with commission.
402
July 1 (40) From the Minister in Hungary (tel.)
Appointment of Széchényi, Hungarian Minister at Washington, to represent Hungary in negotiations with commission.
402
July 6 (13) From the Minister in Finland (tel.)
Appointment of Finnish Minister at Washington to represent Finland in negotiations with commission.
403
July 8 From the Czechoslovak Legation
Appointment of Štangler, Counselor of Legation, to represent Czechoslovakia in negotiations with commission.
403
July 15 (294) From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
Statement of Chancellor of Exchequer in House of Commons (text printed) regarding British obligation to the United States and solemn resolve to meet it.
403
July 17 (295) From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
Official notification that British delegation will proceed to the United States early in September to negotiate terms for funding of debt.
404
July 19 From the French President of the Council and Minister of Foreign Affairs
Personal message calling attention to French burden of reconstruction, caused by Germany’s small reparation payments and by French scruples against pressing Allied debtors for payments; hence France’s inability to discharge its debt to the United States.
404
[Page XXXVII]July 27 (126) From the Ambassador in Italy (tel.)
Italy’s acceptance of proposal to send delegation to discuss war debts and inquiry as to opportune time for arrival of delegates.
406
Aug. 4 (1550) From the Ambassador in Great Britain
Balfour’s note, August 1, to the French Ambassador (text printed) requesting the French Government to make arrangements for dealing with Anglo-French loans, the amount of interest and repayment to depend upon what Great Britain has to pay the United States in settlement of war debts; and conveying offer to abandon all further right to German reparations and all claims to repayment by Allies, provided this renunciation formed part of an international settlement.
(Footnote: The same note, mutatis mutandis, was sent by Balfour to the representatives of Italy, Serbia, Rumania, Portugal, and Greece.)
406
Aug. 4 (338) From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
Debate in House of Commons on international debt situation and on Balfour’s note. Statement by Chancellor of Exchequer (excerpts printed) affirming British intention to arrange for funding of war debt to the United States, at same time lamenting fact that each nation cannot consider its subscription to cost of war as a willing contribution to a common success.
410
Aug. 4 (117) To the Ambassador in Italy (tel.)
Instructions to state that most opportune time for arrival of Italian delegates at Washington would be middle of October.
(Footnote: Statement that Italy did not open debt negotiations with commission until 1925.)
411
Aug. 8 (271) To the Commissioner at Riga
Instructions to inform Governments of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania of U. S. debt-refunding plan and of invitation to send delegates to Washington, in view of fact that recognition has been extended to these countries.
411
Aug. 23 To the French President of the Council and Minister of Foreign Affairs
Expression of appreciation of Poincaré’s personal note regarding France’s financial burdens, and assurance that commission will give it consideration.
412
Aug. 24 Statement Issued to the Press by the Secretary of the Treasury
Refutation of claims that British indebtedness was not incurred for British Government but for other Allies and that United States had insisted upon British security in making loans to other Allies. Memoranda handed to British Ambassador in 1918 and 1920 (excerpts printed) substantiating fact that borrowing nations each gave own obligations for U. S. money advanced and that no guaranty of one borrowing nation was asked of any other borrowing nation.
413
[Page XXXVIII]Sept. 28 (740) From the British Ambassador
Arrangements for British delegation, headed by Home, Chancellor of Exchequer, to sail for the United States to negotiate with commission.
415
Oct. 20 (4446/2) From the Rumanian Chargé
Designation of Antonesco, counselor of Rumanian Supreme Court, and Antoniade, president of commission for consolidation of treasury bonds in Paris, to conduct Rumanian debt negotiations at Washington.
415
Oct. 25 From the Minister of the Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes
His appointment to negotiate settlement or refunding of obligations of Kingdom, in place of former Minister.
416
Nov. 1 (193) From the Commissioner at Riga (tel.)
Information that notes have been presented to the three Governments, as instructed.
416
Dec. 1 From the Secretary of the World War Foreign Debt Commission
Commission’s approval of request for postponement of Latvian negotiations until January 1, 1923.
416
Dec. 19 (947) From the British Ambassador
Personnel of British delegation, whose departure has been postponed until December 27.
417

Agreement Signed by the Presidents of Nicaragua, Honduras, and Salvador August 20, 1922, on Board the U. S. S. “Tacoma” in Fonseca Bay

Date and number Subject Page
1922 July 25 (39) From the Minister in Nicaragua (tel.)
Approval, subject to Department’s instructions, of Foreign Minister’s proposal of conference on board U. S. S. Tacoma between Presidents of Honduras and Nicaragua and U. S. Ministers to each country, to discuss border and inter-revolutionary difficulties.
417
July 31 (27) To the Minister in Nicaragua (tel.)
Willingness to place war vessel at disposal of Presidents as neutral meeting ground and to have U. S. Ministers present to offer good offices, if requested. Intention to present plan to Honduras.
418
Aug. 1 (61) From the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
Acceptance by Honduran President of proposition for conference and suggestion that it be held in Gulf of Fonseca. Suggestion that President of Salvador be invited to participate.
418
Aug. 3 (40) From the Minister in Nicaragua (tel.)
President’s agreement to Gulf of Fonseca as meeting place and readiness to go at Department’s convenience.
419
Aug. 12 (39) To the Minister in Salvador (tel.)
Instructions to invite Salvadoran President to participate in Tacoma conference, Minister to be present also.
419
[Page XXXIX]Aug. 14 (78) From the Minister in Salvador (tel.)
President’s acceptance of invitation, requesting, however, in view of disturbed political situation in Salvador, that conference be postponed, as his departure might be interpreted as flight.
420
Aug. 15 (40) To the Minister in Salvador (tel.)
Authorization to make public U. S. invitation to the three Presidents to conference on board Tacoma in Fonseca Bay. U. S. purpose to inform the three countries that quiet and order is expected during conference.
420
Aug. 16 (79) From the Minister in Salvador (tel.)
Arrangements for publishing U. S. invitation to conference and for departure from city, date of conference having been set for August 19.
421
Aug. 20 From the Ministers in Honduras, Nicaragua, and Salvador (tel.)
Signature of agreement by the three Presidents, the three Foreign Ministers, and the three U. S. Ministers as witnesses. Invitation to Guatemala and Costa Rica to indicate adherence.
421
Aug. 20 Agreement between the Presidents of Honduras, Salvador, and Nicaragua
For maintaining amicable fraternal relations of good will and peace among the three countries, as laid down in treaty of 1907, and looking to future agreement in conference to be called in December for political unification of Central America.
422
Aug. 23 (44) From the Minister in Costa Rica (tel.)
Hesitation of President to adhere to agreement owing to uncertainty as to its contents and fact that he had not been previously informed.
425
Aug. 25 (33) To the Minister in Nicaragua (tel.)
The President’s message to President Chamorro (text printed) expressing satisfaction and gratification over conference and agreement arrived at, giving assurance of U. S. continued interest in welfare of Nicaragua.
(Sent, mutatis mutandis, to Ministers in Honduras and Salvador.)
425
Sept. 10 (50) From the Minister in Costa Rica (tel.)
President’s refusal (text printed) to subscribe to agreement since he considers terms of the treaty of 1907 as sufficient.
426
Sept. 25 (211) From the Chargé in Salvador
Receipt of reply from Guatemala stating Tacoma convention will receive fullest consideration.
426
Oct. 4 (84) From the Minister in Guatemala (tel.)
Foreign Minister’s message to Presidents of Salvador, Honduras, and Nicaragua that Guatemala has not ceased to comply with treaty of 1907 and has not denounced it, but is disposed to carry out provisions of Washington treaties and will support intimation of any other Central American countries to facilitate defense of states and reconstruction of nation.
427
[Page XL]

Conference on Central American Affairs, Convened at Washington December 4, 1922

Date and number Subject Page
1922 Oct. 11 (98) From the Chargé in Salvador (tel.)
Salvador’s desire that Department invite December preliminary conference to meet in Washington and that Guatemala and Costa Rica participate.
427
Oct. 13 (53) From the Minister in Nicaragua (tel.)
Impression that invitation from Hughes for December conference to be held in Washington would be gladly accepted.
428
Oct. 18 (80) From the Chargé in Honduras (tel.)
Foreign Minister’s statement that Government would be pleased to have invitations sent to Central American states to attend December conference.
428
Oct. 21 To President Harding
Advisability of convoking at Washington a conference of Central American powers on lines similar to one held in 1907.
428
Oct. 21 From President Harding
Approval of invitation to Central American states to hold conference at Washington.
429
Oct. 21 (17) To the Minister in Costa Rica (tel.)
Invitation to Costa Rica (text printed) to send plenipotentiaries to a conference at Washington on Central American affairs.
(Sent, mutatis mutandis, to representatives in Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Salvador.)
430
Nov. 11 To the Diplomatic Representatives in Costa Rica, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Salvador (tel.)
Instructions to express gratification that all states have accepted invitation, and to inquire whether they desire U. S. participation by duly appointed delegates or simply by good offices.
431
Nov. 17 (71) From the Minister in Costa Rica (tel.)
Costa Rica’s desire simply for U. S. friendly aid; reasons why U. S. participation by regularly appointed delegates might create wrong impression and thus nullify work of conference.
431
Nov. 17 (23) To the Minister in Costa Rica (tel.)
Instructions to inform President that the other states desire U. S. participation through duly appointed delegates.
432
Nov. 20 (72) From the Minister in Costa Rica (tel.)
President’s acquiescence in U. S. participation in conference by means of regularly appointed delegates.
433
Nov. 22 To the Diplomatic Representatives in Costa Rica, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Salvador (tel.)
Notification of U. S. representation at conference by Hughes and Sumner Welles.
433
[Page XLI]

Boundary Disputes

dominican republic and haiti

Date and number Subject Page
1922 Sept. 20 (67) From the High Commissioner in Haiti
Report on recent boundary violations by both Haitians and Dominicans. Recommendation that Dominican consent be obtained for submitting boundary question to arbitration; also that Dominican customs guard be reestablished to patrol provisional boundary line fixed by the United States in 1912, in view of anticipated withdrawal of U. S. forces from Dominican Republic.
434
Oct. 4 (70) From the High Commissioner in Haiti
Reference to Department of question of boundary line directly east of Pedernales River, which has become disputed territory since status quo line was defined by the United States in 1912.
436
Oct. 5 (41) To the High Commissioner in Haiti
Inadvisability of taking up boundary question during period of transition from Military to Provisional Government in Dominican Republic; decision, however, to inquire views of U. S. Minister and High Commissioner in Dominican Republic on subject, also regarding reestablishment of Dominican customs guard.
437
Oct. 5 (472) To the Minister in the Dominican Republic
Transmittal of despatch of High Commissioner in Haiti and request for views of Minister and of High Commissioner with regard to taking up boundary question at this time and reestablishing Dominican customs guard.
437
Oct. 28 (39) From the Minister in the Dominican Republic (tel.)
Concurrence of High Commissioner and Minister in view that frontier guard should not be reestablished. Suggestion that provisional boundary line, established in 1912 and accepted by both Governments, be traced on ground.
438
Oct. 30 (48) To the High Commissioner in Haiti
Instructions to inform Haitian Government of U. S. expectation that provisional boundary line established in 1912 will be scrupulously respected by both Governments. Expression of hope that establishment of permanent constitutional government in Dominican Republic will make resumption of negotiations possible.
438
Oct. 30 (475) To the Minister in the Dominican Republic
Instructions to inform Government that Haitian Government has been notified that the United States expects both Governments to respect provisional boundary line established in 1912.
439
Nov. 8 (51) To the High Commissioner in Haiti
Transmittal of telegram no. 39, October 28, from Minister in Dominican Republic and request for views regarding suggestion that provisional boundary line be traced on ground. Opinion that matter should rest until establishment of constitutional government.
440
[Page XLII]Nov. 18 (90) From the High Commissioner in Haiti
Agreement with Department’s opinion that matter of tracing provisional boundary line on ground should rest pending establishment of constitutional government. Arrangements between patrols on each side of border by which it is hoped friction will be avoided.
440
Nov. 27 (807) From the Minister in the Dominican Republic
Foreign Minister’s reply, November 23 (text printed) expressing willingness to maintain provisional boundary line, with reservation of rights; also the desire to be informed of Haiti’s attitude in the matter.
441
Dec. 19 (61) To the High Commissioner in Haiti
Transmittal of Dominican reply, with instructions to present it and request Haitian engagement to respect provisional boundary line of 1912, without prejudice to any rights which either party may claim, pending permanent settlement of question.
442

honduras and nicaragua

Date and number Subject Page
1922 Undated Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with the Nicaraguan Minister, August 3, 1922
Nicaraguan Minister’s request that Honduras be again approached regarding U. S. suggestion that boundary dispute’ be submitted to Chief Justice of the United States. Secretary’s promise to consider matter.
443
Aug. 8 From the Honduran Minister
Request for suggestions as to friendly solution of boundary dispute with Nicaragua and for information as to status of mediation. Quotation of paragraphs from note of Foreign Minister giving reasons for nonacceptance of U. S. arbitration’ suggestion.
443
Aug. 15 (28) To the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
Instructions to suggest that boundary question be brought up for settlement at conference in Fonseca Bay along lines proposed; namely, that question of award by King of Spain be submitted to Chief Justice of the United States, and, if held invalid, the Chief Justice himself determine the boundary.
445
Aug. 17 (70) From the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
The President’s assurance that he will bring up boundary question at conference and attempt to arrive at solution.
446
Aug. 22 (158) From the Minister in Honduras
Discussion of boundary question by Presidents of Nicaragua and Honduras and insertion of clause into convention. Acceptance by Honduras of arbitration proposal along lines suggested by Department.
446
[Page XLIII]

The Tacna-Arica Question

negotiations at washington leading to signature of the protocol of arbitration and the supplementary act, july 20, 1922

Date and number Subject Page
1922 Jan. 13 (2) To the Ambassador in Chile (tel.)
Invitation (text printed) to send representatives to Washington to settle controversy regarding unfulfilled provisions of Treaty of Ancón, or to arrange for settlement by arbitration. Instructions to inquire before presenting invitation whether this action would be agreeable.
(Sent, mutatis mutandis, to the Chargé in Peru.)
447
Jan. 14 (95) From the Chargé in Peru (tel.)
President’s willingness to accept U. S. invitation without qualification.
448
Jan. 17 (2) From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.)
Chile’s willingness to accept invitation.
448
Jan. 18 (4) To the Ambassador in Chile (tel.)
Instructions to present invitation in view of favorable attitude of both Chile and Peru.
(Sent, mutatis mutandis, to the Chargé in Peru.)
449
Jan. 19 (96) From the Chargé in Peru (tel.)
Peruvian reply (text printed) accepting invitation on understanding that, if necessary, there shall be arbitration “adjusted by the Government of the United States” to settle differences arising out of Treaty of Ancón.
449
Jan. 19 (6) From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.)
Chilean reply (text printed) accepting invitation.
450
Jan. 19 (8) From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.)
Foreign Minister’s confidential note (text printed) making reservations against nullification of Treaty of Ancón, holding the treaty to be in force in all its parts, and unchangeable.
451
Jan. 20 (5) To the Chargé in Peru (tel.)
Request that Peru delete words “adjusted by the Government of the United States” from its note of acceptance, as it would introduce a new and unnecessary complication.
452
[Jan. 21 (?)] President Saavedra of Bolivia to President Harding (tel.)
Bolivian petition that, in the hearing given to Tacna-Arica dispute which Peru and Chile wish to submit to President Harding, Bolivia’s claim to maritime territory be considered.
453
Jan. 21 (97) From the Chargé in Peru (tel.)
President’s assurance of unqualified acceptance of invitation and explanation that he had not considered wording of reply as prejudicial to acceptance, as U. S. arbitration was to be inferred from holding of conference at Washington. Explanation that reply to invitation was influenced by publicity given Chile’s reply.
455
Jan. 22 (98) From the Chargé in Peru (tel.)
Information that President and Foreign Minister see no necessity for deleting phrase from note of acceptance, in view of their interpretation of phrase to mean “guided by the United States.” Possible embarrassment to Government because note has already been published.
456
[Page XLIV]Jan. 23 (8) To the Ambassador in Chile (tel.)
Chilean Ambassador’s statement that he intends to suggest that Foreign Minister change phraseology of confidential note quoted in Ambassador’s telegram no. 8, January 19. Authorization to accept substitute note covering same points in another manner.
456
Jan. 24 (6) To the Chargé in Peru (tel.)
Instructions to reply that phrase “adjusted by the United States” seeks to impose moral obligation upon U. S. Government with respect to arbitration which it does not intend to assume and is, therefore, unacceptable. Information that invitation will be withdrawn if Peru is not prepared to accept without qualification.
457
Jan. 27 President Harding to President Saavedra of Bolivia (tel.)
Explanation that proposed conference does not contemplate a hearing before any U. S. official, but direct negotiations between representatives of Chile and Peru, thus precluding any initiative on part of the President.
458
Jan. 27 (2) From the Chargé in Peru (tel.)
Foreign Minister’s willingness to replace note of acceptance by another in exact terms but omitting objectionable phrase.
459
Jan. 27 (8) To the Chargé in Peru (tel.)
Information that arrangement stated in Chargé’s telegram no. 2, January 27, will be satisfactory.
459
Jan. 28 (3) From the Chargé in Peru (tel.)
Receipt of substitute note with desired deletion. Peru’s wish that neither note be published.
459
Jan. 30 (12) To the Ambassador in Chile (tel.)
Instructions to forward Chilean substitute note and to inform Chile of Peru’s acceptance of invitation; suggested arrangements for conference, it being understood that plenipotentiaries are not to be accredited to U. S. Government.
460
Jan, 30 (10) To the Chargé in Peru (tel.)
Announcement of acceptance of U. S. invitation by Peru and Chile, without publishing replies from either Government. Instructions to inform Peru of Chile’s acceptance; suggested arrangements for conference, it being understood that plenipotentiaries are not to be accredited to U. S. Government.
460
Jan. 31 (75) From the Ambassador in Chile
Substitute Chilean confidential note of January 19 (text printed) explaining that acceptance of invitation was based on principle of validity of Treaty of Ancón and the immutability of the consequences of the War of the Pacific.
461
Jan. 31 (18) From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.)
Early announcement of Chilean delegates; press comment on the President’s reply to Bolivia; investigation by Foreign Minister of Peruvian charge of unjust expulsions from Tacna area.
461
[Page XLV]Feb. 24 (14) From the Chargé in Peru (tel.)
Appointment of plenipotentiaries to conference and suggestion of April 20 to 30 as convenient time for Delegate Porras to attend.
462
Apr. 13 (34) To the Chargé in Peru (tel.)
Expected arrival of Chilean delegates following week; no definite information as to arrival of Peruvian delegates. Instructions to state that delay in opening would be fatal to success of conference.
462
Apr. 14 (34) From the Chargé in Peru (tel.)
Tentative arrangements whereby Peruvian delegates should arrive in Washington by the end of April.
463
Apr. 19 (36) To the Chargé in Peru (tel.)
Creation of unfortunate impression by further delay of Porras, in view of fact that Chilean delegation has already arrived.
463
Apr. 21 (36) From the Chargé in Peru (tel.)
Further unavoidable delay in Peru’s preparation for conference, instructions and credentials for delegates being due to arrive at New York on May 8; assurance that all will be in readiness not later than May 15.
464
Apr. 24 (37) To the Chargé in Peru (tel.)
Instructions to inquire if May 10 could be set for formal opening of conference, since instructions and credentials will arrive the 8th, and in view of long wait of Chilean delegates.
464
May 4 To the Peruvian Chargé
Acknowledgment of note signifying consent of Peruvian delegation to opening of conference May 12.
(Footnote: Change of date of opening to May 15 by agreement between Chilean and Peruvian Ambassadors.)
465
May 20 (43) To the Chargé in Peru (tel.)
Instructions to state that conference was called to deal with unfulfilled provisions of Treaty of Ancón and that Peru’s alleged intention to raise question of return of Province of Tarapacá would bring about failure of conference and forfeit U. S. support.
465
May 21 (44) From the Chargé in Peru (tel.)
President’s assurance that delegates have not been instructed to demand return of Tarapacá; his contention, however, that Treaty of Ancón has been violated by Chile and consequently nullified; his understanding that conference is intended to settle existing difficulties, and is not limited to article dealing solely with Tacna-Arica.
466
May 23 (44) To the Chargé in Peru (tel.)
Further representations to Peru against contention that treaty has been nullified, since conference is proposed to discuss unfulfilled portions thereof, and in view of Peru’s having disclaimed any desire to submit consequences of War of Pacific to arbitration.
467
[Page XLVI]May 24 (21) From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Foreign Minister’s contention that no lasting settlement can be effected unless Bolivia, as participant in War of Pacific, can join in conferences with Peru and Chile and present its claims.
467
May 25 (49) From the Chargé in Peru (tel.)
Peru’s instructions to its delegates not to hold to nullification theory but to confine their discussions to unfulfilled portions of treaty and to contend that article 3 has been violated and cannot now be fulfilled, which will precipitate arbitration.
468
May 31 (10) To the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Instructions to state that questions under discussion in conference arise out of Treaty of Ancón and are for consideration of Chile and Peru exclusively as sole signatories.
468
Undated Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with the Peruvian Ambassador, June 7, 1922
Deadlock in negotiations and decision of delegates to state their cases to the Secretary. Annexed statement by Peruvian delegation (text printed) of its proposals to Chile for arbitration to decide whether plebiscite should be held in Tacna and Arica and under what conditions.
469
June 14 (52) From the Chargé in Chile (tel.)
Message from Chilean President to President Harding (text printed) stating that five propositions for agreement were presented to Peruvian delegates in conference but were rejected; request for President Harding’s personal attention in matter.
470
Undated Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with the Chilean Ambassador, June 16, 1922
Annexed Chilean memorandum (text printed) recounting negotiations in conference, Chilean tentative propositions, Peru’s proposals, and failure of Governments concerned to come to agreement.
471
Undated Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with the Chilean Ambassador, June 17, 1922
Consideration of controversy from point of view of each delegation; discussion by Secretary of tentative proposition; his suggestion for arbitration as to holding of plebiscite, or, upon rejection of plebiscite, solution of difficulty by direct negotiations, with the aid of good offices of United States alone or associated with Argentina and Brazil.
473
Undated Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with the Peruvian Ambassador, June 21, 1922
Deliberation on subjects of controversy and suggestions by Secretary similar to those offered Chilean Ambassador.
476
Undated Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with the Chilean Ambassador, June 22, 1922
Acceptance by Chile of Secretary’s suggestions for settlement of controversy and readiness to proceed accordingly.
480
[Page XLVII]Undated Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with the Peruvian Ambassador and the Peruvian Delegates, June 27, 1922
Wrong impression regarding arbitration proposal conveyed to Peru by Ambassador. Secretary’s repetition of suggestion for direct negotiations, in case no plebiscite is held, with U. S. or other friendly offices as opposed to arbitration; denial that Chile’s claim to sovereignty over territory was advocated, pending settlement; necessity for concessions by both parties.
481
Undated Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with the Chilean Ambassador, June 28, 1922
Secretary’s suggestions similar to those given Peruvian delegation; objections raised by Ambassador; annexed memorandum by Secretary (text printed) enumerating points suggested for settlement in present conference.
484
Undated Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with the Chilean Ambassador, June 29, 1922
Secretary’s objections to certain points in draft protocol presented by Ambassador, declining to commit U. S. Government to role of arbitrator at this time, and urging clear statements in protocol on arbitration as to plebiscite, manner of holding it, and commitment for direct and prompt negotiations in case no plebiscite is held, in order to allay Peru’s fear that Chile, being in possession, will prefer not to reach agreement.
487
Undated Draft of Protocol Prepared by the Chilean Delegation
Providing for the settlement of the controversy between Chile and Peru with respect to the unfulfilled provisions of the Treaty of Ancón.
491
July 1 (50) To the Chargé in Peru (tel.)
Instructions to inform President Leguía of the purpose of the Secretary in suggesting the compromise plan, in view of press reports that President Leguía is unwilling to accept the compromise; and to convey assurance that the United States has prepared no plan relative to ultimate disposal of Tacna and Arica, that being a matter for agreement under the Secretary’s plan.
492
July 3 (62) From the Chargé in Peru (tel.)
Peruvian delegates instructed to approve arbitration for disposition of territory in contingency that plebiscite should not be held.
493
July 5 (51) To the Chargé in Peru (tel.)
Five points for presentation to President showing advantages of plan for settlement suggested by Secretary.
494
Undated Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with the Chairman of the Peruvian Delegation, July 6, 1922
Dr. Porras’ acceptance of Secretary’s original suggestion, with the qualification that in case the arbitrator decided that a plebiscite should not be held, the parties would promptly enter into direct negotiations, and if they could not reach an agreement, they would invite the United States to use its good offices.
495
[Page XLVIII]Undated Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with the Chilean Ambassador, July 6, 1922
Discussion of Peru’s acceptance of Secretary’s original suggestion with qualification as to use of U. S. good offices.
497
July 6 (63) From the Chargé in Peru (tel.)
President’s decision to accept Secretary’s suggestion as it is.
499
Undated Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with the Chairman of the Chilean Delegation, July 10, 1922
Chile’s acceptance of Secretary’s suggestion, with Peruvian qualification as to good offices. Separate interviews with Chilean and Peruvian delegates, in which Secretary recommends Elihu Root as sole arbitrator or as umpire of board of jurists.
500
July 15 From the Peruvian Ambassador
Appeal to Secretary for advice on certain points upon which delegates in joint session could not agree.
500
Undated [Rec’d July 19] Memorandum by Dr. Leo S. Rowe, Director General of the Pan American Union, of a Conference Held in the Office of the Secretary of State, July 17, 1922
Decision of both delegations to conference to request U. S. President to serve as arbitrator; Secretary’s acceptance for the President; Secretary’s suggestion, for incorporation in agreement, that, pending settlement, the administrative organization of disputed provinces shall not be disturbed.
501
July 19 (149) From the Chilean Ambassador
Chilean interpretation of clause “administrative organization of the provinces shall not be disturbed” as subjecting territory to Chilean laws and authority without change of status; inquiry as to correctness of interpretation.
503
July 19 To the Chilean Ambassador
Transmittal of Dr. Rowe’s memorandum of July 17 as reply to inquiries concerning clause in question.
504
July 20 Protocol and Supplementary Act Signed at Washington by the Delegates of Peru and Chile
Providing for settlement of controversy with respect to unfulfilled provisions of Treaty of Ancón.
505
Aug. 1 (53) To the Chargé in Peru (tel.)
Instructions to ascertain, for benefit of Chile, views of Peruvian Government as to whether ratification of supplementary act is necessary since arbitral protocol provides for ratification and exchange of ratifications.
507
Aug. 3 (67) From the Chargé in Peru (tel.)
Peruvian opinion that supplementary act should be ratified and ratifications exchanged in same manner as protocol itself.
507
Aug. 17 (69) From the Chargé in Peru (tel.)
Unanimous vote of confidence given Foreign Minister by Government for his conduct of negotiations at Washington; probability of early ratification.
507
[Page XLIX]Sept. 10 (56) From the Secretary of State, on Special Mission in Brazil (tel.)
Communication from the Ambassador in Chile (text printed) stating Chilean Minister of Interior requests 60 days’ extension for exchange of ratifications, pending arrival home of Delegate Aldunate, in view of near crisis in Cabinet; expressing doubt as to ratification and view that favoring of delay would be sign of weakness.
508
Sept. 12 (70) From the Chargé in Peru (tel.)
Ratification of protocol and supplementary act by Peru.
509
Sept. 20 (63) From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.)
Indications that demand will be made for amendments and reservations, although President is determined to prevent rejection. Recommendation for assurances which would allay Chilean fear regarding Tarapacá problem, alleged expulsions from disputed territory, and plebiscite qualifications.
509
Sept. 29 (52) To the Ambassador in Chile (tel.)
Undesirability of giving any assurances or making any suggestions which would tend to destroy impartiality of arbitration and indicate a prejudgment of questions under consideration. Authorization for statement regarding Tarapacá problem.
511
Oct. 15 (73) From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.)
Ambassador’s change of view and advocacy of extension of time for ratification.
512
Oct. 16 (56) To the Ambassador in Chile (tel.)
Inadvisability of requesting Peru to extend time for ratification; opinion that proposed reservations by Chile would be tantamount to reopening of negotiations. Suggestion that Chile proceed with ratification, after which ratifications may be exchanged despite expiration of the period.
513
Oct. 17 (74) From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.)
Debate in Senate over proposed reservations (text printed), resulting in resignation of Cabinet which supported reservations.
514
Nov. [14] (81) From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.)
Resolution in Chamber of Deputies (text printed) approving ratification of agreement and exchange of ratifications at Washington, notwithstanding expiration of stipulated time, and rejecting Senate reservations.
516
Nov. 27 (89) From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.)
Senate vote sustaining reservations to protocol; return of bill to Chamber of Deputies where it seems assured of requisite majority for ratification without reservations.
516
Nov. 28 (90) From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.)
Information that Chamber of Deputies has rejected Senate reservations by two-thirds majority. Official information that protocol will be ratified by Senate without reservations, for want of two-thirds majority to sustain reservations.
517
[Page L]Nov. 29 (91) From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.)
Ratification of protocol without reservations.
517
Dec. 1 (65) To the Chargé in Peru (tel.)
Information that Chile has ratified without reservations protocol and supplementary act, and that only remaining step in conclusion of agreement is acceptance by Peru of exchange of ratifications, notwithstanding lapse of time. Authorization to make informal recommendation to this effect.
517
Dec. 8 From the Peruvian Ambassador
Peru’s consent to extend time for exchange of ratifications of protocol and supplementary act from October 20, 1922, to January 15, 1923.
518

Renunciation by the Western Telegraph Company and the All America Cables, in Favor of American and British Cable Companies, of Exclusive Rights in South America

Date and number Subject Page
1922 Feb. 4 (3) To the Chargé in Argentina (tel.)
Draft license handed the Western Union Telegraph Co. on December 8, 1921 (text printed) granting the right to land cable at Miami, conditioned on waiver by that company and All America Cables of their exclusive privileges in South America in favor of American and British companies. Resolution of Western Telegraph Co., January 25, 1922 (text printed) waiving exclusive privileges in Argentina, Brazil, and Uruguay, provided All America Cables surrenders similar rights in Colombia, Ecuador, and Peru. Similar resolution adopted by All America Cables on January 30.
Arrangements for presentation of resolutions by local representatives of companies to South American Governments concerned, with request that Governments notify acquiescence in waiver to U. S. diplomatic representatives.
(Sent, mutatis mutandis, to Brazil. Instructions to repeat to Montevideo.)
518
Feb. 6 (12) To the Chargé in Peru (tel.)
Information similar to that conveyed in telegram no. 3, February 4, to Argentina. Resolution by All America Cables, January 30 (text printed) waiving special privileges in Colombia, Ecuador, and Peru, provided Western Telegraph Co. surrenders similar rights in Argentina, Brazil, and Uruguay.
(Sent, mutatis mutandis, to Colombia and Ecuador.)
521
Feb. 7 (8) From the Chargé in Argentina (tel.)
Presentation of Western Telegraph Co.’s resolution to Government by company’s representative. Chargé’s representations to company’s representative for failure to request Government to notify Embassy of its acquiescence in waiver, also for limiting cable facilities to Barbados route.
523
Feb. 7 (8) From the Chargé in Uruguay (tel.)
Western Telegraph Co.’s presentation of its resolution to Government; arrangements for reply to be communicated to Chargé.
524
[Page LI][Feb. 7] (13) From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Presentation of Western Telegraph Co.’s resolution to Government by company’s representative.
524
Feb. 9 (4) To the Chargé in Argentina (tel.)
Approval of Chargé’s representations to Western Telegraph Co.’s representative. Company’s assurance that corrections will be made as to both points mentioned.
525
Feb. 14 (9) From the Chargé in Argentina (tel.)
Letter of Western Telegraph Co.’s representative to Minister of Interior, modifying former letter so as to exclude mention of Barbados and requesting that U. S. Embassy be informed of Government’s acquiescence in waiver of special rights.
525
Mar. 11 (15) From the Minister in Colombia (tel.)
Note from Minister of Interior (text printed) embodying acceptance of proposal of All America Cables for renunciation of special privileges in favor of American and British cable companies.
525
Mar. 13 (6) To the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Instructions to telegraph for information of Western Union present status of plan for waiver of special privileges.
(Instructions to repeat to Montevideo.)
526
Mar. 14 (17) From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Report that no decision has been made and not much interest shown in cable plan by British Legation or by company. Inquiry whether endeavor should be made to hasten matter.
526
Mar. 14 (18) From the Chargé in Uruguay (tel.)
Report that no reply has been received from Government relative to cable plan.
526
Mar. 23 (23) From the Chargé in Peru (tel.)
Peru’s acceptance of and acquiescence in renunciation of special privileges on part of All America Cables (text printed).
527
Mar. 26 (796) From the Chargé in Ecuador
Ecuador’s reply to All America Cables that no obstacles will be placed in way of laying submarine cables, pending decision by Congress.
(Footnote: Approval by Congress of renunciation of monopoly, October 1922.)
527
Apr. 6 (13) To the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Instructions to verify report that Argentina requires renunciation of special rights be universal and in favor of all nationalities, and that renunciation be made by petition instead of resolution; and to call attention to U.S. interest in subject.
(Sent in part, mutatis mutandis, to Chargé in Uruguay.)
528
June 1 (36) From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Argentina’s decision regarding waiver of privileges by Western Telegraph Co. (text printed); Chargé’s intention to request interpretation of decision, as it seems to have no bearing on articles 8, 13, and 17 of company’s contract.
529
[Page LII]June 20 (56) From the Chargé in Brazil (tel.)
Unofficial information that Brazil accepts resolution of Western Telegraph Co.
(Footnote: Issue of Executive decree authorizing renunciation of special privileges, July 25, 1922.)
530
June 21 (24) To the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Instructions to inquire of Government whether, in view of waiver made by Western Telegraph Co., privileges asserted under contract of June 3, 1909, would stand in way of landing and operating U.S. cables in Argentina on terms of equality with Western Telegraph Co., and in particular whether rights under articles 13 and 17 of contract might be regarded as extinguished.
530
June 23 (801) From the Chargé in Uruguay
Dossier prepared by Uruguayan Government concerning correspondence with Western Telegraph Co. (text printed) declaring service of cable communications open to all competitors, prohibiting concession of privileges to companies, and disclaiming any concern in agreement between Western Telegraph Co. and All America Cables.
531
July 1 (40) From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Official assurance that Government would favor granting permission to any American cable company to lay cable to Brazil, but that administrative measures to make this binding would require time; that article 13 of contract could be rescinded by Congress and that article 17 would prove no bar to cable-laying by any company.
534
July 7 (27) To the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Instructions to present another note to Foreign Office (text printed) inquiring whether Government considers that, in view of waiver made by Western Telegraph Co., it is no longer under legal obligations to accord the company any benefits under article 13 of the contract.
534
Aug. 7 (34) To the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Instructions to make frequent inquiries of Government and to impress on authorities urgency and importance of cable matter.
535
Aug. 11 (52) From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Government’s decision that contract, in view of Western Telegraph Co.’s renunciation, does not constitute obstacle to granting equal privileges to an American company. Promise of note to that effect.
535
Aug. 13 (92) From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Inquiry of manager of Agencia Americana whether Brazil-Barbados-Miami cable line can be open for service on September 7, as arrangements have been made for President Harding and President Pessoa to exchange complimentary telegraphic messages over new line on that day.
536
[Page LIII]Aug. 17 (116) To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Information that Argentina has not yet formally acquiesced in waiver by Western Telegraph Co., and that Department will be happy to arrange for exchange of complimentary messages when Argentina has acquiesced.
536
Aug. 21 (41) To the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Instructions to express hope that Foreign Minister will give promised confirmation before Secretary’s departure from Washington.
536
Aug. 23 (57) From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Resolution signed by Minister of Interior (text printed) declaring that contract of June 3, 1909, with Western Telegraph Co. is not an obstacle to conceding to American companies right to land cable in Argentina or to sending telegrams by cables of U. S. companies.
537
Aug. 25 (44) To the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Signing by the President of license authorizing Western Union Telegraph Co. to land and operate at Miami, Fla., a cable extending to Barbados, where it connects with cable of Western Telegraph Co. going to Brazil. Expression of appreciation of Government’s action.
(Sent, mutatis mutandis, to Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, and Uruguay.)
537

Failure to Secure Ratification of the Cable Agreement Between the United States, Great Britain, and Italy, Signed at the Preliminary Communications Conference of 1920

Date and number Subject Page
1921 Mar. 9 (135) To the Chargé in Great Britain (tel.)
Suggested procedure to secure ratification of agreement reached by United States, British, and Italian delegates to Preliminary Communications Conference providing for reciprocal facilities for landing of cables for relay purposes.
(Instructions to repeat, mutatis mutandis, to Rome.)
538
May 7 (119) From the Ambassador in Italy (tel.)
Desire of Foreign Office to be informed as to what cables United States and England wish to have established in contact with Italian coast and what would be character of relay stations.
539
May 14 (91) To the Ambassador in Italy (tel.)
Instructions to call attention to agreement of December 10, 1920 (text printed) providing for reciprocal facilities for landing cables for relay purposes, the agreement being drawn up without reference to any specific plans for cable extension, which would be dealt with by special agreement covering each individual cable.
539
[Page LIV]June 6 (151) From the Chargé in Italy (tel.)
Foreign Office reply (text printed) deferring adherence to agreement, pending definite settlement of question of division of ex-German cables; Government’s disposition, however, to come to understanding regarding special projects for landing cables within Kingdom and erection of stations for manual and automatic retransmission of cablegrams.
541
1922 May 18 (1315) From the Ambassador in Great Britain
Foreign Office reply, May 16 (text printed) declining to ratify agreement; but giving assurance, however, that requests for landing cables on British territory will be considered on their merits, and that all facilities will be continued for international communication.
542

Refusal by the United States to Ratify the Convention for the Control of the Trade in Arms and Ammunition, Signed September 10, 1919

Date and number Subject Page
1921 Mar. 8 From the Secretary General of the League of Nations
Resolution adopted by Assembly December 14, 1920, in agreement with Council of League (text printed) urging speedy ratification of convention for control of trade in arms and ammunition, signed at St. Germain, September 10, 1919, by certain countries. Inquiry whether the United States as signatory is prepared to ratify.
543
Mar. 29 (1267) To the Chargé in Great Britain
Information that it is not deemed practicable to reply to League’s request to furnish Secretary General with information regarding U. S. export of arms and ammunition in accordance with principles laid down by the Covenant and Arms Traffic Convention.
544
Nov. 21 From the Secretary General of the League of Nations
Resolution adopted by Assembly October 1, 1921, urging importance of ratification of convention at earliest possible moment by all signatory nations, extending invitation to nonsignatory nations also. Further inquiry as to U. S. intention as regards ratification.
544
1922 Jan. 4 From Mr. Balfour, of the British Delegation at the Conference on the Limitation of Armament
Stipulation that ratification is conditional upon acceptance by all Principal Allied and Associated Powers; desire for U. S. ratification and willingness to accept reservation in respect to provisions involving jurisdiction of League. Draft resolution providing for U. S. reservation (text printed).
545
Feb. 4 The Economic Adviser to the British Delegation at the Conference on the Limitation of Armament to the Assistant to the American Delegation
Request that the Secretary of State be consulted regarding three alternative measures of procedure proposed with view to overcoming U.S. objections to Arms Traffic Convention.
546
[Page LV]Mar. 31 (WPD 599) From the Secretary of War
Opinion that U.S. ratification of Arms Traffic Convention would have no military advantages and would be disadvantageous from viewpoint of U.S. munitions industry.
547
Apr. 4 (27280–33:3) From the Secretary of the Navy
Opinion that U.S. ratification of Arms Traffic Convention would be undesirable; enumeration of objectionable features, both from standpoint of diplomacy and of expediency.
548
July 28 To the Consul at Geneva
Reply to Secretary General of League (text printed) expressing sympathy with efforts to restrict traffic in arms and ammunitions of war; but declaring U.S. inability, however, to approve provisions of convention or to ratify, adding that U.S. legislation has already been enacted for restriction of sale at discretion of the President.
550
[Aug. 2] To President Harding
Discussion of provisions of Arms Traffic Convention, noting its objectionable features, and expressing opinion that U.S. ratification should be withheld.
551
Aug. 2 From President Harding
Futility of seeking consent to ratification of convention at hands of Senate and approval of Secretary’s reply to Secretary General of League.
554
Aug. 5 To the British Chargé
Decision not to ratify convention; principal objections to its provisions.
554
Sept. 3 (74) From the Chargé in Switzerland (tel.)
League’s receipt of U.S. decision, considering it as constituting a fait nouveau and making it necessary to reconsider the whole question.
555
Sept. 29 (83) From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
Resolutions adopted by Assembly of League September 27, 1922 (text printed) on desirability of U.S. expression of objections to provisions of convention and any proposals that can be made for overcoming these objections.
556

Statement Defining the Interest of the Department of State Flotation of Foreign Loans in the American Market

Date and number Subject Page
1922 Feb. 1 From the Foreign Trade Adviser
Recommendation that Department issue a public statement concerning public flotation of issues of foreign bonds in United States, in view of mounting European indebtedness in United States and President’s belief that bankers should be requested not to make loans to any power for military expenditures.
556
[Page LVI]Mar. 3 Press Release Issued by the Department of State
Department’s attitude toward public flotation of issues of foreign bonds in United States; desire that bankers observe their assurances to keep Department informed of loan negotiations; method by which bankers may learn Department’s attitude regarding any projected loan.
557

Efforts to Combat the Smuggling of Intoxicating Liquors Into the United States in Violation of the Prohibition Laws

Date and number Subject Page
1920 Jan. 17 To the Secretary of the Treasury
Request of French and Italian Embassies that U. S. practice of placing wine on board foreign vessels in port under seal may be modified so that members of crews may receive daily rations to which they are entitled under contract.
558
Jan. 27 From the Secretary of the Treasury
Advice that Treasury decision will be published at early date amending practice of collectors of customs so that wine under seal on foreign vessels may be released to meet requirements of officers and crews.
559
1922 June 26 To the British Ambassador
Suggestions for United States-British cooperation for the prevention of liquor smuggling by careful supervision of registry and the issuance of clearance papers and by entering into a treaty authorizing the right of search beyond the 3-mile limit.
560
June 27 To the British Embassy
Request for Canadian legislation prohibiting shipments of liquor to United States unless permit has been obtained from U. S. Federal or State authorities.
563
July 7 From the Federal Prohibition Commissioner
Letter of July 4 from the chairman of the Ontario Board of License Commissioners (text printed) concerning failure to secure legislation from Canadian Government before Parliament closed because of late arrival of U. S. request.
563
July 28 From Senator Thomas Sterling
Proposed legislation to extend U. S. jurisdiction over maritime waters beyond 3-mile limit. Opinion, supported by quotations from authorities on international law, that jurisdiction can be extended by law without consent of any other nation.
564
Aug. 16 To Senator Thomas Sterling
Opinion, supported by quotations from authorities on international law, that extension of jurisdiction beyond 3–mile limit would be contravention of established rule of international law and that there could be no departure from rule without general agreement among nations of world.
567
[Page LVII]Sept. 28 From the Attorney General
Denial that seizures outside 3-mile limit for violation of prohibition laws have been authorized; offer to furnish Department with memoranda of each case of a vessel seized under “hovering” statutes.
575
Sept. 29 From the British Ambassador
Inquiry as to retroactive application of Cabinet ruling with respect to seizures of vessels outside 3-mile limit in cases where vessels have been in illegal communication with shore through small boats.
576
Oct. 7 To the Attorney General
Acknowledgment of memorandum regarding 14 vessels under detention, 7 having been seized within 3-mile limit. Opinion that 6 of the 7 seized outside the 3-mile limit should be released since they apparently were not in illegal contact with shore.
576
Oct. 7 From the Secretary of the Treasury
Instructions of October 6 and 7 from President Harding (texts printed) concerning enforcement of the Attorney General’s ruling on service and transportation of liquors on U. S, ships and transportation of liquors on all ships within U. S. waters.
677
Oct. 13 (781) From the British Ambassador
Information concerning the issuance of instructions regarding clearances of vessels and registry. Inability to acquiesce in proposed treaty.
578
Oct. 14 To Diplomatic and Consular Officers (tel.)
Instructions to communicate to all owners or operators of vessels touching at U. S. ports, U. S. notice (text printed) that after October 7 all sales of liquor on U. S. vessels anywhere and on foreign boats within U. S. territorial waters will be unlawful.
580
Oct. 17 From the Secretary of the Mexican Embassy
Protest against effective date of U. S. instructions regarding illegality of service and transportation of liquor within U. S. territorial waters, alleging term too short.
581
Oct. 20 From the Spanish Ambassador
Probable disruption of services on Spanish lines running to United States because of U. S. measures to control service and transportation of liquor.
582
Oct. 23 From the British Embassy
Necessity for British ships to comply with British law requiring them to carry on board, as part of medical stores, specified quantities of wines and spirits.
582
Oct. 28 To the British Ambassador
Appreciation of British cooperation concerning issuances of clearance papers and transfers of registry. Offer to furnish information respecting cases of fraudulent transfer of registry and the issuance of two sets of clearance papers.
583
[Page LVIII]Oct. 28 To Diplomatic Representatives (tel.)
U. S. notice (text printed) continuing in effect existing regulations governing service and transportation of liquors within U. S. territorial waters.
584
Nov. 14 To the British Ambassador
Information concerning seizure of 14 British vessels and status of their cases.
584
Nov. 30 (893) From the British Ambassador
Representations against measures rendering illegal the passive existence of articles of consumption or commerce in the lockers or holds of foreign ships.
585
Dec. 6 (915) From the British Ambassador
Measures taken by Canada to prevent fraudulent transfers of registry.
589
Dec. 26 To the Secretary of the Treasury
Opinion that shipment of liquor from Skagway, Alaska, across U. S. territory into Yukon Territory, Canada, as requested by Yukon Territory Commissioner, is not analogous to diplomatic shipments and, therefore, decision upon request does not come within Department’s province.
590
Dec. 30 (973) From the British Ambassador
Representations against U. S. ruling on seizure of vessels outside 3-mile limit when in illegal communication with shore; reservation of right to lodge protest in individual cases.
591
1923 Jan. 3 To the British Ambassador
U. S. court decisions with reference to the right of foreign vessels to carry liquor within U. S. territorial waters.
592
Jan. 18 To the British Ambassador
Adherence to position on seizure of vessels outside 3-mile limit when in illegal communication with shore.
592

ALBANIA

Recognition Accorded to Albania by the United States

Date and number Subject Page
1921 Dec. 13 (259) From the Ambassador in Italy (tel.)
Report that Albanian delegation requests U. S. recognition and that Albania is ready to give concessions of valuable oil rights. Interest of British and Italian groups.
594
1922 Apr. 3 (251) From the Ambassador in Italy
Albania’s proffer of oil monopoly to Anglo-Persian Co. in return for British loan, examination having indicated large deposits of oil easy of development. Suggestion that U. S. recognition of Albania would prove opportunity for U. S. oil interests and have moral influence as well.
594
[Page LIX]Apr. 24 (52) To the Ambassador in Italy (tel.)
Instructions to report countries which have recognized Albania, whether de facto or de jure, and designation of representatives sent.
596
Apr. 26 From the Secretary of Commerce
Information concerning Sinclair Oil Co.’s activities in Albania. Suggestion that serious consideration be given to recognition of Albania or to possibility of sending U. S. agent to Albania to aid U. S. interests.
596
Apr. 26 From the Vice President of the Sinclair Exploration Company
Recommendation that Albania be recognized and U. S. representative be sent to Albania. Dispatch of company’s representative there with authorization to enter into contract with Albanian Government for oil concession.
597
Apr. 27 (4) To the Diplomatic Agent and Consul General at Tangier (tel.)
For Blake: Appointment as consul general, on temporary detail, to report conditions in Albania, stability of Government, and prospective U. S. interests there. Instructions to proceed to Rome for consultation with Ambassador before proceeding to Albania.
598
Apr. 27 (66) From the Ambassador in Italy (tel.)
Report that powers in Supreme Council have recognized Albania de jure and that Great Britain and Italy are represented by Ministers, France by a consul, and Yugoslavia by a chargé.
598
May 9 To the Consul General on Special Mission, temporarily in Rome
Report that Albanian authorities are taking possession of passports of U. S. citizens of Albanian origin and forcing them to take Albanian passports. Instructions to protest, if report is true.
599
May 18 (157) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Associated Press report that League Council has virtually decided League should assume protectorate over Albania and appoint financial, economic, and legal experts to assist Albania. Instructions to telegraph summary of Council action.
(Instructions to repeat to London, Rome, and Switzerland.)
599
May 20 (31) From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
Assurances that neither Albanian independence nor equality of opportunity for U. S. nationals will suffer through action of League, Albania having requested appointment of economic, financial, and judicial advisers for employment in Albanian Government.
600
May 22 To the Secretary of Commerce
Information that instructions have been given Blake to proceed to Albania as commissioner, with instructions to extend to Sinclair Oil Co. any assistance possible and appropriate in negotiating for oil concession.
600
May 23 To the Vice President of the Sinclair Exploration Company
Information that Blake has been appointed commissioner in Albania and will extend to company any assistance which may be possible and appropriate. Request that Department be kept informed regarding negotiations.
601
[Page LX]May 26 (226) From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
Summary of resolution of Council of League (text printed) regarding request of Albania for economic assistance.
601
June 28 From the Commissioner in Albania (tel.)
Favorable attitude of Government toward V. S. enterprise, offering formal assurances of most-favored-nation treatment; decree providing for acceptance of passports of U. S. citizens of Albanian origin and release of those serving in Albanian Army. Recommendation for recognition of Albania and establishment of U. S. Legation.
602
July 25 (3) To the Commissioner in Albania (tel.)
Instructions to extend to Albania, on July 28, de jure recognition by United States; and to continue as Commissioner, pending legislative action to establish regular diplomatic representation.
604

Negotiations by American Oil Companies for Concessions in Albania

Date and number Subject Page
1922 Sept. 14 From the Commissioner in Albania (tel.)
Active negotiations by Sinclair Exploration Co. for oil concessions in Albania, one condition of award being loan to Government. Presence at Tirana of representative of Standard Oil and of foreign groups. Government’s preference for American companies.
604
Sept. 19 From the Sinclair Exploration Company
Handicap to company’s negotiations caused by opposition of various foreign interests, particularly by the Shell and Anglo-Persian companies. Request that U. S. representative be instructed to give fullest support possible.
605
Sept. 22 (8) To the Commissioner in Albania (tel.)
Instructions to render all appropriate assistance to U. S. oil companies and, in case of competition between them, to be strictly impartial; also to request Sinclair Co. to keep Department advised as to loan as well as concession.
606
Sept. 28 (10) To the Commissioner in Albania (tel.)
Reports that Sinclair Co. is being handicapped by Shell and Anglo-Persian companies. Instructions to telegraph exact status of negotiations of foreign oil interests.
606
Oct. 1 From the Commissioner in Albania (tel.)
Report that Sinclair is only company accepting Albania’s condition of loan in return for concession.
606
Oct. 29 From the Commissioner in Albania (tel.)
Soper to Sinclair: Enumeration of terms of petroleum contract settled upon; deadlock as to loan, Albania demanding $2,000,000 within six months.
607
[Page LXI]Dec. 21 (6) From the Minister in Albania
Inability of Sinclair Co. to secure loan for Albania, and efforts to have grant of any concession postponed until spring meeting of National Assembly; competition with other groups, question being which can offer most generous terms; entrance of personal element into contest in form of Jaquet and Godart of France.
607
Dec. 22 (7) From the Minister in Albania
Prime Minister’s assurance that no concession will be submitted to Assembly until spring session, thereby giving Sinclair Co. time to take advantage of any turn in U. S. financial market favorable to investments in Eastern Europe, or to arrange loan among themselves.
609

ARGENTINA

Presentation of Letter of Credence to President Irigoyen by the American Special Representative at the Inauguration of President-Elect Alvear

Date and number Subject Page
1922 Sept. 26 (49) To the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
President Harding’s letter to President-elect Alvear of Argentina (text printed) presenting Ambassador Riddle as U. S. special representative at inaugural ceremonies. Statement that signed letter will follow.
610
Sept. 29 (61) From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Foreign Office request that letter of credence be addressed to President Irigoyen.
610
Sept. 30 (51) To the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Mention of precedents in upholding U. S. position that letter should be addressed to President-elect.
611
Oct. 1 (63) From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Government’s desire that letters of credence be addressed to President Irigoyen, since special ambassadors are to be received by him several days prior to inauguration.
611
Oct. 5 (53) To the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Substitute for letter of credence previously cabled to President-elect, addressed this time to President Irigoyen (text printed). Statement that signed letter will follow in next pouch and that message of felicitation will be sent new President.
611
[Page LXII]Feb. 10 (441) To the Chargé in Austria
Information concerning the attitude of interested European powers toward proposed plan of League of Nations for economic rehabilitation of Austria. Endeavor of certain nations to place blame for failure of plan on the United States. Instructions.
613
Feb. 23 From the Austrian Chargé
Request to defer lien on Austria’s assets contracted with United States Grain Corporation for relief purposes, in view of urgent need and of proposed deferment of claims by various other nations for period of at least twenty years, in order to enable Austria to use its assets as collateral for loan for rehabilitation.
615
Apr. 13 To the Austrian Chargé
Public Resolution No. 46, approved April 6 (text printed) authorizing extension of time for payment of Austrian debt to United States Grain Corporation, and releasing Austrian assets pledged for payment of loan, as the Secretary of the Treasury deems necessary, provided other creditor nations take similar action.
617
May 2 (949) From the Austrian Chargé
Austrian gratitude and appreciation of U. S. action.
618
June 16 (187) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Press report that Council of Ambassadors has sent pleas to interested Governments urging suspension of claims against Austria. Instructions to make known U. S. willingness to suspend claims, as soon as assured of like action by other nations.
619
Aug. 7 (311) From the Chargé in France (tel.)
From Logan: Reparation Commission’s approval of Austrian law of July 24 creating bank of issue and release for period of 20 years of Austrian pledged assets guaranteeing bank. Urgency for action by Allied and neutral Governments. Request for instructions.
619
Aug. 23 (36) To the Minister in Austria (tel.)
U. S. willingness to suspend priorities, within limits of Public Resolution No. 46, to extent necessary for realization of new Austrian bank of issue.
620
Oct. 12 (64) From the Minister in Austria
Austrian request for U. S. release of pledged assets, in order that they may be utilized as security for proposed external loan contemplated by Geneva agreement of October 4, 1922.
621
Dec. 23 (45) To the Minister in Austria (tel.)
Instructions to confirm U. S. willingness to suspend priorities, within limits of Public Resolution No. 46, to the extent necessary for realization of proposed external loan.
621
[Page LXIII]

Revival of the Extradition Convention of July 3, 1856, Between the United States and the Former Austro-Hungarian Monarchy

Date and number Subject Page
1922 May 4 (27) To the Chargé in Austria (tel.)
Note for Foreign Office (text printed) announcing U. S. desire to revive extradition convention of 1856. Instructions to deliver note on date which note bears, in order to fix date upon which convention is revived.
621
May 12 (32) From the Chargé in Austria (tel.)
Report that note was dated, delivered, and acknowledged May 6.
622

BELGIUM

Negotiations to Ensure by Treaty the Rights of the United States in Territories Under Belgian Mandate

Date and number Subject Page
1921 Sept. 7 (39) To the Ambassador in Belgium (tel.)
Instructions to present Department’s memorandum on A and B mandates, text of which Ambassador in France has been instructed to repeat to Embassy.
623
1922 Feb. 15 (1442) From the Chargé in Belgium
Belgian note, February 11 (text printed) offering guaranty to U. S. citizens of same rights and privileges in mandated territories in East Africa as are enjoyed by League members, and also offering to consult U. S. Government before modifying mandates. Draft mandate for Ruanda and Urundi (text printed).
623
Apr. 6 (20) To the Ambassador in Belgium (tel.)
Note for Foreign Office (text printed) containing U. S. suggestions for mandate and treaty provisions covering discrimination, concessions, missionaries and religious freedom, administrative unions, modification of mandate, extradition, and duplicate of annual report.
630
July 6 From the Belgian Chargé
Transmittal of amended draft mandate for Ruanda and Urundi (excerpts printed) agreed to by French and British and intended to meet U. S. suggestions; also draft of proposed convention between Belgium and the United States. Request that plenipotentiary be designated to sign at Brussels if acceptable to the United States.
633
July 12 To the Belgian Legation
Reply to note of July 6 with observations and further suggestions similar to memoranda sent, mutatis mutandis, to France, July 8.
637
Sept. 9 From the Belgian Chargé
Belgian concurrence in all U. S. suggestions; transmittal of French text of draft with English text of that part of mandate which must be included in treaty, with explanations as to translations. Inquiry concerning U. S. delay in presenting memorandum of July 12 to Foreign Office, as intimated.
637
[Page LXIV]Oct. 14 From the Belgian Chargé
Apologies for attributing to the United States delay in delivery of U. S. memorandum of July 12, which was caused by mistake in Belgian Foreign Office.
638

BOLIVIA

Contract for a Loan to Bolivia by American Bankers, May 31, 1922

Date and number Subject Page
1922 Mar. 27 From Messrs. Curtis, Mallet-Prevost & Colt
Contemplation by Stifel-Nicolaus Investment Co., Spencer Trask & Co., and Equitable Trust Co. of New York of purchase of $19,000,000 of Bolivian bonds of total issue of $33,000,000. Copy of proposal and financing plan submitted for Department approval or for statement of views.
640
Apr. 11 To Messrs. Curtis, Mallet-Prevost & Colt
No objection seen to proposed transaction; attention called to ruling that contract must not imply that it is contingent upon an expression of Department’s attitude.
640
Apr. 29 (4) To the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Opposition to U. S. loan shown by British banking group, aided by British Minister. Instructions to discuss informally with British Minister U. S. bankers’ preferential right to purchase under agreement.
641
May 2 (15) From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Offer of loan of £4,000,000 to Bolivia by London firm; administration’s endeavor to place a loan in New York, bill to this effect being opposed by Liberals in Chamber of Deputies.
642
May 9 From Messrs. Curtis, Mallet-Prevost & Colt
Letter from bankers to Bolivian Financial Adviser, May 6 (text printed) containing modification of financial plan and conditions as to contract; other correspondence on subject; acceptance of proposition by Bolivian representatives, subject to ratification by Government.
643
May 16 (7) To the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Report that proposition of U. S. bankers has been accepted by Bolivian representatives. Instructions to keep Department informed.
645
May 16 (18) From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Passage by Chamber of Deputies of bill authorizing immediate loan of $19,000,000 and additional amount for railway, etc., making total loan of $33,000,000. Expectation of little opposition in Senate.
646
May 31 Contract between the Republic of Bolivia and the American Bankers
Agreement for sale of bonds by Bolivia to Stifel-Nicolaus Investment Co., Spencer Trask & Co., and Equitable Trust Co. of New York.
646
[Page LXV]

BRAZIL

Agreement Providing for a Naval Mission From the United States to Brazil

Date and number Subject Page
1922 Mar. 4 (21) From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
President Pessôa’s desire to have Capt. C. T. Vogelgesang head a U. S. naval mission to Brazil. Ambassador’s recommendation that he be authorized to state that a request to that effect will be granted.
651
Apr. 17 (43) To the Chargé in Brazil (tel.)
Authorization to state that U. S. Government would be glad to designate officers of ability for naval mission to Brazil.
651
May 12 (57) To the Chargé in Brazil (tel.)
Instructions to state that Vogelgesang will be available as head of naval mission to Brazil if so desired.
652
July 24 (76) From the Chargé in Brazil (tel.)
Note from Minister of Marine (text printed) expressing desire for U. S. naval mission to Brazil headed by Vogelgesang. Immediate presence of Vogelgesang suggested by Chargé.
652
July 29 From the Brazilian Ambassador
Aide-mémoire of Brazilian Embassy (text printed) requesting naval mission to Brazil.
653
Aug. 5 (100) To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Information concerning receipt of Brazilian invitation; nomination of Vogelgesang as head of mission; his proposed departure for Brazil accompanying Secretary of State as special aide during mission of friendship.
654
Nov. 9 (760) To the Ambassador in Brazil
Instructions to convey Navy Department’s explanation as to difficulties which might arise by complying with Brazilian request for Vogelgesang to use title and insignia of Vice Admiral.
654
Dec. 20 (75) From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Exceptions taken by Government officials to U.S. naval mission to Brazil, declaring it to be in nature of an alliance, thus defeating aim of pan-American solidarity.
655
Dec. 21 (60) To the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Instructions to explain nature of naval mission to Brazil and give assurances that it has no political significance; citation of precedent.
655

Visit of the Secretary of State and the Special Mission of Friendship to Rio de Janeiro During the Centenary Celebration of Brazilian Independence

Date and number Subject Page
1921 Apr. 8 (1781) From the Ambassador in Brazil
Invitation to the United States to be represented at exposition to be held at Rio de Janeiro, commemorating first centennial of independence of Brazil. Reservation of space for foreign exhibits.
656
[Page LXVI]Nov. 2 (46) To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Instructions to reply that Congress has passed joint resolution accepting invitation to take part in international exposition at Rio de Janeiro.
657
1922 Feb. 13 From the Brazilian Ambassador
Invitation to U. S. Government to attend Centennial Celebration of Independence of Brazil in September.
657
Feb. 18 (15) To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Inquiry whether centennial celebration is distinct from exposition and request for recommendation as to action to be taken.
658
Feb. 20 (16) From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Explanation that Brazil desires U. S. representation at ceremonies on September 7, commemorating centenary of Brazil’s political independence, on which day exposition will be opened. Recommendation for U. S. representation.
658
Mar. 7 To the Brazilian Ambassador
Acknowledgment of invitation and information that it is receiving attention of both Executive and Legislative branches of Government.
(Footnote: Joint resolution authorizing the President to appoint special mission of friendship, good will, and congratulation, approved June 15, 1922.)
658
July 31 (97) To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Information regarding dates for arrival in Brazil and departure of U. S. special mission which will be headed by Secretary of State.
659
Aug. 9 (104) To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Information as to personnel, etc., of U. S. mission to Brazil, and the Secretary’s official return of visit of Emperor Dom Pedro to the United States in 1876. Instructions to inform Government.
659
Aug. 11 (87) From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Foreign Office statement that Secretary of State, as dean of special ambassadors to centennial celebration, will be requested to speak in name of colleagues at certain dinners given by President and Government.
660
Aug. 12 (89) From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Inquiry whether Mexican and Greek Special Ambassadors and resident diplomats should be invited to entertainments given by Secretary of State.
661
Aug. 14 (109) To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Instructions to invite Mexican and Greek representatives to the Secretary’s entertainments as Brazil’s guests, this action in no way implying recognition.
661
Sept. 7 (49) From the Secretary of State at Rio de Janeiro (tel.)
Information that certain members of mission will remain in Brazil, while Secretary and rest of mission sail on the 12th. Assumption that Government will not incur expense by reason of cancelation of reservations. Instructions to inform Secretary of Navy.
662
[Page LXVII]

BULGARIA

Rejection by Bulgaria of a Draft Treaty Proposed by the United States

Date and number Subject Page
1921 Dec. 9 (1) To the Minister in Bulgaria
Instructions to present draft treaty of amity and commerce (text printed), embodying portions of unratified Treaty of Neuilly.
663
1922 Feb. 13 (30) From the Minister in Bulgaria
Prime Minister’s objections to draft treaty; his suggestion that clause be inserted providing for U. S. support in carrying out article 48 and section IV of the Treaty of Neuilly regarding outlet to Aegean Sea for Bulgaria and protection of minorities.
665
Feb. 23 (8) From the Minister in Bulgaria (tel.)
Rejection by Bulgaria of proposed treaty; willingness, however, to negotiate separate commercial agreement on most-favored-nation basis, and conventions regarding naturalization, extradition, etc. Request for instructions.
667
May 27 (7) To the Minister in Bulgaria (tel.)
Instructions to take up draft treaty again and to point out that U. S. settled practice of noninterference with territorial or political questions affecting Europe makes it impossible for the United States to entertain suggestion regarding article 48 and section IV of the Treaty of Neuilly, but that the United States would be glad to consider other modifications of draft treaty.
668
June 16 (17) From the Minister in Bulgaria (tel.)
Prime Minister’s refusal to accept any treaty based on Treaty of Neuilly, favoring separate commercial, naturalization, and consular conventions.
668

CANADA

Renewed Canadian Proposals for the Regulation of Fisheries

Date and number Subject Page
1922 Mar. 16 (193) From the British Ambassador
Suggestion that Sockeye Salmon Fisheries Treaty be resubmitted to U. S. Senate, in view of failure of agreement in conference between Fisheries Board of State of Washington and representatives of Canadian Marine and Fisheries Department as to measures to be taken, both Governments agreeing as to necessity for protection of salmon and halibut in Pacific.
669
Mar. 28 To the British Ambassador
Proposal of treaty by which the two Governments would undertake to prevent landing of salmon taken beyond 3-mile limit of coasts of the United States, Canada, and Alaska, because of waste resulting from immaturity of fish, methods of capture, etc., investigation showing that they do not start for inland waters until mature.
670
Apr. 29 (327) From the British Ambassador
Canada’s opinion that more important treaties for protection of Fraser River salmon fisheries and Pacific halibut fisheries, etc., as yet unsigned or unratified by United States, should be completed before consideration of suggested treaty for protection of salmon in extraterritorial waters.
672
[Page LXVIII]May 19 (337) From the British Ambassador
Discontinuance of war-time privileges granted U. S. fishing vessels in Canadian ports; availability, however, of modus vivendi licenses for eastern ports; urgency of reopening negotiations for settlement of fisheries question in West, in view of rapid depletion of supply.
672
Aug. 29 (667) From the British Ambassador
Canada’s regret that the United States has failed to ratify fisheries treaty, in which a closed season was postponed for halibut fishing. Urgent request that treaty be effected dealing with Pacific halibut fishery alone as separate issue.
673
Dec. 14 To the British Ambassador
U. S. draft of convention for protection of Pacific halibut fishery, which would eliminate opportunity for evasions during closed season, and provide for disposal of halibut taken incidentally while fishing for other species; other modifications of article 7 of former draft treaty.
675

Proposal by the United States to Proceed to the Negotiation of an Agreement for a Joint Project to Improve the St. Lawrence River

Date and number Subject Page
1922 May 17 To the British Ambassador
Favorable attitude toward negotiating treaty with Great Britain and Canada with respect to improvement of St. Lawrence River between Lake Ontario and Montreal for navigation and development of water power, as result of report and recommendations of International Joint Commission on subject.
677
June 3 (431) From the British Ambassador
Inexpediency of dealing with St. Lawrence River improvement scheme at present time, in view of magnitude of project and large outlay of money involved.
679

CHINA

Civil War in Northern China and the Restoration of Li Yuan-hung to the Presidency

Date and number Subject Page
1922 Jan. 9 (11) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Wu Pei-fu’s charge that Premier Liang Shih-yi is subservient to Japan in favoring Japanese loan for redemption of Shantung Railway; his appeal to North and South to unite in driving out enemy and restoring railway to Chinese control.
681
Jan. 15 (15) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Premier Liang’s denial of favoring Japanese loan and Sino-Japanese management of Shantung Railway. Public opposition to Liang; Wu’s demand that he resign. Talk of separate Yangtze government at Nanking. Recommendation that conference at Washington urge unity of country under constitutional government.
681
[Page LXIX]Jan. 22 (20) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Telegram, dated January 19, from Wu and colleagues to President Hsu (text printed) demanding dismissal of Liang, with threat to resign if demand not complied with.
684
Feb. 4 (38) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Summary of Foreign Office circular telegram regarding present status of Shantung negotiations in Washington. Offer by certain tuchuns to contribute toward redemption of railway. Reaction in favor of Liang, who is absent nominally on extended sick leave; his plan for reunification of nation and ousting of President Hsü.
685
Feb. 8 (40) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Various conferences to decide measures to be taken in Cabinet crisis. Opinion that fundamental issues are reunion of provinces and financial rehabilitation.
686
Feb. 28 (71) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Political deadlock and governmental financial embarrassment; alliances in North and South; President Hsu’s appeal, under pressure from Chang Tso-lin, for unity in carrying out decisions of Washington Conference.
687
Mar. 3 (77) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Liang’s refusal to resign. Sun Yat-sen’s threatening attitude toward Peking; Wu’s preparedness to withstand attack; refusal of provinces to furnish Government with military aid against Sun.
688
Mar. 8 (87) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Preoccupation of Cabinet in personal schemes and cessation of any functioning by Government.
688
Mar. 15 (104) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Further report of strife and plots among Government officials. President’s published circular telegram pointing out expiration of his term and necessity for election of new parliament to elect successor.
689
Mar. 25 (119) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Concentration of Chang’s troops on Tientsin-Mukden Railway and in environs of Peking, reinforced by Manchurian garrison.
689
Apr. 2 (127) From the Minister in China (tel.)
From Canton: Reported scheme planned at Mukden for ousting President Hsu and Wu Pei-fu, reorganizing Government on federal lines with new parliament, and naming Sun as President and Liang as Premier.
690
Apr. 3 (128) From the Minister in China (tel.)
From Harbin: Movement of Fengtien troops from railway zone to Changchun.
690
Apr. 6 (135) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Wu’s absorption in training his division of 10,000 men, not for aggression but for defense against Chang or Sun.
690
[Page LXX]Apr. 13 (149) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Efforts of Chow Tzu-ch’i, Acting Premier, to prevent fighting, which becomes more imminent as Chang’s troops proceed to occupy other railway stations farther south. Warning to Chang by diplomatic body.
691
Apr. 24 (164) From the Minister in China (tel.)
President Hsu’s appeal for peace; statement by diplomatic body that occupation of railway by Chinese armed force is violation of protocol, its expression of hope that armed troops will not enter Peking, and decision individually to request presence of naval vessels. Minister’s recommendation accordingly. Report from Canton of Sun’s abandoning expedition and Chen’s resignation.
692
Apr. 25 (167) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Japanese statement of policy of noninterference.
693
Apr. 25 (170) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Little indication of antiforeign sentiment in China.
693
Apr. 26 (98) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Arrangements to land reinforcements to U. S. Legation Guard; instructions to be guided by Department’s telegram no. 180, July 16, 1920, regarding efforts of diplomatic corps to prevent military operations about Peking. Inquiry as to significance of resignation of Chen.
693
Apr. 26 (172) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Expected arrival of forces on the Huron and Albany, which will bring strength of Legation Guard up to 525.
694
Apr. 28 (176) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Notice by diplomatic body that Chinese Government will be held responsible in case of damage to persons or property of their nationals, expressing hope that measures will be taken to avoid entry of armed troops into Peking or use of bombarding airplanes. Presence of 800 Americans in vicinity of Peking outside Legation.
694
Apr. 29 (177) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Recommendation of Minister and other U. S. officials that regiment at Tientsin be brought up to authorized strength.
695
Apr. 29 (179) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Reiteration of former warning to China by diplomatic corps against damage to foreign interests.
695
Apr. 29 (180) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Fighting on railway near Peking, Chang claiming victory. Instructions to Americans to retire to Peking, and suggestions to Admiral Strauss to send gunboat to Tientsin.
695
Apr. 29 (105) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Reluctance to increase contingent in China unless absolutely demanded by conditions; instructions to state reasons for request.
696
[Page LXXI]Apr. 29 (182) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Diplomatic body’s instructions to foreign commandants in Tientsin to adhere to resolutions of January 26, 1912, regarding military occupation of railway from Peking to Shanhaikwan.
696
May 1 (187) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Request for authorization to reinforce Tientsin garrison with marines instead of soldiers as first suggested, in order to protect Americans and keep railway open from Peking to sea. Defeat of Chang’s troops by Wu.
697
May 2 (108) To the Minister in China (tel.)
No objection to substituting marines for soldiers, if approved by naval officers. Instructions to report developments.
697
May 4 (193) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Defeat of Fengtien forces on Peking-Hankow Railway by Chihli troops.
698
May 4 (195) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Occupation by Wu of district of Fengtai on Peking-Tientsin Railway, Chang leaving many dead and wounded.
698
May 4 (197) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Orders for landing of 150 marines with machine guns at Tientsin, also for the Huron and Wilmington to proceed to Taku.
698
May 6 (202) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Arrival of marines at Tientsin, May 5.
699
May 7 (207) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Complete defeat of forces of Chang, due to Wu’s encircling movement at Changhsintien, aided by Christian General Feng’s troops.
699
May 10 (212) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Mandate depriving Chang of all offices; another mandate abolishing office of Inspector General of Manchuria.
700
May 11 (213) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Stand taken by Chang, Sun, and others causing tense situation. Inadvisability of withdrawing marines at present, or of intervening in conflict between Wu and Chang, as advocated by Colonel Martin and consuls.
700
May 13 (121) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Approval of course in avoiding intervention in struggle between two factions.
702
May 13 (217) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Placing of additional guard on railway and protest to Fengtien commanders against entrenching on American sector; impossibility of guarding 2–mile zone with present force. Possibility of declaration of independence of Manchuria with Japanese aid to Chang; Chang’s declaration regarding Three Eastern Provinces (text printed).
702
[Page LXXII]May 15 (218) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Danger of looting by disarmed troops, making it necessary for gates of Peking to remain closed; withdrawal of marines from Tientsin by Admiral Strauss, without approval of Minister.
704
May 18 (126) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Information that protocol powers’ only right in 2–mile railway zone is that of jurisdiction over crimes affecting railway or telegraph or persons and property of soldiers. Approval of Minister’s adherence to strict neutrality.
705
May 20 (225) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Chaotic situation in Canton owing to differences in policy of Sun and Chen; characteristics of each; willingness of Sun to negotiate with Wu.
706
May 24 (231) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Identic telegrams of U. S., British, French, and Japanese Ministers to their Governments (text printed) recommending that they be authorized to urge China to reduce military forces and to offer China financial assistance.
707
May 25 (232) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Departure of Legation Guard reinforcements. Threatening attitude of Chang in North and Chen in South.
708
May 26 (227) From the Ambassador in Japan
Statement by Foreign Minister, May 16 (text printed) reaffirming Japan’s neutral policy in Manchuria, having no reason to change attitude because of recent announcement regarding independence.
708
May 26 From the Consul at Harbin (tel.)
Report of mutiny among Chinese soldiers along Chinese Eastern Railway; request for instructions in regard to asking Japanese military authorities to protect U. S. nationals and property in case of emergency.
709
May 27 From the Consul at Harbin (tel.)
Spread of revolt of Chinese soldiers against Chang throughout railway zone.
709
May 27 (50) To the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Japanese Chargé’s assertion that no support has been or will be given by Japan to warring factions in China, thus denying unconfirmed rumors as to Japan’s assisting Chang.
(Instructions to repeat to Peking.)
710
May 30 From the Consul at Harbin (tel.)
Apparent gaining of control by Wu’s adherents in North Manchuria; Chinese insistence that Japanese are aiding mutineers.
710
May 31 (90) From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Foreign Office statement that Japanese troops will speedily be withdrawn from Hankow, action being based on policy of respecting integrity and sovereignty of China and in keeping with resolutions of Washington Conference.
710
[Page LXXIII]May 31 To the Consul at Harbin (tel.)
Instructions that requests for aid for protection of American interests should be made only to Chinese authorities, and that offer of protection from foreign troops should be accepted only in greatest extremity.
(Instructions to repeat to Peking.)
710
May 31 From the Consul at Harbin (tel.)
Assurances from Wu that order will be maintained in Harbin and railway zone, troops being sent against mutineers.
711
June 2 (243) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Resignation of President Hsu.
711
June 3 (244) From the Minister in China (tel.)
General public approval of Li Yuan-hung’s return to Presidency and of reconvocation of old Parliament; Sun’s successes in South; continuance of military preparations in North by both factions.
711
June 3 (245) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Correspondence between Minister and consul at Mukden (texts printed) in which is conveyed Chang’s request for mediation in factional fight with Chihli, and Minister’s refusal, in accord with U. S. policy of nonintervention.
713
June 5 (246) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Li Yuan-hung’s announcement that he will resume Presidency if Wu and Tsao Kun will consent to disbandment of troops and abolition everywhere of post of Military Governor.
714
June 6 (141) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Approval of Minister’s action regarding nonintervention.
714
June 7 (250) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Decision of Japan that time is inopportune for carrying out suggestion in identic telegram sent by the American, British, French, and Japanese Ministers to their respective Governments, because fighting between factions in China has not ceased. Airing of subject in Japanese newspapers.
714
June 11 (256) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Arrival in Peking of Li Yuan-hung.
715
June 11 (257) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Interview given press (text printed) denying reports in Japanese papers that Ministers of Great Britain, Japan, France, and United States had recommended to their Governments the giving of support to Wu in order to assist him to organize a stable government in China.
715
June 12 (259) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Li Yuan-hung’s assumption of duties of President, temporarily; and W. W. Yen, those of Acting Premier.
715
June 13 (260) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Inauguration of President and appointment of acting members of Cabinet. Opinion that question of recognition does not arise since change is not in form but in administration of Government.
716
[Page LXXIV]June 15 (147) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Instructions to avoid, if possible, raising question of recognition.
717
June 15 (262) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Official notification, June 14 (text printed) of Hsu’s resignation and assumption of office of President by Li Yuan-hung. Comment by Ministers, universal sentiment favoring recognition. Suggested procedure of merely acknowledging notice and attending Li’s reception. Sun’s demands.
717
June 16 (148) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Approval of procedure merely to acknowledge receipt of notice and to attend Li’s reception.
718
June 17 (267) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Armistice between Wu and Chang; seizure of Canton by Chen and escape of Sun; indication of understanding between Wu and Chen. Dinner given by Minister in honor of delegates to Washington Conference, Koo and Wang expressing gratitude to Americans for sympathy and cooperation.
718
June 17 (150) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Opinion of American group that there is slight prospect of loan to China until a stable government is established which would give confidence to investors.
719
June 20 (273) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Unanimous acceptance by diplomatic body of U. S. form of reply to notification of new President’s accession. Agreement reached between Wu and Chang.
720
June 21 (276) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Retirement of Chang’s troops outside wall accomplished by June 20th.
720
June 23 (153) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Public address of Japanese Chargé delivered at Baltimore in which he referred to Japanese withdrawal of troops from Hankow and stated that his Government hopes all foreign troops will be withdrawn when order is restored. Inquiry of matter has been taken up in Peking.
(Instructions to repeat to Tokyo for information.)
720
June 28 (286) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Report that Japanese Minister mentioned withdrawal of foreign troops to British and French Ministers, who considered that small guard should be retained. Schurman’s opinion that foreign troops are unnecessary since they undermine Chinese sense of responsibility for protection of foreigners.
721
June 29 (763) From the Minister in China
Legation circular of June 26 (text printed) communicating to consular officers in China the Department’s instructions as to attitude to be observed during internal disturbances in China.
722
[Page LXXV]

Overthrow of Sun Yat-sen’s Government at Canton

Date and number Subject Page
1922 June 16 From the Vice Consul in Charge at Canton (tel.)
Seizure of Canton by Chen’s troops; declaration against constitutional government and in favor of old Parliament. Sun’s escape to Whampoa on gunboat.
723
June 19 (271) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Bombardment of bund by Sun; U. S. buildings hit; consul’s protest to Sun. Message to Admiral suggesting protection of U. S. property.
723
June 22 From the Vice Consul in Charge at Canton (tel.)
Election of Chen as Provisional Governor of Kwangtung, with support of Navy, who will request Sun to retire; hope of Sun to fight his way back to Canton. Death of Wu Ling-fang.
723
June 25 (285) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Suggestion from Canton that consular good offices be offered to bring about Sun’s retirement; Minister’s opinion that undertaking should be left to Chinese Government if Chen cannot accomplish it.
724
June 26 (156) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Disapproval of consul’s participation in any plan of mediation.
725
Aug. 9 From the Consul in Charge at Canton (tel.)
Defeat of Sun’s forces in north Kwangtung; his departure for Hongkong and Shanghai.
725

Efforts by the United States and Other Powers to Prevent More Effectively the Exportation of Arms to China

Date and number Subject Page
1922 Jan. 30 (192) From the Ambassador in Italy
Italian note verbale, January 24 (text printed) explaining that arms shipments recently released to China were subject to contracts made prior to April 1919, concerning which contracts Italy had formulated reservations to agreement of 1919, and that Chihli government had given assurances material would not be used in internal wars.
725
Mar. 4 (1621) Proclamation
Declaring unlawful the exportation of arms or munitions of war to China.
726
Mar. 4 (23) To the Ambassador in Italy (tel.)
Instructions to request Government to abandon reservations to arms declaration of May 5, 1919.
727
Apr. 13 (56) From the Ambassador in Italy (tel.)
Italy’s assurance that no sales of Italian arms or ammunition shall take place in China.
728
Apr. 15 (50) To the Ambassador in Italy (tel.)
Inquiry whether Italian statement means that deliveries will not be made under contracts made either before or after declaration of May 5, 1919.
728
[Page LXXVI]Apr. 18 (60) From the Ambassador in Italy (tel.)
Affirmation by Foreign Office that no more deliveries will be made under contracts made either before or after declaration of May 5, 1919.
728
May 19 To the Secretary of the Treasury
Opinion that no shipments of airplanes or their equipment should be allowed to leave U. S. ports for China, except upon permits issued by Department of State.
728
June 2 (157) To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
Expression of gratification at British acceptance of U. S. proposal regarding naval construction in China. Information concerning Italy’s abandonment of reservation concerning declaration of May 5, 1919. U. S. desire for approval of amended resolution on Chinese arms embargo (text printed) submitted to Washington Conference but withdrawn because of Italian and Japanese reservations.
729
June 3 (80) To the Ambassador in Italy (tel.)
Proposal, in view of withdrawal of reservations by Italy and Japan, that amended resolution on arms embargo to China be circularized among powers participating in conference for reaffirmation as substitute for declaration of May 5, 1919.
730
June 16 (464) From the British Ambassador
Importance of reaffirmation of embargo of 1919 and widening terms to include materials for manufacture of arms and munitions of war; suggestion that subject be referred to diplomatic representatives in Peking for discussion and recommendations.
731
June 24 To the Secretary of the Treasury
Information that permits are necessary for shipments of arms or munitions of war to Kwangtung but not to British Crown colony of Hongkong, to Korea, or to French Indo-China.
732
June 26 (102) From the Ambassador in Italy (tel.)
No objections on part of Italy to circularizing the powers, as proposed in Department’s telegram no. 80, June 3.
733
June 29 (160) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Instructions to inform colleagues that U. S. representatives at London, Paris, Tokyo, Rome, Brussels, The Hague, and Lisbon have been instructed to request formal approval of amended resolution on Chinese arms embargo.
733
June 29 (188) To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
Instructions to request of Government to which accredited formal approval of amended resolution, Italy having signified approval.
(Instructions to repeat to Paris, Brussels, The Hague, and Lisbon. Similar telegram sent to Ambassador in Japan.)
734
June 29 (94) To the Ambassador in Italy (tel.)
Instructions to request formal adoption of amended resolution.
734
[Page LXXVII]July 12 (110) From the Ambassador in Italy (tel.)
Italy’s reply stating that, as Government has forbidden sale of Italian arms and munitions in China until the establishment of a single government, it could easily extend declaration to apply to the importation of such articles into China.
734
July 14 (98) To the Ambassador in Italy (tel.)
Inquiry whether Italian note gives formal approval to amended resolution.
735
July 17 (120) From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Japanese formal approval of amended resolution to be given on condition that other governments participating in conference give similar approval. Japanese special desire that adherence of Germany be invited.
735
July 20 (303) From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
Foreign Office note (text printed) affirming British adherence to embargo throughout Empire, and stating that proposal for extending embargo has been made to all powers participating in agreement of 1919, except Russia; also to Germany and Austria. Desirability of awaiting outcome of discussions in Peking before formally adopting amended resolution.
736
July 24 (121) From the Ambassador in Italy (tel.)
Inability of Foreign Office to reply owing to ministerial crisis.
737
July 24 (183) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Transmittal of excerpts from correspondence with London on negotiations regarding arms embargo, for guidance and discussion with colleagues, particularly British Minister.
737
July 24 (72) From the Chargé in the Netherlands (tel.)
Desire of the Netherlands to know, before giving formal approval to amended resolution, whether Italy has adhered without reservations.
738
July 28 (53) From the Ambassador in Belgium (tel.)
Belgian reply that adherence to amended resolution would be to the injury of important Belgian industry and to advantage of another nation, signatory to agreement, which is shipping arms to China; promise of cooperation if United States is successful in getting all nations to abide by agreement.
739
Aug. 15 (122) To the Ambassador in Italy (tel.)
Inquiry whether Government can now give definite reply to embargo proposal.
739
Aug. 18 (2246) From the Chargé in France
French reply suggesting desirability of awaiting result of deliberations of diplomatic corps at Peking before formally confirming amended resolutions.
739
Sept. 15 From the British Embassy
Information that suggestion to transfer negotiations to Peking has been accepted by most of treaty powers and Germany. Request that U. S. Government accept suggestion and instruct its Minister in China accordingly.
740
[Page LXXVIII]Sept. 22 To the British Embassy
Information that U. S. Minister in China has been instructed to discuss with interested colleagues British proposal of extension of embargo, bearing in mind limited terms of U. S. statute specifying “arms and munitions of war.” Delayed action by diplomatic body.
741
Sept. 22 (169) From the Ambassador in Italy (tel.)
Italy’s opinion that formal adherence to embargo resolution is no longer necessary, in view of proposed conference of diplomatic representatives at Peking and Italy’s declaration to suspend deliveries of Italian arms in China.
742
Oct. 4 (405) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Identic telegram to be sent by diplomatic body to governments (text printed) approving Washington formula, with interpolation including in embargo “aircraft, other than commercial aircraft, and machinery and materials destined exclusively for manufacture of arms and munitions.”
742
Oct. 5 (408) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Netherland Minister’s inability to join in identic telegram, as Netherland laws give Government no power to prevent export of “materials exclusively destined for the manufacture of arms and munitions.”
743
Oct. 12 (239) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Inquiry as to who initiated proposal that exception be made in case of commercial aircraft; request for definite statement as to number of planes imported by China.
743
Oct. 24 (426) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Report on number of planes imported by China; statement that French Minister insisted that commercial aircraft be excepted from embargo.
744
Oct. 28 (431) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Norwegian Minister’s inability to join in identic telegram since his Government has not adhered to embargo resolution. Renewal of discussion by diplomatic body in near future.
744
Nov. 6 (257) To the Minister in China (tel.)
U. S. willingness, in order to reach a common understanding, to agree to exclusion of commercial aircraft from the embargo.
744

American Proposal for a Mutual Undertaking Among the Powers to Refrain From Assisting China in Naval Construction

Date and number Subject Page
1922 Mar. 14 From the Assistant Secretary of the Navy
Despatch from naval attaché at Peking, March 14 (text printed) regarding China’s consideration of giving task of naval reorganization and building program to another government and its nationals, in view of apathetic attitude of the United States and of Bethlehem Steel Corp.
745
[Page LXXIX]Mar. 16 Memorandum by the Assistant Chief of the Division of Far Eastern Affairs, Department of State
History of contract of 1911 between China and Bethlehem Steel Corp. for construction of certain naval vessels and providing for sending of U. S. naval officers to China as instructors. Statement made to China in 1921 that sending of naval advisers would be held in abeyance pending forthcoming Conference on Limitation of Armament.
745
Apr. 28 (103) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Instructions to make representations regarding China’s desire to proceed with large naval building program at this time; also regarding any steps to vitiate Bethlehem Steel Corp. contract.
747
May 4 To the Japanese Embassy
Request for views as to propriety of proceeding with Bethlehem contract: U. S. willingness to forego any steps toward naval development in China, provided assurance is given by British, French, Italian, and Japanese Governments likewise to refrain from such undertaking.
(Sent, mutatis mutandis, to British, French, and Italian Embassies.)
747
May 4 (37) To the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Transmittal of Department’s aide-mémoire of May 4 to Japanese Embassy with instructions to present to Foreign Office and request expression of views.
(Instructions to repeat to Peking for information. Sent, mutatis mutandis, to London, Paris, and Rome.)
748
May 6 (204) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Chinese memorandum stating purposes for which reorganization of Navy is intended, disclaiming any designs for offensive warfare and desiring to know immediately whether U. S. Government and Bethlehem Steel Corp. are ready to fulfill contract.
749
May 9 (117) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Instructions to explain U. S. move in consulting parties to arms embargo agreement of 1919, at same time reserving all rights accruing under Bethlehem contract with expectation to proceed with matter in preference to any other nationality.
750
May 12 From the Italian Embassy
Italy’s views as to propriety of postponing naval development or technical assistance requested by China until such time as normal conditions and unified government are restored.
750
May 24 (220) From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
British note (text printed) on undesirability of naval construction in China or foreign technical assistance to Navy until restoration of unified government; assurance that British Government will not countenance such action on part of its nationals, provided similar undertaking is assured by France, Italy, Japan, and United States.
751
[Page LXXX]May 31 From the Japanese Embassy
Japan’s views that foreign assistance in construction or improvement in China’s naval armaments might have effect of promoting internal strife; willingness to subscribe to understanding, provided similar assurances are given by other interested powers.
751
June 22 (279) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Chinese note stating that, since contract cannot now be carried out, previous discussions should be canceled and matter ended.
753
June 29 (161) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Inquiry as to meaning of Chinese note, whether intended that discussions or contract should be ended.
753
July 5 (277) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Official notification that France is prepared to subscribe to agreement relative to Bethlehem Steel contract with China.
753
July 11 (302) From the Minister in China (tel.)
China’s meaning that entire project should be canceled and case terminated.
754
July 25 To the Japanese Embassy
U. S. assurance that, pending restoration of unified government in China, no steps will be taken by corporation or Government to avail themselves of rights established by Bethlehem contract, similar assurances having been received from British, French, and Italian Governments.
(Similar aides-mémoire sent to British, French, and Italian Embassies.)
754
Sept. 2 (100) To the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Instructions to give assurance that U. S. policy regarding Bethlehem contract will be followed in all similar cases as well and that this purpose is understood by other interested powers.
755
Oct. 4 (752) From the British Ambassador
Views that undertaking to refrain from extending naval assistance to China should be formally confirmed by other parties to forthcoming discussions at Peking who are also additional signatories to embargo agreement of 1919, with exception of Russia, and also by Germany and Austria.
756
Oct. 17 (118) To the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Advisability of adherence of powers participating in arms embargo of 1919, excepting Russia, and also of Germany and Austria, in withholding of naval assistance to China. Instructions to request Japan’s concurrence.
(Instructions to repeat to Peking. Similar telegram to Ambassador in France, with instructions to repeat to Ambassador in Italy.)
757
Oct. 18 To the British Ambassador
Concurrence in views expressed in Ambassador’s note of October 4; assent of France, Italy, and Japan being asked with view to requesting formal adherence of the other Governments specified.
757
[Page LXXXI]Nov. 2 (828) From the British Ambassador
Proposal that diplomatic corps in Peking be asked to discuss understanding with regard to withholding of naval assistance to China and to draw up exact formula for submission to their governments.
758
Nov. 3 (446) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
French concurrence in plan to request adherence of powers participating in arms embargo of 1919.
758
Nov. 11 (262) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Proposed formula to supplement Arms Embargo Agreement of 1919 and U. S. reservation of eventual rights under Bethlehem contract (texts printed) to be presented to diplomatic corps for transmittal to their governments, when advised that French, Italian, and Japanese Governments have acquiesced.
(Instructions to repeat to Tokyo for information.)
759
Nov. 13 (195) From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
No objections on part of Japan to proposal of October 17.
760
Nov. 16 To the British Ambassador
Transmittal of draft formula for adoption by diplomatic body, together with U. S. reservation of eventual rights as to Bethlehem contract.
760
Nov. 18 (231) From the Chargé in Italy (tel.)
Evasive reply of Foreign Office to request for assurance of adherence to U. S. proposal.
761
Nov. 22 (270) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Instructions to present formula to diplomatic body for consideration.
(Instructions to repeat to Tokyo for information.)
761

Inconclusive Negotiations for a Consortium Loan to the Chinese Government

Date and number Subject Page
1922 Jan. 3 (4) From the Minister in China (tel.)
China’s proposal to representatives of new consortium of issue in China of silver bonds for $96,000,000 secured for present on salt revenues, later on customs surtax. Recommendations for approval.
761
Jan. 18 To the American Group
Acknowledgment of correspondence on proposed loan to China and appreciation of position taken that American group cannot lend its aid to new financing while defaults continue, particularly for loans without proper supervision and for administrative rather than constructive purposes.
762
Jan. 21 (19) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Consent of group of Chinese banks to buy Chinese treasury bonds to amount of $14,000,000, portion of which to be applied to Government’s obligations; security, salt surplus; President’s stipulation of no further foreign or Chinese loans on this security.
762
[Page LXXXII]Feb. 10 (45) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Agreement between Government and Chinese and Japanese bankers for refunding salt surplus debts, 60,000,000 silver dollars of new bonds to be held by Chinese and 30,000,000 by Japanese; automatic transfer of securities to customs increase, placing debt to the United States of over 100,000,000 gold dollars at disadvantage. Inquiry whether conference authorized preferential security.
763
Apr. 7 From Mr. Thomas W. Lamont
Transmittal, for approval, of draft letter to members of American group quoting informally the Secretary’s expression of opinion.
764
Apr. 13 To Mr. Thomas W. Lamont
Approval of sending draft letter including informal comments; suggestion of further stressing fact that new consortium is U. S. conception in nature of public service, designed to substitute international cooperation for competition in China, and U. S. opportunity for development of that country to interest of American group as well.
764
Apr. 24 From the American Group
Letter from managing committee to the members of American group, April 24 (text printed) incorporating the Secretary’s suggestions and appealing for patience to continue intact and await outcome of situation in China, recalling objects of consortium, not only for maintaining open-door policy in Far East, but for upholding U. S. prestige.
765
May 10 (360) From the British Ambassador
Request for U. S. views as to possibility of cooperation among interested Governments in withholding support from loans made by nationals to Chinese Government upon security of salt revenues in excess of amounts required for service of reorganization loan of 1913.
767
May 23 (230) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Government’s efforts to raise money for new expenditures by bond issues secured on salt or customs surpluses which have already been pledged to bankers as security for loans.
769
May 26 (233) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Decision of colleagues to adopt attitude, if approached by Government regarding loan, that proposal cannot be entertained until united, stable government has been formed, at which time they will be prepared to recommend to their governments consideration of financial assistance.
769
May 27 (132) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Approval of position indicated in telegram no. 233, May 26.
770
May 31 (241) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Prospects of unification of China, which would be hastened by financial assistance from consortium. Views of Addis, representative of British banking group.
770
[Page LXXXIII]June 2 To the British Ambassador
U. S. opposition to policy of withholding support from loans made by nationals to Chinese Government upon security of excess salt revenues; absence of legal right to restrict China in disposition of salt surplus; desire to avoid creation of exclusive or monopolistic position in favor of consortium.
771
June 12 From the American Group
Report of council of consortium (text printed) adopted at meeting held May 15 in office of Hongkong & Shanghai Banking Corp., London, setting forth guiding principles of consortium and meeting some of unfounded reports current in China.
773
July 10 (299) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Identic telegrams of the four Ministers to their Governments (text printed) recommending monthly advances by consortium banks, expenditure thereof subject to supervision and audit with foreign assistance, Government to pledge itself to consolidation of internal and external foreign floating debt. Doubt as to continued existence of Government without outside financial assistance.
779
July 19 (177) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Transmittal of copy of Minister’s telegram no. 299, July 10, to American group for comment. Inquiry whether proposal, if adopted, takes place of proposed Boxer indemnity postponement.
780
July 25 (320) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Intention that proposed monthly advances will take place of proposed postponement of indemnity payments. Revision of plan by consortium representatives to meet British objections, basing debt consolidation on security of customs revenues, wine and tobacco tax, railway and salt revenues, etc.
780
July 27 (322) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Deliberations of the four Ministers on consolidation loan proposal and indemnity postponement; Japan’s disapproval of former; decision to submit latter for approval of the four Governments in view of Yen’s assurance that Government will collapse without outside assistance.
781
Aug. 4 From the American Group
Position of group on subject of banking advances to Chinese Government; its inability to take care of obligations without reasonable security.
783
Sept. 29 (397) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Conversations between Foreign Minister and consortium representatives in regard to loan proposals; insistence by latter that Hukuang obligations of December 3 be met; consideration of various means for so doing.
785
[Page LXXXIV]Oct. 5 (409) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Identic telegrams of Ministers to their Governments (text printed) agreeing that Chinese proposals should be adopted as basis for further discussion, in view of certain serious consequences if rejected.
786
Oct. 17 (243) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Information that the United States does not extend its support to consortium to such extent as to make it a monopoly which would preclude support to any interests which would undertake business with which consortium does not concern itself, such as Crisp proposal to negotiate loan for refunding Vickers, Marconi, Pacific Development, and Chicago Bank loans.
(Substance sent to British Embassy.)
787
Oct. 19 From the Japanese Embassy
Japan’s opinion that, because of instability of political conditions in China, it would be premature for consortium to extend immediate financial assistance to Peking Government.
788
Oct. 27 From the American Group
Assurance that Japan will not be lacking in cooperation when sound loan operation presents itself. Request for information on Crisp negotiations. Opinion that U. S. attitude, as expressed to British Foreign Office, appears to recede from position of support to consortium heretofore taken. Suggestion that supplementary memorandum be sent to British Foreign Office by way of amplifying U. S. position.
790
Nov. 2 (831) From the British Ambassador
Desirability of immediate consideration of informal proposal advanced by representatives of four groups in Peking for loan to Chinese Government, in view of improved conditions and urgency of settling question of unsecured foreign debts before meeting of special tariff conference.
793
Nov. 23 To the Japanese Embassy
U. S. inability to share Japanese opinion regarding financial assistance to China; approval of favorable consideration of loan to Peking as sole recognized and responsible government, also of consolidation of floating debt.
794
Nov. 23 To the British Ambassador
U. S. accord with British views expressed in note of November 2; transmittal of copy of memorandum of November 23 sent Japanese Embassy; instructions to U. S. Ambassador in Japan to associate himself with British colleague in urging Japan to authorize its group to give favorable consideration to loan.
797
Dec. 28 From the Japanese Embassy
Further arguments in support of view that it would be premature to extend immediate financial assistance to Peking Government. Recommendations for presenting definite plan for consolidation of loans and for consideration in special tariff conference question of financial reorganization.
797
[Page LXXXV]

Default by the Chinese Government on American Loans

Date and number Subject Page
1922 Feb. 21 (42) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Instructions to inquire when American holders of Chinese bonds issued in connection with Continental and Commercial Bank loan may expect payment, in view of many inquiries received by Department and Continental and Commercial Bank.
802
Mar. 1 (72) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Prime Minister’s reply that there is no possibility of obtaining funds during present Cabinet crisis.
802
May 1 (106) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Statement of Ministry of Finance that coupons and commission of May last will be paid when salt surplus is received in June and July. Instructions to keep matter before Chinese Government and remind them that four semiannual payments are due as well as principal.
802
May 5 (198) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Statement from Ministry of Finance that one-half of interest payments will be made when salt surplus is received and that it will be necessary to devise other means for payment of principal.
803
July 5 (164) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Inquiry regarding Chinese negotiations with Crisp for loan under a contract which provides for payment of all indebtedness to Americans now in default including Pacific Development loan.
803
July 10 (300) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Finance Minister’s proposal that provincial authorities deposit 20 percent of wine and tobacco revenues as sinking fund for payment of Pacific Development and Chicago Bank loans; first payment to be made in 1923, remainder in eight yearly installments.
803
July 11 (301) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Report that Crisp represents a group of London bankers independent of and opposed to consortium group, and that his negotiations for loan to cover Pacific Development Corporation, Chicago Bank, Marconi, and Vickers loans, all in default, have been dropped.
804
July 24 (318) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Efforts of Pacific Development Corporation to get Chinese Government to reopen negotiations with Crisp, in view of its difficult position in carrying tremendous loan. Appeal to Minister who requests instructions.
805
July 26 (187) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Instructions neither to aid nor actively oppose Crisp loan, which is a British enterprise.
805
[Page LXXXVI]Aug. 9 From the Vice President of the Continental and Commercial Trust and Savings Bank
Doubt of ability of Central Government to carry out sinking-fund plan to liquidate Pacific Development and Chicago Bank loans in eight yearly installments, in view of prior defaults; bank’s willingness to negotiate with China regarding a foreign inspector for Wine and Tobacco Administration.
806
Aug. 29 (353) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Investigation revealing that all bonds of $96,000,000 issue are now on market or in hands of Japanese or Chinese banks to whom issued, and that $600,000 of interest due has been paid out of salt surplus.
807
Sept. 1 (209) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Instruction to express U. S. failure to understand why Government is able to pay $600,000 interest on the $96,000,000 issue and does not make interest payments on defaulted U. S. obligations.
808
Sept. 8 (364) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Report that attention of officials has been called repeatedly to the fact that payments are made on internal loans while Government is indifferent to defaulted foreign obligations.
808
Sept. 21 (375) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Report of payments made on Crisp and Anglo-French loans and on internal loans from salt revenues and surplus releases; also of a new loan obtained from Sino-Belgian Bank.
808
Sept. 23 (233) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Instructions to make further representations regarding failure to meet payments on defaulted American loans, and to request statement of definite, reliable plan for liquidation.
809

Decision by the American and British Governments to Remit Further Payments on the Boxer Indemnity, Subject to Legislative Approval

Date and number Subject Page
1922 June 23 (280) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Chinese request, June 19 (excerpt printed) for further extension of time for payments on Boxer indemnity.
809
June 24 (283) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Yen’s proposal of conference with United States, British, French, and Japanese Ministers on postponement of indemnity payments; Japanese Foreign Minister’s statement regarding policy of remission adopted by several governments, making postponement of payments difficult.
810
June 27 (158) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Passage through Senate of resolution to remit remainder of Boxer indemnity; chance of ‘its passage through House if deferred until December session.
811
Aug. 2 (193) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Instructions to state that Department will refrain from pressing for indemnity payments for two years, provided other interested Governments do likewise; and to confer with colleagues as to advisability of obtaining specification of items for which said funds are to be used.
811
[Page LXXXVII]Sept. 21 (230) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Inquiry whether subject of indemnity postponement has been discussed with interested members of diplomatic body and with Chinese Government; if so, with what result.
812
Sept. 23 (378) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Report that Italy refuses to postpone indemnity payments; France cannot; England and Japan oppose principle, but if other nations consent they might follow.
812
Nov. 6 (837) From the British Ambassador
British decision, subject to sanction of Parliament, to remit remainder of Boxer indemnity payments, on understanding that funds will be devoted to objects mutually beneficial to China and Great Britain. Inquiry whether United States desires to associate itself with British in similar announcement. Similar note to Japan.
812
Nov. 17 To the British Ambassador
Information that decision was reached by Secretary of State in July 1921, subject to approval of Congress, to remit to China, unconditionally, all further indemnity payments as from October 1, 1917; joint resolution passed Senate, now pending in House; sums paid by China held subject to return.
813
Dec. 2 From the Secretary of the Treasury
Assurance that any moneys due the United States which may be received on account of Chinese indemnity will be held in special deposit account, pending decision on remission of indemnity by Congress.
814
Dec. 14 (494) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Recommendations as to method for handling indemnity payments, both retained portion and remitted portion.
815
Dec. 16 From the Comptroller General
Statement of amount due the United States from Chinese indemnity as of January 1, 1923.
815
Dec. 23 (295) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Assumption that Minister’s plan is for retained portion of indemnity payments to be paid to International Banking Corp. for transmission to Treasury, and remitted portion to be paid by Inspector General to Foreign Office.
815

Revision of the Chinese Customs Tariff

Date and number Subject Page
1922 Mar. 11 (98) From the Minister in China (tel.)
China’s appointment of delegates to Tariff Revision Commission, setting time and place, and requesting prompt appointment of delegates by other powers.
816
Mar. 31 (75) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Appointment of Arnold as principal delegate to Tariff Revision Commission. Instructions to representatives at Christiania, Copenhagen, Madrid, and Rio de Janeiro to extend invitations to Governments to which accredited to attend conference.
816
[Page LXXXVIII]Apr. 7 (1) From the Consul General at Shanghai (tel.)
From Arnold: Calculation that present tariff revision will form basis for subsequent 2½ percent surtax; consideration of questions of reclassification and of a basis for assessing duties; importance of appointing technical expert as assistant, and local U. S. businessman as member of Commission.
817
Apr. 7 (3) From the Consul General at Shanghai (tel.)
From Arnold: Proposal that Shanghai market values for past six months be taken as basis for new tariff.
817
Apr. 11 (4) From the Consul General at Shanghai (tel.)
From Arnold: Recommendation of W. A. Burns as member of U. S. delegation on Tariff Revision Commission without remuneration.
817
Apr. 13 To the Consul General at Shanghai (tel.)
For Arnold: U. S. assent that prevailing values should be used as basis of valuation.
818
Apr. 22 To the Consul General at Shanghai (tel.)
For Arnold: Appointment of Burns as associate member of U. S. delegation on Tariff Revision Commission. Inquiry as to reasonable remuneration, since voluntary service cannot be accepted.
818
May 27 To Mr. Henry Blackwood, Special Deputy Collector of Customs, Seattle
Appointment as associate member of U. S. delegation on Tariff Revision Commission.
818
Undated [Rec’d Sept. 9] From the Chairman of the American Delegation, China Tariff Revision Commission (tel.)
Inquiry whether draft of revised tariff must be submitted for U. S. sanction before publication or whether delegation’s sanction is sufficient for U. S. ratification.
818
Undated [Rec’d Sept.13] From the Chairman of the American Delegation, China Tariff Revision Commission (tel.)
Proposed prefatory note to completed tariff (text printed) authorizing publication, tariff to come into force December 1, 1922.
819
Sept. 27 (235) To the Minister in China (tel.)
For Arnold: No objections to publication of revised schedule pending deposit of ratification of customs treaty of February 6, provided schedule is accepted by all other interested Governments.
819
Undated [Rec’d Sept.28] From the Chairman of the American Delegation, China Tariff Revision Commission (tel.)
Completion of work and adjournment of Tariff Revision Commission on Sept. 28.
819
Oct. 2 (403) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Resolution in full meeting of conference approving revised import tariff, effective as of December 1, 1922, provided shipments made prior to that date shall pay former tariff. Request of delegates that their Governments agree to above procedure.
820
[Page LXXXIX]Oct. 5 (236) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Reiteration of U. S. inability to approve alteration of tariff schedule pending coming into force of customs treaty of February 6; no objections, however, to arrangement suggested provided it is accepted by all interested Governments.
820
Oct. 18 (422) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Foreign Office circular note stating revision just concluded was made in accordance with international agreement of 1918 and irrespective of Washington Treaty. Japanese opinion schedule cannot go into effect until approved separately by each Government concerned, then only after two weeks’ notification to foreign merchants.
820
Oct. 24 (247) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Authorization to accept Japanese suggestion. Instructions to advise Department of conclusion reached.
821
1923 Jan. 5 (10) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Receipt of notice of approval of revised import tariff from each of powers concerned; notification bringing it into effect January 17.
821

Postponement of the Meeting of the Commission on Extraterritoriality in China

Date and number Subject Page
1922 Apr. 13 From the Chinese Minister
Request for postponement of meeting of Commission on Extraterritoriality in China, in order that statistical information concerning judicial administration may be compiled and translations made of codes of Chinese law and procedure.
822
Apr. 25 To the Chinese Minister
U. S. acquiescence in postponement and instructions to U. S. representatives to ascertain views of other interested Governments on subject.
822
May 4 To the Diplomatic Representatives in Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Spain, Brazil, and Peru (tel.)
Instructions to inquire whether Governments to which accredited desire to adhere to resolution for appointment of Commission on Extraterritoriality in China, also to China’s request for postponement of meeting for compiling of data.
823
May 29 To the Chinese Minister
Receipt of advices from all powers concerned giving assent to postponement of meeting of Commission on Extraterritoriality in China, as requested.
824
Nov. 28 (399) From the Ambassador in Spain
Spanish reply adhering to agreement for postponement of meeting of Commission on Extraterritoriality.
824
[Page XC]

Assertion of the Extraterritorial Rights of the American Citizens Under Martial Law in China

Date and number Subject Page
1922 June 7 (707) From the Minister in China
Request for views on applicability of martial law to persons possessed of extraterritorial privileges, in view of declaration of martial law at Tsinan and territory along Tientsin-Pukow and Shantung Railways.
825
Aug. 18 (208) To the Minister in China
Opinion that declaration of martial law cannot operate to deprive Americans of rights under treaties; that U. S. consuls may, however, render assistance to Chinese authorities in maintaining order and preventing unlawful acts by Americans.
825

Payment of Chinese Claims Arising Out of the Acts of Persons Connected With the Naval or Military Service of the United States

Date and number Subject Page
1922 [Mar. 9] President Harding to the Senate and House of Representatives
Report from Acting Secretary of State, March 7 (text printed) relative to four claims against the United States presented by China arising out of negligent or unlawful acts in China of persons connected with U. S. military or naval service. Recommendation for payment of claims.
(Footnote: Authorization for payment under Second Deficiency Act, 1923.)
826

Proposals for International Cooperation in the Development of Radio Communications in and with China

Date and number Subject Page
1921 Dec. 14 From the Expert Assistant to the American Delegation at the Conference on the Limitation of Armament
Letter, dated December 7, 1921, from Chairman of Board of Radio Corporation of America to Mr. James R. Sheffield (text printed) regarding arrangement with radio interests of England, France, and Germany for radio communications in South America, suggesting similar arrangement in China. Letter dated December 12, 1921, from Chairman of Board of R. C. A. to Senator Elihu Root (text printed) explaining corporation’s offer to cooperate with Federal Telegraph Co. of California in radio development in China.
830
Dec. 16 From the Secretary of the Navy
Desirability of healthy competition among commercial companies for furnishing communication between China and outside world rather than creation of monopolies in radio service which might lead to monopoly in other services. Suggestion that any understandings on subject be submitted to respective Governments for approval.
835
1922 Jan. 9 From the Chairman of the Board of the Radio Corporation of America
Enumeration of advantages of international cooperation in development of wireless stations in China and reasons for favoring theory of regulated monopoly in preference to competitive activity.
837
[Page XCI]Jan. 27 From Mr. Elihu Root, of the American Delegation at the Conference on the Limitation of Armament
Desirability of discussion outside of conference by U. S., British, French, and Japanese experts on electrical communications with view to friendly agreement between private interests holding preferential privileges in China and to improvement of trans-Pacific communication services.
838
Mar. 10 From the Technical Expert, American Delegation at the Conference on the Limitation of Armament
Report on informal discussions by United States, British, French, and Japanese communications experts; their recommendations, February 4 (text printed) regarding cooperative scheme for establishing radio service between China and other countries, and proposed heads of arrangements therefor (text printed).
839
June 2 (414) From the British Ambassador
British approval of conclusions reached by wireless experts on subject of radio communications in and with China.
844

Arrangement Between the Federal Telegraph Company and the Radio Corporation of America for Carrying Out the Former’s Contract With China

Date and number Subject Page
1922 Jan. 6 (5) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Report that Minister of Communications disapproves of French proposals made at Washington Conference for unification of Chinese wireless, and desires that Federal Telegraph Co. proceed with their agreement, urging that U. S. Government give financial support to company.
844
Jan. 10 (4) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Information that U. S. assent will not be given to any foreign arrangement for monopoly of communications in China; that prior consultation with Chinese Government as to any understanding is assured; and that execution of Federal Telegraph Co.’s contract is expected.
845
Feb. 10 (43) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Representations of Danish Great Northern Telegraph Co. to China, pointing out failure of Federal Telegraph Co. to execute contract, and Danish company’s desire to take over contract under guaranty of execution. Chinese official’s evasive reply.
845
Feb. 10 (44) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Chinese delegates at Washington instructed to oppose international control of wireless in China or any interference with Federal Telegraph Co.’s contract and to repudiate monopolistic clauses in British and Japanese wireless contracts. Chinese request that U. S. delegates confer privately with Chinese delegates on subject.
846
[Page XCII]Feb. 16 (36) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Instructions to state, if deemed necessary, that any effort to discredit Federal Telegraph Co. should not be tolerated, in view of fact that it is now proceeding under its concession.
846
Feb. 16 (37) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Information that U. S. delegation has disbanded but that Department is ready to discuss wireless question with Chinese delegates; that cooperative development of radio with other nations was not acted on by conference; and that U. S. expert favors, direct communication between China and the United States, unhampered by foreign interests.
847
Feb. 20 (55) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Report that Federal Telegraph Co. has arranged to secure loan of $2,500,000 gold; Chinese desire that construction of Shanghai station begin at once.
847
Mar. 8 From the President of the Federal Telegraph Company
Opinion that building of Shanghai station should not begin until project has been totally financed.
848
Mar. 22 To the Secretary of the Navy
Memorandum, March 21, by expert assistant to U. S. delegation at Conference on Limitation of Armament (text printed) concerning negotiations being carried on between Federal Telegraph Co. and Radio Corporation of America with regard to Federal Telegraph Co.’s concession in China and looking toward a contract between the two companies for common action in development of trans-Pacific radio communication; recommendations in favor of project under certain enumerated conditions.
848
Mar. 24 (114) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Arrangements for taking over by Chinese Director of Telegraphs of foreign wireless plants and Director’s urgent desire for Federal Telegraph Co. to hasten its construction work.
852
Mar. 25 From the Secretary of the Navy
General accord with proposal for joint company in development of trans-Pacific radio communications; necessity for traffic agreement between new company and Navy high-powered circuits in area; enumeration of certain principles as bases for agreement.
852
May 8 (114) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Efforts of president of Federal Telegraph Co. to conclude traffic agreements and arrange other matters necessary to the carrying out of contract.
854
May 12 (216) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Policy of British, French, and Japanese wireless interests to secure agreement with China at variance with that of Washington Conference; their denouncing of Federal Telegraph Co. contract because of delay in execution. Necessity for haste in launching U. S. project.
854
[Page XCIII]May 17 (123) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Federal Telegraph Co.’s statement that financial, mechanical, and traffic arrangements are being completed and that engineers will soon arrive in Peking. Confidential information regarding negotiations between Federal Telegraph Co. and Radio Corporation of America to form new joint company for operation in China.
855
Aug. 29 From the President of the Federal Telegraph Company
Announcement of tentative arrangements for new company called Federal Telegraph Co. of Delaware, which will be owned and controlled jointly by Federal Telegraph Co. of California and Radio Corporation of America. Transmittal of copies of engagement, in hope that Department will raise no objections to arrangement and will authorize diplomatic support of negotiations in China.
856
Sept. 7 (222) To the Minister in China
Confidential information regarding tentative arrangements for new communications company, with copies of announcement thereof and of Department’s reply. Authorization to give diplomatic support to negotiations to be conducted in China.
856
Nov. 28 (464) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Japanese Minister’s strong protest against Federal Telegraph Co.’s wireless contract. Arrival of new company’s representative to whom all possible support will be given.
857
Nov. 29 (279) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Inquiry with whom and on what basis Japanese protest was filed.
857
Dec. 4 (475) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Report that Japanese protest was filed with Foreign Minister and Minister of Communications on basis of monopolistic clause in supplementary letter to Mitsui wireless contract.
858
Dec. 6 (479) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Article 12 of agreement between China and Japan, December 1, 1922 (text printed) regarding discontinuance of monopoly granted to foreign concerns for electrical transmission.
858
Dec. 28 (299) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Instructions to call attention to U. S. reservation of rights against monopolies in China and to Mitsui Co.’s claim, as being at variance with principles and spirit of Washington treaty. Department’s intention to make representations to Japanese Chargé in above sense, reserving all U. S. rights.
858
1923 Jan. 3 (3) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Report that Federal Telegraph Co. has situation well in hand and that it would serve no good purpose to send note to Japanese Chargé.
859
[Page XCIV]Jan. 5 (6) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Inquiry whether Legation still considers it unwise to make representations to Japanese Chargé.
859
Jan. 7 (14) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Opinion that representations to Japanese Chargé might arouse Japan to protest further to China. Assurances that Department will be notified if conditions change for the worse.
860

Protection of American Life and Property Against Brigandage

Date and number Subject Page
1922 Mar. 4 (28) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Reported killing of Dr. A. L. Shelton, American missionary, by robbers near Batang. Request to Foreign Office for investigation of crime and apprehension of guilty parties.
860
Mar. 11 (96) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Confirmation of murder and renewal of request to Foreign Office for apprehension and trial of guilty parties.
861
Mar. 18 (110) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Summary of Foreign Office reply (text printed) giving circumstances of death of Shelton, his failure to heed official warning against traveling in certain district and Government’s efforts to capture culprits and protect foreigners.
861
Mar. 29 (46) The Minister in China to the Consular Officers in China
Foreign Minister’s note, March 23 (text printed) requesting that instructions be issued to U. S. missionaries and merchants not to proceed to regions on borders of Szechuan, temporarily, since bandits are intermittently active therein.
862
June 17 (192) The Minister in China to the Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs
Insistence that authorities should assume full responsibility for protection of missionaries residing, under treaty rights, at Batang and Tachienlu.
863
June 21 (189) The Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs to the Minister in China
Explanation that discontinuing passports on Szechuan border is measure designed to safeguard lives and property of foreigners; that local authorities will exert utmost efforts for protection of missionaries residing there.
864
Oct. 17 (420) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Report that Anton Lundeen, American missionary, was captured at Juchow, Honan, by brigands following looting of mission station, and that representations have been made.
864
Nov. 4 (436) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Report that Lundeen and Forsberg were captured as hostages not by robbers but by band of soldiers who demand recognition as unit of National Army. Hope of Wu and Feng for release of prisoners through negotiations.
865
[Page XCV]Nov. 16 (449) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Presentation of joint note of protest by United States, British, French, Italian, and Swedish representatives against kidnaping and detention by brigands in Honan of nationals of their respective countries. Koo’s reply that efforts are being made for release of prisoners. Report of further captures by bandits.
866
Nov. 24 (275) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Department’s approval of joint note of protest, awaiting with concern efforts to release Americans.
867
Nov. 29 (466) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Appointment by diplomatic body of an international commission to investigate conditions in Honan and to take steps deemed expedient. Their authorization of telegram demanding liberation of foreigners, and publication of joint protest to Government.
867
Dec. 6 (480) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Wu’s suggestion that departure of international commission for Honan be deferred, which was approved by diplomatic body in view of installation of new Cabinet. Wu’s indignation at publication of protest which holds him jointly responsible for continued captivity of foreigners.
867
Dec. 9 (486) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Reported release of Forsberg, who thinks others will soon be freed; robbers being hard pressed by Government troops.
(Footnote: Recorded release of prisoners.)
868
Dec. 16 (497) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Diplomatic body’s refusal to dissolve international commission, deferring its departure for Honan, but still viewing with anxiety continued danger to nationals in Honan.
868

Constitution of the American Forces in China Into a Separate Command Having Special Relations to the American Minister in China

Date and number Subject Page
1922 Oct. 21 (WPD 938) From the Secretary of War
Information that U. S. troops in China, heretofore attached to Philippine Department, will constitute a separate command under General Connor, reporting directly to War Department. Extract from letter of instructions to General Connor (text printed) outlining the mission of his command.
869
Nov. 8 To the Secretary of War
Views as to duties of U. S. forces in China and relations to be maintained between these forces and U. S. diplomatic mission, in order to preserve U. S. prestige in Far East and assure safety of the mission; citation of precedents in orders given Legation Guard and Marine Corps (excerpts printed).
870
Nov. 21 From the Secretary of War
Accord with views of Secretary of State regarding duties of U. S. forces in China and transmittal of Secretary of State’s letter of November 8 to General Connor for guidance.
873
[Page XCVI]

Termination of Inter-Allied Supervision Over the Chinese Eastern Railway, October 31, 1922, After China’s Rejection of Proposals for Its Continuation

Date and number Subject Page
1921 Dec. 24 (340) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Tentative plan for international conservation of the Chinese Eastern Railway, providing for financing, operating, and policing and designed to prevent any one foreign power from gaining control of railway. Instructions to discuss plan with Chang.
874
Dec. 27 (281) From the Minister in China
Transmittal by Soviet delegate in China of letter dated December 8, 1921, from Commissar for Foreign Affairs (text printed) protesting against any decision regarding Chinese Eastern by Washington Conference detrimental to Russian rights, declaring solution of question to be under exclusive jurisdiction of China and Russia.
875
Dec. 27 (469) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Soviet declaration (excerpt printed) of readiness to restore railway to China free of financial and economic charges in return for China’s guaranty that it will not be turned over to any third power.
877
Dec. 31 (343) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Instructions to impress upon officials questionable validity of any agreement with Soviets and impossibility of obtaining assent of interested powers to nullify 1896 treaty.
877
1922 Jan. 1 (2) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Report of Chang’s unfavorable attitude toward tentative plan for international conservation of Chinese Eastern.
877
Jan. 7 (8) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Foreign Minister’s assertion that no negotiations had taken place with Russian Soviet Government, that China was unanimous in opposition to international control of railway, and that money could be raised by floating bond issue independent of consortium.
878
Jan. 10 (3) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Instructions to present tentative plan outlined in Department’s telegram of December 24, 1921.
879
Jan. 17 (7) From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
From Caldwell: Refusal of Minister of Foreign Affairs of Far Eastern Republic to accept plan for an inter-Allied committee to manage railway, on ground that international guard would be too largely Japanese.
879
Jan. 19 (7) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Instructions to inform British Minister of tentative plan outlined in Department’s telegram of December 24, 1921, with view to securing cooperation in winning its acceptance by Chinese.
880
Jan. 19 (4) To the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Instructions to inform Caldwell that no plan was contemplated which would involve maintenance of foreign troops in concession zone.
880
[Page XCVII]Jan. 22 (21) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Official consideration of Department’s tentative plan of December 24, 1921.
881
Feb. 2 (37) From the Minister in China (tel.)
British Minister’s recommendation to his Government in favor of merely changing existing arrangement by giving Technical Board somewhat greater powers.
881
Feb. 3 (22) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Washington Conference deliberations revealing need for more adequate protection of railway, and impracticability of obtaining financial support without effective financial control assuring economic operation. Instructions to advise that efforts be made to improve situation.
(Instructions to repeat deliberations to Tokyo and Vladivostok and to have Harbin repeat them to Caldwell.)
882
Feb. 3 To the Ambassador in Japan, the Minister in China, and the Consul General at Shanghai (tel.)
Washington Conference deliberations on Chinese Eastern; adoption of resolution, February 2 (text printed) requiring that subject be dealt with through diplomatic channels for better protection and more efficient operation; and reservation of rights by powers other than China, February 4 (text printed) holding China responsible for execution of contracts with bondholders and foreign creditors; views of Chinese delegation.
883
Feb. 6 From the Consul at Harbin (tel.)
Chinese campaign against international control of Chinese Eastern, believed to be instigated by order of authorities.
884
Feb. 16 (41) To the Ambassador in Japan
Information regarding efforts of Japanese delegation at Washington Conference to reach preliminary accord with United States and the transference of negotiations to Tokyo upon departure of delegation; Department’s agreement in principle to any informal exchange of views between any two powers in an entirely preliminary sense.
(Sent also to Peking.)
884
Feb. 22 (60) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Representations to Chinese Government, British Minister acquiescing, stressing need for cooperation with powers regarding future of railway, and advantage to China of voluntarily requesting such cooperation.
886
Mar. 7 (52) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Chinese Minister’s recommendation to his Government to accept suggestions in Department’s telegram no. 22, February 3. Department’s statement, in reply to Japanese inquiry, that U. S. friendly suggestions to China could not be interpreted as opening diplomatic interchanges recommended by Washington Conference.
(Instructions to repeat Department’s statement to Embassy in Japan.)
888
Mar. 9 From the Acting President of the Technical Board (tel.)
To Stevens: Appointment of Dr. C. C. Wang as acting head of railway.
888
[Page XCVIII]Mar. 25 (118) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Wang’s personal views, snared by interested Chinese and Russians, that international cooperation should be rejected; enumeration of reasons; other comments on reorganization and management.
889
Mar. 28 (120) From the Minister in China (tel.)
British desire to withdraw member from Technical Board as an economy measure, proposing as an alternative that Chinese Government assume cost of maintaining Technical Board. Inquiry as to U. S. attitude.
891
Apr. 8 (104) To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
Instructions to state that withdrawal of British member of Technical Board would be considered unfortunate at this time, and that deferred action is desirable, alternative suggestion to be considered later.
892
Apr. 8 (32) To the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Instructions for Stevens to discuss situation with Wang and others, report views as to future possibilities, and advise as to policies to be pursued. Inquiry whether subject of United States-Japanese accord has been approached.
892
Apr. 10 (62) From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Failure of Japanese officials to discuss United States-Japanese accord.
893
May 1 Memorandum by Mr. Douglas Jenkins of the Division of Russian Affairs, Department of State
Organized propaganda in Harbin and elsewhere in North Manchuria against Technical Board and proposed international control of Chinese Eastern.
893
May 15 (220) From the Minister in China (tel.)
British Minister’s report to his Government giving reasons why it is undesirable for Chinese Eastern to bear cost of Technical Board. Schurman’s acquiescence.
894
May 24 (1330) From the Ambassador in Great Britain
Foreign Office note, May 23 (text printed) stating that after December 31 British representation on Technical Board must cease if expense must be borne by British Exchequer.
895
May 25 From the President of the Technical Board (tel.)
Report that it is useless to continue Technical Board, which is being ignored, and that due to mismanagement, railway must soon collapse.
896
May 27 (49) To the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Instructions to confer with Foreign Office and point out necessity for prompt decision as to action to be taken regarding railway situation. Request for Stevens’ report.
897
June 6 (93) From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Stevens’ statement that his report to Department was mailed from Shanghai. Failure of Japan to suggest any remedy for railway situation.
897
[Page XCIX]June 15 To the Consul at Harbin (tel.)
For Stevens: Conclusion that further expenditure of U. S. funds in connection with Chinese Eastern and Trans-Siberian Railways is inadvisable; request for suggestions as to arrangements for securing American interests and estimate of funds remaining after immediate winding up.
898
June 18 From the President of the Technical Board (tel.)
Failure to understand instructions, especially term “American interests.” Intimation that Technical Board may be asked to assume control of railway’s finances. Request for delayed action.
898
June 22 To the Consul at Harbin (tel.)
For Stevens: Explanation that by “American interests” is meant this Government’s financial advances to railway, opportunities for U. S. trade, and prevention of commercial discrimination; also that proposals to other governments may suggest complete termination of Allied agreement, or of Technical Board on its present basis.
899
June 27 (64) To the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Request for suggestions regarding protection of U. S. advances made under inter-Allied agreement and any substitute plan to conserve railway, in case agreement is terminated and Technical Board abolished.
(Instructions to repeat to Peking.)
899
June 29 From the President of the Technical Board (tel.)
Recommendation that action be deferred in view of probable developments which may change railway situation.
900
June 30 From the President of the Technical Board (tel.)
Suggestion that Chinese Government be urged to suspend agreement between South Manchuria and Chinese Eastern Railways regarding tariff rates, as it gives Japan complete control over North Manchuria soya-bean crop, to detriment of Chinese Eastern and violates open-door policy. Arrangement accomplished by agreement to advance large sum in cash to Chinese Eastern.
900
June 30 From the President of the Technical Board (tel.)
Resolution of Technical Board that each representative advise his government of inefficiency of Chinese forces guarding Chinese Eastern and request that proper guard be provided.
900
July 1 (291) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Press announcement by Chinese Eastern’s Board of Directors of issue, July 1, of 5-year 10 percent bonds valued at 3,000,000 rubles.
901
July 1 (163) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Instructions to report any negotiations between China and Moscow or Chita representatives regarding Chinese Eastern.
901
July 1 (292) From the Minister in China (tel.)
China’s denial of any knowledge as to agreement regarding tariff rates on soya beans.
901
[Page C]July 6 (166) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Instructions to renew negotiations and point out informally how prejudicial to China’s interests is continuance of present railway situation. Inquiries regarding bond issue.
902
July 6 (295) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Suggested substitutes for Technical Board and discussion of their merits.
902
July 8 From the President of the Technical Board (tel.)
Opinion that through agreement regarding tariff rates Japanese have gained control of Chinese Eastern and North Manchuria and that export and import business through Vladivostok will be destroyed.
903
July 12 To the Consul at Harbin (tel.)
For Stevens: Information that agreement regarding tariff rates has been brought to attention of Chinese Foreign Office.
904
July 15 (307) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Information regarding bond issue.
905
July 17 To the Consul at Harbin (tel.)
For Stevens: Decision, in view of Japan’s purpose to withdraw troops and the consequent automatic termination of agreement, to take up question of winding up Inter-Allied Committee and Technical Board and of confirming attitude taken at Washington Conference.
905
July 17 (209) To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
Draft memorandum for approval of interested powers (text printed) proposing a common course of action in winding up Inter-Allied Committee and Technical Board, pursuant to terms of 1919 agreement and in giving effect to resolutions adopted at Washington Conference.
905
July 17 (73) To the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Instructions to request comment on draft memorandum relating to Chinese Eastern.
907
July 18 (311) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Report that conversations have taken place between Foreign Minister, Soviet delegate in China, and manager of Russo-Asiatic Bank regarding status of railway, with no new developments.
907
July 22 From the President of the Technical Board (tel.)
Report that attempt to float bonds has failed, end of resources admitted, and outside assistance imperative, Stevens’ recommendation for loan, on condition of complete financial control. Russo-Asiatic Bank’s approval, but Government’s attitude hostile.
908
July 25 To the Consul at Harbin (tel.)
For Stevens: Expression of appreciation of observations and recommendations; conviction that Department has adopted only course possible under circumstances.
909
[Page CI]Aug. 9 (135) From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Japanese note, August 8 (text printed) expressing views on draft memorandum; willingness to proceed in winding up Inter-Allied Committee and Technical Board, agreeing to common course of action, suggesting careful observation of railway administration and operation with view to rendering future assistance.
909
Aug. 11 (87) To the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Information that Ambassadors at London, Paris, and Borne are being instructed to present memorandum on Chinese Eastern. Instructions to take similar action.
910
Aug. 15 From the President of the Technical Board (tel.)
Report of mutiny of Chinese forces guarding railway; anticipation of further trouble.
910
Aug. 15 (91) To the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Approval of Japanese suggestion for careful observation of Chinese management with view to rendering future assistance; and proposal to submit plan to other powers concerned.
911
Aug. 16 From the Consul at Harbin (tel.)
Inability of Chinese troops to guard railway adequately, as proved by mutiny at Pokotu and hold-up of train by Russian brigands.
911
Aug. 17 From the President of the Technical Board (tel.)
Opinion that Russian interests would be betrayed by granting to China control over railway.
911
Aug. 18 To the Consul at Harbin (tel.)
For Stevens: Information that Legation at Peking has been instructed to point out how prejudicial to China’s interests is continuance of present situation in railway zone.
912
Aug. 23 (140) From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Japan’s reply to draft memorandum of July 17, in exact terms of its memorandum transmitted in Ambassador’s telegram no. 135, August 9.
912
Aug. 23 (349) From the Minister in China (tel.)
China’s program for Chinese Eastern: exclusive right to administer railway until Russia is recognized and final negotiations concluded; demand for dissolution of Technical Board as soon as Japanese forces withdraw from Siberia.
912
Aug. 24 (372) From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
British concurrence in action proposed in U. S. memorandum of July 17.
913
Aug. 28 (95) To the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Information that Japan’s suggestion is being brought to attention of British, French, and Italian Governments.
913
Aug. 30 (274) To the Chargé in France (tel.)
Instructions to inquire when reply to U. S. memorandum may be expected, favorable replies having already been received from Great Britain and Japan.
(Instructions to repeat to Rome.)
913
[Page CII]Sept. 5 (350) From the Chargé in France (tel.)
French reply concurring in principle with U. S. memorandum and affirming particular interest in Chinese Eastern on account of amount of French capital in Russo-Asiatic Bank, which is only stockholder of railway. Inquiry as to what countries are included in expression “the powers other than China.”
913
Sept. 7 (278) To the Chargé in France (tel.)
Explanation of phrase “the powers other than China” as intended to refer to the five powers party to agreement of 1919. Proposal contemplates identic notes to Peking in sense of U. S. memorandum.
914
Sept. 8 (365) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Foreign Minister’s inquiry concerning reported conversations between Department of State and Japanese Embassy regarding railway, and statement that he expects questions affecting Chinese Eastern to be taken up with China.
914
Sept. 9 From the Consul at Harbin (tel.)
Postponement of meeting of shareholders of railway at Peking because Chang objects on ground that railway, being in Manchuria, is under his sole jurisdiction.
915
Sept. 11 (218) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Reference to certain correspondence to prove China’s indisposition toward international cooperation as regards Chinese Eastern. Assurance that China will be communicated with in due time.
915
Sept. 11 (398) From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
British concurrence in Japanese suggestion regarding observation of railway operation by powers concerned, with view to rendering assistance.
916
Sept. 28 From the Chief of the Division of Russian Affairs, Department of State
Further representations of Chinese Minister regarding negotiations in progress and reiteration of declaration that China would not recognize any United States-Japanese agreement affecting Chinese Eastern, which was entered into secretly. Renewal of U. S. assurances to Minister.
916
Oct. 1 From the President of the Technical Board (tel.)
Evacuation of Chinese Eastern Zone by Japanese Army.
917
Oct. 2 From the President of the Technical Board (tel.)
Prospective conference between Moscow Envoy Extraordinary in Peking and Chinese Government, to dispose of railway between themselves. Chinese seizure of Russian radio station at Harbin.
917
Oct. 5 (303) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Instructions to make formal representations (text printed) reviewing negotiations and expressing hope that France will give formal adherence to proposals for termination of inter-Allied supervision over Chinese Eastern.
(Instructions to repeat to London for information of Foreign Office. Sent also to Tokyo for Foreign Office.)
917
[Page CIII]Oct. 7 (240) To the Minister in China
Instructions to assume noncommittal attitude toward new tariff arrangement, reserving right to protest should U. S. interests be discriminated against or open-door policy be otherwise infringed.
918
Oct. 13 (398) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
France’s formal adherence to proposals regarding Chinese Eastern.
919
Oct. 13 (311) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Instructions to repeat to London for action, to Rome for information, and to present at Paris proposal that each Government proceed with termination of inter-Allied supervision of Chinese Eastern; namely, discontinue Inter-Allied Committee and Technical Board, withdraw railway experts, present note to China, and give publicity to action taken.
(Substance sent to Ambassador in Japan.)
920
Oct. 17 (172) From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Japanese informal acquiescence in proposed course of action. Japanese memorandum dated October 16 (text printed) urging simultaneous action in winding up organizations by October 31 when evacuation of Japanese troops will be completed; and special instructions to Japanese representative on Technical Board and representative at Vladivostok (text printed).
920
Oct. 19 (121) To the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Instructions for U. S. representative on Inter-Allied Committee. Request for comments by Stevens on Japanese memorandum and instructions, particularly on point 4 of instructions concerning proposal to withhold payment of military transportation accounts.
922
Oct. 24 (424) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
France’s adherence to action proposed in Department’s telegram no. 311, October 13, with statement that necessary instructions will be sent to its Missions at Peking and Tokyo, when informed of British and Japanese adherence.
922
Oct. 24 (203) From the Ambassador in Italy (tel.)
Italy’s adherence to proposed course of action to terminate Inter-Allied Committee and Technical Board with common understanding as to future action.
923
Oct. 25 (176) From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Japan’s formal consent to proposals, requesting in addition that points in Japanese memorandum of October 16 be deemed supplementary to U. S. proposals insofar as compatible.
923
Oct. 26 (323) To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
Instructions to inform Foreign Office that France and Japan have concurred in U. S. proposal and to urge that British reply be expedited; also to state that Italy has adhered to original proposals.
(Instructions to repeat last statement to Paris.)
923
[Page CIV]Oct. 26 (156) To the Ambassador in Italy (tel.)
Instructions to inform Foreign Office that Japan and France have concurred in U. S. proposal.
924
Oct. 26 (126) To the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Instructions to advise Foreign Office of Italian concurrence in original proposal, also that France concurs in proposal to terminate international control October 31.
924
Oct. 27 From the President of the Technical Board (tel.)
Comments on Japan’s instructions to its representative on Technical Board; disapproval of point 4 on ground that expenditure of Allied funds was to be charged against future Russian Government.
924
Oct. 27 (253) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Note to be addressed to Foreign Office on October 31 (text printed) in regard to termination of inter-Allied control of railway, quoting resolutions of Washington Conference. Understanding that similar notes will be presented by British, French, Japanese, and Italian colleagues.
(Instructions to repeat to Stevens and consul at Vladivostok, with instructions for winding up affairs of two organizations, and to repeat to Tokyo for information of Foreign Office.)
925
Oct. 27 (341) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Instructions to advise Foreign Office, informally, that U. S. representatives on Inter-Allied Committee and Technical Board have been notified to arrange with their colleagues for cessation of activities; also that Minister in China has been instructed to present note confirming resolutions regarding Chinese Eastern, to Chinese Foreign Office on October 31. Expression of hope that similar instructions will be given French representatives.
(Instructions to repeat to London and Rome for similar action.)
927
Oct. 30 (129) To the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Approval of certain of Japan’s instructions to its representative on Technical Board; intention to submit observations on point 4, which is believed to require further discussion.
927
Oct. 31 (432) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Presentation of U. S. note to Foreign Office. Information that notes of similar purport have been presented by British, French, and Japanese Legations, and that Italian Legation is awaiting instructions.
928
Nov. 1 From the President of the Technical Board (tel.)
Termination of Technical Board and Inter-Allied Committee.
928
Nov. 7 (134) To the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Desire to await Stevens’ arrival in Washington before giving consideration to point 4 of Japan’s instructions to its representative on Technical Board.
928
Nov. 9 (190) From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
No objections on part of Japan to delay pending Stevens’ arrival in Washington.
929
[Page CV]Nov. 17 (229) From the Chargé in Italy (tel.)
Italy’s adherence to program of action proposed by the United States and instructions to Minister in China to act accordingly.
929
Nov. 23 From the Former President of the Technical Board (tel.)
Stevens’ departure for Peking en route to the United States.
929
Nov. 27 (1176) From the Minister in China
Chinese reply, November 25 (text printed) explaining improved condition and operation of railway and extent of China’s responsibilities, in absence of formally recognized Russian Government.
929
Dec. 20 Memorandum by Mr. Douglas Jenkins of the Division of Russian Affairs, Department of State
Summary of declarations and notes from Soviet regime to China, with particular reference to the status of the Chinese Eastern.
931

American and British Good Offices in the Negotiation of the Shantung Treaty Between China and Japan, Signed at Washington February 4, 1922

Date and number Subject Page
1921 Nov. 25 (303) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Consultations of Secretary and Balfour with Kato and Sze, separately, on inexpediency of China’s presenting Shantung question to Washington Conference; desirability of resuming negotiations at Washington between representatives of China and Japan; offer of good offices. Instructions to impress upon Foreign Minister, opinion of Secretary and Balfour that negotiations should be resumed at Washington.
934
Nov. 27 (423) From the Minister in China (tel.)
China’s willingness to renew discussions with Japan, collaterally with Washington Conference, if they could be initiated without sacrificing Chinese self-respect and dignity.
935
Nov. 30 (206) To the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Arrangements for meeting with representatives of China and Japan on December 1 to initiate discussions on Shantung question; intention of Secretary and Balfour to convene meeting and offer good offices.
937
Dec. 21 (220) To the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Japanese proposal that China pay for Japanese interest in railway by long-term loan from Japanese financiers and that railway employ Japanese technical experts. Chinese counterproposal for payment by Chinese treasury notes and for employment of but one Japanese expert. Suspension of discussions on December 20 to enable Japanese delegation to consult Government.
(Instructions to repeat to Peking for information.)
937
Dec. 26 (435) From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Japan’s willingness to support delegation’s proposal that railway be paid for by Japanese long-term loan and instructions to delegation in that sense.
938
[Page CVI]Dec. 28 From the Chinese Minister
Attention called to Japan’s delay in resuming negotiations.
939
1922 Jan. 14 (4) From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Japan’s insistence that only means by which China may buy railway must be with money obtained by loan made by Japanese bankers, who will take lien on railway as security.
939
Jan. 16 (16) From the Minister in China (tel.)
China’s receipt of the alternative proposals made by the British and U. S. observers at the discussions. Foreign Minister’s choice of proposals, barring the one contemplating a loan from Japanese bankers.
940
Jan. 22 (10) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Information concerning best terms China can hope to obtain from Japan on method of payment for railway, term of financial transaction involved, and degree of administrative supervision. Instructions to impress upon Foreign Minister conviction that arrangement is Japan’s final limit and that China must accept it as the only means of reestablishing herself in Shantung.
(Instructions to repeat to Toyko for information.)
941
Jan. 24 (23) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Expectation of favorable action.
944
Jan. 25 (15) To the Minister in China (tel.)
Chinese Minister’s interview with President Harding, who affirmed that it would be colossal blunder in statecraft for China to refuse this opportunity for settlement of Shantung question as the alternative might involve a risk of losing the Province.
945
Jan. 26 (28) From the Minister in China (tel.)
British urgent representations to China in favor of proposed Shantung settlement. China’s draft of instructions to its delegates.
945
Jan. 27 (31) From the Minister in China (tel.)
Assurance of settlement of Shantung question, instructions having been telegraphed to Chinese delegation at Washington.
947
Jan. 31 From the Japanese Ambassador
Expression of appreciation of good offices of Secretary and Balfour in effecting Shantung agreement; transmission of substance of terms agreed upon.
947
Feb. 1 From the Chinese Minister
Expression of appreciation of good offices of Secretary and Balfour in effecting Shantung agreement; transmission of substance of terms agreed upon.
947
Feb. 4 To the Chinese Minister
Congratulations on successful conclusion of treaty and expression of thanks for receipt of substance of terms agreed upon in time to permit them to be recorded by the conference.
(Same, in substance, to Japanese Ambassador.)
948
[Page CVII]1922 Feb. 4 Treaty between Japan and China
For the settlement of outstanding questions relative to Shantung.
948
Feb. 11 From Mr. V. K. Wellington Koo, of the Chinese Delegation, Conference on the Limitation of Armament
Agreed terms of understanding recorded in the minutes of the Chinese and Japanese delegations, February 4 (text printed) concerning conclusion of treaty for settlement of outstanding questions relative to Shantung.
957
Feb. 15 (84) To the Minister in China
Record of Shantung negotiations for information of Minister and for files of Legation; expression of appreciation of Minister’s assistance; alternative proposals as suggested by British and U. S. observers during discussions (text printed).
(Sent also to Ambassador at Tokyo.)
960
May 8 (207) From the Ambassador in Japan
Foreign Office statement, May 8 (text printed) announcing completion of withdrawal of Japanese troops from Shantung Railway Zone on May 5.
967
Dec. 4 (430) From the Chargé in Japan
Foreign Office statement, December 2 (text printed) regarding agreement covering details of retrocession of Leased Territory of Kiaochow to China.
967
Dec. 6 (217) From the Chargé in Japan (tel.)
Foreign Office statement, December 6 (text printed) announcing signature on December 5 of detailed agreement regarding amount of compensation for railway and date of transfer to China, marking completion of arrangements for restitution of Shantung.
970

Chinese Administration of Former German and Austrian Concessions at Tientsin and Hankow

Date and number Subject Page
1921 May 6 (1168) From the Minister in China
Request for instructions as to length to which Legation may go in joining other nationalities in pressing for creation of effective municipal government in ex-German and ex-Austrian concessions at Tientsin and Hankow.
970
1922 Jan. 25 (68) To the Minister in China
Instructions to limit activities to protection of existing U. S. property rights and to rights of U. S. citizens, under treaties, to lease and hold land at ports open to international trade, ex-German and ex-Austrian concessions at Tientsin and Hankow having been restored to sovereignty of China.
972
[Page CVIII]

COLOMBIA

Exchange of Ratifications of the Treaty of April 6, 1914, Between the United States and Colombia

Date and number Subject Page
1922 Jan. 6 (1) From the Minister in Colombia (tel.)
Colombia’s desire to effect exchange of ratifications of treaty of April 6, 1914, incorporating in protocol of exchange a statement (text printed) as interpretation of U. S. Senate resolution denying to Colombia free passage of ships, troops, etc., through Panama Canal in event of war between Colombia and another country. Request that exchange instruments of ratification be forwarded.
974
Jan. 17 (478) To the Minister in Colombia
Instructions as to procedure in exchange of ratifications, instruments thereof being forwarded by pouch with the President’s full power to effect exchange and to sign protocol, which incorporates Colombian statement.
975
Mar. 1 From the Colombian Minister of Foreign Affairs (tel.)
Notification that exchange of ratifications of treaty of April 6, 1914, has been effected.
976
Mar. 1 Treaty between the United States and Colombia, Signed at Bogotá April 6, 1914, as amended, and Protocol of Exchange of Ratifications, March 1, 1922
To restore cordial friendship between the two countries and to define and regulate their rights and interests in respect to the Isthmus of Panama.
976

COSTA RICA

Extradition Treaty Between the United States and Costa Rica, Signed November 10, 1922

Date and number Subject Page
1921 May 27 (27) To the Chargé in Costa Rica
Instructions to ascertain whether Costa Rica will resume negotiations with the United States with a view to concluding a treaty of extradition.
980
July 14 (35) To the Chargé in Costa Rica
Transmittal of copies of extradition treaty between United States and Spain as sample of acceptable form of treaty, message of Costa Rica’s willingness to open negotiations having been received.
980
Oct. 27 (230) From the Chargé in Costa Rica
Partial translation of draft treaty submitted by Foreign Minister (text printed) showing departures from model treaty with Spain; his objections particularly to death penalty as applied to criminals extradited. Chargé’s representations.
981
Oct. 29 (231) From the Chargé in Costa Rica
Foreign Minister’s withdrawal of amendment regarding death penalty, requesting that other amendments be submitted to Department.
984
Nov. 30 (53) To the Chargé in Costa Rica
Transmittal of full powers to conclude formal treaty, amendments having been accepted with certain exceptions enumerated.
984
[Page CIX]Jan. 21 (146) From the Chargé in Costa Rica (tel.)
Signing of extradition treaty by U. S. Chargé and Foreign Minister.
985
June 15 (51) From the Minister in Costa Rica
Vote of Congress to modify treaty so as to make it impossible to inflict death penalty in cases of extradition; decree of ratification in modified form.
985
Aug. 22 (91) To the Minister in Costa Rica
U. S. inability to agree to modification as indicated in decree of ratification; willingness, however, to effect such modification in exchange of notes.
986
Oct. 18 (61) From the Minister in Costa Rica (tel.)
Doubt whether treaty can be resubmitted to Congress under Costa Rican laws. Request for instructions as to procedure for ratification and exchange of notes, also for full powers in case new convention is required.
987
Oct. 23 (18) To the Minister in Costa Rica (tel.)
Instructions as to procedure for ratification and exchange of notes, full powers being sent to sign new convention, if required.
987
Nov. 10 Treaty between the United States and Costa Rica
Providing for extradition.
988
Nov. 10 (333 B) The Costa Rican Minister for Foreign Affairs to the American Minister
Understanding as to U. S. assurance that death penalty will not be enforced against criminals delivered by Costa Rica to the United States under extradition treaty, such assurance forming part of treaty.
994
Nov. 10 (63) The American Minister to the Costa Rican Minister for Foreign Affairs
Assurance that death penalty will not be enforced against criminals delivered by Costa Rica to the United States for any crimes enumerated in extradition treaty, such assurance to form part of treaty.
994
1923 Feb. 7 To President Harding
Return of extradition treaty for reconsideration by Congress because of failure to affirm notes exchanged regarding death penalty, which are to form part of treaty and to be mentioned in ratifications.
995
Feb. 8 Resolution of the Senate of the United States Advising Ratification of the Extradition Treaty with Costa Rica
Advising ratification and stipulating that death penalty will not be enforced, such agreement to form part of treaty.
995
Feb. 9 From the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations
Reconsideration of vote of ratification; treaty again ratified together with notes which had been overlooked in previous action.
996
[Page CX]

Representations by the United States to Costa Rica Deprecating Arbitrary Cancelation of the Costa Rica Oil Corporation’s Contract

Date and number Subject Page
1922 Jan. 4 (274) From the Chargé in Costa Rica
Present status of controversy between Government and Costa Rica Oil Corporation.
996
Apr. 29 (15) From the Minister in Costa Rica (tel.)
Plans of President to cancel contract of Costa Rica Oil Corporation by Executive decree. Corporation’s claim that forfeiture can be declared only after contractor is heard in his own defense.
998
May 5 (7) To the Minister in Costa Rica (tel.)
Instructions to make representations to Costa Rica regarding proposed cancelation of contract, if corporation so desires.
998
May 8 (18) From the Minister in Costa Rica (tel.)
Report that corporation representative hesitates to request representations because contract stipulates that contractor cannot reverb to diplomatic channels.
999
May 13 (8) To the Minister in Costa Rica (tel.)
Authorization to make representations in accordance with Department’s telegram no. 7, May 5.
999
May 16 (23) From the Minister in Costa Rica (tel.)
Note from Minister of Public Works to Wilson, local manager of corporation, enumerating reasons for canceling contract, granting, however, hearing within 6 days. Impossibility of Wilson’s being present.
999
June 13 (81) To the Minister in Costa Rica
Instructions to inform Foreign Office, after consultation with corporation representative, of U. S. conviction that contract has not been evaded or violated; that matter of exploiting oil deposits should be subjected to arbitration of experts under article 14 of contract; and that authorities have needlessly harassed the corporation.
1000
July 12 (66) From the Minister in Costa Rica
Presentation of representations. Unofficial information that Government will attempt to argue the matter, in the meantime seeking a compromise with the corporation. Opinion that corporation would gain in public confidence and place itself beyond unwarranted attacks by additional activity in drilling operations.
1002

CUBA

Proposals by General Crowder for Administrative and Fiscal Reform and Their Acceptance by President Zayas—Measures Providing for an External Loan of $50,000,000

Date and number Subject Page
1922 Jan. 3 (1) From the Representative on Special Mission in Cuba (tel.)
Withdrawal of objections to advance loan of 5 million dollars to Cuba, in view of readjustment of annual budget reducing current expenses.
1004
Jan. 14 To the Cuban Minister
Sanction of advance loan of 5 million dollars, with explanation that such sanction does not necessarily entail U. S. approval of 50-million-dollar loan.
1005
[Page CXI]Jan. 21 To the Representative on Special Mission in Cuba, temporarily in the United States
Note to be presented to President Zayas (text printed) redefining relations under treaty of 1903 and emphasizing duties of Representative on Special Mission under article 2 of treaty, in view of financial situation which infringes article 2.
1006
Feb. 24 From the Representative on Special Mission in Cuba
Draft of President Zayas’ reply to Secretary, February 21 (text printed) expressing accord in principle but dissenting from view as to infringing article 2 of treaty; Crowder’s memorandum to Zayas, February 24 (text printed) reiterating contention that Cuba under treaty agreed not to contract any public debt unless ordinary revenues were sufficient to service public debt and defray current expenses.
1009
Feb. 25 From the Representative on Special Mission in Cuba
Bankers’ scheme for examination and statement of Cuban national finances and for new system of public accounting. Request for U. S. views on scheme and desirability of supporting it.
1014
Mar. 15 (18) From the Representative on Special Mission in Cuba (tel.)
Inquiry whether bankers’ scheme for examination and statement of Cuban national finances should be taken up with Morrow, representative in Cuba of Morgan & Co.; reminder that no national audit and statement by Cuban Government will command confidence.
1015
Mar. 16 (16) To the Representative on Special Mission in Cuba (tel.)
Approval of discussion with Morrow and President Zayas of scheme for examination and statement of national finances and for new system of public accounting, deemed necessary for securing permanent loan.
1016
Mar. 25 From the Representative on Special Mission in Cuba
Decision to defer exhaustive audit in view of official audit now in progress; intention to submit for approval of Department certain demands upon Zayas administration for specific reforms as regards national lottery, contractual indebtedness of Public Works, etc., suggesting ultimatum.
1016
Apr. 5 From the Representative on Special Mission in Cuba
Submission, for U. S. approval, of memorandum to President Zayas criticizing failure of Cuban Congress to enact annual budgets; intention to submit second memorandum outlining President’s duties in framing budget and listing specific reforms.
1018
Apr. 8 (21) From the Representative on Special Mission in Cuba (tel.)
Proposed second memorandum to President Zayas, containing concluding paragraph (text printed) intimating that failure of reform legislation would force consideration of U. S. intervention.
1019
Apr. 9 From the Representative on Special Mission in Cuba
Transmission of his second memorandum, together with a working summary of both memoranda.
1020
[Page CXII]Apr. 10 From the Chief of the Division of Latin American Affairs, Department of State
Comments on Crowder’s memoranda. View that contemplated reforms are necessary, but point not reached justifying threat of intervention.
1022
Apr. 11 (24) To the Representative on Special Mission in Cuba (tel.)
Approval of presentation of memoranda as outlined except last paragraph of second memorandum, for which substitute is supplied (text printed) containing no threat of intervention.
1023
Apr. 21 From the Representative on Special Mission in Cuba
Presentation to President Zayas of memoranda as approved and revised by Department. Passage of amnesty bill by Senate. Submission, for U. S. approval, of memorandum on subject of graft, corruption, and immorality in public administration, to be followed by one on reform of national lottery. Comments and request that warnings to administration be given.
1024
May 4 From the Representative on Special Mission in Cuba
Submission of memorandum on reform of national lottery, which reform was once endorsed by President Zayas but regarding which no action has ever been taken. Need of external support for remedial measures.
1025
May 13 (30) To the Representative on Special Mission in Cuba (tel.)
Authorization to present to President Zayas memorandum regarding lottery, avoiding intimation of threat or insistent demand, and calling attention to President’s commitment on subject.
1026
May 19 (28) From the Representative on Special Mission in Cuba (tel.)
Message to Castillo, liaison officer (text printed) to stress, in interview with Secretary Hughes, difficulties in way of securing compliance with reforms recommended in memoranda and failure to secure dependable national audit or statement as; to deficit.
1027
May 20 (29) From the Representative on Special Mission in Cuba (tel.)
Points suggested for discussion in coming interview between Secretary Hughes and Castillo; namely, failure of President Zayas to carry out reforms, necessity for large foreign loan, and renewed agitation for President Zayas’ resignation.
1027
May 28 (30) From the Representative on Special Mission in Cuba (tel.)
President Zayas’ contemplation of establishing a budget himself in accord with the United States, in view of inaction of Congress Suggestion that President Zayas be notified through Cut an Minister at Washington that he is expected to take immediate steps in line with recommendations.
1029
Undated Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with the Cuban Minister, May 29, 1922
Secretary’s request that President Zayas be informed that U. S. Government fully supports General Crowder’s recommendations and that he be impressed with the seriousness of the situation and the necessity of radical reforms.
1030
[Page CXIII]June 9 (31) From the Representative on Special Mission in Cuba (tel.)
Conferences with President Zayas, who agreed to reforms in national lottery and change of Cabinet.
1030
June 12 From the Representative on Special Mission in Cuba
Crowder’s participation in selection of new Cabinet, in preparation of decree reforming the lottery, and in formulation of tax bill. Lack of cooperation on part of Congress.
1032
June 14 (33) From the Representative on Special Mission in Cuba (tel.)
Representations to President Zayas (text printed) against his list of eligibles for Cabinet, with assertion that moralization of public administration is supreme issue and can be accomplished only by appointment of best men in Cuba.
1033
June 26 (40) From the Representative on Special Mission in Cuba (tel.)
Conference with new Secretaries of Treasury and Public Works to whom was submitted substitute for President Zayas’ draft of lottery decree.
1034
June 30 (41) From the Representative on Special Mission in Cuba (tel.)
Report of signing by President Zayas of lottery decree as drafted by Crowder and replacement of President Zayas’ relatives by responsible officials; anticipation of storm of opposition.
1035
July 5 (39) To the Representative on Special Mission in Cuba (tel.)
Commendation for way in which negotiations have been handled.
1036
Aug. 21 (51) From the Representative on Special Mission in Cuba (tel.)
Suggested public statement by Secretary Hughes (text printed) recommending a five-point program of legislative measures for reconstruction and reform of national administration.
(Footnote: Information that statement was issued to press on August 23.)
1036
Sept. 1 (54) From the Representative on Special Mission in Cuba (tel.)
Lack of progress in Congress in reaching decision on five-point legislative program; Crowder’s statement that he would wait ten days longer for decision of Congress, then report to his Government, which statement has been termed an ultimatum.
1037
Sept. 2 (60) To the Representative on Special Mission in Cuba (tel.)
Department’s public denial that formal ultimatum has been given to Cuba. Instructions to Crowder to avoid statements which can be so construed.
1038
Sept. 5 (58) From the Representative on Special Mission in Cuba (tel.)
Bill introduced in lower House by Ferrara to avoid public loan and pay off obligations with interest-bearing certificates of indebtedness to be met by new taxes and economies. Inadequacy of measure. Assumption that certificate will require U. S. sanction.
1038
[Page CXIV]Sept. 6 (61) To the Representative on Special Mission in Cuba (tel.)
Uncertainty whether Cuban revenues, after defraying current expenses of Government, are adequate for service of interest-bearing certificates. Inquiry as to accuracy of report of 2-million dollar balance in Treasury for July and August, in excess of budget obligations.
1039
Sept. 7 (59) From the Representative on Special Mission in Cuba (tel.)
Balance of $527,000 in Treasury for July and August in excess of budget obligations.
1040
Sept. 11 (61) From the Representative on Special Mission in Cuba (tel.)
Official decision that proposed interest-bearing certificates would increase public debt and require U. S. sanction. Crowder’s submission of four objections to Ferrara bill in conference of officials.
1040
Sept. 13 (63) From the Representative on Special Mission in Cuba (tel.)
Opposition in Cuban Congress to five-point legislative program; possible Presidential veto of two of the bills because of vicious amendments.
1041
Sept. 14 (62) To the Representative on Special Mission in Cuba (tel.)
Public statement by Department (text printed) deploring opposition of Cuban Congress to reform program deemed necessary for stamping out corruption and securing Cuban prosperity.
1042
Sept. 28 From the Acting Chief of the Division of Latin American Affairs, Department of State
Crowder’s message stating loan has passed lower House and quick action on this and reform bills is expected.
1042
Oct. 10 From the Acting Chief of the Division of Latin American Affairs, Department of State
Crowder’s desire to come to Washington to confer on Cuban situation. His report that amnesty bill which has passed Senate would upset whole program of reform. Waiving by Morgan & Co. of any special rights regarding larger loan.
1043
Oct. 18 From the Cuban Chargé
Passage of law authorizing issue of bonds for exterior loan of 50 million dollars; details as regards terms and security based on ordinary revenue and special sales taxes. Formal application for U.S. approval of loan in accordance with provisions of article 2 of treaty of 1903.
1044
Oct. 21 From the Representative on Special Mission in Cuba, temporarily in the United States
Comments on Cuban note of October 18 making formal application for approval of 50-million-dollar loan.
1046
Oct. 24 (72) From the Representative on Special Mission in Cuba (tel.)
President Zayas’ desire for services of Harding, Governor of U.S. Federal Reserve Board, in connection with projected audit, if loan is approved.
1047
Oct. 28 (73) To the Representative on Special Mission in Cuba (tel.)
Harding’s arrangements to proceed to Habana.
1047
[Page CXV]Nov. 1 To the Cuban Chargé
No objections to contemplated loan, provided Government confirms statement that sufficient funds will be supplied from ordinary revenues if taxes allocated to cover service prove insufficient.
1047
Nov. 2 To the Representative on Special Mission in Cuba
Information that Lee, Higginson & Co. are desirous of bidding on Cuban loan and are making inquiries as to form of bond to be executed. Request for information.
1048
Nov. 3 From the Cuban Chargé
Assurances that taxes allocated to cover service of new loan are deemed sufficient, but if they prove inadequate additional funds from ordinary revenues will be pledged.
1049
Nov. 4 To the Cuban Chargé
No objections to loan in view of assurances given.
1049
Nov. 8 (75) From the Representative on Special Mission in Cuba (tel.)
President Zayas’ illness, preventing arrangement of terms on which loan will be offered to public.
1050
Nov. 9 (80) To the Representative on Special Mission in Cuba (tel.)
Instructions to telegraph manner in which loan will be negotiated, since Lee, Higginson & Co. and others may be present if there is competitive bidding.
1050
Nov. 10 (76) From the Representative on Special Mission in Cuba (tel.)
President Zayas’ invitation to Morrow of Morgan & Co. to advise Government as to terms and conditions upon which loan should be offered. Morrow’s proposals that President make terms subject to U. S. approval. Presence of competitors in bidding.
1050
1923 Jan. 13 (5) From the Representative on Special Mission in Cuba (tel.)
Presidential resolution awarding loan to Morgan & Co.
1052

Withdrawal of United States Marines From Camaguey

Date and number Subject Page
1921 Dec. 9 (185) To the Representative on Special Mission in Cuba (tel.)
Instructions to cable opinion whether presence of U. S. marines in Province of Camaguey is still necessary, in view of Cuba’s desire that they be withdrawn.
1052
1922 Jan. 24 To the Secretary of the Navy
Request that Marine Corps garrison at Camaguey be withdrawn since local conditions no longer require their presence.
1052
Jan. 26 From the Secretary of the Navy
Information that orders will be issued immediately for withdrawal of Marine Corps garrison at Camaguey.
1053
[Page [CXVI]]