867n.01/318

The Ambassador in Great Britain ( Harvey ) to the Secretary of State

No. 1748

Sir: Confirming this Embassy’s telegram No. 442 of October 4, 12 noon, 1922,27 I have the honor to enclose herewith copies of Notes No. W 7965/1110/98, and No. E 9865/78/65, dated September 30, 1922,28 and October 2, 1922, respectively, relative to the proposed Convention between Great Britain and the United States regarding the Palestine mandate and the African mandates.

I have [etc.]

For the Ambassador:
Oliver B. Harriman

First Secretary of Embassy
[Enclosure]

The British Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs ( Curzon ) to the American Ambassador ( Harvey )

No. E 9865/78/65

Your Excellency: With further reference to your note of July 14th29 to the Earl of Balfour transmitting a counter draft from the State Department of the proposed convention between Great Britain and the United States regarding the Palestine mandate, I have the honour to inform your excellency that the terms of this convention have received the most careful consideration and His Majesty’s Government are prepared substantially to accept the operative clauses of the convention now proposed by the State Department, subject to certain modifications explained below. At the same time they desire to suggest a somewhat different form to the preamble to the convention, as suggested by the United States Government.

2.
His Majesty’s Government are anxious if possible that the convention should contain a specific allusion to the policy of establishing [Page 305] a national home for the Jewish people in Palestine, having regard to the interest taken in this policy in the United States and the warm support which it has received in that country, of which the recent resolutions of both houses of Congress have afforded striking evidence. On this ground, and also because article 2 of the mandate—which is in any case to be recited in the preamble to the convention—contains an explicit reference to the preamble to the mandate, His Majesty’s Government hope that the United States Government will now be willing to agree to the insertion of the whole mandate, including the preamble, in the preamble to the convention. The United States Government will observe that the text of the preamble to the mandate, as now finally defined by the Council of the League at its recent session in London, a copy of which has already been furnished to you,30 contains no reference to the Treaty of Sèvres or to the Turkish renunciation in favour of the principal allied powers of all rights and title over Palestine, thus removing a difficulty to which the United States Government had previously drawn attention in their negotiations with His Majesty’s Government on the question of this convention.
3.
If the preamble to the mandate is thus to be recited together with the mandate in the preamble to the convention, His Majesty’s Government would suggest that a shorter preamble might be adopted for the convention itself in the following sense:—

“Whereas for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of article 22 of the covenant of the League of Nations a mandate for the administration of Palestine, including therein the territories lying between the Jordan and the eastern boundary of Palestine as ultimately determined, has been entrusted to His Britannic Majesty and

Whereas the terms of the mandate in respect of Palestine have been defined by the Council of the League of Nations as follows:—

(here insert terms of mandate in full) and

Whereas His Britannic Majesty has accepted the mandate in the above terms in respect of Palestine and has undertaken to exercise it on behalf of the League of Nations: and

Whereas the Government of His Britannic Majesty and the Government of the United States of America are desirous of reaching a definite understanding as to the rights of their respective countries and of their nationals in Palestine:

His Britannic Majesty and the President of the United States of America have decided to conclude a convention to this effect and have nominated as their plenipotentiaries . . . . . . who . . . . . . . have agreed as follows:—”

4.
This shortened preamble has been specially drafted with a view to avoid these difficulties to which the United States Government [Page 306] have drawn the attention of His Majesty’s Government. With regard to the reference to the states by which the mandatory has been selected, it will be seen that the draft merely records that in fact His Britannic-Majesty has been selected to be the mandatory for Palestine. As this selection has been accepted by all parties, specific reference to the powers who were actually present at the meeting where the selection was made, in the body of the preamble to the convention seems quite immaterial.
5.
If the United States Government, however, still find difficulty in accepting the insertion of the preamble to the mandate in the preamble to the draft convention, and if they see any serious objection to the shortened form of the preamble given above, His Majesty’s Government would reluctantly be prepared in the last resort to accept the draft of the preamble as suggested by the United States Government, provided, however, that, in order to meet the desire of His Majesty’s Government, regarding a reference in the convention to the policy of establishing a national home for the Jews in Palestine, the United States Government would agree to insert an additional recital immediately after the third recital in the preamble to the United States draft of the convention in something like the following terms:—

“Whereas the Government of the United States have recognised the decision of the principal allied powers that the mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the declaration originally made on the 2nd November 1917 by His Britannic Majesty’s Government and adopted by the other allied powers in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil or religious rights of non-Jewish communities in Palestine or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country: and”

6.
As regards the operative clauses of the convention His Majesty’s Government accept the word “consents” instead of “concurs” in article 1 of the convention subject to the reservations already made on this point by His Majesty’s representative at Washington in connection with the African mandates.31 As a draft alteration they would also suggest that, if the shortened form of the preamble suggested above is accepted by the United States Government, the words “as defined in the preamble hereto” might be substituted for the words “including the territories …32 as ultimately determined” in article 1. If the shortened form of the preamble is not accepted, the American draft of article 1 would stand. Subject to this reservation [Page 307] as regards article 1, His Majesty’s Government are prepared to accept the State Department’s draft of the first four articles of the convention.
7.
With regard to article 5 of the American draft convention I would refer you to the note which I addressed to you on the 30th ultimo regarding the B mandates.33 The considerations there set forth, relating to the necessity for United States persons and institutions in B mandate territories being subject to the restrictions required for the maintenance of good government apply with equal force to Palestine. At the same time, His Majesty’s Government desire to assure the United States Government that the use of the word “maintaining” [“maintain”?] in article 15 of the mandate for Palestine is not intended to restrict the opening of new American schools in that country or to restrict the right of such schools to admit pupils of another community. They also wish to make it clear that the second clause of article 16 of the mandate is intended to show that the supervision of the mandatory will be strictly limited to that required for the maintenance of public order and good government. The fact that schools are not mentioned in article 16, and that article 15 merely provides that schools of local communities shall conform to such educational requirements of a general nature as the administration may impose, does not imply that schools in Palestine are to be free from the restrictions required for the maintenance of good government. In conclusion His Majesty’s Government assure the United States Government that United States nationals will be perfectly free to teach in the English language in those educational, philanthropic and religious institutions which they may establish and maintain in Palestine. In the light of these explanations and assurances His Majesty’s Government feel sure that the United States Government will regard as unnecessary the insertion in the convention of any article dealing with these points and article 5 of the American draft has accordingly been omitted in the British counter-draft of the convention.
8.
Article 6 in the American draft is identical with that of article 5 in the original British version, and His Majesty’s Government have no desire to amend it. They are, however, anxious to substitute in the second paragraph of article 7 of the American draft the expression “coming into force” for the words “formal issue” and “issue.”
9.
The minutes of the July meeting of the Council of the League of Nations, relating to the mandates for Palestine and Syria, read as follows:—“The Council decided that the mandate for Palestine [Page 308] was approved …34 and that the mandate for Syria would come automatically into force as soon as the negotiations between the French and Italian Governments have resulted in a final agreement. It was further understood that the two mandates should come into force simultaneously.”
10.
In these circumstances His Majesty’s Government are anxious that nothing in the proposed convention should give rise to the impression that the suspension of capitulatory rights in Palestine should not take place until the conclusion of peace between the allied powers and Turkey and the consequent formal issue of the mandate. In their view the mandatory régime has now received formal sanction and will come automatically into force in the manner described in the minutes of the Council of the League, to which reference is made above, and they trust that the United States Government will agree that in these circumstances the provisions of article 8 of the mandate fully safeguard the legitimate interests of American citizens in Palestine.
11.
With reference to article 10 of the mandate His Majesty’s Government have inserted in the convention a new article 5 as follows: “the extradition treaties and conventions in force between the United States and the United Kingdom shall apply to Palestine.” His Majesty’s Government trust that the United States Government will see no objection to such an article but they would of course be prepared to accept in its place an assurance from the United States Government that they regard the words “foreign powers” in article 10 of the mandate as applying to the United States.
12.
I transmit, herewith, for convenience of reference copies of the Anglo-American convention amended in accordance with the suggestions set forth above.

I have [etc.]

Curzon of Kedleston
[Subenclosure]

Draft Convention between the United States and Great Britain Regarding the Mandate for Palestine

Whereas for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations a mandate for the administration of Palestine, including therein the territories lying between the Jordan and the eastern boundary of Palestine as ultimately determined, has been entrusted to His Britannic Majesty, and

Whereas the terms of the mandate in respect of Palestine have been defined by the Council of the League of Nations as follows:—

[Page 309]

(Insert terms of mandate in full).

and

Whereas His Britannic Majesty has accepted the mandate in the above terms in respect to Palestine and has undertaken to exercise it on behalf of the League of Nations: and

Whereas the Government of His Britannic Majesty and the Government of the United States of America are desirous of reaching a definite understanding as to the rights of their respective Governments and of their nationals in Palestine:

His Britannic Majesty and the President of the United States of America have decided to conclude a Convention to this effect and have nominated as their plenipotentiaries . . . . . who . . . . . . . have agreed as follows:—

Article 1

Subject to the provisions of the present convention the United States consents to the administration by His Britannic Majesty, pursuant to the aforesaid mandate, of Palestine, as defined in the Preamble hereto.

Article 2

The United States and its nationals shall have and enjoy all rights and benefits secured under the terms of the mandate to members of the League of Nations and their nationals, notwithstanding the fact that the United States is not a member of the League of Nations.

Article 3

Vested American property rights in the mandated territory shall be respected and in no way impaired.

Article 4

A duplicate of the annual report to be made by the mandatory under article 24 of the mandate shall be furnished to the United States.

Article 5

The extradition treaties and convention[s] in force between the United States and the United Kingdom shall apply to Palestine.

Article 6

Nothing contained in the present convention shall be affected by any modification which may be made in the terms of the mandate, as recited above, unless such modification shall have been assented to by the United States.

[Page 310]

Article 7

The present convention shall be ratified in accordance with the respective constitutional methods of the High Contracting Parties. The ratification shall be exchanged in London as soon as practicable. It shall take effect on the date of the exchange of ratifications.

His Britannic Majesty’s Government agree that in the conduct of any provisional administration of Palestine pending the entry into force of the mandate the rights and privileges of American citizens, as defined by this convention, shall be fully respected. There shall be no suspension of capitulatory rights prior to the entry into force of the mandate.

In witness whereof . . . . . . .

  1. Not printed.
  2. Note of Sept. 30, post, p. 330.
  3. Not printed; see memorandum of July 12 to the British Embassy, p. 287.
  4. Ante, p. 290.
  5. See aide-mémoire from the British Chargé received June 29, p. 314.
  6. Omission indicated on Foreign Office note.
  7. Post, p. 330.
  8. Omission indicated on Foreign Office memorandum.