711.60p2/21
The Minister in Latvia (Coleman) to the Secretary of State
[Received April 5.]
Sir: I have the honor to refer to the Department’s instructions Nos. 406 and 415, of January 21 and February 17, 1927,29 respectively, concerning a proposed treaty of Friendship, Commerce and Consular Rights between the United States and Latvia, and to the following [Page 184] telegrams which were exchanged between the Department and the Legation on the same subject:
- (1)
- My No. 13, of February 7, 10:00 A.M. (1927)30
- (2)
- My No. 16, of February 21, 4:00 P.M. (1927)
- (3)
- Department’s No. 7, of February 24, 5:00 P.M. (1927)
- (4)
- My No. 17, of February 28, 4:00 P.M. (1927)
- (5)
- Department’s No. 8, of March 7, 6:00 P.M. (1927)
In this connection, I have the honor to transmit herewith a copy of a note which I addressed to the Latvian Foreign Office on February 7, 1927,31 together with copies of two memoranda, dated March 5 and 16, 1927, in reply, from the Foreign Office. It will be observed from these memoranda that the Latvian Government accepts the text of the following articles in the draft submitted by the United States Government:
2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 28, 29, 30, 31, Protocol paragraphs 1 and 2.
With regard to the remaining articles of the United States draft, the Latvian Government, in its two memoranda, proposes slight alterations, which were explained to me verbally by an official of the Latvian Foreign Office, and which are discussed numerically hereinafter in this despatch.
Preamble
The Foreign Office memorandum of March 5th states that “according to the constitutional practice of Latvia the authorization for the signature of the Treaty will be given by the Latvian Government”. The Latvian Government would appreciate it if a change in the United States draft could be made so that the proposed U. S.-Latvian treaty would be identical in this respect with the U. S.-Esthonian treaty.
Article 1
The Foreign Office memorandum of March 5th proposes that the sentence “upon the same terms as nationals of the State of residence or as nationals of the nation hereafter to be most favored by it” be replaced by the sentence “upon the same terms as nationals of the most favored nation”.
A Latvian Foreign Office official informed me that his Government desired to make this restriction on account of future negotiations with the Soviets.
Articles 7 and 16
The Foreign Office memorandum of March 5th stated “whilst accepting paragraphs 2–7 of Article 7, the Latvian Government [Page 185] proposes to unite the exceptions from most favored nation treatment embodied in paragraph 8 of Article 7 and in Article 16 under one separate article and with the text as set forth in Annex 1 to this memorandum. This new article should be inserted at the end of the Treaty before Article 29 of the draft.”
In this connection, the following telegrams were exchanged between the Department and the Legation:
- My No. 16 of February 21, 4:00 P.M. (1927)
- Department’s No. 7, of February 24, 5:00 P.M. (1927)
- My No. 17, of February 28, 4:00 P.M. (1927)
- Department’s No. 8, of March 7, 6:00 P.M. (1927).
A Foreign Office official informed me orally on March 16th that the Latvian Government would accept the proposals contained in the Department’s telegram No. 8, of March 7, 6:00 P.M.
In connection with Article 7, the Foreign Office memorandum of March 5th further states that the end of paragraph 1 of that article should be worded as follows:
… “on such terms as it may see fit:
- a)
- Prohibitions or restrictions relating to national defence, public security and public order;
- b)
- Prohibitions or restrictions of a sanitary character designed to protect human, animal or plant life;
- c)
- Prohibitions or restrictions relating to articles, goods or products constituting a state of monopoly;
- d)
- Regulations for the enforcement of police or revenue laws.”
Clause a) is apparently designed to afford the Latvian Government greater protection against communism than would result from clause d) alone.
Article 11
The Latvian Government would like to insert after the words “coasting trade” (in two places) the words “and the towing service” and to add a second paragraph to the text of this Article with the following text:
“The provisions of this Treaty relating to the mutual concession of national treatment in matters of navigation do not apply to the special privileges reserved by either High Contracting Party for the fishing industry and for the national shipbuilding industry.”
Article 13
The Latvian Government desires to add at the end of the first paragraph the sentence “The foregoing stipulations do not apply to the organization of and participation in political associations”. (See Foreign Office memorandum of March 5th).
A Latvian Foreign Office official explained to me verbally that his Government desired to add the above quoted sentence on account [Page 186] of its relations with the Soviets. The same clause exists in the United States-Estonian Treaty.
Article 15
The Latvian Government desires to insert between “importation” and “may be prohibited” the words “or transit”. (See Foreign Office memorandum of March 5th). A Foreign Office official explained that Latvia is principally a transit nation. The Legation believes that the Latvian Government wants to be free to make regulations which will prevent the transit through Latvia of certain articles—such as ammunitions or poison gas—to Soviet Russia.
The Foreign Office’s memorandum of March 16th states that “in order to avoid misunderstanding as to the significance of the stipulation embodied in Article XV of the Draft and exempting the Panama Canal and waterways and canals which constitute international boundaries from the application of the principle of freedom of transit, the words ‘of the United States’ should be left out”.
Article 27
The Latvian Government wishes to replace paragraph 1 of this Article by the text set forth in Annex 2 to its memorandum of March 5th. The Latvian Foreign Office explained that the Latvian Government desires this change on account of Latvia’s relations with Soviet Russia. The same clause exists in the United States-Estonian treaty.
Protocol
On account of its relations with the Soviets, the Latvian Government desires to add a third paragraph with the following text:
“In addition to consular officers, attaches, chancellors and secretaries, the number of employees to whom the privileges authorized by Article 27 shall be accorded shall not exceed five at any one post.” (See Foreign Office memorandum of March 5th).
In its memorandum of March 16th, the Latvian Foreign Office states that “the Latvian rules concerning the measurement for tonnage of vessels being based on the Moorsom system and therefore substantially in conformity with the American system of measurement, it is proposed to agree by exchange of notes on the mutual recognition of certificates of measurement”.
A translation of the Latvian rules concerning the tonnage measurement of vessels is enclosed herewith.32
The Latvian Foreign Office informed me orally that the privileges reserved in Article 27—i. e. exemption from examination of baggage, etc.—would be extended informally to United States Consuls.
I have [etc.]