811.7353b W 52/50
The Ambassador in Great Britain (Harvey) to the Secretary of
State
London, November 17,
1922.
[Received November 27.]
No. 1839
Sir: I have the honor to refer to my cable No.
536, dated November 16, 5 p.m., 1922,99 and to report that, in compliance with the
Department’s cable Instruction No. 306, dated October 7, 7 p.m., 1922, a
Note was addressed to the Foreign Office on October 18, 1922,
re-iterating the position of the United States with respect to cable
concessions in the Azores desired by the Western Union Telegraph Company
and the Commercial Cable Company. A copy, in triplicate, of that Note is
attached hereto.
A reply has just been received from the Foreign Office, a copy of which
is transmitted herewith in triplicate, in which it is suggested that the
British and the United States cable companies should be allowed to come
to direct agreement under certain conditions with regard to the Azores
traffic, “untrammelled by administrative restrictions on either side”,
and that “on the conclusion of such an agreement and its confirmation by
the issue of landing licences for the Azores cables in the United
States, and on the full and immediate renunciation of the exclusive
rights of the All-America Company in Colombia, His Majesty’s Government
will have much pleasure in withdrawing their opposition to the
applications of the Western Union and Commercial Cable companies at the
Azores.”
I have [etc.]
For the Ambassador:
Oliver B.
Harriman
First Secretary of
Embassy[Enclosure 1]
The American Ambassador (Harvey) to the British Secretary of State for Foreign
Affairs (Curzon)
London, October 18,
1922.
No. 410
My Lord: As I have previously had the honor
to bring to Your Lordship’s attention, two American companies, the
Western Union Telegraph Company and the Commercial Cable Company,
have for sometime past sought to obtain from the Government of
Portugal certain concessions for the landing and operating of cables
at the Azores. It appears, however, that although the Government of
Portugal is quite prepared to grant the concessions desired, it has
been deterred from so doing through the active opposition of His
Majesty’s Government exercised through the British Minister at
Lisbon.
From enquiries and representations made at the Foreign Office by this
Embassy it is understood that the opposition of the British
Government to the concessions applied for by these American
companies was due to the desire to protect certain British cable
interests already established in the Azores from the competition
which would result from the presence there of American companies,
competition which might result, it was believed, in financial loss
to the same British company which, it is alleged, has already
suffered through the refusal of the Government of the United States
to grant, until certain stipulations were fulfilled, a license for
the landing and operating at Miami, Florida, of a cable in which it
held an interest. Although, as I had the honor to point out in my
note of July 24th last,1 my Government was unable to admit that the
question of the license to land the cable at Miami and the question
of the concession to American companies at the Azores were in any
way related, the statements of the Foreign Office that His Majesty’s
Government was unable to change its policy of opposition to American
concessions at the Azores until the question of the landing at Miami
were settled led to the natural conclusion that when this license
was granted British opposition to the Azores concessions would be
withdrawn.
On August 25 [24], 1922, as the Foreign Office
has already been advised, the President of the United States signed
the license authorizing the Western Union Telegraph Company to land
and operate the Barbados–Miami cable. It has therefore been a matter
of surprise to my Government that, as this Embassy has been recently
informed, the British Minister at Lisbon continues his active
opposition to the granting by the Portuguese Government of the
applications of the American companies even though highly placed
Portuguese officials have intimated that their Government is quite
[Page 381]
prepared to grant at
once the concessions desired by the American companies.
It is understood that the condition which His Majesty’s Government,
at the instance of the British cable companies, desires the
Portuguese Government to impose upon the American companies is that
the proposed American cables should be restricted to North American
traffic, and that the traffic from Europe to South America should be
routed over the Western Telegraph Company’s lines. In this
connection it may be well to point out that acquiescence by the
Government of Portugal in such a policy would constitute a violation
of the International Telegraph Convention, to which convention the
Portuguese Government is a party, which obligates the signatory
states to require cable companies to respect the routing directions
of cablegrams.
Acting under urgent instructions from my Government, I have the honor
to request Your Lordship to examine again this question with a view
to obtaining the withdrawal of the opposition heretofore exercised
by His Majesty’s Government on the Government of the Republic of
Portugal to the serious detriment of legitimate American
interests.
I have [etc.]
For the Ambassador:
Oliver B.
Harriman
First Secretary
of Embassy[Enclosure 2]
The British Secretary of State for Foreign
Affairs (Curzon) to the American
Ambassador (Harvey)
[London,] 14 November,
1922.
No. A 6715/116/45
Your Excellency: I have had under
consideration your note No. 410 of the 18th ultimo respecting the
applications of the Western Union and Commercial Cable Companies for
landing licences at the Azores, and I note Your Excellency’s
assumption that now the Miami landing licence is granted, the
opposition of His Majesty’s Government to those applications will be
withdrawn.
- 2.
- You will recollect that the Miami landing licence was only
obtained in return for the cession by the Western Telegraph
Company of its valuable rights in Brazil and, further, that, as
part of the same arrangement, the All-America Cable Company was
to abandon its similar rights in Colombia, Ecuador and Peru. The
Miami transaction should therefore have been complete in itself
and the issue of the landing licence, being, as it was, a part
of the transaction, can scarcely be held to give the United
States cable companies
[Page 382]
a claim to further consideration on the part of His Majesty’s
Government. Owing, however, to the delays which occurred in the
issue of the licence, the Western Telegraph Company suffered a
loss of some four hundred and fifty thousand dollars in interest
and depreciation alone for which no compensation has been
offered. Nor have the exclusive rights of the All-America Cable
Company in Colombia yet been waived with that completeness on
which the United States Government insisted in the case of the
similar British rights in the Argentine and Uruguay. According
to a report of October 6th from His Majesty’s Minister at Bogotá
the Colombian Government had not at that date received any
notification from the All-America Cable Company, and the
government only expressed their readiness to accept the waiver,
when received, for the period of the existing concession,
expiring on August 25th, 1924.2 Not
only, therefore (unless the position has been subsequently
modified), have the All-America Cable Company not completed
their undertaking, but the Colombian Government are leaving the
way open for a renewal of the company’s exclusive rights on the
expiry of the present concession. In these circumstances, you
will, I feel sure, agree that His Majesty’s Government would be
failing in their duty if they encouraged any further diversion
of traffic from the Western Telegraph Company by United States
cable companies.
- 3.
- I am aware that the United States Government base their
treatment of that company on the principle that landing licences
are not granted in the United States to cable companies
possessing exclusive rights. As stated in paragraph 7 of my note
of August 18th last,3 His Majesty’s Government do not share
the views of the United States Government with regard to
exclusive rights, and, while they regret the difference of
opinion on this point, they feel that their views are entitled
to as much consideration as are those of the United States
Government. In the particular case of the Miami cable the United
States secured the recognition of their principle; in the case
of the Azores landings it would therefore seem equitable that
the United States Government should accept the views of His
Majesty’s Government, the more so as the arrangements which His
Majesty’s Government desire to secure at the Azores would not in
practice prejudice the interests of the United States
companies.
- 4.
- I am most anxious to remove any misunderstandings on this
point from the mind of the United States Government, and
therefore venture to remind you that the Western Telegraph
Company merely propose that their route to South America shall
continue to
[Page 383]
be
regarded as the normal route for “unordered” telegrams from
Europe, which, indeed, its directness and shortness as compared
with that via New York manifestly make it. Telegrams ordered via
the United States cables would, however, be forwarded freely by
those cables. In order to close the matter, I therefore have the
honour to suggest that the British and United States cable
companies should be allowed to come to a direct agreement on
this basis with regard to the Azores traffic, untrammelled by
administrative restrictions on either side. On the conclusion of
such an agreement and its confirmation by the issue of landing
licences for the Azores cables in the United States, and on the
full and immediate renunciation of the exclusive rights of the
All-America Company in Colombia, His Majesty’s Government will
have much pleasure in withdrawing their opposition to the
applications of the Western Union and Commercial Cable companies
at the Azores.
- 5.
- The above distribution of traffic complies with those
provisions of the Telegraph Convention which you have quoted. I
have, however, felt bound to inform the Portuguese Government
that the United States cannot properly claim the benefit of
those particular provisions, seeing that the United States
Government have expressly declared their inability to grant
their benefit to the other powers signatory to the
convention.
I have [etc.]
