611.1931/61
The Minister in Panama (South) to
the Secretary of State
Panama, November 17,
1923.
[Received November 27.]
No. 352
Sir: I have the honor to enclose herewith, for
the information of the Department, a copy of a note, with a translation
thereof, concerning the abrogation of the Taft Agreement, which was sent
by the Foreign Office to this Legation.
From this note it appears that Panama will contest the right of our
Government to abrogate the Taft Agreement, unless a new treaty is
accepted by both countries prior to May 1, next, which looks like an
attempt upon the part of Panamá to place the burden of rushing through a
new treaty upon our Government.
As it is more to the advantage of Panama than it is to our Government
that a new treaty be in force, it is presumed that they will propose
that the negotiations be commenced as soon as possible and that such a
proposition will be made in Washington.
As it will be to the advantage of our Government to have Panama make the
first proposals in the matter and to state their own position before we
are called upon to state ours, no reply will be made to the attached
note until instructions have been received from the Department.
I have [etc.]
[Enclosure—Translation27]
The Panaman Secretary of Foreign Affairs
(Garay)
to the American Minister (South)
Panama, November 14,
1923.
S. P. No. 2527
Mr. Minister: I have received Your
Excellency’s note no. 176, in which you inform me that “the
Government of the United States will, in virtue of the Congressional
authorization granted by the Senate Joint Resolution No. 259, passed
by the House of Representatives on Tuesday, February 6, 1923,
abrogate on May 1, 1924, the international agreement, commonly
called the Taft agreement, embodied in the Executive orders
mentioned in the Senate Joint Resolution.”
Your Excellency understands that the Taft agreement, although it was
not entered into between the Department of State of the United
States and the Department of Foreign Relations of Panama, but by the
Secretary of War of the United States and the President of the
Republic of Panama and his Cabinet, has been, nevertheless, a
[Page 679]
true public treaty that
has committed the faith of the two contracting countries.
It is the custom that international contracts of this class may not
be modified or abrogated without the previous consent and agreement
of both parties; and although our two Governments are actually
engaged in studying the bases of a new arrangement between them,
better suited to conditions of life on the Isthmus now that the
Canal is constructed, the questions which we must resolve are so
many and of such importance that one can only conjecture as to the
time that will elapse before our two Governments come to a
satisfactory agreement.
In view of this fact, and since the Joint Resolution of the Congress
of the United States, a copy of which Your Excellency has furnished
me, does not fix an exact time limit for the Executive of the United
States to proceed to the abrogation of the so-called Taft agreement,
the Government of Panama is obliged to make the most express
reservations as to the sufficiency of the period that the Executive
Power of the United States on its part has thought necessary to fix
in order to proceed to the definite abrogation of the agreement.
If this period proves to be sufficient—which is improbable—for the
purpose of replacing the present agreement by one which would better
serve the interests and aspirations of both parties, this Government
would not raise the least objection; but it cannot admit, if such
should not be the case, and if the 1st of May, next, finds us
without having yet settled the difficulties inherent in the weighty
negotiations which are to be initiated, that the Government of the
United States may unilaterally declare that agreement abrogated
without awaiting the discussion, acceptance, and approval of the new
pact under consideration, by means of all the constitutional and
legal formalities of our respective countries.
I avail myself [etc.]
