711.4112Anti-War/17: Telegram
The Ambassador in Great Britain ( Houghton ) to the Secretary of State
[Received 5:18 p.m.]
88. Chamberlain told me yesterday, in regard to the arbitration treaty,39 that the replies from the Dominions were very slow in coming in and that he had now urged immediate action on their part; from his own examination, however, he thought that changes in the text would be necessary. He said that at the moment he was thinking of Egypt, and added that Great Britain also has her “Monroe Doctrine”. [Page 40] Probably he will find it necessary to ask for extension of present treaty until he has his reply ready.
He could say nothing in regard to the multilateral anti-war treaty except that its consideration would be approached sympathetically. As yet he has not been able to give it any real study. The French proposal will also require his attention. He said offhand that he thought that a meeting between the Foreign Secretaries probably would be necessary at some later date; he expressed his pleasure at your intimation to Sir Esme Howard40 that you might be willing to come here to meet with them.
Chamberlain said that he would like to speak personally on one matter. His assumption was that you would agree with his view that the right of self-defense was not denied. I replied that of course such a right was inherent and was implicit in any treaty. He asked, What then of the Monroe Doctrine? It was not a part of international law but was merely an expression of our national will; how would the United States regard its violation? I replied, also speaking personally, that I thought he could answer that question himself. I went on to say, however, that this approach to the treaty seemed to me to be precisely the wrong one. The assumption I preferred to make was that if we entered into an agreement to renounce war we did so because we intended to keep it, and that having entered into such an agreement we would not thereupon seek its violation through committing an act of war. What we were talking about was, after all, the renunciation of war, not a search to determine just how far one nation could push another without bringing on war. Chamberlain agreed, but went on to say that this doubt was the one which Briand had in mind. He closed our interview by saying that as soon as the British attitude was determined he would send for me; at that time he would wish to ask me certain questions by way of interpretation.
There are two suggestions which I am venturing to make:
- 1.
- Would the addition of a further argument to paragraph headed “Covenant” in your telegram No. 97, April 23,41 not be helpful? Obviously the League of Nations can function only as soon as the great powers or a sufficient majority of them agree. The entire League structure falls when they seriously disagree. Your proposal takes on special significance at precisely this point; for, as it covers a wider field than the Covenant covers, it thereupon brings into operation the pledges to renounce war made with nations which are not in the League. Therefore it is a new and added security.
- 2.
- As Briand has now made counterproposals, I am strongly of opinion that Chamberlain will endeavor to act as mediator between him and you, and thus by degrees gain for himself and Great Britain full credit for whatever treaty may result. My suggestion is, therefore, [Page 41] that it might possibly be expedient to give to American press such a statement as that which is embraced in your telegram No. 97. Its form and tone are admirable, and it is most convincing. As far as we are concerned it defines the possible limits of negotiations, and if a treaty results from them it can be only along the lines that you and not Chamberlain have laid down. Publication would also serve to strengthen popular sentiment in all quarters in favor of your proposal.
I learn that Grey of Falloden, in addressing a large meeting of Laborites and Liberals a couple of days ago in a committee room of Parliament, made statement that he thought treaty should be signed with no reservations, but that each signatory, if it so desired, should make a supplementary statement covering its interpretation of any phrase or portion of the text.
I have heard rumor that because of ill-health Briand may resign within the next fortnight and that Poincaré will take over the Foreign Office.
- See vol. ii, pp. 943 ff.↩
- British Ambassador in the United States.↩
- See telegram No. 118, Apr. 23, 5 p.m., to the Ambassador in France, p. 34.↩