881.05/4
The Diplomatic Agent and Consul General at
Tangier (Blake) to the Secretary of State
Tangier, February 12,
1926.
[Received March 16.]
No. 67
Sir: I have the honor to enclose herewith the
French text, and English translation, of a communication which I have
received from the Belgian Consul-General containing a proposal that
direct official contact be established between the American Consular
Court at Tangier and the Mixed Court, created under the provisions of
the Tangier Convention of 18th, December 1923.2 Identical communications have also
been received from the Consuls General of Spain, of Great Britain, of
France and of Holland in Tangier.
I also transmit to the Department herewith a copy of my reply to each of
the notes above mentioned.
My communications to my colleagues set forth my personal opinion in
regard to this matter, but I venture to trust that the position, which I
have taken, may be found to be in accordance with the views of the
Department on the subject.
I have [etc.]
[Enclosure
1—Translation]
The Belgian Consul General at Tangier
(Watteeuw) to the American
Diplomatic Agent and Consul General at Tangier (Blake)
Tangier, January 30,
1926.
No. 110/A (M–3)
Mr. Diplomatic Agent and Dear Colleague:
The Convention of December 18th, 1923 signed at Paris between the
British, Spanish and French Governments, and to which the
Governments of Belgium and Holland subsequently adhered, stipulates
by Article 13 that “as a result of the establishment at Tangier of
the Mixed Court, as provided
[Page 717]
in article 48, the capitulations shall be abrogated in the
Zone.[”] Article 48 adds that [“]an international jurisdiction,
called the Mixed Court of Tangier, and composed of French, British
and Spanish magistrates, shall be responsible for the administration
of justice to the nationals of foreign Powers.” It provides that the
Mixed Court of Tangier will replace the existing Consular
jurisdictions.
Accordingly, from June 1st 1925, the date upon which the Statute was
applied, I divested myself, in favor of the aforementioned Mixed
Court, of the jurisdictional powers which I held in regard to
Belgian subjects and protégés, under the regime of the
capitulations; the Belgian Consular Court, over which I presided at
Tangier ceased to exist on the same date, and the Mixed Court of
Tangier has thenceforth dealt with all new Belgian judicial cases,
in civil, commercial and criminal matters, in accordance with the
conditions set forth in the texts above referred to. Furthermore the
Registrar’s Office of the Mixed Court has, as a matter of course,
replaced the Registrar’s Office of the Belgian Consular Court,
installed up to that time, in the chancery of the Belgian Consulate
General.
It would appear useful to determine the conditions in which the
relations of a judicial order between the Consular Court of your
Diplomatic Agency and these new organizations should be continued.
Two solutions appear to me to be possible.
- 1)
- Whenever the Consular Court of the United States of America
would have to address this Consulate General on a judicial
matter involving a Belgian interest, it would do so through our
intermediary, but in acceding to your request, I could only
transmit your demand to the Mixed Court. Inversely, whenever the
Mixed Court, dealing with a Belgian matter, would have to enter
into relations with your jurisdiction, this Court would have to
pass its request through this Consulate General, which would
transmit it to you. This procedure has the disadvantage of being
lengthy.
- 2)
- Does it not appear possible to you to adopt a more simple
method, and to agree that, concerning any case involving a
Belgian interest or element before either of these two
jurisdictions, the Consular Court of the United States of
America and the Mixed Court of Tangier, as well as their
respective Registrar’s Offices, shall enter into direct written
or verbal relations? You might let me know who, in the
Diplomatic Agency of the United States of America, is the person
that would be entrusted with this service.
The Mixed Court has already contemplated the necessity of having a
Magistrate carry out this function, and the Judges forming the
Tribunal have designated the President of the Section of Appeal.
[Page 718]
It would be this high
Magistrate, in the present hypothesis, who would assure the contact
between the two jurisdictions.
I beg you will kindly let me know your views in this connection. So
far as I am concerned, I should be pleased to see the second
solution adopted, which simplifies and accelerates the procedure; it
has therefore two advantages which we have not the right to neglect
and which are essential in an international town, when judicial
action must, in commercial and criminal matters (attachments,
execution of judgments, arrests, hearing of witnesses, etc.)
manifest itself with the least possible delay.
I avail myself [etc.]
[Enclosure 2]
The American Diplomatic Agent and Consul General
at Tangier (Blake) to the Belgian
Consul General at Tangier (Watteeuw)
Tangier, February 6,
1926.
Mr. Consul-General and Dear Colleague: I
have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your communication of
January 30th, 1926, submitting suggestions as to procedure to be
adopted for the purpose of creating contact between the American
Consular Court and the Mixed Court of Tangier, as a result of the
fact that, conformably with the terms of the Tangier Convention of
December 18th, 1923, the Belgian Consular Court has surrendered its
extraterritorial jurisdiction in the Tangier Zone to the last
mentioned Tribunal.
In reply, I would inform you that the proposal contained in your Note
hereby acknowledged, for a “liaison” between the jurisdiction of the
United States Consular Court and that of the Mixed Tribunal in
Tangier, does not appear practicable, in the circumstances.
It is evident that the extraterritorial jurisdiction, and the
position of the Consular Court of the United States in Tangier is
entirely unmodified by the provisions of the Tangier Convention, to
which the United States has not adhered.
The jurisdiction of the American Consular Court and the procedure
followed in that Court, are entirely independent of, and separate
from, the jurisdiction and procedure of the Mixed Court of Tangier,
both Courts holding towards each other the position of foreign
jurisdictions.
Belgian subjects being, as you explain, now deferred to the
jurisdiction of the Mixed Court, it follows that an American
plaintiff will automatically have recourse against a Belgian
defendant in that Court, and will be subject to its rules of
procedure and other regulations, so far as concerns the prosecution
of his suit.
[Page 719]
On the other hand Belgian subjects will continue to sue American
citizens and protégés, who appear as defendants in suits, before the
American Consular Court, the preliminary step in the procedure
being, as heretofore, a note of introduction and indication of the
plaintiff’s nationality delivered by the Belgian Consul-General.
Reciprocally the nationality of any Belgian defendant will be
officially certified to by the Belgian Consul-General, prior to the
initiation of the American plaintiff’s suit before the Mixed
Tribunal, upon the request of the American suitor, following an
administrative introduction of him to the Belgian Consulate General,
by the American Diplomatic Agency and Consulate-General.
If the necessity is deemed to arise for attachments, injunctions and
arrests, under the jurisdiction of the American Consular Court, by
parties to a suit before the Mixed Court, it will be incumbent upon
such parties to initiate, concurrently, independent proceedings to
the end desired, before the Consular Court of the United States in
Tangier.
Testimony required of American citizens and protégés, who will not
voluntarily give their depositions in the course of proceedings
interesting a Belgian subject before the Mixed Tribunal, may be
taken by an American Consular Officer in Tangier, who is
commissioned to take such depositions, on the exhibition of an order
duly made to the parties concerned, by the Mixed Court, and
signified to the American Consular Authority by the Belgian
Consulate-General.
Finally, I find it difficult to conceive any circumstances, in
Tangier, in which the execution of a judgment would simultaneously
involve the jurisdiction of the American Consular Court and of the
Mixed Tribunal, since judgments could be pronounced, and made
executory by either Court, only against persons within the
respective jurisdictions of these Courts.
In view of the foregoing, I venture to assume that adequate contacts
for the administration of justice, between two separate and distinct
systems of judicial control, each exercising independently
identically similar powers, while co-existing side by side in the
same community, are already provided for, without the necessity of
creating any other nexus, than that which has been fixed by the
customs of the country and confirmed by practices of long
observance.
Please accept [etc.]
