List of Papers

[Unless otherwise specified, the correspondence is from or to officials in the Department of State.]

FRANCE

Resumption of Negotiations To Ensure by Treaty the Rights of the United States in Syria and the Lebanon

Date and number Subject Page
1923 Sept. 29 To the Chargé in France
Instructions to report concerning progress of negotiations between France and Italy with regard to mandate for Syria and the Lebanon.
(Similar instructions to Embassies at London and Rome and to consulates at Beirut and Jerusalem.)
1
Oct. 12 (3583) From the Chargé in France
Information that agreement between France and Italy was notified to League of Nations on September 29. Request for instructions concerning resumption of negotiations for convention between United States and France regarding mandate for Syria and the Lebanon.
1
Oct. 23 (391) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Telegram from consul at Beirut, October 18 (text printed) reporting ordinance abolishing capitulations. Instructions to inform Foreign Office of U. S. desire to resume convention negotiations; U. S. refusal to acquiesce in abolition of capitulations prior to conclusion of convention; U. S. reservations as to right to modify draft convention to include agreements between France and any other power.
2
Nov. 2 (406) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Message from consul at Beirut (text printed) that ordinance abolishing capitulations will not affect U. S. interests and nationals prior to conclusion of convention. Instructions to inform Foreign Office of U. S. gratitude and willingness to facilitate conclusion of an agreement with regard to Syria.
3
Nov. 7 (3645) From the Ambassador in France
French reply, November 2 (text printed) conveying substance of French assurances to Italy concerning Syria and the Lebanon and stating that their benefit is assured United States by provisions of convention and mandate. Draft convention with modifications.
4
Dec. 17 (466) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Note for Foreign Office (text printed) conveying U. S. understanding that France will accord most-favored-nation treatment to United States with respect to all agreements relating to Syria and the Lebanon concluded between France and other powers; U. S. desire that extradition and consular treaties and conventions be extended to include mandated territory.
6
[Page VIII]

Conventions Between the United States and Feance Relating to American Rights in Togoland and the Cameroons, Signed February 13, 1923

Date and number Subject Page
1923 Feb. 13 (2857) From the Ambassador in France
Signature and forwarding of texts of Franco-American conventions regarding French mandates over Togoland and Cameroons.
8
Feb. 13 Convention between the United States of America and France
Denning U. S. rights in Cameroons.
8

Agreement Between the United States and France, Signed July 19, 1923, Further Extending the Duration of the Arbitration Convention of February 10, 1908

Date and number Subject Page
1923 June 25 To the French Ambassador
Draft note of agreement for renewal of arbitration convention of 1908, with proposal to refer to Permanent Court of International Justice disputes mentioned in convention. U. S. British exchange of notes on same subject.
13
June 25 To the French Ambassador
Draft of proposed agreement for renewal of arbitration convention with France, similar to that signed with Great Britain.
13
June 29 From the French Ambassador
Information of his authorization to renew arbitration convention with United States. Recommendation that reference of disputes to Permanent Court be optional.
14
June 30 To the French Ambassador
U. S. willingness to accept change in arbitration convention recommended by France.
14
July 19 Agreement between the United States of America and France
Extending for another 5 years the arbitration convention concluded February 10, 1908, and renewed in 1913 and 1918.
15
July 19 To the French Ambassador
U. S. understanding that France will assent to modification of arbitration convention or to signing separate agreement by which disputes could be referred to Permanent Court, provided U. S. Senate consents to U. S. adherence to protocol creating Permanent Court.
16
July 19 From the French Ambassador
French acquiescence in U. S. understanding concerning modification of arbitration convention.
16

Protest by the United States Against the Grant of Exclusive Privileges to French Archeologists for Research in Albania and Afghanistan

Date and number Subject Page
1923 Jan. 5 (11) From the Minister in Albania
Representations to Albania against reported monopolistic archeological concession to France.
17
[Page IX]Feb. 19 (17) To the Minister in Albania
Authorization to indicate U. S. desire for open door for U. S. institutions in Albania. Information concerning French monopoly in Persia for conducting archeological exploration, secured in 1895, and present efforts to gain similar privileges in Afghanistan.
18
Feb. 19 (573) To the Ambassador in France
Instructions to make inquiries concerning reported monopolistic concession granted French Archeological Exploration Mission by Afghanistan; and to report attitude of French Government. Information concerning exclusive French rights of similar nature in Persia and present efforts to secure like privileges in Albania.
18
Mar. 7 (2928) From the Ambassador in France
Confirmation of report that Afghan Government has granted monopoly for exploration to French archeologist. French Government’s disapproval of such monopolies and assurance that arrangements can be made with French archeologist for U. S. organizations to participate. British representations.
19
Apr. 28 (639) To the Ambassador in France
Instructions to make representations to French Government against monopolies such as granted by Afghanistan to French scientist for archeological research.
20
July 27 (3329) From the Ambassador in France
Foreign Office reiteration of assurance that no U. S. archeologist would have difficulty in coming to arrangement with French archeologist; that French archeologist did not desire exclusive concession in Afghanistan but that agreement was drawn up in that form.
20
Sept. 9 (152) From the Chargé in Albania
Monopolistic archeological concession granted France over certain parts of Albania.
21

GERMANY

Treaty Between the United States and Germany, Signed December 8, 1923, Regarding Friendship, Commerce, and Consular Rights

Date and number Subject Page
1923 July 25 To the German Ambassador
Draft of proposed treaty of amity, commerce, and consular rights containing unconditional most-favored-nation clause.
22
Nov. 30 (92) To the Ambassador in Germany (tel.)
Premature release from Berlin to German organization in New York of text of proposed treaty, creating unfavorable impression in United States. Conference between Secretary and German Ambassador, November 28, in an effort to prevent withdrawal of treaty by obtaining immediate agreement on points of difference and by early signature.
23
[Page X]Dec. 2 (216) From the Ambassador in Germany (tel.)
German Ambassador’s authorization, December 1 (text printed) to negotiate and sign proposed treaty. German Government’s regret concerning premature publication, and desire to conclude convention without delay.
23
Dec. 3 From the Counselor of the German Embassy
Memorandum of conference, December 1 (text printed) of officials in Department with German Ambassador and Counselor of German Embassy to discuss articles of proposed treaty. Suggestions for additional amendments.
24
Dec. 5 From the Solicitor for the Department of State
Report of negotiations, the German Ambassador agreeing to accept proposed treaty with certain final modifications.
28
Dec. 8 Treaty between the United States of America and Germany
Of friendship, commerce and consular rights. (German agreement to U. S. reservations contained in Senate resolution of February 10, 1925.)
29

Efforts of the United States To Assist in the Solution of the Problems of German Reparations

Date and number Subject Page
1923 Undated Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with the French Ambassador, January 5, 1923
Discussion of report that French Foreign Minister had denied receiving U. S. suggestion for impartial examination of reparations by financial experts. Secretary’s assertion of informal transmittal of proposal to France, and request that situation be stated to French Government to avoid wrong impression in United States.
46
Undated Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with the French Ambassador, January 8, 1923
Discussion of report concerning French intention to occupy the Ruhr; possible withdrawal of U. S. troops; and information given press by the Secretary concerning submission of U. S. suggestion to the French Government.
47
Jan. 10 (5) From the Ambassador in Germany (tel.)
Intention of Germany to send protest to all governments concerned if French occupy Ruhr, to recall Ambassador at Paris, and to refuse to discuss or pay reparations during occupation. German desire that U. S. troops be retained. Seriousness of situation should France divert coal supply, already inadequate.
48
Jan. 10 (16) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Report concerning French plans for movement of troops into the Ruhr.
49
[Page XI]Undated Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with the Belgian Ambassador, January 11, 1923
The Ambassador’s explanations concerning unavoidable participation by Belgium in occupation of Ruhr. Secretary’s expression of regret and belief that serious consequences may ensue.
49
Jan. 10 Statement for the Press Handed by the German Ambassador to the Under Secretary of State, January 11, 1923
German protest against administration of Ruhr by control missions, announced by France and Belgium to guarantee program of Reparation Commission. Statement that Germany will not resort to violence or withdraw from Treaty of Versailles.
50
Jan. 13 From the Unofficial Observer on the Interallied Rhineland High Commission (tel.)
Presentation to High Commission of personal representations regarding renewal of negotiations. Evidence that economic mission in Ruhr is giving way to occupation by force.
51
Jan. 15 (15) To the Unofficial Observer on the Interallied Rhineland High Commission (tel.)
Instructions to refrain from expressing opinions or presenting plans regarding Ruhr occupation, and to take no action except in connection with withdrawal of troops.
52
Undated Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with the British Ambassador, January 25, 1923
Discussion of public opinion in United States and Great Britain concerning occupation of Ruhr; Italian attitude toward French action. Secretary’s inquiry as to what the British Government believes can be done.
52
Undated Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with the British Ambassador, February 23, 1923
British appreciation of Secretary’s inquiry and belief that nothing can be done at present concerning Ruhr occupation. Secretary’s suggestion of preliminary investigation to determine satisfactory plan of action.
55
May 2 From the German Embassy
Offer for settlement of reparations, fixing total obligation at 30 billion gold marks, or submission of entire matter to independent international commission.
57
Undated Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with the German Ambassador, May 3, 1923
Discussion of German note containing offer for settlement of reparations. Secretary’s suggestion that France and Germany negotiate directly as only practicable basis for reaching agreement.
60
Undated Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with the Belgian Ambassador, May 3, 1923
Secretary’s view that German note may serve as starting point for negotiations. Necessity for conducting these quietly until point of reasonable adjustment can be reached.
61
[Page XII]June 7 From the German Ambassador
Allied Governments’ replies to German offer of May 2 and German counter reply (text printed), suggesting guarantees for accomplishment of reparation plan and urging oral discussions as only practicable means for conducting negotiations.
62
Undated Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with the German Ambassador, June 7, 1923
Discussion of German counter reply. Secretary’s acquiescence in German proposal to conduct negotiations directly through oral discussions.
64
Undated Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with the Belgian Ambassador, June 7, 1923
Secretary’s suggestion that time was ripe for direct oral negotiations.
64
Undated Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with the Italian Ambassador, June 23, 1923
Secretary’s views on conditions and procedure necessary to effect negotiations.
65
Aug. 17 (57) To the Ambassador in Belgium (tel.)
Personal views of Secretary expressed in conference with Belgian Chargé, for transmission to Belgium, that reparations are distinct from war debts and that American people are not disposed to cancel the latter.
66
Oct. 13 From the British Chargé
Aide-mémoire (text printed) recording British belief that U. S. cooperation is essential toward settlement of reparations, attributing present difficulties to lack of unanimity among Allies, and indicating readiness to suggest that Allies extend joint invitation to United States to participate in conference or an inquiry under Reparation Commission.
68
Oct. 15 To the British Chargé
Aide-mémoire (text printed) conveying U. S. willingness to participate in conference or, unofficially, in inquiry under Reparation Commission; but maintaining U. S. position that there is no relation between reparations and interallied debts.
70
Oct. 16 (284) To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
Transmission of British and U. S. aides-mémoire, October 13 and 15, respectively. Importance of conciliatory attitude by British in approaching French concerning proposed inquiry, with no suggestion of a British-American understanding in advance.
(Instructions to repeat to Embassies in Belgium, France, Italy, and Germany.)
73
Oct. 19 (896) From the British Chargé
British appreciation of U. S. willingness to cooperate. Action to ascertain attitude of Allies toward extending joint invitation to United States to participate in inquiry.
74
[Page XIII]Oct. 22 (116) From the Ambassador in Belgium (tel.)
Confidential statement by Foreign Minister concerning British communication revealing U. S. willingness to assist in reparation inquiry.
74
Oct. 24 (420) From the Chargé in France (tel.)
From Logan: Information that Germany will submit proposal of payment to Reparation Commission; doubt of acceptance because of French attitude; fear, in case of rejection, of dissolution of Germany. Suggestions as to U. S. action.
76
Oct. 24 (393) To the Chargé in France (tel.)
Summary of conversation between French Chargé and Secretary, in which were discussed French desire to preserve rights under Treaty of Versailles and position of United States, with suggestion by United States of immediate action to prevent dissolution of Germany and to insure payments.
(Instructions to repeat to Embassies in Italy and Belgium.)
79
Oct. 25 (397) To the Chargé in France (tel.)
Instructions to urge immediate adoption of constructive financial policy concerning reparations, based upon Germany’s capacity to pay.
83
Undated Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with the French Chargé, October 26, 1923
The Chargé’s oral transmission of substance of French reply to British proposal concerning inquiry, stating French desire for U. S. cooperation and preference for inquiry under Reparation Commission.
84
Oct. 26 (125) From the Ambassador in Belgium (tel.)
Acceptance by Belgium and France of British alternative proposal whereby Reparation Commission would make inquiry through committee of experts.
85
Oct. 26 (428) From the Chargé in France (tel.)
Uncertainty that commission of experts will receive sufficient scope to insure satisfactory results.
85
Oct. 29 From the French Chargé
French refusal to reconsider amount of German debt as fixed May 1, 1921, by Reparation Commission.
86
Undated Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with the Counselor of the Italian Embassy, October 29, 1923
Acceptance by Italian Government of inquiry by commission of experts and appreciation of U. S. willingness to cooperate.
87
Undated Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with the French Chargé, October 31, 1923
Secretary’s assertion that there had been no change in U. S. position; and expression of hope that France would not render inquiry futile by limiting its scope.
87
[Page XIV]Nov. 2 (130) From the Ambassador in Belgium (tel.)
Belgium’s acceptance of joint invitation proposed by Great Britain to be sent to United States.
90
Nov. 6 (409) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
French Ambassador’s presentation of French proposal to limit scope of inquiry through (1) consideration only of present capacity to pay, (2) refusal to consider any reduction in amount of reparations previously fixed, and (3) refusal to deal with occupation of Ruhr; and Secretary’s request for clarification of limitations.
(Instructions to repeat to London and Brussels.)
90
Undated Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with the French Ambassador, November 7, 1923
Ambassador’s explanation of proposed limitations. Secretary’s assertion that proposed limitations would make inquiry futile; similar view held by President.
91
Undated Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with the British Chargé, November 9, 1923
Communication to British Chargé of substance of interview between Secretary and French Ambassador on November 9.
94
Nov. 9 (414) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Summary of further conversation between Secretary and French Ambassador in which Ambassador explained French limitations, indicating no change in French attitude, and Secretary reiterated opinion that limitations would frustrate purpose of inquiry. Information that substance of conversation has been made public.
(Sent also to Ambassadors in Great Britain and Belgium. Instructions to repeat to Rome.)
94
Nov. 10 (460) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
French note (text printed) expressing regret at U. S. decision, reported by press, to end negotiations; explaining French position; and conveying assurances of French desire for close cooperation with United States.
95
Nov. 12 (415) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Information that negotiations have ended only in sense that proposed limitations would frustrate inquiry. Instructions to present note (text printed) as final reply to France, stating U. S. position as unchanged.
97
Nov. 28 (481) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
From Logan: French draft resolution for presentation to Reparation Commission (text printed) creating two committees of experts: (1) to balance budget and stabilize currency of Germany, and (2) to estimate capital escaped from Germany and force its return. Letters from French and Belgian representatives on Commission (texts printed) inviting U. S. representation. British and Italian support of French proposal. Four suggestions for U. S. action.
98
[Page XV]Nov. 30 (436) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
For Logan also: Necessity for definite proposal before Department can accept French plan of two committees or acquiesce in acceptance of invitation by U. S. experts.
101
Dec. 6 (496) From the Ambassador in France
From Logan: Reply to inquiry concerning French proposal. Note from French representative on Reparation Commission, December 5 (text printed) explaining scope of committee proposed for balancing budget and stabilizing currency of Germany.
102
Dec. 7 From the German Ambassador
Decision of Reparation Commission to appoint two committees of experts as proposed by France. Request by German Government for U. S. representation on committee for balancing budget and stabilizing currency.
104
Dec. 11 (455) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
For Logan: Reply to French representative on Reparation Commission (text printed) approving proposal of two committees of experts and favoring acceptance by U. S. experts of invitations to participate unofficially. Suggestion of General Charles G. Dawes as member of first committee.
105
Dec. 12 (505) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
From Logan: Information that two Americans in addition to Dawes will be needed for committees. Suggestion that Owen D. Young be considered.
106
Dec. 20 (528) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
From Logan: Commission’s intention to extend invitation to Harry M. Robinson, Los Angeles, to sit on second committee of experts. Inquiry as to acceptance.
(Footnote: Robinson’s acceptance.)
107
Dec. 21 (535) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
From Logan: Formal invitation to Dawes and Young (text printed) to become members of first committee, offering chairmanship to Dawes.
108
Dec. 27 To General Charles G. Dawes
Information regarding time and place of meeting of committees. Suggestion that formal acceptance be sent to Reparation Commission.
108
Dec. 27 To Mr. Owen D. Young
Information regarding time and place of meeting of committees. Suggestion that formal acceptance be sent to Reparation Commission.
109
1924 Jan. 8 (7) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
From Logan: Press statement of Dawes and Young (text printed) that membership on committee is as private citizens without instructions and with no obligation to make reports except to Reparation Commission.
109
[Page XVI]

Agreement Between the United States and the Governments of Great Britain, France, Italy, and Belgium in Regard to the Reimbursement of the Costs of the American Army of Occupation, Signed May 25, 1923

Date and number Subject Page
1923 Feb. 19 To the Assistant Secretary of the Treasury
Instructions for information and guidance in mission to Paris to discuss reimbursement of costs of American Army of Occupation with representatives of Allied Governments. Position of United States as previously established in diplomatic correspondence (excerpts printed) and present attitude, particularly in respect to obtaining amount of claim previously fixed, responsibility of Allies to United States for payments already received from Germany in excess of their army costs, and application of German dyes, war materials, and property toward fulfillment of claim.
110
Mar. 1 (108) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
From Wadsworth: Report of meeting with Allied representatives, their attitude being cooperative, with no question of U. S. equity.
135
Mar. 10 (122) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
From Wadsworth: Allies’ proposal for settlement; comments, queries, and recommendations.
135
Mar. 15 (105) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
For Wadsworth: Unwillingness of United States to accept any plan for settlement without definite assurances of payment. Instructions to point out that Allies have received payments from Germany in excess of their army costs at expense of United States. Reply to comments and queries. Willingness to make further concessions if equitable and necessary.
138
Mar. 23 (141) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
From Wadsworth: Draft agreement (text printed) between the United States and Great Britain, France, Italy, and Belgium, subject to approval of other interested Allied Powers.
143
Mar. 25 (118) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
For Wadsworth: Rejection of provision making agreement subject to approval of other interested nations not participating in conference. Suggestions for modifications.
145
Mar. 26 (147) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
From Wadsworth: Inquiry concerning interest rate acceptable on deficits, with suggestion of 4 percent.
148
Mar. 26 (121) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
For Wadsworth: Suggestion of 4¼ percent interest rate on deficits, or agreement on 4 percent if desirable.
149
Mar. 29 (156) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
From Wadsworth: Proposal by Allies of additional modifications of draft agreement.
149
Mar. 29 (157) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
From Wadsworth: Allies’ insistence on submission of agreement to other interested nations for approval; acceptance of certain proposed modifications and status of others.
150
[Page XVII]Mar. 31 (129) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
For Wadsworth: U. S. rejection of proposal to submit agreement to other interested nations for approval; position regarding priority of army costs, limitation of United States to 25 percent of cash payments for first 4 years, British Reparation Recovery Act, interest, loans, and reduction of U. S. claim as consequence of seized German ships.
152
Apr. 3 (163) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
From Wadsworth: Allies’ alternative proposal that agreement be presented to other interested powers for approval before signature.
156
Apr. 3 (133) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
For Wadsworth: U. S. rejection of Allies’ alternative proposal.
156
Apr. 7 (140) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
For Wadsworth: Notice to Mixed Claims Commission (text printed) of U. S. claim for army costs against Germany, to preserve U. S. rights, with explanation that this does not affect basis of U. S. claim against Allies who have received payments at U. S. expense.
157
Apr. 10 (185) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
From Wadsworth: Amendment proposed by Belgian representative (text printed) changing basis of allotment of payments to United States.
158
Apr. 10 (145) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
For Wadsworth: Department’s assumption that under proposed amendment United States would receive nothing until European army costs were paid.
159
Apr. 11 (190) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
From Wadsworth: Confirmation of assumption that under amendment European army costs would have priority over those of United States under proposed amendment, and that this has been position of Allies from beginning.
160
Apr. 13 (151) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
For Wadsworth: Refusal to accept priority of European army costs. Restatement of U. S. position, citing concessions made, fairness of U. S. claim, and extent of cooperation on remaining unsettled points.
160
Apr. 19 (205) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
From Wadsworth: Allies’ refusal to alter position on priority of their army costs. Request for permission to discuss situation with Chancellor of Exchequer while in London.
163
Apr. 19 (93) To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
For Wadsworth: Permission to discuss reimbursement of army costs with Chancellor of Exchequer. Instructions to explain situation to U. S. correspondents at Paris, if Allies do not alter position on priority.
(Footnote: Chancellor’s statement denying knowledge of situation.)
164
[Page XVIII]Apr. 24 (211) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
From Wadsworth: Draft of agreement containing Allies’ compromise yielding priority to U. S. installments during last 8 years of proposed 12–year payment period.
165
Apr. 25 (170) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
For Wadsworth: Rejection of Allies’ reservation to abrogate agreement if United States should take payments directly from Germany, either in cash or kind or through special legislation such as reparations recovery act, without applying proceeds to discharge army costs.
(Footnote: Text of paragraph 2, article 6, of draft agreement containing Allies’ abrogation reservation.)
165
Apr. 26 (220) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
From Wadsworth: Suggestion to reduce U. S. priority during last 8 years from 100 to 80 percent, and to surrender priority during first 4 years if abrogation reservation is eliminated.
166
Undated Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with the French Ambassador, April 27, 1923
French fear of failure of negotiations unless United States accepts abrogation reservation. Review by Secretary, expressing belief that United States has been generous enough, but offering compromise as final concession.
168
Apr. 27 (172) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
For Wadsworth: Authorization to accept Allied proposals on priority and if abrogation reservation cannot be eliminated, to offer amendment (text printed) as final concession.
172
Apr. 30 (227) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
From Wadsworth: Proposal by Allies of changes in proposed amendment, with suggestion that United States yield its right of abrogation. Wadsworth’s affirmation of U. S. view that agreement is satisfactory if paragraph containing Allies’ abrogation reservation is eliminated; and prospect that paragraph may be eliminated.
172
May 1 (178) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
For Wadsworth: Consent to changes in proposed amendment. Willingness to accept elimination of paragraph containing Allies’ abrogation reservation. Approval of refusal to yield U. S. right of abrogation.
173
Undated Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with the French Ambassador, May 5, 1923
The Secretary’s declination of Ambassador’s request for new formula to conciliate British and Belgians; assertion of U. S. right to collect amount of claims from Germany without sacrificing army costs.
174
May 22 (49) From the Chargé in Belgium (tel.)
Belgian note consenting to suppression of abrogation reservation and interpreting Treaty of Versailles as permitting Reparation Committee, should need arise, to protect in their entirety the rights of Belgium.
176
[Page XIX]May 22 (253) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
From Wadsworth: Prospect of early signing of agreement, with signatures of certain powers subject to approval of their parliaments because of constitutional requirements.
177
May 22 (203) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
For Wadsworth: Authorization to sign agreement if abrogation reservation favoring Allies is omitted, with understanding that treaty will be subject to parliamentary approval of signatory nations.
177
May 23 (255) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
From Wadsworth: Prospect of immediate signature of agreement, to become effective upon exchange of ratifications at Paris; and confirmation of understanding that abrogation reservation had been omitted.
178
May 23 (256) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
From Wadsworth: Purpose to obtain early signature; Italians causing delay.
178
May 24 From the Chargé in Belgium (tel.)
Recall by Belgium of note of May 22 and submission of substitute (text printed) omitting reference to Reparation Commission as protecting Belgian rights under Treaty of Versailles.
179
May 25 (259) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Receipt of copy of Italian note to U. S. Ambassador to Italy, identical with Belgian note; receipt also of slightly different French note (excerpt printed).
179
May 26 From the Assistant Secretary of the Treasury
Signature of agreement, May 25, between United States and Great Britain, France, Italy, and Belgium (text printed) for payment of costs of American Army of Occupation.
180
June 5 (207) From the Chargé in Great Britain (tel.)
British note, May 26 (text printed) consenting to suppression of abrogation reservation and interpreting Treaty of Versailles as safeguard, in favor of Allies, of priority reparations and other charges against Germany.
186
July 14 (284) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Note for Foreign Office (text printed) acknowledging receipt of French note consenting to suppression of abrogation reservation; and stating U. S. understanding that French do not deny rights and advantages to which United States is entitled under Treaty of Versailles and treaty of 1921 between United States and Germany.
(Sent, mutatis mutandis, to missions in Belgium, Great Britain, and Italy.)
187
Oct. 16 (409) From the Chargé in France (tel.)
British unwillingness to notify agreement to Reparation Commission until scope is interpreted, because of alleged U. S. claim for share of Bulgarian reparation payment.
187
[Page XX]Oct. 19 (289) To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
Instructions to state U. S. hope that position reported does not represent views of British Government and that agreement may be notified promptly to Commission; reservation of U. S. rights in event share in Bulgarian payments be not accorded.
188
Nov. 8 (451) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Decision of Conference of Ambassadors to notify text of agreement to Reparation Commission.
189
Dec. 13 (461) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
For Logan: Views as to U. S. participation in reparation payments made by Bulgaria. Request for comments.
190
Dec. 19 (519) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
From Logan: Concurrence in Department’s view that United States cannot demand crediting of Bulgarian payments to German reparation account and therefore cannot share in these unless Commission should choose to credit them as German reparations.
191
1924 Jan. 10 (11) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
For Logan: Conditional authorization to support view that reparation payments by Bulgaria be credited by Reparation Commission to Germany’s reparation account.
192

Withdrawal of the American Army of Occupation and of the Unofficial Observer on the Interallied Rhineland High Commission

Date and number Subject Page
1923 Jan. 10 To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Announcement of decision to withdraw U. S. troops on Rhine.
(Instructions to repeat to London, Berlin, Brussels, Rome, and Lausanne.)
192
Undated Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with the German Ambassador, January 23, 1923
Expression of thanks of German Government for correct conduct of U. S. troops during occupation.
192
Jan. 27 From the Unofficial Observer on the Interallied Rhineland High Commission (tel.)
Relinquishment of U. S. zone to French.
193
Jan. 31 (47) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
For Allen: Decision to withdraw U. S. observer from Rhineland High Commission and instructions to present statement of retirement (text printed).
193
[Page XXI]

Objections by the United States to Discriminatory Regulations on Exports From the Occupied Region of the Ruhr

Date and number Subject Page
1923 Mar. 5 (85) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Statement of opinion on principles governing situation in Ruhr, particularly in regard to U. S. commercial interests, stressing necessity for neutral attitude, but holding France to strict accountability for any abuses of power, particularly levying of duplicate export taxes and discriminatory acts against Americans.
(Instructions to repeat to Embassies in Great Britain, Germany, Belgium, and Italy. Summary to be sent to U. S. consul at Cologne.)
194
Mar. 22 (2973) From the Ambassador in France
Resolution of Interallied Rhineland High Commission, March 15 (text printed) providing new regulations for licensing exports from Rhineland and Ruhr.
198
Apr. 11 (146) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Objections to certification feature of new regulations for licensing shipments from Rhineland and Ruhr as being impracticable, causing long delay, and not within functions of U. S. diplomatic representative; suggestion for modification, permitting direct application for export license through buyer’s representative, assisted by local U. S. consul.
(Instructions to repeat, mutatis mutandis, to Belgium.)
200
Apr. 16 (201) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Refusal to sign formula certifying conditions of shipment required by Interallied Rhineland High Commission for obtaining licenses; French explanation that Ambassador’s statement declaring exports have general interest for United States would be sufficient assurance of validity, leaving remainder of form to be filled out by U. S. purchaser. Request for instructions.
201
Apr. 19 (161) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Instructions to urge modification of regulations so as to permit U. S. buyers to make direct application for export licenses with aid of local U. S. consul.
202
Apr. 24 (215) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Justification by Foreign Office of procedure required for obtaining export licenses, citing acceptance by other nations and smooth operation; willingness to receive suggestions for better method.
202
Apr. 28 (173) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Note for Foreign Office (text printed) requesting that certification by U. S. consul at Coblenz be accepted for U. S. traders in Ruhr in lieu of diplomatic certification at Paris, to afford Americans equal opportunity for obtaining licenses with nationals represented by Rhineland High Commission, also at Coblenz.
203
May 4 (232) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Suggestion that informal letter be issued by commercial attaché for presentation to Rhineland High Commission by U. S. buyers, expressing appreciation of any courtesies in issuing exportation permits to American purchasers, as means of relieving losses of U. S. buyers pending settlement of certification question.
204
[Page XXII]May 7 (237) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Note from Foreign Office (text printed) explaining necessity for, and operation of, commercial regime in occupied territory; and justifying denial of certification privilege to U. S. consul at Coblenz, asserting that present procedure through Paris is rapid and equitable and to make concession would cause disorganization.
204
May 8 (189) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Instructions to continue representations against discriminatory features of regulations; authorization to issue certificates temporarily in order to prevent serious losses.
206
May 9 (45) From the Chargé in Belgium (tel.)
Foreign Office note of May 8 stating that regulations cannot be changed and that foreigners are not thought to be in less favorable position for obtaining export licenses.
207
May 11 (239) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Indefinite extension of time for receiving applications from U. S. buyers; French acceptance of proposed temporary certification; details of procedure to be followed by U. S. buyers in making application to Rhineland High Commission at Coblenz for export licenses.
207
May 14 (193) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Department’s statement outlining for U. S. buyers procedure in making application for export licenses (text printed), sent to Ambassador before release to press.
(Instructions to inform Embassies at Brussels and Berlin and U. S. consul at Coblenz of details.)
208

Consideration of the Disposal To Be Made of the Tank Ships of the Deutsch-Amerikanische Petroleum Gesellschaft Under the Arrangement of June 7, 1920

Date and number Subject Page
1923 June 21 From the Unofficial Representative on the Reparation Commission
Brief filed before Tanker Tribunal in behalf of Reparation Commission presenting arguments unfavorable to claim of Standard Oil Co. for return of tankers; obligations of United States if decision is unfavorable to claimants; position of brief regarding principle of beneficial ownership; review of D. A. P. G. ownership and stock transfers.
(Footnote: Telegram of June 16, 1921, to Ambassador in France containing U. S. approval of plan for the formation of Tanker Tribunal.)
209
Nov. 13 From the Unofficial Representative on the Reparation Commission
Probable decision of Tanker Tribunal, holding valid the transfer of tankers by Germany to Reparation Commission and denying claim to them by Standard Oil Co. on grounds that stockholder has no legal or equitable interest in assets of corporation.
212
[Page XXIII]Dec. 12 (457) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
For Logan: Department’s argument to refute probable decision of Tanker Tribunal, contending that latter violates terms of tanker agreement and is contrary to position taken by Allies, and that, regardless of ability to establish beneficial ownership, Standard Oil Co. should be compensated in tankers for any loss suffered.
213
Dec. 29 (548) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
From Logan: Tanker Tribunal’s further consideration of subject.
217

GREAT BRITAIN

Efforts To Maintain American Capitulatory Rights in Palestine Pending Agreement by Treaty Regarding the British Mandate

Date and number Subject Page
1922 Dec. 28 To the Vice Consul at Jerusalem
Authorization to communicate to British Legal Secretary for Palestine Government modifications desired by United States in procedure for civil and criminal cases in which Americans are defendants. Opinion of Department concerning detention of U. S. prisoners in Palestine jails.
218
1923 Mar. 3 (1104) From the Vice Consul at Jerusalem
Acquiescence of Chief Secretary of Palestine Government in proposed modifications, and order to put these into effect in Palestine courts.
221
July 20 From the Vice Consul at Jerusalem (tel.)
Information that U. S. capitulations are not in accord with Palestine order in council and that Attorney General need not comply with order of Chief Secretary to courts. Necessity for action through London to secure amendment of order in council.
221
Aug. 11 From the Vice Consul at Jerusalem (tel.)
Decision of Court of Appeals that U. S. capitulations are not in accordance with order in council and courts should refuse to recognize instructions regarding them.
222
Aug. 15 To the Vice Consul at Jerusalem (tel.)
Instructions to inform High Commission of U. S. desire that present arrangement between Legal Secretary and consulate be followed until ratification of Allied treaty with Turkey and conclusion of U. S.-British agreement regarding recognition of British mandate in Palestine.
222
[Page XXIV]Oct. 4 (977) To the Chargé in Great Britain
Summary of U. S. agreement with Legal Secretary for Palestine regarding changes in procedure for civil and criminal cases in Palestine courts, and refusal of Chief Justice and Attorney General to accept modifications. Instructions to request conformity to agreement as U. S. right until recognition of British mandate in Palestine; conclusion of treaty between Allies and Turkey, providing opportunity for early consideration of such recognition.
222
Oct. 31 From the Vice Consul at Jerusalem (tel.)
Palestine mandate effective September 29; increasing difficulties with civil courts. Request of local government for instructions from London.
224
Nov. 30 (3180) From the Chargé in Great Britain
Two notes from Foreign Office, November 29 (texts printed) regarding: (1) difficulties arising in Palestine over conflict of order in council with agreement made with local authorities by U. S. vice consul in Jerusalem, and (2) desire of British Government to conclude Anglo-American treaty recognizing British mandate in Palestine.
225

Negotiations To Ensure by Treaty the Rights of the United States in Territories Under British Mandate

b mandates

Date and number Subject Page
1923 Mar. 21 (61) To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
Note to Foreign Secretary (text printed) agreeing to accept wording proposed for article 8 of mandate for East Africa and article 7 of mandates for Togoland and Cameroons, reserving, however, position with regard to U. S. missionary and educational institutions in territories under A mandates. Objections to preambles of African treaties; instructions for preparing drafts for signature, with preamble same as in French treaties.
228
Nov. 30 (3181) From the Chargé in Great Britain
Note from Foreign Secretary, November 26 (text printed) expressing gratification over U. S. agreement to substantive portion of proposed Anglo-American treaties affecting mandated territories in Central Africa, and expressing hope of developing acceptable preamble.
230

c mandates

Date and number Subject Page
1922 July 24 (218) To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
Instructions to present note (text printed) inquiring into discriminatory tariffs imposed by New Zealand and Union of South Africa in mandated territories and into restrictions by Australia on sale of enemy property and on oil deposits in New Guinea. Request for duplicate annual reports on administration of C mandates.
232
[Page XXV]1923 Oct. 18 (287) To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
Note for Foreign Office (text printed) restating U. S. position as regards mandates and presenting two draft conventions relating: (1) to British C mandates except Samoa, and (2) to Samoa.
235

Decision by the Department of State To Support the Turkish Petroleum Company’s New Concession in Iraq (Mesopotamia) Providing for American Participation and the Open Door

Date and number Subject Page
1923 Jan. 30 (93) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Instructions to bring to attention of British Foreign Secretary U. S. note of November 17, 1921, suggesting that validity of claim of Turkish Petroleum Co. should be determined by suitable arbitration; unwillingness of U. S. oil companies to participate in Turkish Petroleum Co. until claim is validated or company obtains new concession.
240
Feb. 3 (234) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Note sent to British Foreign Secretary, February 1 (text printed) calling attention to U. S. position as set forth in U. S. note of November 1, 1921.
241
Feb. 6 From the President of the Standard Oil Company of New Jersey
American group’s refusal of proposal made by Turkish Petroleum Co. for 24 percent participation in oil interests in Iraq; suggestion of conference in New York to develop plan acceptable to all.
242
Apr. 17 From the President of the Standard Oil Company of New Jersey
Negotiations in New York between American group and representatives of Turkish Petroleum Co. regarding participation in oil concession in Iraq. Agreement on open-door formula (text printed) and expectation that this will be adopted by company.
243
Oct. 25 From the President of the Standard Oil Company of New Jersey
Draft convention between Government of Iraq and Turkish Petroleum Co., Limited, September 1923 (text printed) containing provision for effecting open-door formula; also cablegram to managing director of company (text printed) suggesting amendment to article 34 to provide equal opportunity for sublessees irrespective of nationality.
246
Nov. 8 To the President of the Standard Oil Company of New Jersey
Offer of diplomatic support to U. S. interests on understanding that oil development in Iraq is to be under terms of new concession to Turkish Petroleum Co., reorganized to provide equal participation by British, Dutch, French, and U. S. interests, by means of subleases, free from discrimination or exploitation to advantage of any one nation.
257
[Page XXVI]Dec. 10 From the President of the Standard Oil Company of New Jersey
Transmittal of convention as drafted November 16, 1923, with modification of article 33 freeing Turkish Petroleum Co., Ltd., from obligation to organize its subsidiaries under British law. Request of company that amendment to article 34 be omitted as unnecessary and prejudicial to reaching agreement with Iraq Government. Request for views.
260
Dec. 15 From the Consul at Bagdad (tel.)
Fall of old Cabinet, necessitating negotiations from beginning with new Cabinet.
261
Dec. 18 To the President of the Standard Oil Company of New Jersey
Suggestion that, in case amendment to article 34 is not included in convention, assurances be obtained by American group that principles of open-door formula for subleases will be carried out.
262
Dec. 19 From the Associate General Counsel of the Standard Oil Company of New Jersey
Cablegram to managing director of Turkish Petroleum Co. (text printed) accepting proposed omission of amendment to article 34 on condition that company and Foreign Office give assurances that open-door formula for subleases will be carried out.
263

Discrimination in India Against American Oil Companies

Date and number Subject Page
1923 Mar. 15 (216) From the British Ambassador
Request for repudiation by United States of spurious documents taken as basis of Federal Trade Commission’s report to Senate concerning discrimination against Americans in Burma oil fields.
264
Mar. 24 To the British Ambassador
Deletion from Federal Trade Commission’s report of reference to spurious documents, and repudiation by United States. Review of previous correspondence; reference to British failure to transmit mining laws, as reason for U. S. acceptance of conclusion that in fact U. S. oil companies are excluded from oil development in Burma.
266
[Page XXVII]

Withdrawal of British Opposition to the Granting of Portuguese Concessions to American Companies for Landing Submarine Cables in the Azores

Date and number Subject Page
1923 Feb. 3 (799) To the Ambassador in Great Britain
Instructions to make representations against British opposition to applications of American cable companies for concession in Azores; irrelevance of Miami-Barbados cable transaction, here reviewed, and maintenance of U. S. position that rights of All America Cables have been effectively waived in Colombia.
271
Feb. 17 (37) To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
Prospect for approval of Western Union contract by Portuguese Government; renewal of British pressure at Lisbon.
279
Feb. 20 (53) From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
Representations made to Foreign Secretary in sense of Department’s instructions of February 3.
280
Mar. 19 (140) From the Minister in Colombia
Statements of British Minister intimating that Colombian Government has not acquiesced in renunciation of preferential rights by All America Cables. Suggestion that cable company file formal waiver with Colombian Government to avoid delay.
281
Mar. 27 (68) To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
Protest of British Minister to Portugal against granting of cable concessions to U. S. companies.
282
Apr. 20 (2273) From the Ambassador in Great Britain
British note, April 18 (text printed) presenting arguments to uphold position relative to Azores cable situation; but expressing willingness to leave granting of concession to discretion of Portuguese Government after free negotiation between British and U. S. companies.
283
Apr. 26 From the Italian Embassy
Information concerning instructions sent Italian Ambassador at London to join with U. S. Ambassador in inducing British Government to desist from pressure on Portuguese Government against landing of Western Union cable at Azores.
286
Apr. 28 (135) From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
Opinion of Western Union officials that purpose of British is to delay matters until adjournment of Parliament at Lisbon.
286
May 4 (145) From the Chargé in Great Britain (tel.)
Italian Ambassador’s representations to British Foreign Office against opposing the landing of U. S. cable at Azores, explaining that Italian cable was to connect with U. S. cable at Azores. Promise of British Foreign Secretary to state position of his Government in memorandum to Italian Embassy, requesting Rome to take no action in meantime.
287
May 4 (146) From the Chargé in Great Britain (tel.)
Adjournment of Portuguese Parliament within month; desire of Western Union officials to know if British have withdrawn opposition to landing U. S. cable at Azores.
287
[Page XXVIII]May 5 (13) To the Minister in Colombia (tel.)
Instructions to inform Foreign Office of U. S. assumption that Colombia had acquiesced in waiver of rights by All America Cables and to express hope that Colombia considers waiver complete. Information that alleged incompleteness of waiver is being used by British in opposing U. S. cable concession at Azores.
288
May 16 (167) From the Chargé in Great Britain (tel.)
Failure of Italian Embassy to receive promised note revealing British attitude; Mussolini’s instructions that Embassy renew representations.
289
May 17 (111) To the Chargé in Great Britain (tel.)
Note for Foreign Secretary (substance printed) reviewing action of All America Cables to secure waiver of rights in Colombia and acquiescence of Colombian Government; explanation of action of U. S. courts regarding application of Western Union for license to land cable at Miami; request that British cease further opposition to applications of U. S. companies for cable rights in Azores.
(Instructions to send copy to Legation at Lisbon.)
289
May 24 (181) From the Chargé in Great Britain (tel.)
Information that British opposition will continue. Advisability of raising case in British Parliament to weaken opposition in Lisbon. Probability that Portuguese will grant U. S. cable concession in spite of British opposition.
293
June 9 To the Italian Ambassador
Proposal of license (excerpt printed) granting Western Union permission to land cable in United States extending to Azores to connect with Italian cable, on condition that licensee shall not enter into monopolistic contracts.
294
Undated Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with the Italian Ambassador, June 14, 1923
Proposal of Italian Ambassador that no action be taken on proposed license for U. S.-Azores cable without Italy’s consent.
295
June 21 From the Italian Ambassador
Italy’s concurrence in proposed license with addition of provision (text printed) regarding unordered traffic.
296
June 26 (250) From the Chargé in Great Britain (tel.)
Formal offer to Western Telegraph Co. by Western Union and Italian cable company of certain cable traffic (substance printed), upon condition that British withdraw opposition to Western Union contract with Portugal.
297
June 27 To the Italian Ambassador
Gratification that condition against monopoly in proposed Western Union license is acceptable to Italian Government; assurance that United States will take no action to carry out provisions of condition until after discussion with Italy.
(Footnote: Signature of license by President, August 25, 1923.)
297
[Page XXIX]June 30 (165) To the Chargé in Great Britain (tel.)
Purpose not to oppose proposed agreement offering cable rights to Western Telegraph Co. Inquiry whether second paragraph of proposed agreement relates to all traffic or only to unordered traffic.
298
July 3 (264) From the Chargé in Great Britain (tel.)
Explanation that second paragraph of proposed agreement relates to all traffic originating in South Europe served by Italian cable.
298
July 16 (17) From the Minister in Colombia (tel.)
Information that Colombian Government considers that it has accepted waiver of All America Cables.
299
July 18 (303) From the Chargé in Great Britain (tel.)
Rejection by Western Telegraph Co. of offer of Western Union and Italian cable company.
299
Nov. 20 (516) From the Chargé in Great Britain (tel.)
Agreement between Western Telegraph Co. and Western Union following negotiations at Foreign Office; prospect of early withdrawal of British opposition to U. S. concession in Azores.
299
Undated Memorandum of a Conversation between the Assistant Secretary of State and Messrs. Goldhammer and Burden of the Commercial Cable and Postal Telegraph Companies, November 22, 1923
Goldhammer’s statement that his company’s rights in Azores had been secured through British company and that future relations with Portuguese would be conducted in same way; right of German company to land Emden cable in Great Britain to connect for South American traffic via Azores.
300
Dec. 18 (561) From the Chargé in Great Britain (tel.)
Information that British Minister in Portugal has been instructed to withdraw opposition to concession for Western Union in Azores following signature on December 10 of agreement between Western Union, Italian, and Western Telegraph companies.
301
Dec. 19 (86) From the Minister in Portugal (tel.)
Inquiry whether representations should be made for withdrawal of British opposition not alone to Western Union but to any other concessions to U. S. interests. Request for instructions concerning concession of Commercial Cable Co.
301
Dec. 22 From the General Attorney for the Western Union Telegraph Company
Agreement, December 10 (text printed) between the Western Telegraph Company, Ltd., the Compagnia Italiana dei Cavi Telegrafici Sottomarini, and the Western Union Telegraph Company of New York, relative to cable communication between the Americas and Europe via Azores.
301
[Page XXX]Dec. 26 To the Minister in Portugal (tel.)
(46) Instructions to take no action regarding applications for concessions in Azores pending request of U. S. companies and approval of Department.
305
1924 Jan. 24 From the Minister in Portugal (tel.)
(6) Approval of Western Union contract by Chamber of Deputies. 306
306

Dispute With the British Government Over Withdrawal of Recognition of the American Consular Officers at Newcastle-on-Tyne

Date and number Subject Page
1923 Feb. 12 (812) To the Ambassador in Great Britain
Note for Foreign Secretary (text printed) stating orders have been issued not to reopen consulate in view of British cancelation of exequatur and of recognition, respectively, of Consul Slater and Vice Consul Brooks on charges not substantiated by U. S. investigation.
306
Mar. 2 (63) From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
Foreign Office note (text printed) stating that British Government was not informed of proceedings in U. S. investigation nor was evidence revealed.
307
Mar. 9 (47) To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
Publication of U. S. notes to Great Britain regarding case of consular officers, with statement explaining U. S. position (text printed); release also to press of circular instruction no. 865 and statement concerning rejection of British proposal of identic instructions to consular officers of both countries as condition for settling case, indicating, however, U. S. willingness to discuss with Great Britain, after adjustment of Newcastle incident, a convention denning consular rights and duties.
308
June 7 (211) From the Chargé in Great Britain (tel.)
Resolution of city council of Newcastle-on-Tyne urging British Government to settle case in order to secure reopening of U. S. consulate.
309
June 14 (224) From the Chargé in Great Britain (tel.)
Statement in Parliament that Government is prepared to reopen negotiations with United States on subject of Newcastle resolution.
310
July 27 (323) From the Chargé in Great Britain (tel.)
British suggestion that case be settled by presentation of British note withdrawing charges because of insufficient evidence and simultaneous U. S. announcement of reopening of consulate.
310
July 28 (324) From the Chargé in Great Britain (tel.)
Further British suggestion that U. S. announcement take form of Embassy note to British Foreign Office.
310
[Page XXXI]July 30 (202) To the Chargé in Great Britain (tel.)
Willingness to accept British proposals provided there has been prior agreement on text of notes and their simultaneous publication and provided the British withdraw without qualification their charges against U. S. consuls.
311
Sept. 7 (2839) From the Chargé in Great Britain
Drafts of notes to be exchanged (texts printed).
311
Oct. 16 (286) To the Chargé in Great Britain (tel.)
Approval of texts of notes; willingness to proceed with exchange of notes if advance assurance is given that British will recognize appointment of Slater at Fort William and Port Arthur and Brooks at Belfast. Instructions concerning new consul at Newcastle.
312
Nov. 3 (485) From the Chargé in Great Britain (tel.)
Delivery of note to Foreign Office setting forth U. S. proposals respecting Newcastle consulate.
313
Nov. 13 (3086) From the Chargé in Great Britain
Foreign Secretary’s unwillingness to have Brooks appointed to Belfast; his view that Brooks should be sent to some inland post.
313
Dec. 13 (380) To the Chargé in Great Britain (tel.)
A. P. despatch from Newcastle, December 13 (text printed) intimating that settlement of deadlock rests with Department. U. S. reply to press inquiry that opening of consulate is impossible until stigma against consuls is removed by appropriate British action.
314

Agreement Between the United States and Great Britain, Signed June 23, 1923, Further Extending the Duration of the Arbitration Convention of April 4, 1908

Date and number Subject Page
1923 June 23 Agreement between the United States of America and Great Britain
Extending for another 5 years the arbitration convention concluded April 4, 1908, and renewed in 1913 and 1918.
315
June 23 To the British Ambassador
U. S. understanding that, if Senate assents to U. S. adhesion to protocol of 1920 creating Permanent Court of International Justice, British will not be averse to considering modification of arbitration convention or to making separate agreement to provide for reference to Permanent Court of disputes mentioned in convention.
316
June 23 (523) From the British Ambassador
Confirmation of U. S. understanding.
317
[Page XXXII]

GREECE

Withdrawal of American Relief Organizations From Operations in Behalf of Greek Refugees, and Formation of the Refugee Settlement Commission Under the Auspices of the League of Nations

Date and number Subject Page
1923 Feb. 19 From the Chairman of the American Red Cross
Letter from Colonel Haskell, January 29 (text printed) recommending that relief operations in Greece cease in June and that early announcement be made to give Greek Government opportunity to make necessary arrangements. Request for views.
318
Feb. 28 To the Chairman of the American Red Cross
Concurrence in view that Red Cross emergency relief in Greece should cease; summary of refugee situation and suggestion of plan of constructive action on behalf of refugees after relief stops. Request that no publicity be given to proposed termination of Red Cross activities.
319
Mar. 1 From the Chairman of the American Red Cross
Intention of Red Cross to withdraw from Greece on June 30; necessity for permanent plan of reconstruction in connection with exchange of populations and inability of Greece to absorb Armenian refugees. Request that United States invite other governments to cooperate in carrying out such plan; promise of Red Cross assistance.
321
Mar. 8 From the General Secretary, Near East Relief
Report on Near East Relief for 1922. Statements giving information on (1) total relief disbursements since 1915, (2) total relief disbursements for 1922, (3) emergency relief, and (4) plans for immediate future, recommending that adult relief be turned over to responsible governments but that child welfare and orphanage work be continued with U. S. support.
323
Mar. 16 (44) To the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Instructions to report condition of refugees in Constantinople and to forward views on possible measures of relief. Inability of Red Cross to assist, and limitations of aid from Near East Relief.
326
Mar. 20 (56) From the Chargé in Greece (tel).
Departure of Haskell to present to Turkish authorities Hoover’s proposal regarding U. S. relief for devasted regions in Turkey on condition that the Turks permit refugees in Greece to return to homes in Turkey.
327
Mar. 21 (14) To the Chargé in Greece (tel.)
Information that Haskell is without authorization to make proposals regarding devastated regions in Turkey and that trip is possibly to investigate practicability of repatriation of refugees.
327
Mar. 24 (50) To the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Report that Turkish authorities have ordered deportation to interior of 4,500 refugees now at Mersina, in case arrangements are not made for their immediate departure from that port. Instructions to report conditions at all Turkish ports.
328
[Page XXXIII]Mar. 28 (82) From the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Danger of deportations at Mersina and Black Sea ports; threats of such action probably intended to urge Greeks to send ships for evacuating refugees.
328
Mar. 29 (86) From the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Report that permission has been obtained from Angora to allow refugees to remain until transportation is available.
329
Mar. 29 (66) From the Chargé in Greece (tel.)
Haskell’s report that Turks insist upon exchange of populations according to Lausanne Agreement, and that they refuse to allow refugees in Greece to return to their former homes.
329
Mar. 31 To the British Ambassador
Information that emergency relief work of Red Cross in Greece will terminate on June 30. Proposal of an exchange of views on the desirability of cooperation in the liquidation of the refugee problem in the Near East.
(The same, mutatis mutandis, to French and Italian Ambassadors.)
329
Mar. 31 (17) To the Chargé in Greece (tel.)
Authorization to transmit to Greek authorities substance of Department’s note of March 31 to British, French, and Italian Ambassadors.
331
Mar. 31 (19) To the Chargé in Greece (tel.)
Payne to Haskell: Message for Greek authorities (text printed) announcing withdrawal of Red Cross from Greece June 30; readiness of Haskell to cooperate in arranging transfer of activities to avoid interruption of work.
332
Apr. 4 (70) From the Chargé in Greece (tel.)
Conclusion that future relief must consist of financial aid in, and foreign control of, settlement of Greek refugees on properties as vacated by Turks.
332
Apr. 6 (3008) From the Ambassador in France
French reply to Department’s note of March 31, stating inability of France to cooperate financially in further relief work.
333
Apr. 6 (61) To the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Instructions to make representations to Turkey if report is true that heavy consumption duties have been levied on food supplies sent by Near East Relief for refugees in Constantinople.
333
Apr. 9 (272) From the British Ambassador
Acceptance of U. S. proposal for exchange of views, and willingness to cooperate in working out Constructive scheme for liquidating refugee problem in Near East.
334
Apr. 9 (182) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
French proposal to Great Britain and Italy to cooperate in seeking special commission appointed by Council of the League to handle Armenian problem. Inquiry whether the United States would cooperate with such a commission.
334
[Page XXXIV]Apr. 26 From the Italian Ambassador
Acceptance of U. S. proposal for exchange of views.
335
Apr. 27 (125) From the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Authorization for Red Crescent, Constantinople, to pass Near East Relief food supplies through customs free of duty.
335
May 5 From the French Ambassador
French proposal to utilize certain number of refugees to relieve French farm labor shortage, if U. S. committees will defray transportation, sending 100 to 200 persons first for trial.
335
May 17 (94) From the Chargé in Greece (tel.)
Haskell’s recommendation against U. S. participation with League in solving refugee problem and his suggestion, as alternative solutions, of return of refugees to Turkey with financial aid from powers or the establishment by contributing governments of international commission having U. S. chairman and no contact with League.
336
May 23 From the Vice Chairman, Central Committee in Chargé of Foreign Operations, American Red Cross
Formal request by Greece for continuation of American Red Cross relief and reply of Red Cross (text printed) declining. Explanation that withdrawal of Red Cross aid will facilitate solution of refugee problem through compelling break-up of concentration camps and distribution of refugees.
338
May 29 (100) From the Chargé in Greece (tel.)
Report concerning League investigations as to security Greece can offer for refugee loan. Information that no assistance toward refugee relief may be expected from Italy and France, and little, if any, from England.
339
June 13 (182) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
British note, May 25 (text printed) inviting United States to send technical observer to meeting of League’s Finance Committee to consider plan for refugee relief and loan to Greece. U. S. appointment of Dolbeare; his instructions to make statement (substance printed) setting forth need for permanent solution and Department’s willingness to have any approved plan of relief carried out by representative commission of interested governments or agencies at Athens.
(Instructions to repeat to Legation in Greece.)
340
June 15 (428) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Notification to League’s Finance Committee that Dolbeare is ready to attend meetings insofar as they relate to emergency relief.
342
June 23 (453) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
From Dolbeare: Report on meetings of League’s Finance Committee; Ter Meulen’s scheme of private company for financing refugee aid through Greek banks.
343
[Page XXXV]June 25 (462) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
From Dolbeare: Adoption of Ter Meulen’s plan, with organization of representatives of Greek Government and Greek banks and two foreigners nominated by International Finance Commission and relief organizations. Council to take up plan July 2 and meetings of Finance Committee to be resumed July 2.
345
June 26 (463) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Haskell’s recommendations as transmitted from Athens June 25 (text printed) regarding Greek relief.
345
June 27 (38) To the Chargé in Greece
Desire of Near East Relief to terminate emergency feeding of adult refugees in Black Sea area, Constantinople, and Mersina. Instructions to report progress of transfer of refugees to Greece.
(Instructions to repeat to Constantinople.)
346
June 30 (211) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
For Logan: Instructions for carrying out assignment as unofficial observer at meetings of League’s Finance Committee to be resumed on July 2. Question of validity of proposed financing until Greek Government is recognized.
346
July 3 (111) From the Chargé in Greece (tel.)
Information that Government contemplates transfer to Greece of refugees in question after signing of peace.
348
July 6 (315) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
From Logan: Finance Committee’s recommendation to League of plan for organization of nonprofit refugee settlement society in lieu of private land company opposed by subcommittee; approval of plan by League and transmittal to Greek Government. Finance Committee’s further recommendation that a committee be formed, with Nansen as chairman, to seek means to aid Greek Government in caring for refugees pending funds from settlement society.
348
July 10 (185) From the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Report on condition of refugees in Constantinople and Anatolia; termination of Red Cross operations on June 30 after distribution of 6 weeks’ supplies to refugees; evacuation of Greek refugees at Mersina in Greek ships; recommendation that Near East Relief aid in Pontus area and in Constantinople be withdrawn unless Greek Government adopts constructive relief policy and evacuates refugees.
352
July 17 (287) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
For Logan: Information concerning Haskell’s recommendations; further comments and suggestions in regard to financing refugee relief. Instructions to state orally that Red Cross does not desire to be represented on Nansen Committee.
(Instructions to repeat to Lausanne, Athens, and Constantinople.)
353
[Page XXXVI]July 17 (326) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
From Logan: League’s inquiry whether a U. S. relief agent will be appointed to Nansen Committee; Greek acceptance of League’s plan to organize refugee settlement society, subscription of million pounds toward loan, and steps to raise additional funds from U. S. and London banks.
355
July 24 (964) From the Greek Chargé
Request that U. S. assent be given, as required by financial agreement of 1918, for pledging Greek security for loan to be used for settlement of refugees.
356
July 30 (622) From the British Chargé
Information regarding plan evolved by League for relief in Near East; necessity for supplemental funds from charitable agencies; expression of hope that U. S. societies will continue to cooperate.
357
Aug. 4 (47) To the Chargé in Greece (tel.)
Information that on August 15 Near East Relief will discontinue feeding adults in region of Constantinople and Black Sea. Instructions to urge Greek Government to take prompt action.
(Instructions to repeat to Constantinople.)
359
Aug. 6 (204) From the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Recommendation that Greece be urged to effect evacuation of refugees to Greece, and that Near East Relief continue relief for reasonable time.
359
Aug. 6 (205) From the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Turkey’s request that Near East Relief continue to feed refugees and that Greece evacuate them as soon as possible.
360
Aug. 7 To the Greek Chargé
Assurance of sympathetic consideration of Greek request for U. S. assent to pledging of Greek security for loan for refugee aid.
360
Aug. 7 (147) To the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Information that Chargé in Greece has been instructed to make representations for removal to Greece of refugees; inability of Near East Relief to continue adult relief.
(Instructions to repeat to Athens.)
361
Aug. 7 (117) From the Chargé in Greece (tel.)
Foreign Minister’s proposal (text printed) to transfer one half of refugees to Greece in August and remainder in September if U. S. agencies supply partial relief; Chargé’s reply stating inability to accept proposal. Request for instructions.
361
Aug. 7 (118) From the Chargé in Greece (tel.)
Authorization to dispose of Red Cross supplies, sufficient for 6 weeks, to refugees arriving in Greece in September.
362
Aug. 8 From the Chargé in Greece (tel.)
Recommendations for solution of refugee problem in Greece.
362
[Page XXXVII]Aug. 9 From the French Chargé
Resolution of League Council, July 5 (text printed) regarding securities offered by Greece as basis for loan and willingness of Council to assist in management of funds. Appointment of Nansen Committee for obtaining temporary relief pending funds from loan. Request that U. S. charitable agencies be urged to continue relief.
363
Aug. 10 (343) From the Chargé in France (tel.)
From Logan: Information that a half million refugees will require 4 months’ relief before loan will be available; formula for financing deficit for this period.
364
Aug. 18 (1057) From the Greek Chargé
Information concerning Greek cooperation in refugee relief; hope that American relief organizations will be represented on Nansen Committee.
366
Aug. 18 (51) To the Chargé in Greece (tel.)
Approval of action in not accepting Foreign Minister’s proposal to evacuate refugees if U. S. agencies would continue relief. Instructions to continue to present problem as concerning only Greece and Turkey.
(Instructions to repeat to Constantinople.)
370
Aug. 19 (120) From the Chargé in Greece (tel.)
Information that Near East Relief will feed refugees in accord with proposal of Greek Foreign Minister, and that some refugees have already left Constantinople on Greek vessels. Understanding that League will care for 5,000.
370
Aug. 25 (353) From the Chargé in France (tel.)
From Logan: Delay in raising British subscription to refugee settlement society loan, necessitating preliminary conditional advance by Bank of England. Formal acceptance by Greek Government, July 29 (text printed) of League’s scheme for organization of settlement society. Possibility of nomination of Morgenthau as U. S. chairman of society.
371
Sept. 10 To the British Embassy
Acknowledgment of British note conveying League’s plan for relief of refugees in Greece; restatement of salient features of plan; and indication of positions of American Red Cross and Near East Relief with respect to participation in future relief work in Greece.
(Similar communication sent to French Embassy.)
373
Sept. 12 To the Greek Chargé
Assurance that Department will not oppose representation of U. S. relief agencies on Nansen Committee. Suggestion that European and Greek agencies communicate directly with American Red Cross and Near East Relief to learn their position regarding refugee relief work in Greece.
374
[Page XXXVIII]Sept. 19 (401) From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
Foreign Office note, September 18 (text printed) conveying information concerning proposed British reply to Greek inquiry, i. e., that Great Britain will consent to assignment by Greece of security for proposed loan if United States and France also agree; and inquiring concerning possible U. S. reply to similar application from Greece.
375
Oct. 1 From the Chief of the Division of Near Eastern Affairs, Department of State
Press report of selection of Morgenthau as chairman of refugee settlement society; information regarding society and attitude of Department, Red Cross, and Near East Relief.
375
Oct. 10 (278) To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
Note for Foreign Office (text printed) stating U. S. consent to assignment by Greece of security for proposed loan if France and Great Britain likewise agree.
377
Oct. 29 From the First Secretary of the British Embassy
Information that British Treasury can give no assurances concerning participation of European voluntary societies in relief work in Greece and that there can be no question of further government assistance.
377
Nov. 23 From Mr. Ernest J. Swift of the American Red Cross
Cable from chairman of Refugee Settlement Commission to American Red Cross received November 22 (text printed) appealing for refugee relief for Greece until spring.
378
Dec. 5 (539) From the Chargé in Great Britain (tel.)
French willingness to consent to assignment of security by Greece for proposed refugee loan.
378
Dec. 29 (84) To the Chargé in Greece (tel.)
Information concerning Red Cross receipt of various appeals for assistance in Greek refugee relief; and request for comments on proposed Red Cross reply (text printed) that situation does not appear to be of such emergency character as to justify reopening of relief work.
379
Dec. 31 (187) From the Chargé in Greece (tel.)
Suggestion that Red Cross reply be sent to Morgenthau, with additional statement concerning the magnitude of the task of finding permanent occupations for the refugees.
(Footnote: Communication of Red Cross reply to Morgenthau.)
379
[Page XXXIX]

GUATEMALA

Disapproval by the Department of State of a Proposed Loan to Guatemala by a Group of American Bankers

Date and number Subject Page
1923 Oct. 9 (412) From the Chargé in Guatemala
Draft contract for loan to Guatemala by group of U. S. bankers for establishment of fixed monetary standard on gold basis and creation of central bank having exclusive right to issue currency in Republic.
381
Nov. 8 (63) To the Chargé in Guatemala (tel.)
Instructions to inform U. S. bankers and Guatemalan Government of Department’s objections to proposed loan.
381
Nov. 10 (92) From the Chargé in Guatemala (tel.)
Bankers’ intention to modify contract to overcome Department’s objections. Guatemala’s appreciation of Department’s solicitude for its welfare.
383
Nov. 20 (452) From the Chargé in Guatemala
Bankers’ request that Chargé assure President Orellana that United States does not desire to have loan negotiations completely terminated; Chargé’s refusal.
383
Dec. 18 (664) To the Chargé in Guatemala
Approval of action in declining to discuss loan proposition further with Guatemala; Department’s view that matter is closed.
384

HAITI

Exchange of Notes Between the United States and Haiti Providing for the Administration of the Internal Revenues of Haiti

Date and number Subject Page
1923 Mar. 7 (29) To the Chargé in Haiti (tel.)
For Russell: Inquiry whether President Borno has issued decree providing funds for installation of internal revenue system.
385
Mar. 9 (29) From the High Commissioner in Haiti (tel.)
President Borno’s consent to issue decree appropriating fund for preparation of internal revenue law, general accounting law, and revision of tariff law.
385
Mar. 10 (31) From the High Commissioner in Haiti (tel.)
President Borno’s reconsideration, holding proposed appropriation illegal but authorizing charge for necessary work under expenses of Financial Adviser’s office, as permitted by treaty.
385
June 15 (81) From the High Commissioner in Haiti (tel.)
Proposal to President Borno of an agreement placing control of Haitian revenues in American hands.
386
June 28 (88) From the High Commissioner in Haiti (tel.)
Draft agreement (text printed) for administration of internal revenue, consolidating offices of Financial Adviser and General Receiver of Customs and reorganizing treaty officials for conduct of all financial activities.
386
[Page XL]July 10 (188) From the High Commissioner in Haiti
Report that draft of internal revenue law has been completed. Intention not to present draft to Haitian Government until agreement is effected with United States for control of internal revenues and reorganization of treaty officials.
388
July 25 (82) To the Chargé in Haiti (tel.)
For Russell: Concurrence in recommendation that control of internal revenues be effected by agreement. Suggestion that same man be appointed to offices of Financial Adviser and General Receiver instead of consolidating offices. Authorization to enter into agreement outlined, with certain changes.
389
Aug. 30 Memorandum by Mr. Dana G. Munro, of the Division of Latin American Affairs, Department of State
President Borno’s objections to agreement as extending treaty; his suggestion that U. S. control of internal revenues be granted by means of a law; his opposition also to establishment of U. S. auditor.
391
Sept. 2 (107) To the Chargé in Haiti (tel.)
Department’s view that agreement rather than law is necessary to assure stability of control. Consent to omit position of auditor from proposed agreement.
391
Sept. 12 Memorandum by Mr. Dana G. Munro, of the Division of Latin American Affairs, Department of State
Draft letter to President of United States requesting that High Commissioner be authorized to present nominations of subordinate officials direct to President of Haiti, to avoid burdensome routine of present system.
(Footnote: President’s authorization, September 29.)
392
Nov. 22 (136) To the High Commissioner in Haiti
Authorization to present nominations of subordinate officials direct to President of Haiti, nominations of higher officials continuing through customary channels. Willingness that minor employees of customs service be appointed by Receiver General on his own responsibility. Information concerning procedure to be followed in appointments to positions to be filled by officers and enlisted men of U. S. Navy and enlisted men of Marine Corps.
393
Dec. 15 (49) To the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Instructions to inform W. W. Cumberland of his appointment as Financial Adviser and General Receiver of Customs in Haiti. His instructions.
394
Dec. 26 (60) From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Cumberland’s acceptance of appointment. Efforts to arrange with Peru for release from present duties.
(Footnote: Assumption of duties by Cumberland as Financial Adviser in Haiti, February 4, 1924, and as General Receiver April 1, 1924.)
395
[Page XLI]1924 Feb. 21 (310) From the High Commissioner in Haiti
Agreement concerning appointment of personnel and disposition of funds to be collected by Administration Généale des Contributions, effected by exchange of notes between High Commissioner and President Borno, dated January 3, 1924, and February 14, 1924 (texts printed).
(Footnote: Law creating bureau promulgated June 6, 1924.)
395

Organization of the Haitian Claims Commission

Date and number Subject Page
1923 Jan. 20 (10) From the Chargé in Haiti (tel.)
Haiti’s view that each member of Claims Commission should be president in turn for 1 month. Request for views.
397
Jan. 30 (18) To the Chargé in Haiti (tel.)
Instructions to inform U. S. member of Commission of Department’s preference that U. S. member should be president. Suggestion that matter be settled by commissioners themselves.
398
Jan. 31 (18) From the Chargé in Haiti (tel.)
President Borno’s insistence on rotation of presidency; concurrence of Financial Adviser and U. S. member in Department’s views that U. S. member should have control; inability of members of Commission to agree upon a president.
398
Feb. 3 (20) To the Chargé in Haiti (tel.)
Instructions to inform U. S. member that compromise with Haiti regarding presidency would be preferable to continuation of dispute; suggestion for U. S. and Haitian members to alternate in presidency.
399
Feb. 6 (21) From the Chargé in Haiti (tel.)
Organization of Claims Commission, with Haitian member to preside over debates and U. S. member over deliberations.
399
Mar. 2 (27) To the Chargé in Haiti (tel.)
Expectation of early settlement of French-Haitian negotiations in Washington; information that French Minister’s demand for settlement solely in accordance with arbitration convention of 1913 was not authorized by French Government.
400
Mar. 7 (28) To the Chargé in Haiti (tel.)
For Russell: U. S. views concerning Haiti’s obligations toward German claimants, and concurrence with Haitian Government in position regarding diplomatic claims and diplomatic appeals by Germany. Nomination of Mr. Edmund Helmcke as member of Commission while German claims are under consideration.
400
Mar. 21 (32) To the Chargé in Haiti (tel.)
For Russell: French insistence upon right of appeal through diplomatic channels of awards or claims arising subsequent to 1913. Instructions to urge acceptance by President Borno, reminding him of British and Italian reservations.
401
[Page XLII]Mar. 26 (42) From the High Commissioner in Haiti (tel.)
President Borno’s decision to accept French proposal without reservation, recourse to revision through diplomatic channels being extended also to other foreign governments having claims.
402
Apr. 3 (47) From the High Commissioner in Haiti (tel.)
Concurrence in legal adviser’s opinion that jurisdiction of Claims Commission is limited to pecuniary claims pending on date of exchange of ratifications of treaty, May 3, 1916.
402
Apr. 6 (49) From the High Commissioner in Haiti (tel.)
Estimate of maximum of claims; advisability of increasing series B bond issue to 8 millions to facilitate payment of claims by Commission under probable plan of 60 to 70 percent in bonds and remainder in cash.
403
Apr. 7 (43) To the Chargé in Haiti (tel.)
For Russell: Concurrence in legal adviser’s view that jurisdiction of Claims Commission is limited to claims pending May 3, 1916. Inquiry whether any important claims have arisen since then.
404
Apr. 11 (44) To the Chargé in Haiti (tel.)
For Russell: Objections to proposed increase in series B bond issue on grounds that revenues do not justify greater public debt and that present issue will be adequate for all requirements.
404
Apr. 12 (53) From the High Commissioner in Haiti (tel.)
Report of claims before Commission originating since May 3, 1916; probability that others will be presented.
405
Apr. 14 (47) To the Chargé in Haiti (tel.)
For Russell: Instructions to inform Haitian Government that Department will notify foreign governments of extent of jurisdiction of Claims Commission, if Haiti concurs in U. S. view.
405
Apr. 19 (59) From the High Commissioner in Haiti (tel.)
Recommendation that Department authorize increase of series B bond issue, citing prospective increase in customs collections and other factors as sufficient guarantees of, and justification for, such action.
406
Apr. 26 (52) To the Chargé in Haiti (tel.)
For Russell: Department’s refusal to consent to increase of bond issue; recommendation that at least 50 percent of Commission’s awards be paid in cash to avoid difficulties with foreign claimants.
407
May 15 (69) From the High Commissioner in Haiti (tel.)
Haitian note, May 12 (text printed) presenting reasons for extending jurisdiction of Claims Commission to ratification of protocol establishing Commission, June 26, 1922, rather than limiting it to date of treaty ratification, May 3, 1916.
408
[Page XLIII]May 28 (62) To the Chargé in Haiti (tel.)
For Russell: Instruction to present argument to prove that jurisdiction of Commission must be limited to claims pending when treaty came into effect, and that extension of time can be arrived at only by separate agreement between governments.
409
June 12 (77) From the High Commissioner in Haiti (tel.)
French suggestion that three French claims occurring after May 1916 might properly be referred to Arbitral Tribunal; President Borno’s statement that if other governments desire same treatment Haiti would approve.
410
June 15 (82) From the High Commissioner in Haiti (tel.)
Haiti’s consent to limit jurisdiction of Claims Commission to claims arising before May 3, 1916.
410
July 9 (116) To the High Commissioner in Haiti
Information that Department has no objection to proposal to refer claims arising since May 1916 to Arbitral Tribunal.
410
Aug. 11 (215) From the High Commissioner in Haiti
French-Haitian agreement to exchange notes regarding French claims; extension by Commission of time for presentation of claims to December 31, 1923.
411

Rejection of the Demand of French Bondholders for the Redemption in Gold of the Haitian Loan of 1910

Date and number Subject Page
1922 Dec. 16 (126) To the Chargé in Haiti (tel.)
For Russell: Request of National City Bank for change of instructions to avoid attachment of funds by French bondholders if they demand payment in gold of Haitian loan of 1910; also bank’s suggestions regarding publication of required notices of redemption, payment for bonds and commissions in French francs instead of gold, and redemption of 1896 bonds on December 31.
411
Dec. 29 (127) To the Chargé in Haiti (tel.)
For Russell: National City Bank’s suggestion that proposed deposit for redemption of 1896 loan be made in form of special trust fund to prevent attachment by 1910 bondholders; and recommendation that notice of redemption of 1910 bonds be published regardless of fiscal agent’s protest and his demand for payment in gold.
413
Dec. 30 (168) From the High Commissioner in Haiti (tel.)
Cabled instructions to Haitian Legation, Paris, for publication of redemption of 1910 bonds, and for transfer of funds for immediate redemption of 1896 bonds.
414
1923 Jan. 18 (8) From the High Commissioner in Haiti (tel.)
Report that instructions have been sent to Haitian Legation, Paris, to publish redemption notice of 1910 bonds at once.
414
[Page XLIV]May 12 To the French Ambassador
Categorical reply to bondholders’ arguments, disclaiming any obligations on part of Haiti to redeem 1910 bonds except in francs of current circulation.
415

Reorganization of the National Railroad of Haiti

Date and number Subject Page
1921 Oct. 5 To the French Chargé
Information concerning plans for payment of coupons in arrears and current interest and status of plan for reorganization of railway.
418
1923 Feb. 7 To the Receiver for the National Railroad of Haiti
View that revised tentative plan for reorganization of National Railroad Company is acceptable. Understanding that plan will be presented to President Borno and to bondholders for approval.
419
Mar. 9 (30) From the High Commissioner in Haiti (tel.)
President Borno’s approval of plan for reorganization of National Railroad.
420
Aug. 1 (86) To the Chargé in Haiti (tel.)
For Russell: French bondholders’ acceptance of reorganization plan if given cash and new government bonds for railroad bonds; necessity for immediate passage of law (substance printed) sanctioning plan, and early signature of agreement with railroad. U. S. approval of agreement and request for prompt action.
420
Aug. 21 (117) From the High Commissioner in Haiti (tel.)
Inability of legislative body to approve reorganization plan, because of limited time; emergency note of Foreign Minister authorizing receiver of railroad to conclude agreement with bondholders of National Railroad of Haiti for payment of bonds.
422
Sept. 5 (109) To the Chargé in Haiti (tel.)
Receiver’s opinion that Haitian Government must authorize issue of C bonds, although note of authorization will be sufficient for negotiations with bondholders.
423
Dec. 28 (181) From the High Commissioner in Haiti (tel.)
Passage by Council of State of reorganization plan and law authorizing issuance of series C bonds.
423
[Page XLV]

HONDURAS

Efforts by the United States To Allay Factional Dissensions Among Candidates for the Presidency in Honduras

Date and number Subject Page
1923 Apr. 7 (328) From the Minister in Honduras
Report concerning negotiations for the unification of the Liberal Party or the selection of one Presidential candidate to oppose the Conservative candidate, Carias; Congressional decree setting elections for October 28–30.
424
Apr. 21 (34) From the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
Secret mission from Guatemalan Government offering support to candidate of Liberal Party if friendly to Guatemala.
425
Apr. 28 (15) To the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
Authorization to use good offices to assist in bringing about agreement between candidates for Presidency. Instructions to Legation at Guatemala (text printed) to state U. S. desire that Guatemala take no sides in Honduran elections.
425
Apr. 30 (39) From the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
Report on conference of Liberal Presidential candidates and its failure to accomplish anything; imminence of revolution owing to Government’s intention to have candidate.
426
May 1 (40) From the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
Willingness of all Presidential candidates to attend conference suggested by Minister for purpose of seeking agreement to assure peace.
427
May 7 (273) From the Minister in Guatemala
Disavowal of any intention on part of President Orellana to influence elections in Honduras; his accord with U. S. hope that problem will be solved by agreement or free election.
427
May 8 (43) From the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
Report on conference of all Presidential candidates: Their inability to select compromise candidate and decision of all to run for office if Government guarantees free election; President Orellana’s assurance of free elections.
428
May 13 (46) From the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
President Orellana’s negotiations with Liberal candidates, ending in failure; his implication that United States has expressed opinion that one candidate was sufficient from each party and that the United States would not countenance revolutionary movement; his request that U. S. Minister use good offices to secure agreement among candidates.
428
May 15 (20) To the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
President Orellana’s request for U. S. assurances of support in maintaining public order; U. S. refusal to give assurances.
429
May 15 (21) To the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
Denial that United States has expressed opinion that one candidate was sufficient from each party and that United States would not countenance revolutionary movement. Restatement of U. S. position.
430
May 26 (51) From the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
Proposal of another conference between President Orellana and candidates. Minister’s decision not to attend.
430
[Page XLVI]May 30 (53) From the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
Report on conference: President Orellana’s refusal to be present; refusal of Conservative candidate to withdraw from elections; withdrawal of one Liberal candidate, Colindres, and probability of agreement between Arias and Bonilla, the remaining two Liberal candidates.
431
June 21 (15) To the Minister in Salvador (tel.)
Instructions to impart, casually, 17. S. attitude toward Honduran elections.
431
June 26 (56) From the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
Failure of Arias and Bonilla to reach agreement; evidence of agreement between Government and Bonilla, increasing threat of civil war.
432
June 30 (26) To the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
Statement for presentation to President Orellana and other political leaders, and for wide publicity (text printed) warning of grave situation and inevitable consequences if agreement is not reached between Presidential candidates for free and fair elections; and stating that U. S. attitude is consonant with provisions of treaty of 1923 between Central American States regarding nonrecognition of revolutionary governments.
(Instructions to repeat to other Central American Missions.)
432
July 11 (63) From the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
Further negotiations between candidates; scheme for modification of treaty between Central American States.
434
July 14 (28) To the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
Information that modification of treaty will not change U. S. attitude of consonance with present provisions.
435
July 26 (560) To the Minister in Honduras
Instructions informally to express U. S. hope that President Orellana will be able to maintain principle of free elections and that officials conducting elections will have confidence of all parties.
435
July 29 (66) From the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
Carias’ threat to start revolution; gathering of forces on Nicaraguan border under Funes for invasion of Honduras; other revolutionary preparations.
436
Aug. 3 (29) To the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
Statement of Nicaraguan President that he will dispatch armed guard in search of Funes.
436
Aug. 27 (73) From the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
Conviction that Government’s support of Bonilla is provoking revolution, now imminent; suggestion of conference between President and candidates aboard U. S. ship at Amapala.
437
[Page XLVII]Aug. 28 (35) To the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
Opinion that there is no advantage in holding conference unless Government will assure all parties that it will not impose candidate in elections. Instructions to ascertain whether President Orellana will give such assurance.
437
Aug. 30 (74) From the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
President Orellana’s assurance that he will not impose a candidate and will do everything in his power to guarantee free elections.
438
Sept. 19 (77) From the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
President Orellana’s information of revolution scheduled for September 23; his request that representations be made to Nicaragua for reconcentration of Funes’ forces.
438
Sept. 24 (78) From the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
Failure of scheduled revolution to materialize. President Orellana’s desire for courtesy call by U. S. warship.
438
Sept. 28 (40) To the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
Opinion that visit of U. S. warship is neither necessary nor justifiable.
439
Oct. 5 (80) From the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
Imposition of Arias by government officials planning to control elections through coercion; threat of Carias faction to retaliate by revolution; request of President Orellana’s secretary that U. S. Minister seek to convince President of intrigues of officials.
439
Oct. 8 (41) To the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
Instructions not to comply with request of President Orellana’s private secretary.
439
Oct. 8 (81) From the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
Interview with President Orellana in which Minister pointed out intrigues of officials. President’s telegram to military commandants and governors (text printed) ordering strict neutrality during elections.
440
Oct. 10 (42) To the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
Memorandum from Honduran Government seeking U. S. cooperation in maintaining peace if none of the candidates receives majority of votes and Congress fails to elect President before February 1; U. S. reply that assistance cannot be assured. Instructions to inform President Orellana of U. S. confidence in efficacy of recent order and suggest its publication.
440
Oct. 11 (83) From the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
President Orellana’s appreciation of U. S. confidence. Information that President’s order has been published in Honduras; and President’s authorization to publish order in United States.
441
Oct. 17 (45) To the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
Information that copy of President Orellana’s order concerning free elections has been given to U. S. press.
442
[Page XLVIII]Oct. 26 (86) From the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
Report that all effective measures have been taken to insure peaceful election and that the three candidates have disavowed any intention to resort to violence.
442
Oct. 27 (87) From the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
President Orellana’s telegram to all military commandants (text printed) again urging that elections be held with absolute freedom.
443
Oct. 30 (90) From the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
Returns of election; final vote showing Carias leading, but with no candidate receiving a majority.
443
Nov. 7 (91) From the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
Post-election complications; efforts of candidates to effect fusions to gain control of Congress; Carias’ determination to fight for his right to office. Request for instructions.
443
Nov. 9 (48) To the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
Instructions to confine activities only to reporting situation fully and to exerting proper influence to dissuade political factions from using force.
444
Nov. 13 (93) From the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
Failure of Guatemalan Minister’s effort to effect fusion between Carias and Arias. President Orellana’s proposal of conference with three candidates to effect agreement.
444
Nov. 16 (94) From the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
Report that conference between President Orellana and candidates was ineffective, Carias having refused to attend.
445
Dec. 1 (96) From the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
Rumors of intended coup d’éat to set up de facto government. Suggestion that presence of U. S. warship at Amapala would aid in preventing disorders.
445
Dec. 3 (97) From the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
Information that Minister has brought to President Orellana’s attention the rumors of the proposed coup d’état; President’s assurance that every precaution will be taken to defend city and palace against attack.
446
Dec. 3 (49) To the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
Inadvisability of sending warship to Amapala.
446
Dec. 15 (54) To the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
Authorization to advise Carias informally of U. S. opposition to recognition of revolutionary governments.
446
Dec. 17 (104) From the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
Intention of Government to declare martial law until Congress convenes; possibility that such action may precipitate revolution by Carias.
447
Dec. 18 (105) From the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
Declaration of martial law by Executive decree; arrest of Carias’ adherents.
447
[Page XLIX]Dec. 19 (107) From the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
Wholesale arrests of Carias’ leaders and slaying of Congressman.
447
Dec. 20 (108) From the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
Report of numerous outbreaks. President Orellana’s request for U. S. warship, stating that his only desire is to maintain peace until Congress convenes.
448
Dec. 21 (55) To the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
Instructions to state orally to President Orellana and other officials U. S. disapprobation of martial law and wholesale arrests and U. S. purpose to refuse recognition to administration placed in power by abuse of authority on part of existing Government. Departure of U. S. warship for Amapala.
448
Dec. 22 (24) To the Minister in Costa Rica (tel.)
Authorization orally to inform Government of U. S. purpose to refuse recognition to an administration placed in office by abuse of authority on part of existing Government.
(Sent, mutatis mutandis, to missions in Guatemala, Nicaragua, and Salvador.)
449

HUNGARY

Reservation by the United States of Its Rights in Reparation Payments by Hungary

Date and number Subject Page
1923 Aug. 22 (351) From the Chargé in France (tel.)
From Logan: Surrender by Hungary of Bulgarian treasury bills to Reparation Commission; proposal to accede to Hungary’s request of assurance that delivery will not prejudice her interests if United States protests acceptance by Commission. Request for instructions.
450
Aug. 30 (337) To the Chargé in France (tel.)
For Logan: Instructions to state that United States has no objection to surrender of treasury bills by Hungary to Commission, reserving right, however, of being consulted regarding disposition.
450
Nov. 8 From the Unofficial Representative on the Reparation Commission
Request for instructions regarding British proposal of compromise to avoid controversy over treaty rights in connection with question of Commission’s accountability for treasury bills surrendered by Hungary. Points in support of compromise proposal.
451
Dec. 7 (444) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
For Logan: Inability to perceive how parties to Treaty of Neuilly can realize on treasury bills; no desire to participate in disposition. Instructions to make U. S. position clear.
454
[Page L]

JAPAN

Cancelation of the Lansing-Ishii Agreement of November 2, 1917

Date and number Subject Page
1923 Jan. 20 (6) To the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Japanese Chargé’s request that cancelation of Lansing-Ishii Agreement be postponed until coming into force of Washington conference treaties; Secretary’s reply that cancelation has already been effected, but that public announcement might be postponed.
455
Apr. 6 (31) To the Chargé in Japan (tel.)
Japanese Ambassador’s request for new exchange of notes setting forth cancelation of Lansing-Ishii Agreement; U. S. compliance and submission of tentative drafts (substance printed).
(Instructions to repeat to Peking.)
456
Apr. 11 (34) From the Chargé in Japan (tel.)
Status of Government’s approval of final draft of notes. Expression of appreciation by Count Uchida.
456
Apr. 13 (33) To the Chargé in Japan (tel.)
Japan’s approval of proposed exchange of notes in a form substantially though not textually same as U. S. draft; notes to be signed April 14 and announced April 16.
(Instructions to repeat to Peking.)
457
Apr. 14 To the Japanese Ambassador
Understanding of views developed by discussions with Japanese Embassy regarding status of Lansing-Ishii Agreement.
457
Apr. 14 From the Japanese Ambassador
Confirmation of U. S. understanding regarding status of Lansing-Ishii Agreement.
458

Court Decisions in the United States Upon the Constitutionality of the Land Laws of the States of California and Washington

Date and number Subject Page
1923 Nov. 17 (251) To the Chargé in Japan (tel.)
Two decisions of U. S. Supreme Court sustaining laws of California and Washington in restricting ownership and use of land by aliens for agricultural purposes, holding these acts not to be in conflict with treaty of 1911 with Japan.
458
Nov. 23 (255) To the Chargé in Japan (tel.)
Two further decisions by Supreme Court (excerpts printed) regarding agricultural employment contract and purchase of stock in agricultural enterprise, upholding right of state to prohibit both direct and indirect ownership or control of land by ineligible aliens.
459
Dec. 4 From the Japanese Embassy
Representations regarding California Alien Land Laws and recent Supreme Court decisions.
460
[Page LI]Dec. 5 (188) From the Chargé in Japan (tel.)
Increasing agitation in Japanese press regarding Pacific Coast land laws; pressure by emigration associations on Foreign Office to seek appointment of joint commission to investigate situation.
463
Dec. 12 (53) To the Chargé in Japan
Ruling of Supreme Court of California (excerpt printed) that provisions of Alien Land Law relating to guardianship matters are unconstitutional.
464

American Assistance to the Japanese Following the Earthquake of September 1, 1923

Date and number Subject Page
1923 Sept. 1 President Coolidge to the Emperor of Japan (tel.)
Expression of sympathy in his own name and that of the American people and offer of help to Japanese in alleviating sufferings resulting from earthquake.
465
Sept. 2 (105) To the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Instructions to convey to Foreign Minister the heartfelt sympathy and offer of aid of U. S. Government; also Secretary’s profound sympathy.
465
Undated [Rec’d Sept. 4] From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Report concerning safety of Americans, destruction of Embassy buildings, acuteness of food shortage. Request for rations from Philippines.
466
Sept. 3 Press Release Issued by the Department of State
President’s appeal to American people for Red Cross contributions to aid Japanese sufferers.
466
Sept. 3 (106) To the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Department’s concern over safety of U. S. officials and citizens. Information concerning relief measures taken by Red Cross, U. S. Navy, and State Department. Request for information and suggestions.
467
Sept. 4 From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Report from Yokohama of serious situation, with loss of American lives; estimate of casualties in Tokyo; acute food shortage; destruction of Embassy records.
467
Sept. 4 From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Repetition of appeal for relief for millions of destitute and homeless.
468
Sept. 5 From the Consul at Kobe (tel.)
Report of complete destruction of Yokohama; departure of all surviving foreigners; relief efforts of residents of Kobe; Americans killed; complete disorganization of Tokyo, necessitating use of Kobe as consular center; use of Shipping Board vessels for relief; suggestions for sending relief funds.
468
[Page LII]Sept. 6 (131) To the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Statement issued to press (text printed) expressing sympathy for Japan and offering assistance.
469
Sept. 6 From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Suggestion that relief supplies be delivered to Japanese authorities for distribution and that no attempt be made at distribution by U. S. organizations, in order to preserve present happy relations.
469
Sept. 6 From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Arrival of destroyers with food supplies at Yokohama; evacuation of Americans from Yokohama and Tokyo.
470
Sept. 7 From the Japanese Ambassador
Expression of appreciation and gratitude on behalf of Japanese for U. S. aid and sympathy.
470
Sept. 8 From the Acting Chairman of the American Red Cross
Measures for immediate relief in Japanese disaster; plans for raising 5-million-dollar relief fund.
470
Sept. 9 From the Japanese Embassy
Japan’s expression of gratitude to Government, President, and people of United States for their generosity and sympathy.
472
Sept. 10 (27) From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Opinion that no relief expeditions should be sent from United States; that relief supplies should be delivered to Japanese authorities for distribution.
473
Sept. 10 To the Japanese Ambassador
Acknowledgment of Ambassador’s personal letter of September 7.
474
Sept. 11 (150) To the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Concurrence in view that relief supplies should be delivered to Japanese authorities for distribution.
474
Sept. 11 From the Japanese Ambassador
Japan’s message of thanks to American Red Cross for generous and effective measures of assistance.
474
Sept. 11 (154) To the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Instructions to convey to Prime Minister the President’s appreciation of Japan’s friendly message and the assurance of sympathy of American people for people of Japan.
475
Sept. 13 From the Chairman of the American Red Cross
Resume of Japanese disaster relief operations.
475
Sept. 15 (58) From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Presentation of draft for million dollars to Prime Minister for Earthquake Relief Board.
477
Undated [Rec’d Sept. 17] From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Report that food emergency has been met and that Japanese desire to handle problem of distribution themselves. Japanese appreciation of assistance rendered by U. S. Navy. |
477
[Page LIII]Sept. 18 (173) To the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Red Cross confirmation of appointment of General McCoy as director general of Red Cross activities in Japan, acting as liaison under Ambassador, with understanding that purchasing and distribution of supplies will be made by Imperial Japanese Emergency Relief Bureau.
478
Undated [Rec’d Sept. 19] From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
For Payne, American Red Cross: Desire of Japanese Cabinet to be consulted as to needs before further relief shipments are made, and refusal of offer of personnel.
478
Sept. 21 (182) To the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Telegram from vice president of American Association at Kobe (text printed) appealing for 5 percent of U. S. funds for relief of foreigners in Japan. Red Cross statement (text printed) that general relief is to be extended through Japanese Relief Bureau to all disaster victims and special assistance to U. S. citizens through officials of State Department. Instructions to pass upon all requests for aid, with assistance of General McCoy.
479
Sept. 22 (14–E) From the Ambassador in Japan
Departure of Asiatic Fleet; favorable impression on Japanese of efficiency and resourcefulness of U. S. Navy; commendation of work of Admiral Anderson.
480
Sept. 22 (185) To the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
From Payne, American Red Cross: Details of plan to extend special relief to U. S. citizens through State Department officials and general relief through Japanese Relief Bureau.
480
Sept. 24 (10–E) From the Ambassador in Japan
Description of disaster, with detailed account of Embassy’s efforts to provide relief as only diplomatic mission remaining on duty in Tokyo, creating lasting Japanese friendship for United States through prompt and sympathetic action.
481
Sept. 29 To the Japanese Ambassador
Expression of appreciation for Japanese assistance to Americans, and assurance of U. S. willingness to be of further service if necessary.
484
Undated [Rec’d Oct. 3] (105) From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
For American Red Cross: Résumé of Japanese Government’s activities since disaster and U. S. relation thereto.
485
Oct. 13 (219) To the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
From Payne, American Red Cross: Purchase of 2½ million dollars’ worth supplies as requested; availability of 3 million dollars for expenditure.
486
Oct. 18 (78) From the Japanese Ambassador
Expression of appreciation of aid given; information that present needs have been met; hope for U. S. good will in prosecution of reconstruction work.
486
[Page LIV]Oct. 30 (84) From the Japanese Ambassador
Expression of gratitude for services rendered by Admiral Anderson and the naval forces under his command and by General McCoy and the relief corps under him.
487
Nov. 3 To the Japanese Ambassador
Acknowledgment of Japan’s note expressing gratitude for services rendered by Admiral Anderson and General McCoy.
488
Nov. 6 (56–E) From the Chargé in Japan
Estimate of total value of American contributions for Japanese relief; sources from which contributions were made.
488
Nov. 13 (171) From the Chargé in Japan (tel.)
Japanese acquiescence in suggestion that remainder of U. S. relief fund be used for permanent relief memorial, indicating a memorial hospital would be suitable. Ambassador’s opinion that amount to be expended be limited to 1 million dollars.
489
Nov. 22 (253) To the Chargé in Japan (tel.)
From Fieser, American Red Cross: Information that Red Cross would approve expenditure of a million dollars for hospital for continuing needs growing out of disaster, provided adequate sum remained after all relief requirements had been met.
489
Nov. 24 To the French Ambassador
Message of appreciation to captain of André Lebon for aid extended to U. S. citizens in Yokohama harbor at time of earthquake.
490
Nov. 24 To the British Chargé
Message of appreciation to captain of Empress of Australia for humanitarian service in rescuing Americans in Yokohama harbor at time of earthquake.
490
Nov. 28 (1028) From the British Chargé
Expression of gratitude for U. S. assistance to British subjects at time of earthquake.
491
Dec. 1 (262) To the Chargé in Japan (tel.)
From Fieser, American Red Cross: Suggestion that plan be changed so that balance of relief funds would be divided into three parts, using 1½ millions for construction of hospital, same amount for endowment, and remainder for relief supplies. Insistence that plan come from Japan with full approval.
492
Dec. 2 (183) From the Chargé in Japan (tel.)
For Red Cross: Intimation that Japanese desire balance of relief funds to be divided into three parts and expended as suggested.
492
Dec. 8 (268) To the Chargé in Japan (tel.)
From Fieser, American Red Cross: Authorization to inform Japanese Relief Bureau that Red Cross will honor request for 3 million dollars for hospital and endowment, and also requisition for supplies.
493
[Page LV]Dec. 12 (101) From the Japanese Ambassador
Resolutions of House of Peers and House of Representatives, December 12 (texts printed) expressing gratitude to foreign nations for aid and sympathy extended at time of earthquake.
493
Dec. 13 (272) To the Chargé in Japan (tel.)
Information that Red Cross has no intention to retain control of hospital endowment fund, as rumored, but purposes to turn it over to Japanese Red Cross or other agency as a permanent endowment.
494
Dec. 17 (141–E) From the Chargé in Japan
Statistical report of loss of lives and property in earthquake.
494
Dec. 19 (197) From the Chargé in Japan (tel.)
Japan’s request for 3 million dollars for hospital and endowment and 1½ million dollars for direct social service work.
495
Dec. 24 (157–E) From the Chargé in Japan
Transmittal of book containing letter of thanks with signatures of about a half million Japanese.
496
Dec. 29 (282) To the Chargé in Japan (tel.)
From Fieser, American Red Cross: Authorization to make donation of 1½ million dollars to Japanese Relief Bureau for direct social service work among destitute refugees. Information that 3-million-doilar fund for hospital and endowment is available.
496
1924 Undated [Rec’d Jan. 4] American National Red Cross Japanese Relief Fund Receipts, Expenditures, and Commitments, January 2, 1924
Report in detail including total and balance available.
497
Mar. 8 (36) To the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Reported Japanese misapprehension that hospital proposal could not be declined without giving offense to U. S. donors and U. S. Government; instructions to deny influence by U. S. Government, if misapprehension exists; information that Red Cross desires Japanese to use fund as they deem best.
498
Mar. 11 (48) From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Assurance that hospital proposal was made by Japanese authorities and that they desire to construct hospital with relief funds.
498
Mar. 13 (49) From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
For Red Cross: Delivery to Foreign Minister of draft on American Red Cross for 3 million dollars for erection and endowment of memorial hospital. Japan’s expression of appreciation.
499
Apr. 2 (404–E) From the Ambassador in Japan
Note from Japanese Foreign Minister (excerpt printed) acknowledging receipt of funds for establishing memorial hospital in Tokyo, and expressing thanks.
499
May 2 (44) From the Japanese Ambassador
Transmittal of three volumes of letters written by Japanese students expressing thanks for relief action taken by Americans. Request that volumes be presented to President.
500
[Page LVI]May 8 To the Japanese Ambassador
Expression of appreciation on behalf of the President for sentiment expressed in three volumes of letters presented to him.
501
July 3 (112) To the Chargé in Japan (tel.)
Message from Red Cross to be transmitted to appropriate Japanese authorities at Chargé’s discretion (text printed), stating that unexpended balance of $464,992.64 is at disposal of Japanese authorities.
501
Sept. 5 (693–E) From the Chargé in Japan
Report of Social Bureau of Home Office on loss of life and property in earthquake.
501
Sept. 29 (247) From the Chargé in Japan (tel.)
Japanese note (excerpt printed) stating decision of Japanese authorities to use unexpended balance of relief funds for another memorial hospital and seamen’s home in Yokohama.
502
Oct. 22 (172) To the Chargé in Japan (tel.)
Authorization to turn over amount of unexpended balance of relief funds to appropriate Japanese authorities.
503

Unfavorable Attitude of the Department of State Toward American Loans to Foreign Enterprises Competing With American Enterprises in Third Countries

Date and number Subject Page
1922 Dec. 16 Memorandum by the Economic Adviser of the Department of State
Statement made to National City Co. of New York disapproving loan to Oriental Development Co. of Tokyo for development work in South Sea Islands, Singapore, Straits Settlements, Manchuria, and Mongolia on grounds of possible competition with U. S. enterprises.
503
1923 Feb. 17 From the President of the Riggs National Bank
Letter from National City Co., February 16 (text printed) explaining that proposed loan is sanctioned by Japanese Government, that it would be used only within Japan and colonies for productive purposes, and that specific purpose of Oriental Development Co. is to develop Korea agriculturally.
504
Feb. 23 To the President of the Riggs National Bank
No objection to proposed loan to Oriental Development Co.
505
Mar. 5 From the Assistant Secretary of the Treasury
No objection to proposed loan to Oriental Development Co.
506
Mar. 6 From the Assistant to the Secretary of Commerce
No objection to proposed loan to Oriental Development Co.
506
[Page LVII]Mar. 26 (29) From the Chargé in Japan (tel.)
Signature, March 24, of contract for loan from National City Co. to Oriental Development Co. for equivalent of 40 million yen.
507
May 23 To the President of the Riggs National Bank
Disapproval of proposed financing for South Manchuria Railway Co., citing Department’s policy against use of U. S. credit in third countries where such loans may be prejudicial to American enterprises.
507
June 7 From the President of the Riggs National Bank
Inquiry of National City Co. whether Department would object to negotiation and flotation of loan to South Manchuria Railway Co. if entire proceeds were spent in United States.
508
June 15 To the President of the Riggs National Bank
Explanation that expenditure of entire proceeds in United States would not justify approval of proposed loan to South Manchuria Railway Co.
509

Agreement Between the United States and Japan, Signed August 23, 1923, Further Extending the Duration of the Arbitration Convention of May 5, 1908

Date and number Subject Page
1923 Aug. 23 Agreement between the United States of America and Japan
Extending for another 5 years the arbitration convention concluded May 5, 1908, and renewed in 1913 and 1918.
510
Aug. 23 To the Japanese Ambassador
U. S. understanding that, if Senate assents to U. S. adhesion to protocol of 1920 creating Permanent Court of International Justice, Japan will not be averse to considering modification of arbitration convention or to making a separate agreement to provide for reference to Permanent Court of disputes mentioned in convention.
511
Aug. 23 From the Japanese Ambassador
Confirmation of U. S. understanding.
511

LATVIA

Extradition Treaty Between the United States and Latvia, Signed October 16, 1923

Date and number Subject Page
1923 Oct. 16 Treaty between the United States of America and Latvia
For extradition of fugitives from justice.
513
[Page LVIII]

LUXEMBURG

Accrediting of the American Ambassador to Belgium as Representative of the United States Near the Grand Ducal Government

Date and number Subject Page
1922 Dec. 19 (1148) From the Chargé in the Netherlands
Recommendation that combination of missions for Netherlands and Luxemburg be discontinued and that Ambassador to Belgium be accredited as Minister to Luxemburg, because of close economic relationship between Belgium and Luxemburg.
519
1923 Jan. 12 (470) To the Chargé in the Netherlands
Information that recommendation has been made to Congress that Ambassador to Belgium be accredited as Minister to Luxemburg.
520
Mar. 21 (16) To the Chargé in the Netherlands (tel.)
Instructions to inform Foreign Minister of Luxemburg of U. S. intention to accredit Ambassador to Belgium as Minister to Luxemburg; also to request agrement of Fletcher.
(Footnote: Presentation by Fletcher of letter of credence to Luxemburg, October 29, 1923.)
520

MEXICO

Recognition of the Government of General Obregón by the United States and the Resumption of Diplomatic Relations

Date and number Subject Page
1923 Mar. 7 (21) To the Chargé in Mexico (tel.)
President Harding’s favorable attitude toward suggestion by General Ryan, of Texas Oil Co., that commission composed of two representatives from each country be appointed by United States and Mexico to discuss problems.
522
Apr. 5 (7270) From the Chargé in Mexico
Foreign Minister’s note of March 31 (text printed) explaining General Obregón’s policy concerning regulation of article 27 of the Constitution and indemnification for expropriated lands.
523
Apr. 14 (23) From the Chargé in Mexico (tel.)
General Obregón’s letter of April 9 to General Ryan (text printed) accepting proposal to appoint commission and offering hospitality of Mexico City to commissioners. Foreign Minister’s suggestion that proposal be published simultaneously in both countries; request for text of U. S. announcement.
532
Apr. 17 (30) To the Chargé in Mexico (tel.)
Draft of proposed identic statement for press (text printed) announcing commission to meet at Mexico City. Information that reference to “governments” and “presidents” has been purposely avoided in text; that U. S. commissioners will be Charles Beecher Warren and John Barton Payne.
533
Apr. 19 (24) From the Chargé in Mexico (tel.)
Draft of identic statement for press proposed by Foreign Minister (text printed). Information that Foreign Minister could not be induced to omit “governments of” from text.
533
[Page LIX]Apr. 20 (31) To the Chargé in Mexico (tel.)
Acceptance of Foreign Minister’s draft statement for press, subject to explanatory statement (text printed) that wording is not to be understood as according U. S. recognition to present regime in Mexico.
534
Apr. 21 (25) From the Chargé in Mexico (tel.)
Date for publication of identic statement in Mexico City, if satisfactory to Department.
535
Apr. 22 (32) To the Chargé in Mexico (tel.)
Instructions to state that date for publication of identic statement is satisfactory to Department.
535
Apr. 25 (29) From the Chargé in Mexico (tel.)
Publication of names of Mexican commissioners.
535
May 5 (2431) To the Chargé in Mexico
Instructions to Commissioner Warren, May 5 (text printed) to advise representatives of Belgium, France, Great Britain, Poland, and Cuba of developments arising out of conferences with Mexican commissioners.
(Sent also to U. S. Commissioner Payne.)
535
May 8 To United States Commissioner Warren
Dossier of principal correspondence between Department and Mexico relative to safeguarding U. S. property rights in Mexico, especially against confiscation under Constitution of 1917, as condition for recognition of Obregón regime (excerpts printed), and review of situation; instructions to discuss assurances against confiscation of subsoil interests, restoration of or reparation for expropriated lands, and claims conventions, and to investigate terms of future organic law relative to petroleum.
(Sent also to Commissioner Payne.)
536
Aug. 12 (110) To the Chargé in Mexico (tel.)
For Warren and Payne: Plan to inform British, French, Belgian, and Cuban missions in Washington of results of negotiations prior to official announcement; instructions to make no public statement of details.
549
Aug. 13 (77) From the Chargé in Mexico (tel.)
From Warren: Agreement with Mexican authorities not to release conventions or minutes until both Governments decide on concerted action.
549
Aug. 22 (119) To the Chargé in Mexico (tel.)
Note for Foreign Minister (text printed) approving recommendations of U. S. commissioners. Suggestion of procedure for resumption of diplomatic relations and signature of claims conventions.
550
Aug. 25 From the First Secretary of the Mexican Embassy
Telegram from Foreign Minister, August 24 (text printed) conveying approval by Obregón of recommendations of Mexican commissioners; proposing identic press statement (text printed); and suggesting that signature of conventions follow date of resumption of diplomatic relations by 10 or 15 days.
551
[Page LX]Aug. 25 (121) To the Chargé in Mexico (tel.)
Approval of press statement proposed by Mexico; insistence that claims conventions be signed within 1 week after resumption of diplomatic relations.
552
Aug. 27 (85) From the Chargé in Mexico (tel.)
Foreign Minister’s agreement as to date for signing conventions; desire to release press statement of resumption of relations simultaneously with United States on August 31 at noon, Washington time.
553
Aug. 28 To the Belgian Chargé
Procedure for resumption of formal diplomatic relations between United States and Mexico, including announcement for press (text printed).
(Sent, mutatis mutandis, to Cuban, French, British, and Polish representatives.)
554
Aug. 28 (124) To the Chargé in Mexico (tel.)
Agreement for simultaneous release of announcement regarding resumption of diplomatic relations.
554
Sept. 3 (91) From the Chargé in Mexico (tel.)
Presentation of letter of credence by Chargé and acceptance by Foreign Minister.
555
Sept. 4 (134) To the Chargé in Mexico (tel.)
Presentation and acceptance of letter of credence of Téllez as Mexican Chargé d’Affaires ad interim.
555
Sept. 8 General Claims Convention between the United States of America and Mexico
For adjustment of claims by citizens of each country against the other since signing on July 4, 1868, of claims convention, without including claims for losses or damages growing out of revolutionary disturbances in Mexico.
555
Sept. 10 Special Claims Convention between the United States of America and Mexico
For adjustment of claims arising from losses or damages suffered by Americans through revolutionary acts within period from November 20, 1910, to May 31, 1920, inclusive.
560
Nov. 7 (2539) To the Chargé in Mexico
Transmittal of volumes of minutes of conferences in Mexico City between U. S. and Mexican commissioners; U. S. public statement, September 8 (text printed) explaining essential features of general and special claims conventions.
564

Sale of War Material to the Government of Mexico

Date and number Subject Page
1923 Dec. 15 (135) From the Chargé in Mexico (tel.)
Mexican inquiry whether United States will consider sale to Mexico of two discarded naval cruisers.
567
[Page LXI]Dec. 17 (196) To the Chargé in Mexico (tel.)
Instructions to state that sale of war vessels to any foreign government is prohibited by Treaty for Limitation of Naval Armament.
568
Undated Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with the Mexican Chargé, December 26, 1923
U. S. unwillingness to sell to Mexican Government vessels which could be used as war vessels, as contrary to spirit of naval treaty; promise to consider suggestion that United States sell to Mexican Government certain guns and rifles.
568
Dec. 28 (101) From the Minister in Guatemala (tel.)
Authorization of general manager of International Railways to sell oil to Mexican Government at Ayutla, provided no objection is made by Guatemalan Government or U. S. Minister.
568
Dec. 29 (71) To the Minister in Guatemala (tel.)
No objection to sale of oil to recognized Government of Mexico.
569
Undated Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with the Mexican Chargé and the Mexican Commissioner on Confidential Mission in the United States, December 29, 1923
Review of previous conversation with Mexican Chargé, and information that request concerning sale of rifles to Mexican Government is being favorably considered.
569
Dec. 29 (220) To the Chargé in Mexico (tel.)
Instructions to inform Foreign Office concerning U. S. statement given to press (text printed) in explanation of U. S. willingness to sell limited quantity of war material to Mexican Government.
569
Dec. 31 From Señor Enrique Seldner
Protest of Provisional Government of Mexico against reported U. S. intention to deliver munitions to Obregón Government.
570

Authorized Statement by the Federal District Attorney in Boston That the United States Had Not Ceased To Recognize Mexico as an “International Person”

Date and number Subject Page
1923 May 15 To the Attorney General
Action by United States of Mexico in state courts of Massachusetts against Mariano Viamonte y Fernandez to sequestrate certain property claimed to belong to Mexican Government, right of latter to take action being questioned by defendant. Secretary’s request that statement be made before court by U. S. attorney (text printed) affirming that Mexico is recognized as “international person” although there is no intercourse between the two States at present.
571
May 17 From the Attorney General
Information that U. S. attorney at Boston has been directed to appear in court and make desired statement.
572
[Page LXII]July 14 To the Clerk of the Superior Court of Essex County, Massachusetts
Request for copy of decision in case of United States of Mexico v. Mariano Viamonte y Fernandez.
572
June 29 Decision Rendered by the Justice of the Superior Court of Essex County, Massachusetts
Sustaining right of United States of Mexico to take action against Mariano Viamonte y Fernandez in Massachusetts state court.
573

Suit by the Oliver American Trading Company Against the Government of Mexico in the United States District Court for Southern New York

Date and number Subject Page
1923 Sept. 8 To the United States District Judge at New York
Information that negotiations have terminated in U. S. recognition of existing Government of Mexico with accompanying steps to resume diplomatic representation.
574
Oct. 8 To the United States District Judge at New York
Information that, in response to inquiries of Mr. Oliver, Department is replying that U. S. recognition of Government of Mexico is complete and unconditional.
575
Oct. 19 From Mr. Ernest Angell of Messrs. Hardin & Hess
Judge Knox’s decision granting dismissal of action and vacating attachment on ground defendants were entitled to immunity accorded friendly foreign sovereign. Intention of plaintiff to appeal to Supreme Court and to apply for stay and for maintenance of levies of attachment on defendant’s property; request for cooperation of U. S. attorney at New York.
575
Oct. 23 To Mr. Ernest Angell of Messrs. Hardin & Hess
Information that, as Judge Knox is fully advised, action requested of Department is unnecessary.
576

MOROCCO

Discussion of the Future Status of Tangier

Date and number Subject Page
1923 Sept. 22 (405) From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
Incorrect news stories of Embassy representations to Foreign Office regarding future status of Tangier; and of U. S. identic note to France, Great Britain, and Spain urging principle of open door.
578
Sept. 24 (261) To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
Explanation that news story of identic note had its origin in press conference where reference was made to a note presented to France in 1922.
578
[Page LXIII]Oct. 1 (417) From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
French proposal of internationalization of local municipal administration of Tangier including port, and introduction of mixed tribunals; also Sultan’s edicts to be operative only after acceptance by representatives of the powers.
579
Oct. 14 (438) From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
Foreign Office acceptance (text printed) of French invitation to send representatives to conference at Paris, October 22, to discuss future status of Tangier, conference to be limited to representatives from Great Britain, France, and Spain.
579
Oct. 20 (290) To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
Message for Foreign Office (text printed) as reminder of U. S. interest in maintaining open door at Tangier, and expressing the presumption that contemplated conference will do nothing to interfere with this principle.
(Instructions to repeat to Paris and Madrid.)
580
Oct. 23 To the Portuguese Legation
Reply to Portuguese inquiry concerning U. S. attitude toward conference.
(Footnote: Similar reply made October 24 to an Italian inquiry.)
580
Oct. 23 (419) From the Chargé in France (tel.)
French proposal to abolish diplomatic agencies at Tangier, substituting consuls general at Rabat, and to maintain consuls at Tangier to represent respective governments in internationalized municipal administration; oral assurance that U. S. rights will be continued in Tangier.
581
Oct. 27 (309) To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
Instructions to make inquiry concerning British attitude toward French program for Tangier; right of United States, pending actual annexation, to continue diplomatic relationship with Morocco under international law and by virtue of certain treaties.
581
Oct. 30 (3637) From the Chargé in France
French written assurances of maintenance of open door in Tangier and submission of results of conference to all signatories of act of Algeciras except Germany and Austria. Expression of hope that United States will give its natural sequence to recognition of French protectorate over Morocco and cancel capitulations in French zone.
582
Oct. 31 (477) From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
British endeavor to obtain complete and independent internationalization of Tangier in opposition to French attempt to create nominal internationalization under French control.
583
Nov. 28 (429) To the Chargé in France (tel.)
Instructions to present informally U. S. attitude that surrender of capitulatory rights in French zone is not a natural sequence to recognition of protectorate or to adherence to convention for internationalization of Tangier.
(Instructions to repeat to London and Madrid.)
584
[Page LXIV]Dec. 1 (487) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Report that draft convention regarding Tangier will be ready within 15 days; outline of provisions. Further assurance of French that U. S. rights and open door will be maintained.
584
Dec. 7 (445) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Instructions to inform Foreign Office that provisions of draft convention concerning Tangier are not satisfactory to U. S. Government.
585
Dec. 19 (523) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Signature of Tangier convention. Eventual administration of port by international company, permitting U. S. participation if desired.
585

Consent by the United States to the Payment of Consumption Taxes by American Citizens and Protégés in the Spanish and French Zones

Date and number Subject Page
1923 Mar. 23 (117) From the Diplomatic Agent and Consul General at Tangier
Refusal of Spanish authorities at port of Tetuan to release sugar imported by Bergel, U. S. protégé unless 10 percent consumption tax is paid. Spanish High Commissioner’s note, March 8 (text printed) giving notice of consumption tax on sugar, tea, and coffee in Spanish zone and requesting U. S. consent thereto.
585
Apr. 21 (11) To the Diplomatic Agent and Consul General at Tangier (tel.)
Request for opinion whether consumption tax would affect Americans more unfavorably than nationals of most favored nation.
587
Apr. 28 From the Diplomatic Agent and Consul General at Tangier (tel.)
Exemption of British subjects from tax, pending British recognition of legality. Continuation of collection from U. S. citizens and protégés.
587
May 8 (260) To the Diplomatic Agent and Consul General at Tangier
Note presented to Spanish Ambassador stating that United States is prepared to consent to tax if applied equitably and if other governments acquiesce; request also for reimbursement of amounts collected and exemption of U. S. citizens and protégés pending such consent. Instructions to report when British acquiescence to tax is given.
587
June 26 From the Chargé at Tangier (tel.)
British regulation ordering subjects and protégés to pay tax. Nonpayment by nationals and protégés of Netherlands.
588
June 29 (14) To the Chargé at Tangier (tel.)
Instructions to confer with representatives of governments whose nationals and protégés do not pay tax, and to inform Department when such governments consent to imposition.
589
July 4 From the Chargé at Tangier (tel.)
Information that nationals and protégés of all governments except Netherlands are paying tax; request for authorization to direct U. S. nationals and protégés to pay without awaiting action of Netherlands Government.
589
[Page LXV]July 11 (17) To the Chargé at Tangier (tel.)
Desire for opinion as to feasibility and method to be followed in securing deposit with Agency of amount of taxes improperly collected from U. S. citizens and protégés.
589
July 16 From the Chargé at Tangier (tel.)
Report that tax has been returned in only instance of improper collection, i. e., in Bergel case; but that authorities are holding shipment of gin consigned to American semsar, Cohen, for payment of duty.
590
July 19 (19) To the Chargé at Tangier (tel.)
Instructions to inform Spanish Agency at Tangier and U. S. citizens and protégés that Department cannot support refusal to pay consumption tax after release of Cohen’s shipment.
590
July 31 (20) To the Chargé at Tangier (tel.)
Instructions to make proper notification of U. S. consent to tax, if information is true that this tax does not apply to Cohen’s shipment and that no attempt has been made to collect tax on shipment.
590
Aug. 13 From the Chargé at Tangier (tel.)
Opinion that Cohen’s shipment might be subject of separate representations, as alcohol comes under dahir issued before tax in question. Notice to U. S. citizens and protégés of consent by United States to tax on sugar, tea, and coffee. Application of tax to subjects of Netherlands.
591
Sept. 14 (169) From the Chargé at Tangier
Inquiry whether United States will consent to increase in rate of consumption taxes applicable to American ressortissants in French zone.
591
Nov. 12 (271) To the Diplomatic Agent and Consul General at Tangier
U. S. consent to increased tax rates applicable to American ressortissants in French zone, with certain reservations.
594
Nov. 17 (21) To the Ambassador in Spain
Note for Foreign Office (text printed) conveying Department’s conditional consent to tax on alcohol in Spanish zone.
595
Dec. 24 (174) From the Ambassador in Spain
Report concerning presentation of note conveying U. S. conditional consent to tax on alcohol in Spanish zone.
596

Interference by the French Residency General With the Certification of American Protégés

Date and number Subject Page
1922 July 24 (20) From the Diplomatic Agent and Consul General at Tangier
Objections raised by French Residency General to designation of Ben Said as semsar of Vacuum Oil Co. at Salee, on ground that semsar sought U. S. protection to secure political immunity. Request for instructions.
596
[Page LXVI]Oct. 10 (221) To the Diplomatic Agent and Consul General at Tangier
Instructions to investigate circumstances of Ben Said’s semsarship and to submit further report.
597
Dec. 26 (241) To the Diplomatic Agent and Consul General at Tangier
Instructions to inform French Residency General that investigation has revealed no evidence of French charges and therefore the United States regards Ben Said as entitled to rights and privileges of semsar and U. S. protection will be extended to him.
598
1923 June 14 (144) From the Chargé at Tangier
Refusal of Maghzen to recognize Ben Said as being under U. S. protection. Excerpt from French Residency General note of June 8, 1923 (text printed) conveying impression that U. S. Agent had given assurances that name of Ben Said would not appear on U. S. list for 1923. Request for information and instructions.
600
Sept. 20 (266) To the Diplomatic Agent and Consul General at Tangier
Instructions to state to French Residency General that assurances were given that name of Ben Said would be removed from U. S. list for 1923 only if investigation proved he had used U. S. protection to further political activities; and that investigation has not been completed.
(Footnote: Closing of depot at Salee by Vacuum Oil Co. and request for cancelation of Ben Said’s semsarship.)
602
Oct. 26 (180) From the Diplomatic Agent and Consul General at Tangier
Note from French Residency General, October 2 (text printed) maintaining decisions of Maghzen relative to list of U. S. protégés.
603

NICARAGUA

American Assistance in the Revision and Administration of the Electoral Laws of Nicaragua

Date and number Subject Page
1923 Jan. 18 (4) To the Minister in Nicaragua (tel.)
Instructions to urge enactment by Nicaraguan Congress of election law drafted by Dr. Harold W. Dodds.
605
Mar. 17 (22) From the Minister in Nicaragua (tel.)
Passage by Congress of election law drafted by Dodds.
605
Undated Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with the Nicaraguan Minister, September 28, 1923
Secretary’s recommendations regarding Nicaraguan situation, proposing withdrawal of U. S. Marines after new government takes office, aid by Dodds and assistants to secure effective operation of election law, and U. S. cooperation in establishing constabulary; Minister’s conditional acceptance.
606
[Page LXVII]Oct. 8 (102) To the Chargé in Nicaragua
Note for Foreign Office (text printed) conveying information that U. S. Marines will be withdrawn in January 1925 upon installation of government; suggesting that Dodds and assistants be requested to aid in installation of electoral system; and offering assistance in organizing and training constabulary. Information concerning U. S. position; U. S. intention to pay expenses of Dodds and assistants.
607
Nov. 20 (82) From the Minister in Nicaragua (tel.)
Willingness of President Martinez to accept services of Dodds and assistants in starting new election system; doubt that their expenses should be paid by United States. Opinion that U. S. observers will not be desired at elections.
612
Nov. 23 (52) To the Minister of Nicaragua (tel.)
Instructions to inform President Martinez that, if Nicaraguan Government desires to pay expenses of electoral experts, United States will have no objection.
612
Dec. 13 (57) To the Minister in Nicaragua (tel.)
Instructions as to arrangements for services of Dodds and assistants.
613
Dec. 14 (93) From the Minister in Nicaragua (tel.)
Acceptance by Nicaraguan Government of U. S. proposals relative to withdrawal of U. S. Marines and electoral assistance by Dodds; desire to establish constabulary if Financial Plan of 1920 can be modified to provide for maintenance.
613

Question of the Status of Great Corn and Little Corn Islands

Date and number Subject Page
1923 Oct. 1 From the Secretary of the Treasury
Request for opinion, in connection with inquiry by exporter desiring free entry of coconuts from islands, whether Little Corn and Great Corn Islands are part of United States; citation of provision in treaty of 1914 leasing islands to United States for 99 years.
614
Oct. 29 To the Secretary of the Treasury
Information that in international sense islands may be deemed part of United States but that United States has not taken possession of islands under lease and Nicaragua has continued to exercise jurisdiction therein. Request to be informed as to policy of Treasury Department regarding islands.
615
Nov. 3 From the Secretary of the Treasury
Opinion that, for purposes of tariff act of 1922, islands should be treated as foreign country.
615
[Page LXVIII]

NORWAY

Payment by the United States of the Award to Norway Rendered by the Arbitration Tribunal Set Up Under the Special Agreement of June 30, 1921

Date and number Subject Page
1923 Jan. 11 To President Harding
Report on arbitration award made October 13, 1922, in claims of Norwegians against United States arising out of requisitions of U. S. Emergency Fleet Corp.; letter of U. S. arbitrator explaining reasons for absenting himself when award was announced (text printed); criticisms of award. Recommendation that award be accepted and that matter be presented to Congress for necessary appropriations.
617
Jan. 12 From President Harding
Desirability of accepting award and making payment. Submission of matter to Congress for necessary appropriations.
625
Feb. 26 To the Norwegian Minister
Draft on U. S. Treasurer for payment of award covering Norwegian claims; U. S. refusal to accept certain bases of award as declaratory of international law or as binding upon Government as precedents.
626
July 19 From the Norwegian Chargé
Information that Norway holds award to be correct in form as well as realities.
628

Agreement Between the United States and Norway, Signed November 26, 1923, Further Extending the Duration of the Arbitration Convention of April 4, 1908

Date and number Subject Page
1923 Nov. 26 Agreement between the United States of America and Norway
Extending for another 5 years the arbitration convention concluded April 4, 1908, and renewed in 1913 and 1918.
629
Nov. 26 To the Norwegian Minister
U. S. understanding that, if Senate assents to U. S. adhesion to protocol of 1920 creating Permanent Court of International Justice, Norway will not be averse to considering modification of arbitration convention or to making of separate agreement to provide for reference to Permanent Court of disputes mentioned in convention.
630
Nov. 26 From the Norwegian Minister
Confirmation of U. S. understanding.
631

Statement by Norway of Its Paramount Interest in the Island of Jan Mayen in the Arctic Ocean

Date and number Subject Page
1920 Feb. 9 From the Norwegian Chargé
Notification of occupation of Island of Jan Mayen by Norwegian citizen in 1917.
631
[Page LXIX]Feb. 26 To the Norwegian Chargé
Communication to appropriate branch of Government of notification regarding occupation of Island of Jan Mayen by Norwegian citizen in 1917.
632
1922 Apr. 21 From the Norwegian Minister
Notification of annexation of Island of Jan Mayen by Norwegian citizen in name of Norwegian Meteorological Institute, following occupation beginning November 12, 1921.
632
Nov. 9 (66) To the Minister in Norway
Instructions to inquire whether Norway claims ownership of Island of Jan Mayen, and if so to report full details.
633
1923 July 5 (244) From the Minister in Norway
Note from Foreign Office, June 30 (text printed) stating that Norway regards Island of Jan Mayen as terra nullius; but assumes that, because of Norway’s special interests, no other power would attempt to annex island.
633

Arrangement Between the United States and Norway for Reciprocal Exemption From Income Tax on Shipping

Date and number Subject Page
1922 Feb. 13 From the Norwegian Minister
Information that foreign shipping is exempt from taxation in Norway, in reply to U. S. notification that Revenue Act for 1921 exempts from taxation ships of a foreign country granting equivalent exemption to U. S. citizens. Expression of hope that tax exemption for Norwegian shipowners will be retroactive to 1917.
635
Feb. 28 From the Norwegian Minister
Further information concerning freedom of foreign shipping from taxation in Norway. Reiteration of hope that tax exemption for Norwegian shipowners will be retroactive to 1917.
635
Nov. 14 To the Norwegian Minister
Information that under U. S. revenue act of 1921 Norwegian shipping corporations are exempt from income and excess and war profits taxes but are not exempt from capital stock tax.
636

PANAMA

Announcement by the United States of Intention To Abrogate the Taft Agreement

Date and number Subject Page
1923 Undated Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with the Panaman Minister, January 4, 1923
Cordial desire of each to open negotiations for new arrangement to replace Taft Agreement.
638
[Page LXX]Jan. 3 From the Panaman Minister
Observations concerning negotiation of treaty of 1903, Taft Agreement, and present situation existing in Panama; list of controversial questions to be adjusted by new arrangement to replace Taft Agreement.
638
Oct. 15 To the Panaman Minister
Reply to Panaman Minister’s observations on negotiation of treaty of 1903 and the Taft Agreement; discussion seriatim of controversial questions raised by Minister.
648
Oct. 15 To President Coolidge
Passage, February 6, of Senate Joint Resolution 259 authorizing abrogation of Taft Agreement. Request for authorization to notify Panama that United States will abrogate agreement May 1, 1924, thus allowing 6 months for negotiations for new arrangement.
675
Oct. 15 From President Coolidge
Authorization to inform Panama that the United States will abrogate Taft Agreement on May 1, 1924.
676
Oct. 18 To the Minister in Panama
Instructions to inform Foreign Office that, in virtue of Senate Joint Resolution 259 (text printed), United States will abrogate Taft Agreement May 1, 1924.
676
Nov. 17 (352) From the Minister in Panama
Foreign Minister’s note, November 14 (text printed) asserting that Taft Agreement is a true treaty and therefore cannot be abrogated by United States without Panama’s consent; and expressing reservations as to sufficiency of 6–month period for negotiating new arrangement.
678
Dec. 14 (150) To the Minister in Panama
Note for Foreign Minister (text printed) maintaining that Taft Agreement is merely a modus vivendi to serve during construction of Canal; quoting statements of Taft in support of this view; and expressing hope that negotiations will not be protracted beyond date specified.
679
Undated Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with the Panaman Minister, December 15, 1923
Secretary’s statement that, if agreement is effected by May 1, 1924, United States will stand on treaty rights without Taft Agreement; suggestion that negotiations be conducted by Canal Zone authorities and Panaman representatives; assertion that United States would never surrender rights acquired under treaty of 1903 but would enter into negotiations regarding other matters.
682
[Page LXXI]

Loan of $4,500,000 to Panama by American Bankers

Date and number Subject Page
1922 Dec. 15 (66) From the Minister in Panama (tel.)
Section of bill introduced in National Assembly (text printed) providing for transfer to Panama National Bank of 6-million-dollar Canal fund on deposit in United States.
687
Dec. 28 (58) To the Minister in Panama (tel.)
Instructions to make representations to President against signing of bill, if passed, and to remind him of Panaman promise to keep Canal fund intact and safely invested to stabilize Government finances.
688
1923 Feb. 17 (14) From the Minister in Panama (tel.)
President’s approval of bill authorizing loan of 4½ million dollars for road building; elimination from bill of section providing for withdrawal from the United States of 6–milliondollar Canal fund.
688
Mar. 9 (23) From the Minister in Panama (tel.)
Government’s request for loan of $100,000 from bankers in Panama to continue program of road construction. Willingness of bankers to make loan if Department has no objections.
689
Mar. 15 (18) To the Minister in Panama (tel.)
Inquiry as to names of banking interests involved and whether Government regards $100,000 as advance on 4½-million-dollar loan.
689
Mar. 16 (27) From the Minister in Panama (tel.)
Urgent need of loan for road construction; beneficial nature of proposed larger loan for same purpose. Subfiscal agent’s suggestion that Panama secure $100,000 from International Banking Corp., Banco Nacional, and American Foreign Banking Corp., to be paid for out of 4½-million-dollar loan.
689
Apr. 25 Memorandum by the Chief of the Division of Latin American Affairs, Department of State
Mission of Dr. Morales to United States to negotiate loan of 4½ million dollars; his proposed visit to Department.
690
May 18 To the Panaman Minister
Inquiry as to Panama’s plans concerning (1) liquidation of debt to Canal arising from use of unpledged portion of Canal annuity for water-tax deficit, if United States should consent to use of Canal annuity as partial security for 4½-million-dollar loan; (2) letting of road construction contracts; (3) appointment of fiscal agent; (4) public bids for loan.
691
May 21 From the Panaman Minister
Information that (1) debt to Canal has been paid; (2) contracts for road building will be let to public bidders under supervision of Central Roads Board; (3) negotiations for fiscal agent are progressing; and (4) loan contract has been awarded to W. A. Harriman & Co. and Guaranty Trust Co.
692
May 22 To W. A. Harriman & Co., Inc., New York City
No objections to 4½-million-dollar loan.
694
[Page LXXII]May 25 (56) From the Minister in Panama (tel.)
Telegram from Panaman Minister at Washington to President of Panama (text printed) giving details of loan contract signed May 16.
694

Objections by Panama to the Continued Control of Its Wireless Communications by the United States

Date and number Subject Page
1922 Dec. 19 From the Panaman Minister
Proposal that decree of 1914 giving control over wireless in Panama to United States be annulled because of end of war emergency and because of developments in wireless communications.
695
1923 Jan. 11 To the Panaman Minister
View that decree of 1914 confirmed to United States permanent and absolute control of wireless in Panama accorded by treaty of 1903; refusal to consent to annulment of decree; offer, however, to discuss measures for adaptation of regulations to meet new conditions in wireless communication.
698
Jan. 11 (2) To the Minister in Panama (tel.)
Instructions to ascertain whether Panama contemplates immediate abrogation of decree of 1914, and, if so, to make protest.
700
Jan. 24 (7) From the Minister in Panama (tel.)
No immediate danger that Panama will rescind decree. Order given, however, for two receiving sets, one for President’s palace; naval commandant’s opinion that U. S. permission should have been requested.
701
Jan. 26 (7) To the Minister in Panama (tel.)
Instructions for putting into operation schedule of telephone broadcasting from radio naval station, Canal Zone, for benefit of Panamans; also for regulations permitting installation of receiving sets, subject to necessary restrictions.
701
Apr. 26 (47) From the Minister in Panama (tel.)
Panaman refusal to interpret treaty of 1903 and agreement of 1914 as giving U. S. control over wireless communications after conclusion of war.
702
July 19 (117) To the Chargé in Panama
Instructions not to make formal representations regarding control of wireless if matter can be left satisfactorily for present in statu quo; authorization, if necessary, to make clear to Panaman Government that none of rights under decree of 1914 are being relinquished.
702
[Page LXXIII]Oct. 25 Memorandum by the Under Secretary of State of a Conversation with the Ecuadoran Minister
Recommendation to Minister, upon his inquiry, that Ecuadoran negotiations with Panama relative to control of wireless messages between two countries be postponed until after Inter-American Communications Conference; Minister’s assent.
703

Refusal by the United States To Surrender to Panama Fugitives Escaping Into the Canal Zone From the Justice of a Third Government

Date and number Subject Page
1923 June 12 To the Panaman Minister
Refusal to surrender to Panama for extradition two fugitives from justice of Chile detained by Canal Zone authorities.
704
July 7 To the Panaman Minister
Refusal to agree to Panama’s interpretation of article XVI of treaty of 1903 as providing for cooperation of Canal authorities in delivery of fugitives to Panama to surrender to third government. Advice that under Canal Act of 1912 United States has right to surrender fugitives in Canal Zone direct to foreign governments.
705
Oct. 13 To the Panaman Minister
Further arguments in support of Department’s refusal to agree to Panama’s interpretation of article XVI of treaty of 1903. Refusal to submit difference of interpretation to arbitration.
707

PERSIA

Grant of an Oil Concession in Northern Persia to the Sinclair Explora tion Company, Subject to Confirmation by the Persian Mejliss

Date and number Subject Page
1923 Mar. 26 Memorandum by the Chief of the Division of Near Eastern Affairs, Department of State
Progress of loan negotiations of J. P. Morgan & Co. in connection with possible grant of North Persian oil concession to Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey. Department’s policy of absolute impartiality as between U. S. companies competing for concession; and Department’s attitude toward desire of Morgan & Co. to float part of loan in England.
711
Mar. 30 (7) To the Minister in Persia (tel.)
Department’s explanation to Sinclair Exploration Co. that their allegations concerning partiality of Millspaugh, Persian Financial Adviser, toward Standard Oil Co. negotiations have not been corroborated; and that since Persia was aware that Millspaugh had no official status in United States, there could be no misapprehension in Persia that Millspaugh’s policy was that of Department.
712
[Page LXXIV]June 27 From the Consul at Teheran
Passage, June 13, by Mejliss of bill authorizing Government to offer North Persian oil concession to U. S. company, conditional upon 10–million-dollar loan to Persia. Discussion of clause prohibiting concessionaire from assignment or transfer of rights to foreigners and clause restricting concession to four of the five Caspian provinces.
713
June 29 From the Consul at Teheran
Passage, June 20, by Mejliss of bill authorizing grant of oil concessions to Persian subjects in the Caspian province excepted from exploitation by U. S. companies.
715
Oct. 21 From the Consul at Teheran
Negotiations of Standard Oil Co. and Sinclair Co. to obtain acceptable draft concession. Sentiment in favor of obliging U. S. financial mission to administer Persian affairs on basis of Persian revenues solely and without recourse to foreign loans.
716
Nov. 8 To President Coolidge
Statement of Department’s policy and attitude toward American commercial enterprise abroad, in connection with dissatisfaction of Sinclair Co. regarding support of company’s efforts to secure oil concession in North Persia.
717
Nov. 8 (29) To the Minister in Persia (tel.)
Instructions to inform Government of U. S. policy of impartiality and desire to extend proper diplomatic support to U. S. interests abroad in accordance with principle of open door.
718
Nov. 9 To the Persian Minister
Information of U. S. attitude regarding U. S. companies in Persia, in connection with competition for North Persian oil concession.
719
Nov. 21 (2014) From the Persian Minister
View that no misapprehension exists in Teheran regarding U. S. attitude, and that no change has occurred in Persian policy regarding oil concession.
720
Dec. 20 From the Consul at Teheran (tel.)
Signature of North Persian oil concession by Prime Minister and representative of Sinclair Co.
720
1924 Jan. 5 (343) From the Minister in Persia
Contract, dated December 20, 1923, granting oil concession to Sinclair Company (text printed).
720
[Page LXXV]

POLAND

Efforts by the United States To Prevent Discrimination in Poland Against the United States Lines in the Transportation of Emigrants to America

Date and number Subject Page
1923 Jan. 20 From the Consul General at Warsaw (tel.)
Report on refusal of representative of United States Lines to sign discriminatory license for shipment of emigrants, as prepared by Polish authorities; closing of the offices of the Lines by Polish police; the consul general’s intention to close visa section of his office by January 22.
738
Jan. 22 (4) To the Minister in Poland (tel.)
For Consul General Keena: Disapproval of closing of visa section of consulate general; instructions to resume granting of visas.
739
Jan. 24 (10) From the Minister in Poland (tel.)
Request that consul general’s stand be sustained as justified by circumstances of discrimination and because of probable adverse consequences if Department’s instructions to reopen visa section are continued. Opinion that real reason for discrimination is Polish desire to boycott German ports at U. S. expense.
739
Jan. 25 (6) To the Minister in Poland (tel.)
Instructions to make representations against closing of offices of United States Lines as unjustifiable action against U. S. Government; to present memorandum (text printed) explaining status of Lines; and to reopen visa office.
741
Jan. 27 (17) From the Minister in Poland (tel.)
Report of reopening of visa section of consulate general and voluntary removal by Polish Government of ban on office of United States Lines.
742
Jan. 29 (18) From the Minister in Poland (tel.)
Conversation with Foreign Minister for purpose of securing action against continuation of harmful tactics toward Americans by Polish authorities; Foreign Minister’s promise of written assurances of satisfactory treatment for United States Lines and arrangement for Lines to continue temporarily under previous license.
742
Mar. 30 (23) To the Minister in Poland (tel.)
Instructions to urge Polish authorities to grant to United States Lines same treatment respecting Polish-American traffic as enjoyed by Red Star Line. Assurance of Department’s support in all representations in behalf of Lines’ license.
743
Apr. 13 (75) To the Minister in Poland (tel.)
Polish Government’s reasons for refusal to grant Lines’ application for license to transport passengers by rail to Bremen; Government’s desire to negotiate commercial treaty with United States. Recommendations for effective action by United States against Polish treatment.
744
[Page LXXVI]Apr. 23 (34) To the Minister in Poland (tel.)
Note for Foreign Minister (text printed) stating U. S. understanding of discriminatory action of Poland in refusing license application and expressing hope that Polish Government will reconsider attitude and accord treatment to United States Lines equivalent to that afforded foreign competitors.
746
May 16 (1658) From the Minister in Poland
Foreign Minister’s note, May 16 (text printed) disclaiming any desire to discriminate against U. S. interests and affirming that Poland excludes German ports from concessions granted navigation companies because of possible competition with port of Danzig.
747
May 24 From the Consul General at Warsaw (tel.)
Tacit agreement between United States Lines and Poland for shipment of emigrants by rail to Bremen; prospect that this arrangement can be continued through quota season if question of formal license is not pressed.
750
June 20 (50) To the Minister in Poland (tel.)
Instructions to acknowledge Foreign Office note of May 15 and state that discussion of matter will be dropped for present. Shipping Board’s desire not to press for formal license.
751
June 23 (119) From the Minister in Poland (tel.)
Recommendation that Foreign Office note remain unanswered pending further developments.
751

PORTUGAL

Agreement Between the United States and Portugal, Signed September 5, 1923, Further Extending the Duration of the Arbitration Convention of April 6, 1908

Date and number Subject Page
1923 Sept. 5 Agreement between the United States of America and Portugal
Extending for another 5 years the arbitration convention concluded April 6, 1908, and renewed in 1913 and 1918.
752
Sept. 5 To the Portuguese Minister
U. S. understanding that, if Senate assents to U. S. adhesion to protocol of 1920 creating Permanent Court of International Justice, Portugal will not be averse to considering modification of arbitration convention or to making separate agreement to provide for reference to Permanent Court of disputes mentioned in convention.
753
Sept. 5 From the Portuguese Minister
Confirmation of U. S. understanding.
753
[Page LXXVII]

RUSSIA

Continued Refusal by the United States To Recognize the Soviet Regime in Russia

Date and number Subject Page
1923 Mar. 21 Press Release Issued by the Department of State
Secretary’s remarks to delegation of Women’s Committee for Recognition of Russia on U. S. policy toward Soviet regime in Russia.
755
July 9 From the President of the American Federation of Labor
Request for statement of U. S. position regarding recognition of Soviet Russia.
758
July 19 To the President of the American Federation of Labor
Statement of U. S. position regarding recognition of Soviet Russia.
760
Nov. 8 (1458) From the Minister in Latvia
Report on theories and activities of Russian Communist Party, Communist International, Red International of Trade Unions, and Russian Soviet Government; statements of Trotsky, Zinoviev, Chicherin, Radek, and others (excerpts printed). Resolutions of Twelfth Congress of Russian Communist Party (texts printed).
(Copies sent by Department, December 29, to diplomatic representatives in Europe, Japan, and China.)
764
Dec. 16 (613) The Soviet Commissar for Foreign Affairs to President Coolidge (tel.)
Desire of Soviet Government to bring about resumption of friendly relations with the United States and to enter negotiations to that end.
787
Dec. 18 To the Consul at Reval (tel.)
Communication for Soviet representative at Reval for transmission to Soviet Commissar for Foreign Affairs (text printed) containing statement of U. S. refusal to enter into negotiations.
788
Dec. 19 Press Release Issued by the Department of State
Article by Steklov from Izvestia (text printed) containing instructions given to Workers’ Party of America by Zinoviev, President of Communist International and Petrograd Soviet for conducting more intensive revolutionary work in United States.
788
Dec. 24 Press Release Issued by the Department of State
Article by Steklov from Izvestia of November 7, 1922 (text printed) asserting solidarity of Soviet Republics and Communist International, as signified by convening of Fourth Congress simultaneously with celebration of anniversary of October Revolution.
790

Closing of the American Consulate at Vladivostok

Date and number Subject Page
1923 Feb. 22 (7) From the Consul at Vladivostok (tel.)
Notification by local authorities that 3 months will be allowed consul to obtain exequatur through negotiation between United States and People’s Commissariat for Foreign Affairs at Moscow.
792
[Page LXXVIII]Mar. 2 (19) To the Chargé in Japan (tel.)
Instructions to advise consul at Vladivostok that Department will not apply for exequatur and that, if necessary, he may close consulate; Department’s desire, however, that consulate be kept open as long as possible.
793
Mar. 21 (11) From the Consul at Vladivostok (tel.)
Report concerning consul’s protest to local authorities against confiscation of merchandise of International General Electric Co.; suggestion that Department lodge additional protest.
793
Mar. 26 (12) From the Consul at Vladivostok (tel.)
Refusal of local authorities to discuss representations made on behalf of International General Electric Co. and International Harvester Corp., pending official recognition as consul.
794
Mar. 27 To the Consul at Vladivostok (tel.)
Instructions not to file further protests.
794
Apr. 2 (31) From the Chargé in Japan (tel.)
Opinion that retention of consul at Vladivostok is not only useless but incompatible with U. S. dignity.
794
Apr. 20 (40) From the Chargé in Japan (tel.)
Telegram from consul at Vladivostok, April 19 (text printed) stating intention to close consulate on May 1.
795
Apr. 20 (38) To the Chargé in Japan (tel.)
Instructions for consul at Vladivostok to inform local authorities of U. S. intention to close consulate unless immunities and privileges are assured. Information that office at Chita is being closed.
795
May 3 (48) From the Chargé in Japan (tel.)
Telegram from consul at Vladivostok, May 1 (text printed) stating that Moscow authorities refuse immunity and privileges requested, and that consulate will be closed May 15.
796
May 22 (140) From the Consul Formerly at Vladivostok
Closing of consulate May 15 and departure of staff from Vladivostok.
797

Refusal by the Department of State To Make Special Representations to the Japanese Government on Behalf of American Oil Companies With Interests in Russian Sakhalin

Date and number Subject Page
1921 May 12 From the President of the Sinclair Consolidated Oil Corporation
Request for Department’s views relative to company’s negotiations with Far Eastern Republic for contract to conduct explorations for oil on Russian part of Island of Sakhalin, now under Japanese military occupation.
798
[Page LXXIX]Sept. 27 To the Sinclair Consolidated Oil Corporation
Inability to encourage definite engagements for exploration of Russian Sakhalin in view of uncertainty of situation and nonrecognition of Far Eastern Republic by United States.
799
1922 Jan. 12 (27) To the Ambassador in Japan
Reported operations of Japanese group in connection with petroleum prospecting in Russian Sakhalin; information regarding Sinclair contract and sundry claims initiated prior to 1915.
799
Sept. 26 From the Chief of the Division of Russian Affairs, Department of State
Conversation with representative of Sinclair Consolidated Oil Corp. relative to continued occupation by Japanese of Russian Sakhalin. Reaffirmation of Department’s position of nonrecognition of Far Eastern Republic and disapproval of Japanese occupation.
801
1923 Feb. 7 From the Sinclair Exploration Company
Signature, January 7, 1922, of contract and supplementary agreement with Far Eastern Republic and ratification, January 23, 1923, by Russian Soviet Government. Request that Japanese Government be notified of early arrival of Sinclair party on Island of Sakhalin and be requested to extend usual courtesies.
802
Mar. 17 To the Sinclair Exploration Company
Department’s refusal to make representations to Japan on behalf of company.
804
Apr. 2 From the Sinclair Exploration Company
Explanation that company’s request for representations to Japan rests on rights of U. S. nationals comprising Sakhalin exploration party to usual courtesies from friendly power rather than on rights of company under contract. Desire to know best way to safeguard interests of personnel if Department cannot comply with request.
805
Apr. 14 To the Sinclair Exploration Company
Information that U. S. passports can be issued to Sinclair party, that they are valid for all countries, but holders can enter territory of foreign country only upon consent of latter. No objection to direct communication with Japan concerning admission of party to Russian Sakhalin.
807
May 19 To Mr. Francis B. Loomis of the Standard Oil Company of California
Reply similar to that sent Sinclair Co., April 14, in answer to Standard Oil’s request that Department secure through Embassy at Tokyo permission to send party to Russian Sakhalin to explore for petroleum.
808
[Page LXXX]May 22 From Mr. Francis B. Loomis of the Standard Oil Company of California
Request for further consideration of company’s application for special representations to Japanese Government.
809
June 12 To Mr. Francis B. Loomis of the Standard Oil Company of California
Department’s declination to accede to Standard’s request for special representations to Japanese Government.
810
Oct. 24 From the Sinclair Exploration Company
Information that company has sent party to Russian Sakhalin to commence exploratory work for oil.
811
Nov. 1 To the Sinclair Exploration Company
Acknowledgment of letter of October 24, 1923.
811
1924 Mar. 14 From the Sinclair Exploration Company
Information that company’s exploration party was not permitted by Japanese military authorities in control of Russian Sakhalin to do any work and was obliged to leave on February 20, 1923.
812

Pledge Given to the Department of State by an American Oil Concessionaire in Russia Not To Infringe Upon the Existing Rights of Americans or Other Foreigners in Russia

Date and number Subject Page
1923 Jan. 30 To the International Barnsdall Corporation
No objections to proposed activities of corporation in Russian oil fields if conducted on own responsibility without infringing upon rights of others; request for written confirmation of understanding to this effect.
812
Feb. 1 From the Chairman of the Board of Directors of the International Barnsdall Corporation
Confirmation of understanding, pledging corporation not to encroach upon property rights of foreign nationals or, in case of unwitting encroachment, to seek satisfactory adjustment.
813
Feb. 12 To the International Barnsdall Corporation
Department’s interpretation of pledge; request for confirmation.
814
Feb. 14 From the International Barnsdall Corporation
Confirmation of Department’s interpretation of pledge, with slight modification.
815
[Page LXXXI]

Displeasure Expressed by the United States at Sentences of Death Passed Upon Roman Catholic Clergy in Russia

Date and number Subject Page
1923 Mar. 28 To President Harding (tel.)
Appeals to Department from Catholic societies to protest against sentence of death passed by Russian Soviet authorities on Archbishop Zepliak and other ecclesiastics. Suggestion that Ambassador in Berlin be instructed to make known to Soviet representative how deeply action against ecclesiastics has stirred public opinion in United States.
815
Mar. 28 From President Harding (tel.)
Acquiescence in suggestion to make known to Russian Soviet authorities U. S. sentiment in regard to death sentence for ecclesiastics.
816
Mar. 28 (27) To the Ambassador in Germany (tel.)
Instructions to communicate informally with Soviet representative in Berlin regarding effect on U. S. public mind of sentence of death passed upon ecclesiastics in Russia.
816
Mar. 30 (63) From the Ambassador in Germany (tel.)
Information that Soviet representative, already informed by press of nature of U. S. representations, refused to meet Ambassador informally without instructions from Moscow.
817
Mar. 31 (30) To the Ambassador in Germany (tel.)
Probability that Russians are sufficiently informed of U. S. sentiment not to require notification by Ambassador. Instructions to communicate message through Embassy secretary if approached by Soviet representative.
817
Apr. 9 To President Harding
Proposed reversal of decision to grant visa for wife of Soviet President to visit the United States, as in effect a protest against action of Soviets in condemning ecclesiastics and executing Vicar General.
818
Apr. 9 From President Harding
Acquiescence in proposed exclusion from the United States of wife of Soviet President as protest against treatment of ecclesiastics in Russia.
819
Apr. 10 (17) To the Minister in Latvia (tel.)
Cancelation of authorization sent consuls at Riga and Reval to grant visa to wife of Soviet President to visit the United States.
819
Apr. 13 From the Chief of the Division of Russian Affairs, Department of State
Regret of Russian agent, as expressed in conversation with officer of Military Intelligence Division, concerning loss to cause of Russian recognition in United States resulting from execution of Vicar General.
820
Apr. 16 From the Counselor of the Embassy in Germany
Conveyance to Soviet representative, informally, of Department’s message inviting attention to unfortunate impression on Americans of condemnation and execution of ecclesiastics.
821
[Page LXXXII]

SALVADOR

Statement of the Limited Responsibility of the Department of State Under the Loan Contract of June 24, 1922

Date and number Subject Page
1923 Jan. 9 (2) To the Chargé in Salvador (tel.)
Information that bankers have been advised that Department has no objections to their proceeding under loan contract of June 24, 1922.
823
Apr. 9 To Messrs. Lansing & Woolsey
No objections to sale of limited number of bonds in London provided loan is issued in accordance with contracts submitted.
823
Aug. 29 (50) From the Minister in Salvador (tel.)
National Assembly’s approval of all pending loan decrees.
824
Oct. 20 (28) To the Minister in Salvador (tel.)
Statement issued to press October 18 (text printed) presenting true particulars of Department’s relation to Salvadoran loan, to refute misleading impression that United States has entered into a secret treaty with Salvador.
824
Oct. 29 From Senator Couzens
Transmittal of article from The Nation entitled “Mr. Hughes Makes a Secret Alliance.” Request for correct information.
825
Nov. 7 To Senator Couzens
Information concerning understanding with Salvador, effected by exchange of notes, July 17, 1922, regarding carrying out of loan stipulations relating to collector of customs and settlement of disputes by submission to arbitration of Justice of Supreme Court of United States or another member of Federal judiciary.
825
Nov. 15 From Senator Couzens
Inquiry as to wisdom of policy of assigning officials of U. S. courts and other U. S. public officers to arbitrate differences between foreign governments and private U. S. citizens.
826
Nov. 28 To Senator Couzens
Information that it is customary in contracts between U. S. companies and Latin American governments to provide for arbitration; that in Salvadoran loan both parties desired Secretary of State to use good offices in submitting disputes to Chief Justice of Supreme Court or another member of Federal judiciary.
827
Dec. 3 From Senator Couzens
Opinion that submission of disputes to some unofficial board of arbitration would be safer for both countries, or else agreements should be made public and confirmed by Senate.
828
Dec. 7 To Senator Couzens
Information that exchange of notes in this case was not treaty requiring confirmation by Senate, only an understanding between executive branches of the governments, by which Secretary consents to do certain things within customary limits of diplomatic action. Invitation to inspect notes exchanged.
829
[Page LXXXIII]

SPAIN

Failure To Conclude a Treaty of Friendship and Commerce Between the United States and Spain—Agreement To Prorogue the Commercial Agreement of 1906 to May 5, 1924

Date and number Subject Page
1923 May 18 (162) To the Ambassador in Spain
Draft treaty of friendship and commerce to be submitted to Spain (text printed). Comments on provisions of treaty.
831
June 6 (43) From the Ambassador in Spain (tel.)
King’s objection to treaty because of U. S. liquor control regulations prohibiting Spanish ships with wine on board from entering U. S. ports.
847
June 8 (45) From the Ambassador in Spain (tel.)
Presentation of Special Assistant Hackworth to Foreign Minister; agreement to initiate treaty negotiations in spite of obstacle of U. S. liquor control regulations.
848
June 12 (46) From the Ambassador in Spain (tel.)
From Hackworth: Objections of Lago, president of Spanish treaty commission, to the draft treaty. Suggestion that United States refuse to sign proposed treaty with Spain on ship’s liquor stores and cargo until conclusion of treaty of amity and commerce.
848
June 13 (30) To the Ambassador in Spain (tel.)
For Hackworth: Categorical reply to Lago’s objections to U. S. draft treaty; Department’s desire to avoid conditional acceptance of proposed treaty on ship’s liquor stores and cargo, insisting, however, that stringency of U. S. regulations cannot be relinquished unless Spain’s commercial relations with United States accord with proposed treaty of amity and commerce.
849
June 15 (48) From the Ambassador in Spain (tel.)
Lago’s suggestion that schedule of articles be substituted for most-favored-nation clause in proposed treaty, as was done in British treaty; favored position of British as purchasers of 50 percent of Spain’s exports. Ambassador’s recommendations.
851
June 18 (31) To the Ambassador in Spain (tel.)
For Hackworth: U. S. commitment to principle of unconditional most-favored-nation treatment. Possible proposal of temporary modus vivendi in case of deadlock on this issue.
852
June 25 (57) From the Ambassador in Spain (tel.)
Opinion that application for modus vivendi should be made at once; request for instructions.
853
June 29 (39) To the Ambassador in Spain (tel.)
Instructions to inquire whether Spain would agree to exchange of notes for continuance of commercial arrangement of 1906 pending conclusion of new treaty. Draft modus vivendi (text printed).
853
July 3 (62) From the Ambassador in Spain (tel.)
Letter, June 25, to Foreign Minister requesting conference for Hackworth with treaty commission. Foreign Minister’s reply (text printed) granting request but indicating improbability of early conclusion of negotiations. Ambassador’s counterreply presenting U. S. proposal for modus vivendi.
854
[Page LXXXIV]July 4 (64) From the Ambassador in Spain (tel.)
Decision to withhold temporarily proposal of modus vivendi and urge proceeding at once with negotiations.
856
July 6 (66) From the Ambassador in Spain (tel.)
Conference with treaty commission: Spanish preference for separation of commercial from general relations; maintenance of position regarding granting of unconditional most-favored-nation treatment through schedules of articles; and statement that negotiations must be based on admission of Spanish wine and tariff reductions on certain Spanish products. Hackworth’s explanations of U. S. prohibition and tariff laws.
856
July 10 (42) To the Ambassador in Spain (tel.)
Further inquiries as to Spain’s position; recommendation of immediate request for modus vivendi; undesirability of separating commercial from general and other provisions of treaty.
858
July 11 (67) From the Ambassador in Spain (tel.)
Foreign Minister’s offer to proceed to consideration of commercial treaty alone and assurance of modus vivendi should negotiations not be completed before November 5, when commercial arrangement of 1906 expires. Recommendation that treaties be separated.
859
July 12 (68) From the Ambassador in Spain (tel.)
Further explanation of Spain’s refusal to agree to use of term “most-favored-nation treatment” and Spain’s bases for negotiation.
860
July 14 (43) To the Ambassador in Spain (tel.)
Note for Foreign Minister (text printed) accepting Spanish offer to proceed to consideration of an exclusively commercial treaty, with understanding that 1906 commercial arrangement shall continue in force pending conclusion of new commercial treaty.
861
July 25 (74) From the Ambassador in Spain (tel.)
Discussion of short draft of treaty with treaty commission; view of commission that conflict of tariff systems of United States and Spain can be solved only by Council of Ministers.
862
July 26 (75) From the Ambassador in Spain (tel.)
Foreign Minister’s request for U. S. consent to increase duty on tea, coffee, and sugar in Spanish Morocco to facilitate obtaining Council of Ministers’ approval of modus vivendi.
863
July 27 (47) To the Ambassador in Spain (tel.)
Information that Department has already consented to imposition of consumption tax on sugar, tea, and coffee in Spanish Morocco.
863
Oct. 3 (89) From the Ambassador in Spain (tel.)
Spanish proposal of certain considerations to permit prorogation of 1906 arrangement.
864
[Page LXXXV]Oct. 8 (63) To the Ambassador in Spain (tel.)
Note for Spanish Government (text printed) in reply to Spanish proposal for prorogation of 1906 arrangement. Request that any further proposals or statements be made in writing.
865
Oct. 8 (90) From the Ambassador in Spain (tel.)
Note from President of Military Directory (text printed) confirming oral proposal for prorogation of 1906 arrangement.
866
Oct. 17 (100) From the Ambassador in Spain (tel.)
Note from President of Military Directory, October 6 (text printed) agreeing to prorogation of 1906 arrangement for 6 months, but excluding United States from benefits of treaties negotiated by Spain during prorogation.
867
Oct. 20 (68) To the Ambassador in Spain (tel.)
Note for Foreign Office (text printed) expressing satisfaction with temporary arrangement, but reserving freedom of action with respect to Spanish imports if U. S. goods are not accorded benefits given to other countries.
867
Oct. 22 (103) From the Ambassador in Spain (tel.)
Spanish refusal to accept U. S. reservation. Cable from Spanish Ambassador in Washington (excerpt printed) stating that United States is disposed to reduce customs on Spanish imports by virtue of section 315 (a) of Tariff Act and to waive most-favored-nation clause for modus vivendi. Request for confirmation.
868
Oct. 22 (104) From the Ambassador in Spain (tel.)
Foreign Minister’s offer to waive exclusion of United States from benefits of treaties negotiated during prorogation if U. S. Tariff Commission will investigate possibilities of reductions on certain Spanish imports.
869
Oct. 23 (69) To the Ambassador in Spain (tel.)
Authorization to eliminate U. S. reservation. Information that no action is contemplated under section 315 of Tariff Act.
869
Oct. 23 (105) From the Ambassador in Spain (tel.)
Substitute for Spanish note of October 6 (text printed), agreeing to prorogation of 1906 arrangement for 6 months on condition that United States investigate possibilities of reducing customs duties on certain Spanish products.
870
Oct. 24 (70) To the Ambassador in Spain (tel.)
Instructions to present note accepting without reservation the proposal set forth in Spanish note of October 6.
870
Oct. 27 (124) From the Ambassador in Spain
Prorogation of commercial arrangement of 1906 until May 5, 1924, effected by exchange of notes (texts printed). Recommendation for investigation of U. S. customs duties on certain Spanish products. Request for representative of Department to assist in negotiations for permanent treaty.
871
[Page LXXXVI]Nov. 3 (109) From the Ambassador in Spain (tel.)
Spanish intention to delay consideration of permanent treaty until about February 15, when new treaty commission will be appointed.
874

SWEDEN

Arrangement Between the United States and Sweden for Reciprocal Exemption From Income Tax on Shipping

Date and number Subject Page
1922 Jan. 27 From the Swedish Minister
Cognizance of provision in U. S. revenue plan for 1921 exempting from income tax ships of foreign countries granting equivalent exemption to U. S. citizens; hope that exemption may be made retroactive to January 1, 1917; request for extension of 6 months to accommodate Swedish owners in filing returns.
875
Feb. 24 From the Swedish Minister
Information that Swedish exemption from tax on income derived from operation of foreign ships antedates 1917; reiteration of request for reciprocal exemption from January 1, 1917.
876
May 16 To the Swedish Minister
Information that no provision is made for exemption from U. S. taxation of income derived from operation of foreign ships prior to January 1, 1921.
877
May 30 From the Swedish Minister
Request that Department seek enactment by Congress of legislation providing retroactive exemption of Swedish owners from payment of income tax.
877
Aug. 9 To the Swedish Chargé
Inability of Department to comply with request to seek legislation providing income-tax exemption for Swedish owners retroactive to January 1, 1917.
878

TURKEY

American Participation in the Lausanne Conference on Near Eastern Affairs

first phase

Date and number Subject Page
1922 Sept. 19 From the Chief of the Division of Near Eastern Affairs, Department of State
British unofficial inquiry whether U. S. Government would consent to send representative to take part in Near Eastern settlement.
879
[Page LXXXVII]Sept. 26 To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
Statement made to press (text printed) approving Allies’ proposals to Turkey concerning freedom of the Straits and protection of racial and religious minorities.
(Instructions to repeat to Paris, Rome, and Constantinople.)
880
Oct. 5 (238) From the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Importance of defining U. S. position with regard to imminent Near East settlement, as one of capitulatory powers with extensive vested interests in Turkey. Suggestion of separate treaty with Turkey in case conference on capitulatory rights is not held.
880
Oct. 12 (460) From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
Curzon’s inquiry as to possibility of U. S. participation in conference; suggestion that participation could be limited to arranging for free navigation of Straits.
881
Oct. 18 (470) From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
Austen Chamberlain’s expression of appreciation of Secretary’s statement approving British attitude with respect to freedom of Straits; British desire for U. S. cooperation.
883
Oct. 26 (432) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Report that conference will be held at Lausanne on November 13 and that it is planned to have two conferences, one for peace treaty and revision of Treaty of Sevres, in which Turkey and Allied Powers will participate, and the other for settlement of freedom of Straits, in which certain additional powers will participate.
884
Oct. 27 (344) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Aide-mémoire for Foreign Minister, to be presented October 30 (text printed) indicating U. S. readiness to send observers to conference to safeguard U. S. interests and facilitate exchange of views, while refusing to participate in final peace negotiations or to assume responsibility for political or territorial adjustments effected.
(Instructions to repeat to London and Rome.)
884
Oct. 27 (345) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Information regarding U. S. position and course of action decided upon, and outline of U. S. interests to be protected. Purpose to be prepared at any time to make separate treaty with Turkey.
(Instructions to repeat to London and Rome.)
886
Oct. 27 From the British Embassy
Invitation to United States to send representative to Lausanne to participate in conference, especially in discussions regarding Straits.
(Footnote: Identic notes received from French and Italian Ambassadors.)
889
Oct. 28 (161) To the Ambassador in Italy (tel.)
Notification of his appointment as observer, together with Minister Grew and Admiral Bristol, at Lausanne Conference.
889
[Page LXXXVIII]Oct. 30 (208) From the Ambassador in Italy (tel.)
Presentation of aide-mémoire; no opportunity to discuss subject because of political conditions.
889
Oct. 31 (499) From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
Foreign Minister’s comments on U. S. aide-mémoire of October 30; his desire for attendance of U. S. observers at all conference sessions and full participation of United States in Straits convention; his views on capitulations practically identical with those of United States.
890
Nov. 2 (443) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
French reply to U. S. aide-mémoire of October 30 giving assurance of protection of U. S. interests. Foreign Minister’s comments when receiving aide-mémoire and expression of gratification that U. S. representative would attend conference.
891
Nov. 7 From the British Ambassador
Postponement of conference.
892
Nov. 9 (840) From the British Ambassador
Tentative date for conference set for November 20.
893
Nov. 9 (524) From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
Foreign Office note, November 8, acknowledging U. S. aide-mémoire of October 30 and stating that Government will welcome presence of one or more U. S. representatives at Lausanne.
893
Nov. 10 (G.B.438 Serial 1151) From the Senior Member Present of the General Board, Department of the Navy, to the Secretary of the Navy
Statement of U. S. policy regarding control and navigation of Dardanelles.
893
Nov. 13 (223) From the Ambassador in Italy (tel.)
Suggestion as to status of U. S. observers at Lausanne.
897
Nov. 14 To the British Ambassador
Notification concerning persons designated to represent United States at conference.
(Sent, mutatis mutandis, to French and Italian Chargés.)
897
Nov. 15 (175) To the Ambassador in Italy (tel.)
Instructions for U. S. observers to take appropriate place in conference and attend sessions, and to state U. S. position whenever necessary.
898
Nov. 20 (3) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Request for instructions should permanent chairmanship of conference be offered to U. S. representative.
899
Nov. 20 (2) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Decision that it would not be fitting for U. S. representative to preside at conference.
899
Nov. 21 (7) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Report on opening session of conference; statement of U. S. delegation as to their status (text printed).
900
[Page LXXXIX]Nov. 22 (8) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Report on confidential interview between Child and Djelal-ed-Din Arif Bey: Turks’ objections to any scheme of zones or mandates, to surrender of territory as refuge for minorities, and to capitulations; their desire for U. S. participation in Mosul oil lands; their assent to U. S. wishes regarding religious and philanthropic institutions and archeological expeditions; and their readiness to enter into treaty or agreement with United States.
900
Nov. 22 (11) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Inquiry as to attitude to be taken regarding reduction of Turkish territory to form areas of refuge for minorities.
902
Nov. 24 (8) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Instructions to make representations to Turkish delegates against expulsion of minorities during inclemencies of winter. Concurrence in opinion concerning unwillingness of Turks to surrender territory for an independent Armenia. Inquiry as to Allied projects for relief of Armenians.
902
Nov. 24 (9) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Desirability of U. S. representation on Council for Administration of Ottoman Public Debt, should certain conditions develop.
903
Nov. 25 (19) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Child’s statement before commission on territorial and military questions (text printed) regarding U. S. traditional open-door policy in opposition to secret treaties and agreements.
904
Nov. 25 (22) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Justification of Child’s open-door statement as opportune and appropriate.
905
Nov. 27 (25) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Report on interview between Child and Ismet Pasha: Ismet’s assertion of Turkey’s will to administer own affairs as indicating that capitulations may be serious hindrance to negotiations; Child’s desire for assurances from Turkey regarding safety of U. S. religious and educational interests there.
906
Nov. 27 (26) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Contradiction of press reports that Child’s open-door statement was shown outside U. S. delegation or that any other delegation was consulted.
907
Nov. 27 (10) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Inquiry concerning (1) position and influence of Djelal-ed-Din Arif Bey; (2) guarantees Turks will give for protection of Christian minorities; and (3) protection Turks propose for U. S. philanthropic establishments and for foreigners.
907
Nov. 27 (12) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
For Child: Approval by the President and Department of open-door statement.
908
[Page XC]Nov. 27 (29) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Necessity for determining U. S. policy regarding Ottoman public debt. Suggestion for enlarging Council for Administration of Ottoman Debt and widening its functions.
908
Nov. 29 (18) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Disapproval of suggestion regarding Ottoman Debt Council; continuance of Department’s policy as stated in telegram of November 24.
909
Nov. 29 (36) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Position and influence of Djelal-ed-Din Arif Bey; replies to Department’s questions concerning attitude of Turkey toward forced evacuation of Christians and protection of U. S. religious and educational institutions in Turkey.
909
Dec. 1 (47) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
No opposition in conference to general principle of freedom of Straits during peace for ships of commerce; questions of passage of warships during peace and administration of neutralized or demilitarized zone. Request for instructions.
910
Dec. 1 (49) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
U. S. representative’s statement before subcommittee on customs and shipping (text printed) regarding U. S. claim to same treatment as most-favored nation in respect to commerce and shipping.
911
Dec. 3 (55) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Statement given to press (text printed) denying that U. S. delegation has suggested postponement or change in program of conference.
911
Dec. 3 (29) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
U. S. position with respect to freedom of Straits, for Mission’s guidance; authorized statement (text printed) regarding U. S. membership on international board of control for demilitarized or neutralized zones.
912
Dec. 6 (64) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Child’s statement before commission on territorial and military questions (text printed) that Straits and Black Sea should be open to all nations in peace and to neutrals during war and that means for effecting such freedom should be found in agreements rather than in force.
913
Dec. 6 (67) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Opportuneness of Child’s statement as deterrent to acceptance by Turks of Soviet proposal that Straits be closed to all warships and that Turkey be allowed to fortify them.
914
Dec. 7 (31) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Expression of gratification regarding manner of Child’s presentation of Government’s views concerning freedom of Straits.
915
[Page XCI]Dec. 7 (71) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Report on meeting of subcommission on prisoners of war and exchange of populations: Conflict of Greek and Turkish views on evacuation of minorities; Grew’s statement (text printed) in protest against evacuation of Greeks from Constantinople; concurrence of British and French delegates in Italian delegate’s appeal to Turks to reconsider policy.
915
Dec. 8 (34) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Information of Department’s desire to have proper treaty assurances for passage of commercial and war vessels without an international board of control.
916
Dec. 8 (73) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Drift of conference sentiment toward strict limitation of military and naval armaments in Straits and Black Sea. Importance of inducing Soviet delegates to conclude separate protocol on Straits and give pledges not to maintain large naval forces in Black Sea. Mission’s desire to receive Soviet delegation.
917
Dec. 9 (38) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Authorization to receive Soviet delegates unofficially. Instructions to report plan for separate agreement regarding Straits and whether this may be used to give de jure recognition to Moscow regime.
918
Dec. 9 (41) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Comments on proposals before subcommittee on customs regime; U. S. insistence upon continuance of existing agreements during 2-year interval pending conclusion of commercial treaty.
918
Dec. 11 (84) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Information that France and Great Britain do not contemplate recognition of Russia; that French delegate suggested separate instrument for agreement with Russians to avoid de jure recognition; and that Mission will not receive Soviet delegates.
919
Dec. 11 (85) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Report that discreet suggestions have been made to delegates that there be no international board of control and that reliance be placed on treaty rights; that Curzon will try to prevent any unwelcome invitations being extended to United States.
920
Dec. 13 (96) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Child’s statement before commission on territorial and military questions (text printed) regarding problem of minorities and presenting U. S. view that ends to be sought are prevention, guaranties of safety, and permanence of joint action, as opposed to mere relief and spasmodic separate activity.
920
Dec. 14 (46) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Approval of statements on minorities made by Child and Grew. Suggestion to British Ambassador of adoption of comprehensive relief plan.
922
[Page XCII]Dec. 15 (48) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Desirability of referring question of jurisdiction and modification of judicial capitulations to special commission unless soon settled at Lausanne. Inquiry whether arrangement regarding capitulatory rights will form part of peace treaty or be separate instrument.
923
Dec. 16 (118) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
U. S. representative’s statement before subcommittee on exchange of populations (text printed), emphasizing protests of groups of American citizens against proposal to abolish or remove institution of Patriarchate of Constantinople.
924
Dec. 17 (120) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Insistence of Turks upon abolition of capitulations; Allied concessions and disposition to cooperate rather than seek separate favors; desirability of adoption of conciliatory policy by United States toward Turkish aspirations.
925
Dec. 18 (121) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Report on conversation between Ismet and Child: Disposition of Turks not to exchange economic for political concessions at Lausanne and to apply open-door policy in Turkey.
927
Dec. 18 (122) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
U. S. representatives’ statement for conference record (text printed) of U. S. position in favor of reliance on treaty rights for freedom of Straits; its submission to conference prior to discussion of Allied draft containing plan for international board of control.
928
Dec. 19 (125) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Report that peace treaty probably will include capitulation modifications, and that these modifications probably will serve as basis for separate treaties with various countries.
928
Dec. 20 (134) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Proposal of plan to guarantee freedom of Straits through Turkish trusteeship.
929
Dec. 21 (59) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Request for information as to why Turks object to political guaranty in proposal for freedom of Straits. Disapproval of Turkish trusteeship for Straits. Instructions not to press matter of board of control if agreement has been reached on such a board.
929
Dec. 21 (60) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Instructions to refrain from further comment regarding Patriarchate.
(Footnote: Acting High Commissioner’s warning to Department against unqualified support of Patriarchate.)
930
Dec. 21 (141) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Turkish permission, as result of Mission’s representations, for reopening of U. S. educational and religious institutions under Government protection.
931
[Page XCIII]Dec. 22 (146) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Explanation that Turks object to political guaranties because enforcement would be in hands of League of Nations; Turkey’s preference for direct and positive guaranties of neutrality from signatory powers.
931
Dec. 22 (63) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Instructions to support Allies in efforts to obtain judicial protection for foreigners in Turkey; or, if deadlock develops, to suggest commission to decide question, offering for consideration the arrangement in Siam; desirability of securing most-favored-nation treatment if Turkey will concede nothing on capitulations.
931
Dec. 23 (148) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Telegram of December 23 to Constantinople (text printed) expressing probability that Turks will continue Patriarchate as an exclusively religious institution and will agree to change person holding office.
934
Dec. 26 (65) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Telegram received by Near East Relief from Barton, Peet, and Montgomery (text printed) stating that Allied demand for protected area for Armenians was meeting great opposition. Inquiry as to what demands Allies had made and whether any proposals were practicable.
934
Dec. 26 (154) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Perplexity as to cause of sudden change of Turkish attitude to one of resistance and unwillingness to compromise. British anxiety concerning position of French.
935
Dec. 28 (157) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Ismet’s refusal to yield on capitulations, insisting that Turkish laws and administration should regulate status of foreigners. Child’s statement of U. S. position and renewal of representations (text printed).
936
Dec. 28 (67) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Expression of confidence in Mission’s ability to exert helpful influence in conference crisis.
938
Dec. 28 (68) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Instructions to indicate U. S. position, on proper occasion, relative to settlement by arbitration of conflicting oil claims; reference to correspondence on open-door policy regarding mandate for Mesopotamia and to arbitration of claims of Turkish Petroleum Co.
938
Dec. 28 (159) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Information concerning Allied demand for national home for Armenians; evident desire of Allies to use question for trading purposes and to involve American delegation if possible.
939
Dec. 29 (165) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
U. S. representative’s statement before subcommittee on minorities (text printed) suggesting that Turkey make some declaration concerning extension of amnesty so that deportees or refugees may return to former homes and have property restored.
940
[Page XCIV]Dec. 30 (168) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Statement of U. S. delegation submitted to subcommittee on minorities (text printed) presenting recommendations of representative U. S. organizations interested in national home for Armenians. Also press statement (text printed) explaining position of U. S. delegation.
940
Dec. 30 (70) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Approval of statement on capitulations; instructions to continue to seek settlement giving adequate guaranties.
941
1923 Jan. 1 (170) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Explanation that statement submitted to subcommittee on minorities contained no proposal; also that intention of Mission is not to make commitments prior to presentation of definite plan supported by Allies.
941
Jan. 2 (72) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Instructions not to transmit to conference the recommendations of individual Americans unless they have Mission’s official support, to avoid misunderstandings in future cases.
(Instructions to send summary of telegram and Mission’s 168 and 170 to Constantinople.)
942
Jan. 3 (27) From the Special Mission at Lausanne
Recommendations of Barton, Peet, and Montgomery concerning national home for Armenians (texts printed).
943
Jan. 6 (75) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Suggestion of informal conversations with Turkish delegates to impress desirability of their taking initiative in offering home for Armenians; suggestion also of sounding out French as to attitude toward concessions by France in northern Syria for Armenian national home.
946
Jan. 7 (184) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Unyielding attitude of Turks toward proposals for Armenian relief.
948
Jan. 9 (186) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Opinion that Allies can influence Turks to patch up treaty only by use of economic pressure; that there will be no war even if treaty negotiations are broken off. Information concerning Curzon’s attitude toward Mosul.
948
Jan. 15 From President Harding
View that United States can do no more than strongly appeal in behalf of Armenian national home.
950
Jan. 15 (196) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Gillespie’s statement before subcommittee on fiscal regime of foreigners (text printed) presenting U. S. policy regarding replacement of capitulations by new treaty guaranties.
950
[Page XCV]Jan. 18 (198) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Interview with Ismet: U. S. determination to adhere to open-door policy regardless of Mosul boundary question; necessity for treaty to replace capitulations; inefficiency of Turkish legislation and administration; disavowal by Ismet of urgency to reform system of administering justice and his contention that complete liberty of Turkey, freed of capitulations and without provisional regime to make reforms, would be most advantageous.
951
Jan. 21 (202) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Prospect that Mosul territorial problem may be submitted to arbitration for settlement.
953
Jan. 21 (203) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Report on special meeting of subcommittee on judicial regime of foreigners: Chairman’s submission of draft convention and declaration for settlement of problem of capitulations; provision for adherence of nonsignatory powers.
954
Jan. 21 (205) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Ismet’s objections to request of Denmark, Netherlands, and Spain for clause in peace treaty permitting their adherence to section dealing with capitulations; his approval, however, of negotiations for separate conventions with these countries. Position of Norway, Sweden, and Belgium on subject.
954
Jan. 22 (207) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Proposal of Allied delegations that draft treaty be presented on January 29 to Turks and that chief delegates them disperse; evidence that French are prepared to turn weakness of Allies’ position to own advantage. Recommendations concerning U. S. Mission.
955
Jan. 23 (87) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Instructions to continue to cooperate in helping powers with capitulatory rights to secure proper safeguards from Turkey; also to advise Department of any objectionable provisions in proposed convention.
956
Jan. 24 (210) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Child’s statement submitted at end of meeting of commission on military and territorial questions (text printed), calling attention to Curzon’s mention of validity of claims of Turkish Petroleum Co. and suggesting that conflicting claims already in existence be submitted to arbitration.
957
Jan. 25 (90) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Approval of postponement of U. S. negotiations with Turkey if Allies do not effect agreement; desirability of exchange of notes with Turkey in meantime and written declaration from Turks of friendly intentions.
958
Jan. 25 (216) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Schedule for (1) final meetings of conference; (2) presentation to Turks of treaty and to Russians and Bulgarians of advance copy of Straits convention; and (3) departure of Allied delegation.
959
[Page XCVI]Jan. 27 (92) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Desire of Department as means of assisting in peaceful settlement of Turkish and Allied differences, that Mission make statement to conference summarizing views of United States on chief questions. Completion of draft treaty of friendship and commerce with Turkey.
959
Jan. 27 (218) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Refusal of Turks to grant privileges of research in archeology except as provided by domestic legislation; advisability of withholding U. S. representations until opportunity for separate negotiations.
960
Jan. 27 (219) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Turks’ rejection of Allies’ proposal (excerpt printed) that Turkey consult Council of Debt on contracts pertaining to concessions; U. S. reservations respecting principle involved; and Allies’ assurances of no intention to infringe upon Turkish sovereignty (text printed).
960
Jan. 28 (220) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Advisability of continuing present course of private discussions as best means of promoting peaceful settlement. Appreciation of Department’s decision to leave choice of final action to discretion of Mission.
961
Jan. 31 (226) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Child’s statement before general conference (text printed) reaffirming U. S. policies and purposes in the cause of peace in Near East.
962
Jan. 31 (227) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Formal presentation of draft treaty to Turkish delegation; arrangements to enable Turkish delegation to hold conversations with Allies to discuss treaty provisions.
964
Feb. 1 (95) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Approval of Child’s statement and course of action.
965
Feb. 1 (231) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Desire of Turks for peaceful settlement if full autonomy and sovereignty for Turkey are assured and capitulations are not revived; Ismet’s appeal to Child to devise settlement on these principles.
965
Feb. 2 (232) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Allies’ resolution to demand Turks’ acceptance of treaty by certain date.
966
Feb. 4 (236) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Dissolution of conference upon Turks’ rejection of all compromise on capitulations and objections to provisions for economic concessions; Turkish counterproposals. Reasons for failure of conference.
966
Feb. 7 (242) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Allies’ proposal to proceed to signature of treaty providing Turks make written declaration of what they are willing to concede on capitulations and on economic clauses.
967
[Page XCVII]Feb. 7 (244) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Child’s note to Curzon, February 4 (text printed) proposing that difficulties due to certain ambiguous economic and financial clauses in treaty be ameliorated by insertion of blanket clause permitting settlement of conflicting claims by arbitration.
968
Feb. 8 (14) From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
Ismet’s informal agreement to Montagna formula for Turkish declaration on judicial safeguards for foreigners in Turkey.
968
Feb. 15 (41) From the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Report on conversation with Ismet, while en route to Bucharest: Clarification of Ismet’s attitude, expectations, and views regarding proposed peace settlement; High Commissioner’s intimation that the United States prefers to defer treaty negotiations until after peace settlement between Turkey and Allies.
969
Feb. 15 From the Vice Consul at Constantinople, Temporarily at Angora
Report on Turkey’s attitude toward failure of conference and feeling toward France, Great Britain, and United States.
970
Mar. 31 To the British Embassy
Categorical explanation of provisions in economic and financial clauses of draft treaty considered ambiguous, in reply to British request for elaboration.
972

second phase

Date and number Subject Page
1923 Apr. 4 From the Chief of the Division of Near Eastern Affairs, Department of State
U. S. representation and character of participation upon resumption of conference; review of events subsequent to interruption, and present status of negotiations; U. S. position relative to principal questions for reconsideration. Suggestions concerning personnel of U. S. Special Mission.
974
Apr. 7 (18) To the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
Instructions to prepare to go to Lausanne. Telegram to Child (text printed) explaining situation and instructing him to be prepared to go also in case he is needed.
980
Apr. 19 (28) To the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
Instructions to proceed to conference at Lausanne; status and functions of representatives; explanations as to U. S. position; points to be considered, namely, judicial safeguards, protection of philanthropic and commercial enterprises, and devising of system to replace capitulations.
981
[Page XCVIII]Apr. 19 (117) From the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Report on interview with Ismet: Ismet’s statement that Montagna formula will require selection by Turks of judicial advisers from nations not participating in war; that direct negotiations had been inaugurated between concessionary companies and Angora authorities for settlement of claims; and that revision of concessionary contracts is purely domestic matter.
986
Apr. 22 (249) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Ismet’s desire, as expressed in conversation, for treaty with United States as means of promoting early settlement with Allies; Turkish offer to restore diplomatic and consular relations by treaty, supplemented by pledges of protection of U. S. missions and schools and of fair treatment of Americans in trade and courts.
987
Apr. 23 (251) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Report on informal meeting of delegations: Apportionment of work of conference among three committees; Grew’s statement of position of U. S. representation (text printed).
988
Apr. 23 (252) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Advantage to Mission of Montagna’s appointment as chairman of economic committee; his success in averting steamroller tactics.
989
Apr. 27 (263) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Report on interview with Ismet: Ismet’s intention to quit conference if reparations issue is revived; difficulties presented by capitulations in effecting treaty with United States; inadvisability of appointment of American judicial adviser; Turkish opposition to discussion of concessions. Mission’s recommendations concerning U. S. attitude at conference.
989
Apr. 27 (265) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Allies’ refusal to subscribe to assertion that capitulatory regime was abolished by unilateral act of Turks; Grew’s statement in corroboration (text printed).
992
Apr. 27 (267) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
British desire for cordial association between U. S. and British delegations. U. S. offer of cooperation.
992
Apr. 29 (272) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Mission’s suggested program for participation in negotiations for drafting Turkish declaration and conventions; suggestion that United States proceed at once to negotiate treaty of amity and commerce with Turkey. Request for authorization to begin conversations with Turks and Allies.
993
Apr. 30 (116) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Approval of position taken in conversations with Ismet and Allied delegates and also of statement on capitulations.
994
Apr. 30 (2–A) From the Special Mission at Lausanne
Montagna formula (text printed) for Turkish declaration on judicial safeguards for foreigners; also Rumbold formula.
994
[Page XCIX]Apr. 30 (117) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Authorization to begin discussions with Turks and Allies relative (1) to negotiation of treaty of amity and commerce between United States and Turkey and (2) to participation in negotiations for drafting Turkish declaration and conventions.
996
May 2 (278) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Information concerning attitude of various delegates toward U. S. program for participation; British objections to U. S. participation in deliberations of experts and to inauguration of U. S.-Turkish treaty negotiations; Ismet’s promise of written definite proposals regarding treaty with United States.
997
May 3 (285) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Report on meeting of third committee; Grew’s statement at end of meeting reserving privilege to make more detailed comment in later discussions; British delegate’s opposition to U. S. participation.
999
May 4 (286) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Information that status of U. S. delegation is under discussion by inviting powers because of Grew’s representations and the opposition of the British delegate.
999
May 4 (290) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Withdrawal of British opposition; U. S. representation on all subcommittees dealing with matters of U. S. interest.
1000
May 4 (288) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Sharp dispute in conference over acceptance of Montagna formula; submission of Rumbold formula modifying Montagna formula with respect to domiciliary visits, searches, arrests, etc.; Ismet’s refusal to accept change; Grew’s statements on subject (texts printed).
1000
May 5 (293) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Summary of recent activities of conference.
1002
May 6 (297) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
U. S. representation by Turlington on subcommittee of legal experts; his cordial acceptance; his views on certain questions.
1003
May 6 (298) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
U. S. representation on three main committees and on three subcommittees of conference.
1004
May 10 (311) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Report on meeting of special subcommittee: Discussion of Turkish declaration regarding schools; addition of religious institutions to category; Dolbeare’s request for liberal attitude by Turkish Government.
1004
May 11 Memorandum by the Chief of the Division of Near Eastern Affairs, Department of State
Record of conversation with Mr. Craigie of British Embassy in which Mr. Craigie commented in detail on U. S. memorandum of March 31 regarding economic clauses of treaty.
1005
[Page C]May 23 (360) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Greek request for Grew’s intervention to secure return of Armenians and Greeks to homes in Anatolia; Turks’ insistence that return of Armenians is impracticable at present; subcommittee’s approval of Greek point of view as regards Greeks resident in Constantinople.
1010
May 27 (373) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Report of private meeting of delegates with Ismet and Venizelos: Submission of proposal that Turks accept Karagatch from Greeks in lieu of indemnity; Grew’s statement (text printed) appealing for peaceful settlement of problem; Ismet’s acceptance of proposal.
1010
May 31 (384) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Provisional agreement of Allies and Ismet on formula for judicial declaration.
1012
June 1 (390) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Interview with Ismet to urge desirability of including in proposed judicial declaration requirement that warrants be issued before arrests and that consuls have access to nationals in prison.
1013
June 1 (159) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
View that nothing at present can be done regarding refugee problem.
(Instructions to repeat to Athens and to Constantinople.)
1014
June 4 (399) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Report on meeting of first committee: Acceptance of formula for judicial declaration as agreed to by Ismet and Allies; Grew’s statement (text printed) commending declaration; Turkish intention to engage four legal advisers.
1015
June 6 (402) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Allies’ intention at last meeting of conference, and before signature, to make forcible representations to Turks for extension of amnesty to permit Armenians to return to homes in Anatolia or receive compensation for property; their suggestion that United States participate in representations. Mission’s suggestion that United States might, instead, make general statement on refugee question.
1015
June 6 (406) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Allied pressure upon Turks to admit into treaty a provision confirming concessions made before war upon which work had actually commenced, but which had not been legally validated. Mission’s representations to Allied powers; and request for instructions.
1016
June 8 (409) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Prospect that question of concessions will be settled satisfactorily. Allies’ request for U. S. good offices to assist in arranging settlement with Turks regarding payments on Ottoman debt.
1018
[Page CI]June 8 (175) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Department’s approval of Mission’s suggestion of general statement on refugee question and avoidance of coercive measures. Instructions to refer in statement to Department’s previous communications, U, S. relief work, and Haskell’s mission to Angora.
1019
June 9 (411) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Ismet’s declaration that Turkish delegation will quit conference unless their proposals on Ottoman debt bonds are accepted; Grew’s communication of ultimatum to French delegate.
1020
June 16 (429) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Résumé of concessions clauses which Allies desire to incorporate into a protocol to peace treaty. Mission’s objection to article 2 providing for validity of concessions concerning which on October 29, 1914, all formalities had not been completed but upon which work had been commenced or about which arrangements had been made between Turkey and Allies. Advice that protocol is to be supplemented by Turkish declaration.
1021
June 19 To the Secretary of the British Embassy
Department’s objections to article 2 of protocol.
1022
June 23 (244) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Instructions to make oral representations against provisions of article 2 of protocol on concessions in sense of statement telegraphed to Grew June 16 (text printed).
(Instructions to repeat to London and Rome for similar action.)
1023
June 27 (465) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Interviews with Allied delegations and with Ismet in which Minister explained precisely and forcefully U. S. position regarding article 2 of protocol on concessions; Ismet’s promise to stand firm against provisions of article; prospect of early settlement.
1025
June 27 (467) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Revised text of protocol as submitted to Turkish delegation (excerpts printed); opinion that modifications in article 2 do not remove U. S. objections.
1027
June 28 (207) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Instructions to make representations as telegraphed June 16, should protocol be adopted.
1027
June 28 (470) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
French advocacy of sending ultimatum to Ismet regarding Ottoman debt; desire of British and Italians to compromise, if possible.
1028
July 7 (510) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Further representations to Ismet regarding objectionable features of article 2 of protocol.
1028
[Page CII]July 7 (511) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Prospect that Allies may abandon stand on article 2 of protocol if companies are given appropriate compensation, particularly the British in respect to Vickers-Armstrong Co.
1029
July 8 (513) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Discussion of proposal to delete article 2 of protocol and substitute provisions to compensate French concession and Vickers-Armstrong Co. and to confirm Turkish Petroleum concession. Ismet’s pledge not to prejudice U. S. interests.
1029
July 10 (518) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Elimination of article 2 of protocol and Allies’ presentation to Ismet of substitute article.
1030
July 10 (232) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Instructions to make objections and reservations and to seek exclusion of clause in substitute article 2 of protocol pertaining to validation of alleged rights of Turkish Petroleum Co. No objection to clause intended to cover Samsun-Sivas railway.
1030
July 12 (525) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Representations to British delegate against proposed clause in article 2 of protocol, validating alleged rights of Turkish Petroleum Co. Ismet’s pledge of protection by Turkish laws of U. S. vested rights.
1034
July 17 (538) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Agreement on principal questions; deletion of objectionable features from protocol; replacement of provisions regarding priority in future concessions by identic letters to Régie Générale and Vickers-Armstrong Co. (text printed), guaranteeing them equal opportunity with other companies during 5-year period should foreign capital be desired for construction or exploitation; arrangements for evacuation of Allied military and naval forces.
1035
July 17 (539) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Discussion, in final meetings, of protocol of evacuation, declaration of amnesty, Ottoman debt, and concession protocol. Suggestion of arbitration of Turkish Petroleum Co.’s rights. Grew’s statements (texts printed) regarding refugee question and concessions, and felicitating delegates on results of negotiations. Ismet’s assurances in reply.
1036
July 19 (543) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Inquiry whether Grew should sign final act. Secretary general’s view that it would be desirable.
1039
July 20 (249) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Instructions not to sign final act; reasons.
1039
[Page CIII]

Negotiation and Signing of a General Treaty and an Extradition Treaty Between the United States and Turkey

Date and number Subject Page
1922 Nov. 15 (226) From the. Ambassador in Italy (tel.)
Views and assurances of Djelal-ed-Din Arif Bey, Turkish delegate en route to Lausanne Conference, regarding Turkish policy and Government’s need of friendly U. S. attitude toward its financial problems. Ambassador’s response, citing influence of open-door policy and course of peace negotiations.
1040
Nov. 19 (1) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Report on Lausanne Conference preliminaries. Inquiry how far it is left to Mission’s discretion to engage in preliminary discussions with Turks regarding basis for treaty after recognition of Angora.
1041
Nov. 20 (3) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
No objections to informal conversations at Mission’s discretion.
1041
Nov. 29 (37) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Conversation between Child and Ismet: Ismet’s eagerness to begin negotiations for treaty with the United States; Child’s assertion that conversations must not affect negotiations between Turkey and Allies and that U. S. attitude will be made known to Allies.
1042
Dec. 22 (143) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Conversation with Riza Nour Bey: Turks’ inclination to favor U. S. participation in Turkish concessions and intimation that early conclusion of treaty would be to U. S. advantage; Mission’s intention not to sign treaty before conclusion of treaty between Allies and Turks.
1042
1923 Jan. 8 (78) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Inquiry as to desirability of entering upon direct negotiations with Turks as soon as they have received Allied draft of treaty.
1043
Jan. 12 (194) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Reasons for recommending immediate opening of treaty discussions with Turks. Request for summary of treaty terms.
1043
Jan. 13 (83) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Approval of recommendations to begin discussion of treaty with Turks; authorization to approach Turkish delegation informally on subject, pending instructions.
1044
Jan. 15 (195) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Informal presentation to Ismet of question of initiating treaty discussions, negotiations to begin as soon as there is definite prospect of peace between Turks and Allies. Ismet’s acquiescence.
1044
Jan. 18 (85) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Preparation of preliminary draft of treaty; necessity for examining definitive text of Turkish treaty with Allies to determine action on certain questions, such as safety of philanthropic and religious enterprises in Turkey, free navigation of Dardanelles and Bosphorus, etc. Information concerning transmission of draft treaty.
1045
[Page CIV]Feb. 21 (27) To the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Instructions to obtain information for Department from Angora regarding Lausanne negotiations; view that time is not propitious for opening U. S. treaty discussions with Turks; suggestion of an exchange of notes to settle certain problems arising when diplomatic relations with Turkey are resumed, pending conclusion of treaty.
1046
Feb. 27 (53) From the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Instances of Turkish disregard for capitulatory rights of foreigners. Opinion that argument and persuasion are only courses left United States, since United States has no intention to resort to armed force. Explanation made to U. S. interests in Turkey that official intervention will accomplish less than private negotiation.
1047
Mar. 21 From the High Commissioner at Constantinople
Anomalous situation in Turkey resulting from rejection of capitulations by Turkish authorities and necessity of High Commission to represent them as still in force; loss of American rights.
1049
Mar. 23 (49) To the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Department’s observations on situation in Turkey and consideration of various courses of action. Request for information whether Turks would consider appointing U. S. judicial advisers.
1051
Mar. 31 (91) From the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Categorical reply to Department’s telegram no. 49 of March 23: Acceptance of view that no formal relinquishment of treaty rights should be made; impracticability of obtaining general definition from Turks as to intention regarding U. S. activities in Turkey; futility at present of raising question of U. S. judicial advisers; further observations and suggestions.
1053
May 5 (292) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Tentative draft of note from Ismet suggesting U. S.-Turkish negotiations for treaty; omission of paragraph proposing continuance of negotiations if discussions between Allies and Turks should stop.
1055
May 5 (295) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Letter from Ismet, May 5 (text printed) proposing immediate negotiations for treaties of amity, reciprocal consular relations and conditions of residence for respective nationals, and commerce. Comments and proposed acknowledgment (text printed).
1055
May 9 (133) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Instructions to make certain changes in proposed reply to Ismet. Authorization to advise Ismet that full powers to negotiate will be received when satisfactory result is in sight. Desirability of concluding general treaty of amity and commerce before diplomatic relations are resumed.
1057
[Page CV]May 11 (315) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Dispatch of reply to Ismet. Proposal made to Ismet that basis of negotiations be discussed informally by U. S. and Turkish experts.
1059
May 13 (325) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Telegram no. 12, May 12, from Bristol: Recommendation that U. S.-Turkish negotiations be postponed until conclusion of Turkish-Allied negotiations. Reasons.
1059
May 17 (340) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Summary of views of Turkish expert as basis for negotiations, conditional upon U. S. recognition of abolition of capitulations.
1061
May 17 (139) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Message for Bristol (text printed) stating Department’s reasons for authorizing treaty negotiations with Turks; disposition not to conclude treaty with Turkey until termination of Allied negotiations. Instructions concerning draft treaty sent to Lausanne with Turlington.
1063
May 18 (345) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Sudden change in plans of Turkish delegates and lack of cordiality on part of expert. Opinion that something tangible should be offered by United States as basis for discusssion. Recommendations regarding judicial safeguards, general conditions of residence, and other U. S. interests. Request for instructions.
1064
May 19 (143) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Suggestion that informal negotiations be based upon Turlington draft, or upon Lausanne conventions and declaration with additions from Turlington draft and general commercial treaties; and that assurances be obtained from Ismet acceding to United States privileges no less favorable than those granted to Allies and also reciprocal most-favored-nation treatment.
1065
May 23 (357) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Minutes of meeting of U. S. and Turkish experts: U. S. experts’ statement (text printed) of U. S. willingness to revise its treaty relations with Turkey and readiness to recognize formally the abolition of capitulations and to assure most-favored-nation treatment to Turks, in event of receiving assurances on certain fundamental matters; views of Turkish expert on portions of statement. Proposed communiqué for press announcing informal conversations (text printed).
1067
May 24 (150) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Approval of statement and press communiqué. Grant of full powers to negotiate treaty. Maintenance of view that abrogation of capitulations becomes effective only when new treaty with Turkey is ratified.
1069
[Page CVI]May 28 (374) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Understanding of U. S. and Turkish experts that new treaty is object of negotiations rather than revision or modification of present treaties. Dolbeare’s statement on claims (text printed), suggesting reference to arbitration by mixed commission. Information concerning press communiqués.
1070
May 31 (155) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Statement issued to press (text printed) announcing authorization of Grew to negotiate and sign treaty of amity and commerce with Turkey.
1072
June 1 (389) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Ismet’s agreement with principles proposed by Grew, namely: Resumption of consular and diplomatic relations; reciprocal most-favored-nation treatment, with acceptance of abrogation of capitulations; provisions for naturalization; and settlement of questions concerning claims.
1072
June 1 (162) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Department’s desire not to have resumption of diplomatic and consular relations mentioned in treaty. Instructions to secure assurances that treaty will include provisions substantially identical with conventions between Allies and Turkey; that Ismet will send substantially the same communication as that to Allies on schools, etc.; and that judicial declaration will be given general application.
1073
June 2 (393) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Completion of two treaty drafts; advantages of shorter form, practical reasons for its adoption, and outline of contents.
1074
June 2 (164) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Necessity for caution in phrasing article providing for abrogation of capitulations; suggestion that reference to capitulations be omitted from treaty, if possible.
1075
June 2 (30–A) From the Special Mission at Lausanne
Drafts of short and long forms of proposed treaty between the United States and Turkey (texts printed).
1076
June 3 (165) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Department’s desire that longer form of draft treaty be adopted as basis for negotiations. Instructions regarding provisions of treaty for most-favored-nation treatment and capitulations, Ismet’s written assurances on schools and other establishments, and changing of wording of judicial declaration to provide for appointment of U. S. legal adviser.
1085
June 11 (180) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Instructions to attempt to secure from Turks voluntary statement regarding protection of minorities in Turkey, omitting reference to supervision by League of Nations. Inadvisability of applying principle of reciprocity to question of schools because of diversity of U. S. laws. Inquiry concerning form of declaration on judicial reforms.
1087
[Page CVII]June 13 (422) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Opinion that time is not opportune for discussing voluntary statement on minorities; that statement on schools and other establishments will probably be identical with that made to Allies; and that no changes can be secured in judicial declaration.
1088
June 19 (188) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Information of opposition of U. S. public to United States entering into treaty with Turkey which does not safeguard lives and property of Christians remaining in Turkey.
1090
June 20 (441) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Turkish experts’ agreement to accept U. S. naturalization article, subject, however, to right to exclude expatriates; and desire to negotiate new treaty of extradition.
1090
June 20 (442) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Turkish proposal to divide claims into three categories, all cases to be submitted to Turkish courts or to Government bureau. Mission’s suggestion contemplating registration of all claims within 6 months with government bureau, to be followed by effort to settle through diplomatic channels, with final reference of unsettled claims to mixed arbitral tribunal.
1091
June 21 (444) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Ismet’s refusal to accede to U. S. desire for voluntary statement on minorities; his counterproposal that clauses on minorities in treaty with Allies be published in United States, with explanation of U. S. participation in negotiations.
1092
June 21 (192) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Necessity for having judicial declaration communicated formally; desirability of not limiting legal advisers to Europeans.
1093
June 23 (194) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Instructions to communicate orally the views of Department regarding naturalization; also to obtain assent of Turks to omission of their reservation regarding expatriates.
1094
June 23 (451) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Possible difficulties in securing Ismet’s agreement to separate judicial declaration with or without desired U. S. modification. Suggestion of exchange of notes to serve same purpose.
1095
June 25 (196) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Department’s refusal to accept any proposal involving submission to Turkish courts of U. S. claims arising prior to 1914; desire for mixed arbitral tribunal for settlement of claims or, as alternative arrangement, Mission’s plan for registration in Government bureau, diplomatic discussion, and final reference to mixed tribunal.
1096
June 26 (200) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Instructions to seek exchange of notes with Ismet regarding protection of minorities, in lieu of voluntary statement.
1097
[Page CVIII]June 26 (201) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Further instructions concerning exchange of notes on minorities.
1097
July 6 (503) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Turkish counterproposals for claims settlement (text printed). Mission’s comments.
1098
July 9 (225) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Rejection of Turkish counterproposals for claims settlement. Instructions to urge adoption of plan for registration of claims, diplomatic discussions, and final reference to mixed tribunal, should Turks fail to agree to mixed tribunal in first instance.
1100
July 10 (228) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Instructions to make representations to Ismet for conclusion of treaty before adjournment of conference. Department’s disposition to resume diplomatic and consular relations and to give recognition de jure immediately after signature. Also instructions to forward statement of principal points of difficulty in negotiations and any provisions agreed to by Turks and Allies susceptible of substitution.
1101
July 14 (239) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Department’s suggestion of three general categories of claims for use if description in general terms is not followed; desire to protect interests of protégé claimants in diplomatic and consular missions.
1102
July 20 (545) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Inquiry whether Department desires to embody in treaty the Allied compromise on noncapitulatory taxes or whether question should be avoided in negotiations.
1103
July 20 (247) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Suggestion to seek confirmation by letter of fifth article of Turkish National Pact concerning guarantees for minorities, in case more detailed voluntary statement cannot be obtained.
1104
July 20 (251) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
View that question of noncapitulatory taxes should be settled by direct negotiations with Turkey, rather than by attempting to embody Allied compromise in treaty. Desirability of obtaining provisions for most-favored-nation treatment as well as national treatment in taxation of individuals.
1104
July 21 (548) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Objections to Ismet’s suggestion that unsettled questions be left for future negotiation and that treaty be signed covering settlements already reached. Further discussions of unsettled questions without reaching any agreements.
1105
July 21 (252) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Approval of Grew’s objections to leaving fundamental questions for future settlement.
1106
[Page CIX]July 22 (550) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Summary of Ismet’s final position on questions under negotiation; his request that Department be informed that he is unable to recede on any point; and his intention to depart from Lausanne within few days.
1107
July 22 (255) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Department’s unwillingness to negotiate further unless Turks indicate spirit of conciliation. Instructions to state that if negotiations fail, existing treaties will be considered as still in force. Further observations, instructions, and concessions for settlement.
1113
July 22 (551) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Mission’s draft of article on claims stipulating registration within 6 months of treaty date, examination by U. S. delegate and Turkish delegate within 1 year, and submission to commission for final decision. Opinion that Turks will offer further reservations on claims.
1116
July 24 (261) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Instructions as to procedure for signature.
1118
July 24 (189) From the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Turks’ representations regarding attitude of U. S. delegation; their unwillingness to grant by treaty more to United States than Allies have received; also unwillingness to continue negotiations at Lausanne beyond August 2.
1118
July 25 (554) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Grew’s opinion, after futile conference with Ismet, that negotiations will now develop into test of tenacity.
1120
July 25 (555) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Turkish proposal to sign general and extradition treaties, reserving ratification until after conclusion of separate convention or exchange of notes on claims, to supplement and to accompany treaties.
1120
July 25 (556) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Statement in Swiss press (text printed), obviously given out by Turkish delegation, regarding status of treaty negotiations.
1121
July 25 (263) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Instructions to indicate either in exchange of notes or by formal statement in procès-verbal that right of Americans to hold property in Turkey must be determined by reference to laws of particular States from which they come.
1122
July 25 (192) From the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Opinion that negotiations should merely be suspended and declarations exchanged with Turks providing for resumption after peace treaty with Allies has been ratified by Grand National Assembly.
1122
July 25 (264) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Instructions to arrange, as a last resort, for an exchange of notes on claims.
1123
[Page CX]July 25 (557) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Conjectures as to Turkish attitude, and recommendations; status of pending issues; explanation that claims and abolition of capitulations are only questions still requiring settlement, and that conclusion of negotiations depends largely on former. Grew’s ultimatum to Ismet regarding acceptance of mixed court of arbitration for final appeal of claims.
1124
July 25 (139) To the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Turks’ unfairness in regarding minor changes in treaty draft as an attempt of United States to obtain more than was accorded Allies. Instructions to make representations against suspension of negotiations through withdrawal of Turkish representatives and against arbitrary conditions for resumption of negotiations.
1126
July 27 (269) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Department’s proposal to include in treaty a modification of Turkish formula for settlement of claims, to avoid disadvantage of separate convention.
1127
July 29 (569) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Ismet’s assurance that Turkish Government has no thought of refusing just claims, but cannot be responsible for losses ensuing from war, etc. Mission’s rejection of his offer of new formula (text printed). Grew’s intention to propose modified formula in Department’s telegram no. 269 of July 27, to avoid rupture of negotiations. Transmittal of report on draft of treaty, and suggestion that signature be authorized.
1128
July 30 (573) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Draft of final claims formula based on conversation between Ismet and Grew (text printed). Ismet’s refusal to consider minorities; and his views on other questions. Mission’s opinion that United States must present ultimatum or accept Turkish formula on claims.
1130
July 31 (273) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Reasons why Department does not favor presenting ultimatum. Suggestion of adding phrase to Turkish formula providing for obligation to examine and settle just claims. Authorization to accept Ismet’s offer as last resort.
1133
Aug. 2 (578) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Acceptance of claims formula by Turkish delegation with reservation that understanding be reached on contested nationality. Proposed notes to be exchanged between Ismet and Grew on subject (texts printed). Request for instructions.
1134
Aug. 5 (585) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Mission’s rejection of new claims formula proposed by Turkish representatives (text printed). Agreement to proceed to exchange of notes on claims (texts printed) and to signature of treaties. Mission’s receipt of copies of declarations and | letters agreed upon. Contents of procès-verbal.
1135
[Page CXI]Aug. 5 (279) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Willingness to accept Turkish formula reported in Mission’s telegram no. 573 of July 30 rather than postpone settlement; or, as alternative, to carry out procedure in Mission’s telegram no. 585 of August 5, making U. S. reservations as to claims and capitulations. Prospect of early resumption of diplomatic relations in event of settlement of claims question and ratification by Turkey.
1137
Aug. 6 (588) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Signature of treaties; formal communication of letters on schools and of declarations concerning judicial and sanitary matters.
1138
Aug. 4 The Turkish Plenipotentiary to the American Plenipotentiary
Declaration of July 24 relating to administration of justice (text printed); declaration of July 24 relating to sanitary affairs (text printed).
1139
Aug. 4 The Turkish Plenipotentiary to the American Plenipotentiary
Identic letter from Chief of Turkish Delegation to Chiefs of Allied Delegations at Lausanne Conference (text printed) recognizing existence of their religious and philanthropic institutions. Information that similar treatment will be applied to U. S. institutions in Turkey.
1141
Aug. 6 The American Plenipotentiary to the Turkish Plenipotentiary
Understanding that question of claims is reserved for subsequent discussion as soon as possible after 20 days, but reserving right to postpone ratification of treaties.
1143
Aug. 6 The Turkish Plenipotentiary to the American Plenipotentiary
Confirmation of U. S. understanding regarding claims settlement.
1143
Undated Minutes of the Meeting Held at Lausanne, August 6, 1923
Procès-verbal of interpretations and views of U. S. and Turkish representatives regarding certain articles of general treaty; mutual concurrence and acceptance.
1144
Undated Report of the Subcommittee of the Lausanne Conference Charged with the Study of the Regime of Religious, Scholastic, and Charitable Institutions, May 18, 1923
Confirmation by Turkish delegation of previous assurances on three points regarding Allied institutions, applicable also to U. S. religious, scholastic, and charitable entities in Turkey.
1148
Aug. 6 From the Special Mission at Lausanne
Expression of regret at number of points conceded to Turkey in negotiations; mention of most-favored-nation treatment in establishment articles as most important principle gained; opinion that U. S. concessions were essential to conclusion of negotiations; expressions of appreciation of assistance rendered by staff and of support by Department.
1148
[Page CXII]Dec. 8 (320) From the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Report that leaders of American colony feel that activities are progressing satisfactorily under present regime in Turkey and that Turkish authorities are reasonable and well disposed; their unanimous desire that treaty be ratified.
1150
1924 Jan. 29 (1354) From the Minister in Switzerland
General treaty and treaty of extradition between the United States and Turkey, signed at Lausanne, August 6, 1923 (texts printed).
1151

Exchange of Letters Between the United States and Turkey Providing for the Establishment of a Joint Committee To Examine Claims

Date and number Subject Page
1923 Aug. 8 (285) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Instructions for High Commissioner at Constantinople (text printed) to resume claims negotiations at Angora; importance of not permitting question of naturalization to become chief issue; desirability of establishing commission of U. S. and Turkish representatives to consider individual claims at early date.
1172
Sept. 15 (240) From the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Possibility of preparing way for formal negotiations by informal exploratory discussions between experts at Constantinople. Opinion that Turks will accept Department’s proposal of claims commission; further observations.
1174
Sept. 23 (249) From the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Request for immediate authorization to get in touch with Turkish experts; presence of Mustafa Cherif at Constantinople.
1176
Sept. 25 (173) To the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Authorization to resume negotiations for settlement of claims.
1176
Sept. 29 (181) To the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Department’s inability to supply complete data on claims until later; enumeration of classes of claims not to be pressed.
1177
Oct. 18 (271) From the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Granting by Turkey of full powers to Adnan Bey to negotiate with respect to U. S. claims; naming of U. S. and Turkish experts. Acceptance of suggestion of informal, exploratory conversations to begin October 22 at Sublime Porte. Question of full powers for Bristol.
1178
Oct. 27 (200) To the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
For Bristol: Granting of full powers to negotiate and sign with Turkey claims and naturalization conventions.
1179
[Page CXIII]Nov. 8 (293) From the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Report on first plenary meeting: Turks’ willingness to undertake benevolent examination of specific claims; opposition in principle to submission of claims to arbitration; insistence that claims growing out of war be excluded; and suggestion (1) that certain claims be submitted to local authorities and other claims be handled through regular diplomatic channels, or (2) that negotiations be adjourned, with agreement to reopen within 6 months after general and extradition treaties have been ratified.
1179
Nov. 17 (214) To the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Instructions to make representations regarding Turkey’s proposals and refusal to submit claims to arbitration; also to suggest that Turks agree by exchange of notes to postpone negotiations and to have joint U. S.-Turkish committee set up within 6 months for settlement of those claims upon which it agrees and to decide classes of claims to be referred to arbitration. Department’s inclination to end negotiations should Turks refuse both this exchange of notes and the submission of points at issue to arbitration; intimation of nonratification of general treaty.
1181
Dec. 3 (223) To the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Instructions to report progress of negotiations on claims and naturalization conventions; U. S. intention not to send general treaty to Congress before decision on claims question is reached; difficult situation if no solution is found by time treaty between Turks and Allies is ratified.
1183
Dec. 6 (318) From the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Report that negotiations regarding claims are proceeding satisfactorily, with prospect of agreement for an examining commission. Unwisdom of pressing for naturalization agreement at this time.
1184
Dec. 8 (224) To the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Importance of arriving at early agreement on claims because of general treaty ratification and regularization of relations with Turkey. Ismet’s statement at Lausanne Conference regarding Turkey’s resort to arbitration to settle claims dispute with Soviet Government. Inquiry as to Turkish plans for submitting general treaty to National Assembly.
1184
Dec. 10 (325) From the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Turkish counterproposal to set up, after general treaty has been ratified, a commission of two U. S. and two Turkish members to examine claims presented within 6 months of its constitution, commission’s proceedings not to be made public without mutual consent. Request for authorization to sign arrangement, with revision extending time limit to 1 year.
1185
Dec. 13 (227) To the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Willingness of Department to accept Turkish counterproposal if certain conditions can be agreed upon.
1186
Dec. 16 (329) From the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Adnan Bey’s acceptance of Department’s conditions, with minor exceptions as to time limit and form of agreement.
1188
[Page CXIV]Dec. 20 (234) To the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Authorization to proceed to exchange of letters with Adnan Bey.
1188
1924 Jan. 4 (1070) From the High Commissioner at Constantinople
Exchange of letters, December 24, 1923, with Adnan Bey (texts printed) confirming arrangement between Turkey and the United States for examination of claims by mixed committee to be established 6 months after exchange of ratifications of general treaty.
1189

Decision by the Department of State To Postpone Negotiations for a Naturalization Treaty With Turkey

Date and number Subject Page
1923 Aug. 6 (202) From the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Turkey’s refusal to permit naturalized Americans of Ottoman origin to enter Turkey. Recommendation that no passports be issued to persons of Ottoman origin for return to Turkey.
1191
Aug. 6 (203) From the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Adnan Bey’s statement that naturalized Americans of non-Ottoman origin will be permitted to enter Turkey, but those arriving of Ottoman origin will be requested to leave.
1192
Aug. 21 (157) To the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Information that naturalized citizens are entitled to full protection of U. S. law, that passports cannot be denied them but that such travelers may be warned of present Turkish regulations. Instructions not to communicate information to Turkish authorities, but to make appropriate representations.
1192
Aug. 24 (219) From the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Recommendation that negotiations for naturalization treaty with Turkey be postponed until general treaty has gone into effect and normal consular and diplomatic relations are resumed.
1193
Sept. 29 (178) To the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Desirability of reaching modus vivendi with Turkey on subject of naturalization before treaties go to Senate; instructions to seek solution through informal conversations, explaining U. S. law, citing treaties with other nations as precedents, etc.
1193
Dec. 31 (340) From the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Recommendation that negotiations for naturalization treaty be postponed pending complete exploration of subject and, possibly, development of better attitude by Turks. Reasons.
1196
1924 Jan. 10 (9) To the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Approval of recommendation to postpone negotiations; request that modus vivendi be effected, if possible.
1198
[Page CXV]

Grant of a Concession to the Ottoman-American Development Company (Chester Project) and the Failure of the Company To Obtain Substantial Financial Backing

Date and number Subject Page
1923 Jan. 15 (294) To the Acting High Commissioner at Constantinople
Instructions to observe utmost circumspection to avoid giving impression that Department may be particularly concerned in success of any one American concern. Disposition of United States to accord proper diplomatic support but to refuse special privileges to American interests and citizens. (Sent also to American Mission at Lausanne.)
1198
Undated Memorandum by the Chief of the Division of Near Eastern Affairs, Department of State
Conversations with General Goethals on Chester concession: Goethals’ expectation that Department would give vigorous support to concession; inquiry in respect to Chester claims as against British interests in Mosul; expectation to interest British and French capital in project under an American-controlled company. Dulles’ opinion on advisability of proposed visit of Admiral Chester to Lausanne.
1200
Apr. 12 (104) From the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
French protest to Turkey against adoption of Chester project by National Assembly.
1201
Apr. 13 (150) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Information that French protest represents concession of Ottoman-American Development Co. as conflicting with alleged rights of French interests. Department’s views that concession is not monopolistic nor objectionable, and that question of conflict should be settled by friendly understanding or impartial tribunal.
(Instructions to repeat to Berne, London, Rome, and Constantinople.)
1201
Apr. 16 (111) From the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Acceptance of Chester project by National Assembly, April 9, with certain changes. Observations regarding reasons for and effect of French protests. Recommendation that United States support concession.
1202
Undated Memorandum by the Secretary of State of a Conversation with the French Ambassador, April 16, 1923
French Ambassador’s representations regarding conflict between French concession obtained before war and Chester project. Secretary’s request for facts and legal questions involved, with assurance of careful examination by Department.
1204
Apr. 19 (118) From the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Summary of agricultural concession to Ottoman-American Development Co., negotiated by Clayton-Kennedy, for sale to private individuals in Turkey of agricultural machines and implements and for establishment of model farms, etc., with Government guaranty.
1205
Apr. 20 (76) To the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Instructions to forward text of ratified project and summary of principal changes; also to maintain greatest reserve with both Allies and Turks until situation has developed further.
1206
[Page CXVI]Apr. 28 (268) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Postponement of Lausanne Conference discussion of economic clauses relating to concessions, giving French concessionaires time to arrive at direct settlement with Turkey regarding Chester concession. Understanding that, if French claim comes up at Lausanne, it will have support of British and Italian delegates. Inquiry whether capital of Ottoman-American Development Co. is 49 percent Canadian.
1208
Apr. 30 (331) From the British Ambassador
Attention called to press report that Chester concession comprises rights in Mesopotamia; statement that British Government cannot recognize validity of any concession in Mesopotamia granted by Turkish Government at Angora.
1208
May 1 To the British Ambassador
Assurance that careful consideration will be given to British note when more definite information is available as to exact nature of Chester concession.
1209
May 2 (132) From the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Signing of Chester project agreement at Angora, April 29.
1209
May 2 (122) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Information that Barnard, a Canadian, owns majority of stock, but that voting trust agreement gives Americans present and future control of Ottoman-American Development Co.
1209
May 4 (124) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Telegram, April 27, from Otto H. Kahn denying press report that Kuhn, Loeb and Co. is backing Chester project; his doubt, expressed during conversation at Department May 2, that project could secure necessary financial backing without some Government support. Department’s belief that Turkish abrogation of treaty obligations, capricious legislation, etc., may discourage U. S. investments in Turkey.
(Instructions to repeat to Constantinople.)
1210
May 29 (380) From the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
French delegate’s representations regarding points of French concessions touched by Chester project; his statement that France does not desire to thwart Chester concession, but will demand compensation from Turks and respect for prewar contracts. Request for instructions.
1212
June 1 (161) To the Special Mission at Lausanne (tel.)
Instructions to use points previously emphasized by Department if concession claims are brought up in conference; also to avoid direct offer of arbitration and to stress U. S. desire for fair play and reciprocal regard for valid rights.
1214
[Page CXVII]July 25 From the Ottoman-American Development Company
Copies of: (1) Preliminary agreement between Turkish Government and company regarding Eastern Anatolian Ry., (2) definitive convention, (3) supplementary contract, (4) certified translation of law ratifying Chester concession, and (5) note of confirmation from Turkish Minister of Public Works to Messrs. Clayton-Kennedy and Chester (texts printed); and several other documents.
1215
Aug. 23 (217) From the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Turkish concern over inactivity of Ottoman-American Development Co.; virtual annulment of agricultural concession and probability that French will obtain it. Inquiries as to latest developments in company’s affairs.
1241
Sept. 17 (169) To the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Attempt of Clayton-Kennedy to secure extension of option on Samsun-Sivas railway. Present confused status of Ottoman-American Development Co. Instructions to avoid giving impression that company is regarded by United States as substantially American.
1242
Oct. 3 (184) To the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Belated attempt on part of Americans to take control of Chester concession, requesting Department to secure extension of option; Department’s reply assuring appropriate action upon receiving satisfactory evidence that substantial American investment is involved. Instructions to report Turkish attitude and date contract expires.
1243
Oct. 8 (264) From the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Turkey’s friendly attitude toward concession and probable willingness to extend option if convinced of sound financial backing of company. Clayton-Kennedy’s proposal of 3 months’ extension of option and certain changes in contract, offering immediate deposit of funds and list of subscribers. Participation of Cromwell in negotiations upon withdrawal of Chester group.
1244
Oct. 15 (269) From the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Turkey’s acceptance of proposed changes in definitive agreement and offer to Clayton-Kennedy of choice of two lines of action, namely, deposit of 100,000 Turkish pounds to insure extension of time or a beginning of work on small scale within 30 days.
1246
Oct. 27 (283) From the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Telegram from Barnes, at Angora (substance printed) predicting loss of U. S. prestige if concession fails; Commissioner’s view that Chester fiasco would seriously weaken Turkish Government; his inquiry whether Department can exercise pressure to put in order chaotic affairs of Ottoman-American Development Co.
1246
[Page CXVIII]Oct. 29 (201) To the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Information that Department cannot direct or control affairs of U. S. concession seekers, but must limit itself to appropriate diplomatic support of genuine American enterprise. View that Turkish Cabinet, rather than United States, will lose prestige if project fails.
1248
Nov. 6 (292) From the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Clayton-Kennedy’s instructions to his representative, Soubhi Bey, to begin work on Samsun-Sivas line with formal ceremonies and to obtain procès-verbal stating work has begun; and promise to telegraph necessary funds. Failure of funds to arrive and difficulty of Soubhi Bey in raising money for traveling expenses of technical staff, etc.
1249
Nov. 10 (296) From the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Report that Turkish Government declines to accept company’s contention that work has begun on Samsun-Sivas line in accordance with contract. Grant of extension of time for presentation of evidence of sufficient capital to begin serious work.
1250
Nov. 12 (209) To the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Information that no American company or group is interested in advancing funds to Ottoman-American Development Co. Chester’s statements indicating failure of project.
1251
Dec. 21 (335) From the High Commissioner at Constantinople (tel.)
Notification by Turkish Minister of Public Works to company’s representative that concession has been annulled.
1251

VENEZUELA

Acquiescence by the United States in the Ratification by Venezuela of the Spanish Text Only of the Extradition Treaty Signed on January 19 and 21, 1922

Date and number Subject Page
1923 Apr. 17 (330) From the Minister in Venezuela
Report of exchange of ratifications of extradition treaty between the United States and Venezuela and additional article thereto, April 14. Transmittal of Spanish text supplied by Venezuela and signed English original of protocol of exchange.
1253
May 29 (802) To the Minister in Venezuela
Return of Venezuelan instrument of ratification with instructions to obtain in substitution an instrument incorporating the English as well as the Spanish text of the treaty and additional article.
1253
June 11 (381) From the Minister in Venezuela
Report that Venezuelan custom requires text of ratification to be given in Spanish only; representations by Minister in accordance with Department’s instructions.
1254
[Page CXIX]July 18 (417) From the Minister in Venezuela
Memorandum by Foreign Ministry (text printed) proposing that English text be copied below ratification and certified by Foreign Minister. Note to Foreign Minister, June 20 (text printed) requesting complete instrument of ratification incorporating both English and Spanish texts.
1255
Sept. 27 (487) From the Minister in Venezuela
Foreign Minister’s statement that his Government can do nothing further regarding inclusion of English text in instrument of ratification.
1257
Oct. 18 (820) To the Minister in Venezuela
Acceptance of Venezuelan suggestion to copy and certify English text of instrument of ratification; instructions to obtain same.
1258
Dec. 14 (591) From the Minister in Venezuela
Transmittal of Venezuelan instrument of ratification with English text appropriately certified; also signed English original of protocol of exchange.
1258
[Page [CXX]]