800.01 M 31/132
The Secretary of State to the British Chargé (Chilton)
Memorandum
The Secretary of State presents his compliments to the British Chargé d’Affaires and has the honor to acknowledge his memorandum of July 17, 1922, with reference to the proposed conventions and draft mandates for certain former German territories in Africa.
It is noted that His Majesty’s Government accepts the suggestions of this Government with respect to Article 1 and Article 2 of the proposed treaty relating to British B mandates, and this Government has no objection to the addition at the end of Article 1 of the words “hereinafter called the mandated territory”.
With respect to Article 8 of the British mandate for East Africa and Article 7 of the British mandates for Togoland and the Cameroons, His Majesty’s Government proposes to substitute a wording similar to Article II (1) of the American Japanese Treaty of February [Page 329] 11, 1922, relative to the mandate conferred on the Emperor of Japan over former German islands in the Pacific Ocean. The attention of His Majesty’s Government should be called to the fact that in the quotation of Article II (1) of the American Japanese Treaty there are omitted from the fifth line of the second paragraph of the Article as quoted the words “to open schools” and it is assumed that the words “the mandatory” should be inserted in the same line before the words “shall have the right”.
It will be noted, however, that the Article as suggested by His Majesty’s Government, with the corrections indicated, contains a limiting clause which might be regarded as similar in effect to the phrase “subject to such control as may be necessary for the maintenance of good Government” which was suggested by His Majesty’s Government for insertion in Article 8 of the East African mandate and Article 7 of the mandates for Togoland and the Cameroons and which this Government found it impossible to accept. The area of the territories in Central Africa and the conditions which exist and are likely to arise therein differ to such an extent from those of the islands in the Pacific north of the Equator that the Government of the United States, while willing to accept the wording proposed by His Majesty’s Government for the B mandates, would be compelled to ask the insertion in the proposed treaty relating to those mandates of an Article which has been proposed for insertion into the conventions respecting the mandates for Palestine and for Syria and the Lebanon, namely, the following:50
“Subject to the provisions of any local law for the maintenance of public order and public morals, the nationals of the United States will be permitted freely to establish and maintain educational, philanthropic, and religious institutions in the mandate territory, to receive voluntary applicants, and to teach in the English language.”
It has already been suggested to the French Government that if the phrase “subject to the supervision which would be necessary for the maintenance of good administration” is retained in Article 7 of the French B mandates, the Government of the United States would consider it necessary that there should be inserted in the convention between the United States and France relative to those mandates the Article quoted above51 which was proposed for insertion into the conventions for Palestine and for Syria and the Lebanon. The importance of assurance for freedom to teach in English must be emphasized. It is considered necessary for the adequate protection of American educational, philanthropic and religious [Page 330] institutions throughout the Central African territories that such a provision should be embodied in the conventions relating to the French mandates for certain of those territories; and for this reason, it is anticipated that His Majesty’s Government will have no objection to the inclusion of a similar provision in the conventions relating to the British B mandates.