711.42131/169
Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with the Prime Minister of Canada (Mackenzie King) and the Canadian Minister of Defense (Graham), July 12, 1922
Mr. Chilton, the British Chargé, was present. The interview was had at the request of Mr. Mackenzie King.
Premier King said that several questions had arisen at the last session of the Canadian Parliament and it was thought to be advisable to take them up directly, and he had come to Washington for that purpose. The Secretary expressed his gratification at the visit.
1. Vessels of War on the Great Lakes. Premier King said that he felt that this was an opportune time in view of what had been accomplished at the recent Washington Conference to bring up the question of vessels of war on the Great Lakes. He pointed out that for one hundred years this arrangement had been pointed to as indicating what could be done by nations which desired to live in amity, and that it was desirable that the Rush-Bagot Agreement12 which contained certain provisions hardly suited to modern conditions should [Page 485] be remodeled, the arrangement being placed in suitable and permanent form by treaty.
Premier King said that he understood that there was no ulterior purpose on the part of the United States but that the Canadian people had viewed with some apprehension the increase in the American naval force on the Great Lakes. There were now a number of large vessels, about sixteen, on the Great Lakes which were armed. And that recently a request had been made that the Wilmington should go through and this had been held up pending an adjustment. There were also revenue cutters which he understood carried arms.
Premier King said that the arrangement had been due he believed to the desire of the naval militia in various states bordering on the Great Lakes to have training vessels and no doubt the vessels were to be used exclusively for training, but they carried guns and these guns were used in target practice. Premier King said that no doubt it had not engaged the attention of the American people especially, but the Canadians did not like this increase of naval forces and the fact that the United States already have at present a considerable naval force has led to propositions in the Canadian Parliament that Canada should have a similar naval force. Canada could not well afford to put out money for such a purpose and yet it was rather difficult to resist the demand if the United States maintained its ships, as at present, for its naval militia. Premier King deprecated our beginning anything like competition in equipment in our naval militia on the Great Lakes and thought that the United States would render a great service in following the policies of its recent Conference by entering into an agreement with Canada which should determine exactly what should be permitted, and which would prevent the growth of naval forces.
Premier King and Mr. Graham both alluded to ship building on the Great Lakes and the fact that the proposal might meet with opposition from those who would like to build war ships at their yards. They said that they thought this objection could be met as there was no objection to the building of such ships provided their guns were not placed until they had left the Lakes. Mr. Graham suggested that Canadian ship yards might desire to build also and he thought that there would be no objection merely to the building of ships, but only to arming them.
The Secretary said that the matter had not engaged his attention and he had not been aware that there was any apprehension developing among the Canadian people with respect to any naval force of the United States on the Great Lakes. He knew very well that the notion of the use of any such a force against Canada never occurred to anyone and he supposed, without having inquired into the matter, that the use of training ships to which the Premier had referred [Page 486] simply resulted from the natural desire of the young men in the cities bordering on the Great Lakes to have the same opportunities for naval training that were provided in the Atlantic Coast cities where the naval militia had been developed. The Secretary recalled when he was Governor of New York that the naval militia engaged a good deal of attention from the State Government and had been well provided for. He was quite sure that this was the explanation of the matter.
The Secretary said that he was most sympathetic with the idea of continuing the tradition of the absence of offensive and defensive preparations along the Canadian frontier; that we had referred to this as a unique manifestation of international friendship and we must maintain it. The Secretary felt sure that there was no reason for apprehension on the part of the Canadian people and he would be glad to enter into negotiations to see what arrangements could be made which would modernize and suitably carry out the purpose of the Rush–Bagot Agreement.
The Secretary suggested that it would be well for concrete proposals to be made and asked if the Canadian Government would furnish a more definite statement of just what was desired. The Secretary would be glad to take it under consideration, again emphasizing his deep interest in the maintenance of historic friendship between the two peoples. The Premier agreed that such proposals should be submitted.
- Of Apr. 28 and 29, 1817; see Miller, Treaties, vol. 2, pp. 645 ff.↩