711.4112Anti-War/146
The British Embassy to the Department of State
Aide-Mémoire
The French Ambassador in London has informed Sir Austen Chamberlain of the conversations which the French Ambassador in Washington had recently had with the United States Secretary of State in regard to the French reservations to the treaty for the renunciation of war. These reservations were:—
- 1.
- Maintenance of existing treaties.
- 2.
- Freedom of action for all signatory powers against a power guilty of breaking the treaty.
It appears that the French Government would have preferred that these two reservations should be embodied in the treaty itself but that the Secretary of State had objected and had assured M. Claudel that they would be covered by the wording of the preamble.
If it were impossible to include the reservations in the body of the treaty the French Government would prefer that they should be contained in a protocol of equal value with the treaty.
Mr. Kellogg had replied that if this were done it might well happen that the Senate would accept the treaty but reject the protocol and this would cause an exceedingly embarrassing position.
The French Ambassador stated to Sir Austen Chamberlain that the French Government now fully realised this and had instructed M. Claudel to allow these reservations to be covered by the wording of the preamble, but that he should ask for the following words to be added to Article 2 for the sake of greater clarity: “in conformity with the principles enunciated in the preamble.”
M. de Fleuriau had asked that His Majesty’s Representative in Washington might be instructed to support this proposal. Mr. Chilton [Page 87] was instructed to inform the Secretary of State verbally that as His Majesty’s Government understand the preamble is to be redrafted so as to take account of the views expressed by the different powers. It would be a help if some phrase were added to the treaty itself making it clear that its provisions are based on the principles set forth in the body of the instrument.
His Majesty’s Government, however, do not venture at this juncture to suggest any particular wording for this proposed addition to the text.