List of Papers

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

GENERAL

Proposed Accession of the United States to the Statute of the Permanent Court of International Justice

[Page XXXII] [Page XXXIII] [Page XXXIV] [Page XXXV]

Date and number	Subject	Page
1929 Feb. 19	To the Austrian Minister U. S. view that, with respect to the second part of the fifth reservation of the U. S. Senate, the final act and draft protocol submitted to the conference at Geneva in September 1926 and adopted by 24 nations signatory to the protocol of signature, December 16, 1920, of the statute of the Permanent Court of International Justice, would not furnish adequate protection to the United States; belief that informal exchange of views as contemplated by the 24 Governments may lead to agreement upon some provision which in unobjectionable form would protect the rights and interests of the United States as an adherent. (Footnote: Information that identic notes were sent to the diplomatic representatives of all nations signatory to the protocol of signature of the statute of the Permanent Court.)	1
Feb. 19 (404)	To the Minister in Switzerland Transmittal of note for the Secretary-General of the League of Nations, setting forth text of the communication addressed to signatories of the Court protocol.	3
Mar. 4	From the Consul at Geneva (tel.) From Root: Desire to be advised whether the Secretary of State and the President will approve a draft working agreement (text printed) which Mr. Root has personally suggested to representatives of signatories of the December 16, 1920, protocol, as a means of applying practically the second part of the fifth Senate reservation. (Footnote: Information that Mr. Elihu Root was acting in a purely private capacity as American member of the Committee of Jurists which had been appointed to make a preliminary study of the question of revising the statute of the Permanent Court.)	4
Mar. 5	From the Consul at Geneva (tel.) From Root: Desire for authority to present draft officially to the Secretary-General for information of the Council of the League of Nations.	6
Mar. 6	To the Consul at Geneva (tel.) For Root: Preliminary opinion of the President and the Secretary of State that the proposal submitted seems feasible; belief that U. S. Government should not undertake to negotiate through the League Council; advice that any submission of draft to Council for informal approval should be purely on own responsibility as a member of the Committee of Experts.	7
Mar. 7	From the Consul at Geneva (tel.) From Root: Belief that arrangements have been reached for referring proposal of the 1926 conference to the Committee of Experts; desire for information about the situation in Washington.	7
Mar. 8	To the Consul at Geneva (tel.) For Root: Report of consultation with the President and certain Senators; information that they agree on acceptability of proposed draft; note from the President setting forth views of Senator Borah, and letter from Senator Walsh of Montana containing suggestions as to rewording of draft (texts printed).	7
Mar. 11	To the Consul at Geneva (tel.) For Root: Inquiry by the President as to the possibility of having advisory opinions eliminated from the Court statute; his belief that such elimination would remove the last objection in the United States and that ratification would be almost unanimous.	10
Mar. 12	To the Consul at Geneva (tel.) For Root: Concurrence of the President in Senator Walsh’s suggestion that the third paragraph of draft be omitted.	10
Mar. 14	To the Consul at Geneva (tel.) For Root: Comments on proposal of British member of Committee of Jurists as published in the press; opinion of Secretary of State and Senator Walsh that the original Root proposal is preferable.	10
Mar. 18	From the Consul at Geneva (tel.) From Root: Transmittal of text of a protocol which the Committee of Experts has recommended to the Council for consideration at June meeting; comments on provisions.	11
May 25	To Mr. Elihu Root Apprehension of the President and Senator Swanson that unequivocal and public declaration in favor of amended protocol at the present moment would endanger ultimate ratification by the Senate; Secretary’s desire for assistance in preparing message to the Secretary-General of the League which will express U. S. friendliness to the amended protocol and yet not provoke public debate.	12
May 27 (57)	To the Minister in Switzerland (tel.) Letter for the Secretary-General (text printed), acknowledging informal note of May 2, which transmitted copy of report and draft protocol adopted by the Committee of Jurists, and advising that whenever the Committee’s suggestions have been laid before the Council and have come to the U. S. Government officially, they will be given attentive and cordial consideration.	13
May 30 (44)	From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.) Delivery of letter to Secretary-General; his explanation that procedure will include submission of draft protocol to the Council at forthcoming meeting, official transmission of protocol, in event of agreement by Council, to all interested governments including the United States, and inclusion of matter on agenda of League Assembly meeting to be held in September; his belief that conference of signatories to the Court Statute may be held during the next Assembly.	14
June 12	From the Secretary-General of the League of Nations Report of the Committee of Jurists (text printed), transmitted in accordance with resolution of the Council (text printed), which states acceptance of report and draft protocol and instructs the Secretary-General to transmit the documents to signatories or the Court statute, to the United States, and to the League Assembly for inclusion in agenda of the next session.	15
July 18 (969) (L. N. 1399)	From the Minister in Switzerland Informal letter from the Secretary-General, July 12 (text printed), expressing personal opinion that the presence of an American would be welcomed by the special conference of signatories of the Court Statute to be held during the first week of the Assembly.	21
Aug. 14 (84)	To the Minister in Switzerland (tel.) Aide-mémoire for the Secretary-General (text printed), advising that the draft protocol is satisfactory and that, after acceptance by the states signatories to the protocol of signature and the statute of the Permanent Court, the Secretary of State will request authority to sign and recommend submission to the Senate for ratification.	22
Aug. 15 (86)	To the Minister in Switzerland (tel.) Disinclination to designate representative to attend conference.	22
Aug. 17 (60)	From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.) Information that the Secretary-General was highly pleased with contents of the aide-mémoire, which he will keep confidential and will use only in the most discreet manner; that he also hopes that if many states sign the draft protocol at the September meeting of Assembly, the United States will likewise sign during the session.	23
Aug. 20 (65)	From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.) Suggestion that the Secretary-General be authorized to read U. S. aide-mémoire at opening session of conference in order to nullify misinterpretation of U. S. attitude by unauthorized persons.	23
Aug. 20 (88)	To the Minister in Switzerland (tel.) Satisfaction with the method by which the Secretary-General proposes to treat U. S. aide-mémoire, as outlined in telegram No. 60, August 17; nonintention of the Department to make any announcement at present.	25
Aug. 27 (68)	From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.) Information that present intention is to submit draft protocol to the Assembly for acceptance before submitting it to the committee of signatory powers, and that in the meantime the committee will initiate work on revision of the Statute.	25
Aug. 28	From the Consul at Geneva (tel.) Receipt by the Cuban representative of instructions to suggest in the committee of signatory states that revision of the Statute be postponed until after accession of the United States; request for Department’s instructions.	25
Aug. 29 (95)	To the Minister in Switzerland (tel.) Advice that, while Department appreciates the courtesy of the Cuban Government, it considers that the U. S. Government could not with propriety make any suggestions with regard to time and method of revision of the Statute.	26
Aug. 30 (97)	To the Minister in Switzerland (tel.) Inquiry whether the Minister can ascertain discreetly whether the Secretary-General will show the message contained in telegram No. 84, August 14, to the Council, and if so, when; opinion that it would be preferable that no publicity be given to contents, as premature discussion of matter in the United States might be harmful.	26
Sept. 4	From the Consul at Geneva (tel.) Information that the Secretary-General had read a statement to the conference of signatory powers which advised that he had been reliably informed that draft protocol was acceptable to the U. S. Government; also that it was decided not to make his statement public for the present.	27
Sept. 5 (100)	To the Minister in Switzerland (tel.) Instructions to inform the Secretary-General of a statement made to the press by the Secretary of State (text printed) expressing approval of draft protocol; information that aide-mémoire of August 14 has been made public; instructions to advise the Secretary-General that it is not probable that it will be advisable to submit protocol to the Senate for a considerable period of time.	27
Sept. 7 (78)	From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.) Information concerning the extensive consideration which the conference is giving to U. S. opinions and difficulties, and the hope that U. S. signature may be affixed to the protocol as soon as possible.	28
Oct. 8 (1119) (L. N. 1501)	From the Minister in Switzerland Note from the Secretary-General, October 7 (text printed), containing his statement to the conference, August 16 (text printed), also advising that draft protocol was adopted by conference and Assembly and has been signed by 50 nations, and transmitting authenticated copies of the protocol and a further protocol effecting certain amendments in the Statute which has been signed by 48 nations.	29
Nov. 18	To President Hoover Exposition of reasons for recommending that the American Minister at Berne be immediately authorized to affix U. S. signature to both of the protocols now open at Geneva and also to the original Court Protocol of 1920.	31
Nov. 26	From President Hoover Authorization to make the necessary arrangements for U. S. signature of the three protocols; transmittal of full powers for the Chargé at Berne.	41
Dec. 2 (133)	To the Chargé in Switzerland (tel.) Instructions to advise the Secretary-General of the President’s forthcoming announcement to Congress that he had authorized signature of the three protocols, and of dispatch of full powers for signature by the Chargé on December 9. Note to be handed to the Secretary-General at time of signature (text printed); suggestion that copy be furnished immediately for his confidential information; desire for publication, December 9, of this note and his note of October 7.	41
Dec. 3 (114)	From the Chargé in Switzerland (tel.) Gratification of the Secretary-General with message contained in telegram No. 133, December 2; arrangements for signature, December 9, and release to the press of texts of notes.	42
Dec. 16 (1220) (L. N. 1570)	From the Chargé in Switzerland Transmittal of note from the Secretary-General, December 14, enclosing certified copies of the three protocols (texts printed of the protocol concerning revision of the Statute and the protocol relating to the accession of the United States, both dated September 14, 1929).	43

Informal Suggestions for Further Implementing the Treaty for the Renunciation of War, Signed at Paris, August 27, 1928

[Page XXXVI]

Date and number	Subject	Page
1929	(Note: Information that on July 25, 1929, the Secretary of State made a suggestion for the implementation of the treaty for the renunciation of war, entitled “Suggestions for a Commission of Conciliation”, printed in volume II, page 243.)	59
Sept. 25	From the French Embassy Observations on the naval situation of France and Italy; conclusion that the question of general security is most important for the two nations; suggestion that the principles of article 7 of the Washington Treaty of 1922 concerning China (i. e., provisions for full and frank communication between the contracting powers concerned whenever a situation arises which, in the opinion of any one of the contracting powers, involves the application of the treaty and renders desirable discussion of such application) be extended to the treaty for the renunciation of war.	59
Oct. 10	Memorandum by the Secretary of State Conversation with the French Ambassador concerning the importance of machinery for investigating and enlightening the public opinion of the world as to any controversy, in which the Secretary suggested that the Ambassador ascertain the views of Foreign Minister Briand on the subject.	61
Oct. 25	Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State Conversation with the French Ambassador in which he presented his own informal draft of a multilateral declaration (text printed) to provide methods of dealing with disputes which might arise between nations.	62
Dec. 16 (565)	From the Ambassador in France (tel.) Report of audience with the Foreign Minister in which he remarked that the treaty needed an extra article which would justify the signatory powers in taking action in an emergency.	64

Participation of the United States in the Work of the Preparatory Commission for the Disarmament Conference, Sixth Session

[Page XXXVII] [Page XXXVIII] [Page XXXIX] [Page XL]

Date and number	Subject	Page
1929 Feb. 9 (733) (L. N. 1269)	From the Minister in Switzerland Summary of preliminary agenda for the sixth session of the Preparatory Commission for the Disarmament Conference, to be held April 15, as proposed by Mr. Colban, Chief of the Disarmament Section of the League Secretariat.	65
Feb. 27 (17)	From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.) Information from Mr. Colban that the German delegation intends to propose formation of subcommittee to debate naval questions; his desire to learn whether his proposed agenda would meet with U. S. approval.	68
Mar. 1 (24)	To the Minister in Switzerland (tel.) Authorization to express U. S. approval of Mr. Colban’s proposed agenda; objection to German proposal as leading directly to confusion and deadlock.	69
Mar. 23	To the Ambassador in Belgium Instructions to the Ambassador, Mr. Hugh Gibson, to continue as chairman of the American delegation; exposition of U. S. attitude on the points of the agenda.	70
Mar. 28	From the British Embassy Opinion that progress on naval disarmament problems will be impossible until the ground has been prepared by previous consultation through diplomatic channels, particularly between the U. S. and British Governments; plan to propose, if discussions along present lines fail, that each interested government submit armament-limitation program in its own form in the hope that the several programs may eventually be assembled and embodied in a convention binding the signatories not to exceed them.	78
Apr. 4	To the British Embassy Concurrence in suggestion that progress toward settlement of naval questions would be much more probable if it could be preceded by consultation between the two Governments; willingness to examine any proposals the British may care to put forward. Opinion that proposal regarding submission of programs would be a material modification of the Commission’s functions, and that ultimate agreement would be advanced by clear statement of reasons for failure to agree, rather than by resort to the expedient proposed.	80
Apr. 10	From the British Embassy Desire to avoid further public discussion and possible controversy until there has been opportunity for a full and confidential exchange of views between the two Governments. Impression that the U. S. Government has not fully understood the British proposal; opinion that the convention being prepared by the Commission would be preferable, but that in event of continued disagreement, British plan would be better than no progress at all.	82
Apr. 15 (2)	From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) Information that at morning session president of Commission submitted proposed agenda substantially the same as the Colban proposal.	85
Apr. 16 (4)	From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) Probability that German delegate will soon propose establishment of special committee of the five principal naval powers to seek agreement on methods of naval reduction and limitation; intention of American delegate to state that no reason is seen for singling out the naval problem for special treatment or for excluding other interested naval countries from the debates.	86
Apr. 17 (4)	To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) Approval of attitude toward German proposal.	86
Apr. 17 (5)	To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) Desire to deliver to the British Ambassador, the day previous to American delegate’s speech before the Commission, a reply to memorandum of April 10; transmittal of proposed text; importance of ample notice of the time when American delegate expects to deliver his speech.	87
Apr. 18 (7)	From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) Hope that speech may be scheduled for opening of Monday morning meeting.	87
Apr. 19 (11)	From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) Information that arrangement has been made for speech to be delivered on Monday morning; suggestion that it would be desirable to furnish British delegate on Sunday with copy of Department’s reply to British memorandum.	88
Apr. 20	To the British Embassy Opinion that Commission should now proceed pursuant to its regular program: observation, however, that in the event of an impasse, the U. S. Government will be glad to consult with the British Government as to the possibility of some other plan. Declaration that U. S. Government is prepared, whenever the occasion arises, to examine with British Government the possibility of a limitation of the naval types not already covered by the Washington treaty, taking into account the relative value of ships of varying unit characteristics such as displacement, gun caliber, and age; observation that studies of the subject have convinced the U. S. Government that a formula for estimating equivalent tonnage is possible and offers real hope of an acceptable arrangement.	88
Apr. 20 (9)	To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) Delivery of memorandum to the Counselor of the British Embassy; Department’s non-objection to delivery of copy to British delegate.	90
Apr. 22	Address by the Chairman of the American Delegation Before the Preparatory Commission General statement of U. S. views as to the means best calculated to promote an early agreement, emphasizing reduction of armaments, limitation of all categories of ships, idea of formula for equivalent tonnage, and the significance of the Kellogg Pact in relation to the work of the Commission.	91
Apr. 22 (13)	From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) Information that speech was cordially received and that the British delegate in particular made categorical statement of general approval.	96
Apr. 23 (231)	From the British Ambassador Appreciation for U. S. note of April 20; assurance that the British Government reciprocates spirit of American delegate’s speech and agrees that it is along the lines suggested by him that the problem ought now to be investigated.	96
Apr. 25 (22)	From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) Request for views on desire of Chinese delegate for support of his proposal that conscription be abolished in favor of voluntary armies.	97
Apr. 27 (14)	To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) Instructions to avoid making any statement which might be taken to mean that the principle of universal liability to service in a time of war is inconsistent with American principles.	98
Apr. 30 (84)	From the Ambassador in Germany (tel.) Observation of German press that events at Geneva indicate a release from the tension arising from naval rivalry between the United States and Great Britain and a reestablishment of cordial relations between the two powers.	98
May 3	From the British Embassy Belief that time and opportunity for confidential exchange of views between the U. S. and British Governments should be afforded before new proposals are publicly presented in detail. Inquiry whether British naval authorities should work out their calculations independently or whether the U. S. Government proposes to communicate its calculations for consideration; preference for latter course as being more practical and speedy.	99
May 4	Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State Conversation with the Secretary of the Navy in which it was agreed that the U. S. Government would be in a stronger strategical position if it took the initiative by showing its plan to the British Government, and in which it was agreed that it would be well to advise the French, Italian, and Japanese Ambassadors as to the general character of the Anglo-American discussions.	100
May 6	To the Chairman of the American Delegation Report of recent conversation with the British Ambassador in which he inquired concerning the extent of the suggestions contained in the American delegate’s speech; report of a conversation with the French Ambassador on the same subject.	101
May 6	Address by the Chairman of the American Delegation Re-statement of U. S. suggestion for equivalent tonnage formula; concurrence in British and Japanese delegates’ proposal that consideration of the naval chapter of agenda be postponed until such time as the interested powers have signified to the chairman of the Commission their readiness to embark upon a general discussion.	102
May 6 (40)	From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) Adjournment of Commission; arrangement to reconvene at call of chairman when the time appears ripe for further discussion; information that the next meeting will be a continuation of the present session.	104
May 6 (42)	From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) Suggestion that, in reply to British inquiry as to procedure, it would suffice to say that American delegate has made it quite apparent that the United States feels that the next move should be independent studies by the various naval powers.	105
May 6 (43)	From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) Information that the American delegate has refrained from making any suggestions in reply to inquiries as to the next step to be taken in dealing with the American suggestion. Observations concerning importance of assuring Japanese that they will be kept informed of any progress being made in British-American conversations. Comments on divergence of French and Italian views on land and naval armaments.	105
May 15	Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State Conversation with the Japanese Ambassador, in which he was informed that he could deny absolutely to his Government that there was any truth in press reports that the United States had decided to ask for 250,000–ton maximum limit on cruisers or that the British Admiralty was studying the American plan.	107
May 15 (1827)	To the Chargé in Great Britain Information that on May 3, during conversation with the British Ambassador in which he presented memorandum of that date, the Secretary of State advised that he would reply later to the question concerning procedure to be followed as to calculations; transmittal of copies of British memorandum and report of conversation between the Assistant Secretary of State and the Secretary of the Navy, May 4.	108
May 17 (227)	To the Ambassador in Belgium Advice that on May 9 the French Ambassador called to express his Government’s appreciation of American delegate’s sympathetic attitude with regard to naval armaments, and that he was told, in response to inquiry as to what steps the U. S. Government would take in the future, that no definite plans had been made as yet.	109
May 27 (130)	From the Chargé in Great Britain (tel.) Information from the head of the American Department of the Foreign Office that the British Admiralty has prepared figures under the American formula; his belief that preliminary Anglo-American conversations between political rather than technical officials should take place to compare the two sets of figures and/or to determine on an interpretation of the formula which could be accepted by the two Governments in any subsequent and less secret discussions. Observation that it is obvious that Foreign Office has in mind that the Appointed American Ambassador to Great Britain, Mr. Charles G. Dawes, could initiate such conversations.	109
Sept. 24 (91)	From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.) Understanding that no intention exists of having the Preparatory Commission reconvene in the near future, and that general opinion is that it is necessary to await the results of the naval negotiations.	110

Preliminaries to the Five-Power Naval Conference To Be Held at London in 1930

[Page XLI] [Page XLII] [Page XLIII] [Page XLIV] [Page XLV] [Page XLVI] [Page XLVII] [Page XLVIII] [Page XLIX] [Page L] [Page LI] [Page LII] [Page LIII] [Page LIV] [Page LV] [Page LVI] [Page LVII]

Date and number	Subject	Page
1929 May 14 (1821)	To the Chargé in Great Britain Report of conversation with the British Ambassador, May 9, concerning prospects for the future in the matter of naval armament reduction, in which it was agreed that the American naval proposals made by Ambassador Gibson at Geneva would stand a better chance of success if they were placed under the control of civilians rather than naval experts.	112
May 30	Address of President Hoover at the Memorial Exercises at Arlington Cemetery Declaration that, in order to fulfill the spirit of the treaty for the renunciation of war, nations must reconsider their armament in the light of defensive and not aggressive use; that the defensive needs of navies are relative; and that it is necessary to find a rational yardstick with which to make reasonable comparisons of American naval units with other naval units and thus maintain an agreed relativity. Information that the present Administration has undertaken to approach this vital problem with a new program.	113
June 11 (154)	From the Chargé in Great Britain (tel.) Existence of general belief that the new Ambassador, Mr. Charles G. Dawes, will present disarmament proposals and will convey official invitation for Prime Minister MacDonald to visit the United States.	116
June 17 (158)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Information that the Prime Minister, the Foreign Secretary, and the Japanese Ambassador have approved text of the Ambassador’s proposed speech on naval disarmament. Substance of the Ambassador’s remarks in response to the Prime Minister’s inquiry as to possibility of a trip to the United States.	117
June 18 (159)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Report of satisfactory conferences with the Canadian, French, and Italian diplomatic representatives concerning proposed speech.	119
June 18 (4)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain Announcement by the Prime Minister, June 17 (text printed), that conversations with the American Ambassador on the naval disarmament question have been informal, general, and most satisfactory, and that a speech by the Prime Minister at Lossiemouth and speech by the Ambassador at the Pilgrims Society dinner are intended to be the beginning of negotiations.	120
June 20 (12)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain Speech delivered at the Pilgrims’ dinner, June 18 (text printed), suggesting a change in the method of future negotiations for naval disarmament, i. e., that each government obtain from its respective naval experts their definition of a naval yardstick and that a committee of statesmen of the nations make the inevitable compromise between the differing definitions which will be expressed in the final fixation of the yardstick, draw up the final agreement covering quantitative reductions, and submit it to the nations for approval or rejection.	121
June 20 (39)	From the Ambassador in Belgium (tel.) Advice that Ambassador Dawes desires Ambassador Gibson to come to London for consultation; request for instructions. (Footnote: Information that the authorization requested was granted by telegraph, and that on June 27 general authorization was granted for further consultations in London on naval questions from time to time.)	128
June 20 (162)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Suggestion that announcement be made in Washington concerning Ambassador Gibson’s trip to London. Information that forthcoming debates in Parliament will indicate what support the Prime Minister may expect on his program of pressing for a settlement of disarmament question.	129
June 20 (65)	From the Chargé in Japan (tel.) Declaration by the Prime Minister that Japan is prepared to support any measures looking to further reduction of armaments.	130
June 21 (150)	To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Hope that Ambassadors Dawes and Gibson will make some recommendation as to what steps would be most effective to carry on the work they have begun.	130
June 22 (166)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Suggestion that it might be advantageous to make as full use as possible in the early conferences of the personality of the Japanese Ambassador.	130
June 24 (154)	To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Opinion that the Japanese Ambassador should be kept closely informed of conversations with the British but that he should not be present personally.	131
June 24 (573)	To the Chargé in Japan Information that on June 11, in response to suggestion that it might be possible for authorized U. S., British, and Japanese representatives separately to work out a naval yardstick with the advice of their naval officers, the Japanese Ambassador indicated expectation that the U. S. Government would work out its formula first and submit it to the other nations; also, that he brought up the question of application of the 5–5–3 ratio to auxiliary vessels.	131
June 25 (168)	From the Ambassadors in Great Britain and Belgium (tel.) Belief that the next logical step would be to convene a meeting of nontechnical governmental representatives to consider the naval problem, but that some other power should take the initiative; summary of suggestions.	132
June 25 (169)	From the Ambassadors in Great Britain and Belgium (tel.) Information that the Prime Minister has decided to extend invitation for conference of nontechnical governmental representatives of the five naval powers and will consult the two American Ambassadors about the form of invitation; his preference that conference be held in London.	135
June 26 (171)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Plan of the Prime Minister to urge that conference take place on July 22; his idea that it shall be confined to discussion of certain general principles, methods of work, and adoption of resolution to the effect that ultimate agreement upon the naval problem must be achieved through a full adherence to the spirit of the Kellogg Pact.	136
June 27 (160)	To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Opposition to the holding of a final conference at the present time; approval, however, of preliminary nontechnical consultation limited to examining broad questions of general policy; desire for assurance from the British that they agree with the principle of parity between the two navies; opinion that after the general questions have been settled and time has been afforded for adequate preparation, a final conference could be called with prospects of success immensely increased; approval of London as location for preliminary consultation.	137
June 28 (175)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Prime Minister’s entire approval of terms of telegram No. 160 of June 27. Ambassador’s suggestion that U. S. and British naval mathematicians meet confidentially at Brussels to compare the two yardsticks and study how great is the actual divergence.	139
July 9 (179)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Letter from the Prime Minister, July 8 (text printed), outlining proposals and procedure for disarmament negotiations and requesting views thereon.	140
July 11 (174)	To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Informal reply for the Prime Minister (text printed), stating the points on which there is agreement with his proposals and suggesting that the yardstick be based only on displacement, gun, and age factors.	141
July 11 (186)	From the Ambassador in Great Britian (tel.) Information that present uncertain status of the Prime Minister’s trip to the United States is causing him much embarrassment; opinion that his presence at the final naval conference is important. Prime Minister’s message to the Secretary of State (text printed), advising of decision to slowdown preparations for laying keels of two cruisers and stating that a corresponding step on the part of the United States would have a fine effect.	143
July 12 (187)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Advice that the Prime Minister was pleased with message contained in telegram No. 174 of July 11, but must give further study to suggestions regarding procedure for determining yardstick. Request for authorization to submit the Secretary of State’s message and the Prime Minister’s letter of July 8 to the Japanese Ambassador in confidence.	145
July 12 (176)	To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Plan to study with U.S. naval experts method of arriving at technical yardstick; authorization as requested in telegram No. 187 of July 12.	145
July 12 (177)	To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Concurrence of the President and the Secretary of State in views regarding importance of the Prime Minister’s presence at the final naval conference; information that they can cooperate with his suggestion by slowing down preparations for laying keels of three cruisers.	147
July 15 (190)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Prime Minister’s appreciation for information contained in telegrams No. 176 and No. 177 of July 12; his intention to submit reply.	147
July 18 (197)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Letter from the Prime Minister (text printed) stating that in his view agreement has now been reached that (1) Washington arrangements regarding first class battleships and aircraft carriers will not be disturbed; (2) there shall be parity in cruisers, differences to be resolved by application of a yardstick; (3) there shall be parity in destroyers and submarines on gross tonnage; and observing that only the yardstick is now needed to make agreement complete.	148
July 21 (182)	To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Comments for the Prime Minister on his position: observation that nub of difficulties lies in matter of parity in cruisers, and that fundamental question is at what time and what tonnage parity is to be determined; summary of U.S. understanding of British cruiser figures; belief that agreement must first be reached on limit of British cruiser strength before it will be possible effectively to use the yardstick for the purpose of evaluating the two cruiser fleets.	149
July 22 (201)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Conversation with the Prime Minister in which he read and discussed an address he will make in Parliament (excerpt printed), outlining status of the Anglo-American conversations with regard to naval reduction and his proposed visit to the United States, and announcing decision to suspend and slow down naval construction program.	153
July 23 (186)	To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Approval of the Prime Minister’s statement, with two cautionary suggestions for his consideration and decision.	155
July 23 (202)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Note from the Prime Minister (text printed), proposing that he and the First Lord of the Admiralty meet with Ambassadors Dawes and Gibson to go into the whole cruiser tonnage question until they agree on how they stand. Desire for the Secretary of State’s approval and comment before agreeing to the suggestion.	156
July 23 (187)	To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Opinion that it is most desirable to hold the suggested discussion in order that the Prime Minister may clearly understand the need for practical cessation until 1936 of all further cruiser construction by the British in order that parity may be obtained by the United States.	158
July 24 (189)	To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Desire for check-up on accuracy of British cruiser figures contained in Department’s telegram No. 182 of July 21.	158
July 24 (190)	To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Statement by the President (text printed), commenting with satisfaction on the Prime Minister’s address to Parliament and declaring that keels of three cruisers will not be laid until there has been an opportunity for full consideration of their effect upon the final agreement for parity it is hoped to reach.	158
July 25 (204)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Letter from the Prime Minister (text printed) declaring that U. S. insistence on absolute tonnage figures appears to be a formidable obstacle, giving figures on British cruiser strength, and stating preference that problem be approached by examining the present condition and attempting to work out parity within it.	159
July 26 (192)	To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Review of the position of negotiations, outlining (1) points on which agreement has been reached, and (2) points on which agreement in principle should be reached in order to assure the success of a conference, including hope to reduce U. S. cruiser tonnage to about 200 to 250 thousand tons in 1936; opinion that if agreement can be reached, a preliminary five-power conference should be held in London, and that by mutual consent the conference required by the Washington Arms Treaty to be held in 1931 and the formal conference to be called in December might be merged into one.	162
July 29 (209)	From the Ambassadors in Great Britain and Belgium (tel.) Information that the Prime Minister and the First Lord of the Admiralty agreed to the points contained in telegram No. 192 of July 26 except that it was necessary to revise cruiser reduction item to state that the two Governments desired to reduce their programs and would study the subject; memorandum by the Prime Minister (text printed), stating that cruiser parity might be achieved by having 15 large cruisers for Great Britain and 18 for the United States, and 45 6-inch cruisers for Great Britain, to be equalled by 10 additional American 6-inch cruisers to be constructed if the United States so desires, the 3 additional 10,000-ton cruisers, and the 10 Omaha type cruisers.	164
July 30 (211)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Letter from the Prime Minister (text printed), stating that, although he had agreed the previous day to British cruiser figures of 15 and 45, he would try to find out whether he could not reduce them, especially the second figure, if he could get an agreement with France, Italy, and Japan.	166
July 31 (195)	To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Observation that the Prime Minister’s program apparently presents insurmountable obstacles to agreement because it abandons the principles of decrease in naval armament and of parity between the U. S. and British navies.	167
July 31 (196)	To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Information that it is difficult to express the keen disappointment felt over the Prime Minister’s proposal; belief that he has been won over by the Admiralty, who have returned to all their original demands.	168
Aug. 1 (215)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Advice that telegram No. 196 of July 31 was presented to the Prime Minister and that he is expected to send a statement clarifying the vital issues.	170
Aug. 1 (216)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Letter from the Prime Minister (text printed), pointing out that he cannot agree to a standard of parity so low as to prevent him from fulfilling his obligations as regards protection of his country from three other effectively armed powers and as regards protection of the Dominions, and advising that any figures reached must be provisional upon the agreements to be made with the other powers.	171
Aug. 2 (201)	To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Appreciation of the sincerity and frank friendliness of the Prime Minister’s letter; comments thereon; opinion that no solution that results in an agreement for the United States to construct to parity with an increased British cruiser fleet appears to be a worthwhile result of what the two Governments have been striving to accomplish.	174
Aug. 4 (220)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Letter from Ambassador Gibson (text printed) pointing out that the Prime Minister’s proposal constitutes a considerable modification of the old British position inasmuch as it envisages abandonment of all new construction, and suggesting that a set of proposals be presented to the Prime Minister for study, to be reserved for oral discussions at the time of his visit to the United States. Ambassador Dawes’ comments on this suggestion; his feeling that it would be a mistake to postpone the negotiations.	176
Aug. 5 (221)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Clarification of last portion of telegram No. 220 of August 4 by the substitution of two new sentences.	181
Aug. 5 (206)	To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Opinion that determination of point at which parity is to be reached must not be delayed and that present method of conducting negotiations is generally satisfactory; suggestion that the Ambassador explore with the Prime Minister the possibility of reaching agreement on a plan which would check cruiser strength at 250,000 tons parity to be reached in 1936 and would include a political clause providing that if in 1934 conditions of world armament tended to justify British belief that their needs for small cruisers were absolute needs, they would have the option to increase the parity point by 60,000 tons.	181
Aug. 6 (209)	To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Intention to advise the British Embassy that the Prime Minister’s plan to come to the United States in October will not conflict with the President’s engagements; observation that it is essential that there be prior substantial agreement on the parity question.	183
Aug. 6 (223)	From the Ambassadors in Great Britain and Belgium (tel.) Conversation with the Prime Minister in which he stated that a memorandum based on telegram No. 206 of August 5 was a helpful and friendly approach to the problem; his intention to submit a memorandum explaining exact use to be made of the cruisers and a statement of his ideas as to how parity may be obtained by 1936; his belief that he should not visit the United States until a practical agreement has been reached between the two nations.	183
Aug. 7 (225)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Information that the Prime Minister’s statement has been received and will be forwarded when letter modifying certain paragraphs has been received.	185
Aug. 9 (228)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Revised statement from the Prime Minister, August 8 (text printed), explaining geographical factors which necessitate maintenance of higher British cruiser strength and proposing that agreement be reached that British figures in 1936 be the standard of parity, at which time by scrapping each year one cruiser which he would not otherwise scrap and replacing it by a scheme of building, they would have 50 cruisers and no more.	186
Aug. 12	Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State Conversation with the Japanese Ambassador in which he stated anxiety of his Government that the question of ratio be not brought up if possible and the impossibility of accepting the same ratio in cruisers as they had accepted in battleships and airplane carriers.	188
Aug. 12 (235)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Conversation with the Japanese Ambassador in which he stated that his Government was most sympathetic toward reduction in all categories and would ask for a readjustment of percentages of naval strength to a 10–10–7 basis.	189
Aug. 15 (217)	To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Comments in detail on the Prime Minister’s letter of August 8: willingness to agree to take the December 31, 1936, position as a temporary goal to be worked for subject to necessary provisos; observation that in spite of some disappointment it is believed that the two countries are nearer real and complete agreement than they have ever been.	190
Aug. 23 (179)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain Statement by the Prime Minister, August 20, on the status of Anglo-American conversations (text printed).	195
Aug. 24 (242)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Letters from the Prime Minister, August 22 and 23 (texts printed), stating views on the last statement of U. S. position, and expressing desire to see yardstick formula.	196
Aug. 26 (57)	To the Ambassador in Belgium (tel.) Inquiry as to accuracy of statement (text printed) contained in the Prime Minister’s letter of August 23, to the effect that Ambassador Gibson stated to the British delegate at Geneva, April 23, that the plan then suggested would give the U. S. Navy superiority over the British Navy of one or two 10,000–ton 8-inch cruisers and give the British Navy superiority over the U. S. Navy of some thirty 6,400-ton 6-inch cruisers.	201
Aug. 27 (245)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Letter from the Prime Minister, August 26 (text printed), explaining that the figures quoted as having been used by Ambassador Gibson were not official figures.	202
Aug. 28 (71)	From the Ambassador in Belgium (tel.) Explanation that the Ambassador did not say at Geneva or elsewhere the remarks attributed to him.	202
Aug. 28 (247)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Conversation with the Japanese Ambassador in which he advised that he stated to the British Prime Minister on August 27 that the Japanese Government would desire a 10–10–7 ratio in any proposed settlement and that he was sympathetic toward the negotiations so far as they had progressed.	203
Aug. 28 (224)	To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Information that a separate telegram is being sent from which it seems possible an agreement might be reached, but that the Prime Minister’s letter of August 23 contains errors which must be dispelled if the separate telegram referred to is to lead to results; comments in detail on the Prime Minister’s letter; desire for assurance as to exact tonnage of the 50 British cruisers on December 31, 1936, and observation that if it is not different from expectations of 330,000 tons displacement, it is believed that the United States could go into a conference.	203
Aug. 28 (225)	To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Summary of the extent of agreement which it is felt has been reached with the Prime Minister.	207
Aug. 28 (226)	To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Belief that it would be unwise for the two countries to try actually to agree upon details of a yardstick at present; reasons for this conclusion.	209
Aug. 30 (252)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Conversation with the Prime Minister, August 29, in which the Ambassador presented message contained in telegram No. 225 of August 28, and the Prime Minister indicated that he intends to agree with the statements and that figure of 330,000 tons is certain; Ambassador’s recommendation for certain changes in the memorandum of agreement.	210
Aug. 31 (254)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Letter from the Prime Minister, August 30 (text printed), explaining that in his reply to the memorandum of agreement he has had to add 9,000 tons to the hypothetical figure of 330,000 tons advanced by the United States, and that difficulty would arise from American proposal that for the 15 British 8-inch cruisers the United States should have 23, since the 5–5–3.5 ratio Japan requests would mean a superiority in large cruisers over Great Britain; and suggesting that if American figure was set at 18, they might get Japan to accept 12, and the British would agree.	213
Aug. 31 (255)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Letter from the Prime Minister, August 30 (text printed), commenting in detail on the draft memorandum of agreement.	214
Aug. 31 (256)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Information that the Japanese Ambassador has been helpfully working with his Government and has stated that they hoped to be able to satisfy Great Britain in the large cruiser matter.	217
Sept. 3 (237)	To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Information that in view of the revolutionary changes involved in the new proposals of the Prime Minister, it is necessary to give reconsideration to the entire situation; need for consultation with the Naval General Board; inability to make the immediate reply which the Prime Minister desires to use as basis of a statement at Geneva.	217
Sept. 4 (262)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Understanding from the Japanese Ambassador that Japanese efforts to satisfy Great Britain may involve a proposal to arm a limited number of their smaller cruisers with 8-inch guns in order that an increase in the number of large cruisers may be avoided to that extent.	219
Sept. 6 (263)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Information that telegram No. 237 of September 3 has been transmitted to the Prime Minister, who again reiterated the determination to agree.	219
Sept. 10 (266)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Letter from the Prime Minister, September 9 (text printed), summarizing in very definite form the proposals upon which the Department commented in telegram No. 237 of September 3.	220
Sept. 11 (242)	To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) For the Prime Minister: Information that the Naval Board, in an endeavor to meet British proposals as closely as they can, will accept as representing parity with Prime Minister’s proposed cruiser fleet of 339,000 tons an American fleet of 315,000 tons; also that memorandum of points of agreement has been revised; suggestion that the memorandum be given to the other powers in issuing the call for the conference and to the public at the same time.	222
Sept. 11 (243)	To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Memorandum for the Prime Minister (text printed), stating that final result of telegram No. 242 is that U. S. and British technical experts are apart on only one point—whether three of the American cruisers are to be of the 8-inch-gun 10,000-ton type or whether there is to be a substitution for them of four cruisers of the 6-inch-gun type, or, in the more recent view of the Prime Minister, the question whether the three cruisers of 10,000 tons are to have 8-inch or 6-inch guns—and concluding with the President’s earnest wish that the Prime Minister visit the United States.	223
Sept. 11 (244)	To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Summary of the principles upon which the U. S. and British Governments propose to enter upon a naval disarmament conference of the principal naval powers.	224
Sept. 12 (245)	To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Observation that it is not intended that the Prime Minister come over to discuss and try to end the points of difference outlined in telegram No. 243 of September 11.	225
Sept. 13 (268)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Information that telegrams of September 11 have been delivered to the Prime Minister, who expressed entire satisfaction; hope of Japanese Ambassador that his Government may reach preliminary agreement with the U. S. and British Governments.	225
Sept. 13 (269)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Letter from the Prime Minister (text printed), commenting on difficulties arising from Naval Board figures on 8-inch cruisers, stating that he would like to exchange personal views with the President on this unsolved outstanding point when they meet and suggesting that the proposed conference be held in January; supplementary letter (text printed) stating that separate note will be sent with reference to issue of the memorandum.	226
Sept. 13 (270)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Letter from the Prime Minister (text printed), submitting certain revisions in phraseology and content of the memorandum of agreement and asking that the President advise his decision without delay.	229
Sept. 14 (247)	To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Willingness of the President to exchange views with the Prime Minister and try to arrive at settlement of the cruiser parity difficulty during his visit. Suggestion that the Prime Minister be accompanied by a naval officer and that publication of the agreement and issuance of invitations to a conference be postponed until after the Prime Minister’s visit.	230
Sept. 14 (248)	To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Information that the Prime Minister’s views contained in telegram No. 270, September 13, reinforce the Secretary’s suggestion that publication of the agreement be postponed until after the Prime Minister’s visit.	231
Sept. 16 (272)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Expression of concern over acceptance of the Prime Minister’s suggestion for personal discussion with the President of the remaining technical difference; opinion that it should be adjusted before he leaves.	232
Sept. 17 (273)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Desire of the Prime Minister to begin informal preliminary conversations with France, Italy, and Japan, and his intention to consult the U. S. Government before taking action; his concurrence in advisability of not publishing memorandum of agreement until the time of the conference.	234
Sept. 17 (274)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Letter from the Prime Minister enclosing draft invitation to the French, Italian, and Japanese Governments to attend naval conference at London in January 1930 (texts printed), and stating that delay in issuing invitations would give rise to all sorts of surmises and might give time for difficulties to grow up.	235
Sept. 17 (249)	To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Desire that the Prime Minister understand that minimum position of telegram No. 242, as quoted in telegram No. 243 of September 11, remains; information that a letter is expected from President Hoover outlining his views on the results of the conversations; nonobjection to the Prime Minister’s sounding out France, Italy, and Japan, but hope that he will not 1 proceed until he has received the President’s letter.	238
Sept. 17	From President Hoover Presentation of a new line of thought suggested by the Prime Minister’s emphasis on the importance of a second naval reduction conference in 1935: proposal that he study possibility of reducing British cruiser tonnage from 339,000 tons to 300,000 tons; that U. S. tonnage could then be reduced by 39,000 tons, thus solving question of reduction of 8-inch cruisers from 21 to 18 and permitting further cut of one proposed new 6-inch 7,000-ton cruiser; that during the Prime Minister’s visit they study reduction of destroyer and submarine tonnage and settle the proportion of replacements of battleships to be suggested to the January conference that are to be undertaken prior to 1936. (Sent to the Ambassador in Great Britain as Department’s telegram No. 250, September 17, 8 p.m., for communication to the Prime Minister.)	240
Sept. 17 (251)	To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Instructions not to consent to delivery of the proposed invitation until the President and the Secretary of State have had opportunity to state their views; opinion that invitation should await conclusion of the Prime Minister’s visit.	244
Sept. 18 (252)	To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Acceptance of the Prime Minister’s reasons for issuing immediate invitation and of his proposed date for conference; objections to form of invitation because of its reference to the divergencies which still exist; information that redraft of Prime Minister’s proposed invitation has been prepared.	244
Sept. 18 (253)	Ta the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Revised draft of the Prime Minister’s invitation (text printed).	245
Sept. 18 (275)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Hope that divergence in cruiser figures may be settled before the Prime Minister’s visit in order that the way may be opened for the more important matters suggested by the President.	246
Sept. 19 (276)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Request for instructions whether to urge the Prime Minister to come to a settlement, before he goes to the United States, of the technical differences arising from the two propositions now before them. Suggestion that delegates at the conference be limited to the Secretary of State, the Prime Minister, the French Premier, and the corresponding officials of Italy and Japan.	247
Sept. 19 (255)	To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Instructions to make clear to the Prime Minister, if he should be unwilling to attack the reduction problem proposed by the President before visiting the United States, that U. S. figures contained in telegram No. 242 of September 11 represent the minimum which can be obtained with the consent of the General Board; opinion that the question of delegates had better be left unsettled until after the Prime Minister’s visit.	249
Sept. 20	Memorandum by the Secretary of State Conversation with the French Ambassador, in which he was assured, in relation to informal communications dated September 19 and 20 (texts printed), that throughout the Anglo-American discussions it had been mutually understood that any agreements reached should be contingent on action of the other three powers at the suggested five-power conference.	250
Sept. 21 (279)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Information that the revised draft of invitation has been approved by the Foreign Office with certain minor changes, and that, upon receipt of replies from the Dominions and U. S. approval, invitations will be issued.	253
Sept. 24 (281)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Letter from the Prime Minister, September 23 (text printed), commenting on President Hoover’s letter, pointing out that standard of parity must be fixed by British needs, that 8-inch cruiser problem is the major difficulty, and that if the United States insists upon more than 18 8-inch cruisers, British expansion is inevitable.	253
Sept. 24	Memorandum by the Secretary of State Conversation with the Japanese Ambassador in which he outlined Japanese views on the Anglo-American cruiser figures and reduction of submarines and destroyers, and expressed Japan’s desire for an increased ratio in large cruisers.	257
Sept. 26 (283)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Tentative arrangements for securing U. S. consent to revised draft invitation in the event Dominions’ approval is not received before the Prime Minister’s departure, and for issuance thereof. Prime Minister’s intention that his last letters shall complete the status quo under which the conversations will commence in Washington. (Footnote: Information that by telegram No. 285, September 27, 4 p.m., the Ambassador advised that the Dominions had approved invitation which he was transmitting for the Department’s immediate approval, and that the Department replied by telegram No. 262, September 28, noon, that with certain modifications the draft would be satisfactory.)	259
Sept. 27 (62)	To the Ambassador in Italy (tel.) Information that the Ambassadors of the other interested powers have been confidentially informed of the status of Anglo-American negotiations.	260
Oct. 2	Memorandum by the Secretary of State Conversation with the French Ambassador in which he presented aide-mémoire of October 1 (text printed) setting forth the French position concerning Anglo-American negotiations, and stated that the French Government is ready to go to the conference.	261
Oct. 7 (292)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Foreign Office note (text printed) transmitting copies of invitations delivered to the French, Italian, and Japanese Ambassadors in London, and requesting confirmation of understanding that the U. S. Government will find it possible to participate in the proposed conference; request for instructions.	262
Oct. 7	The Identic British Notes Delivered to the French, Italian, and Japanese Ambassadors in Great Britain Information concerning the extent of agreement reached in the Anglo-American naval conversations; invitation to attend Five-Power Conference to be held at London beginning the third week in January 1930.	263
Oct. 9 (271)	To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Note for the Foreign Office (text printed) accepting invitation to Conference.	265
Oct. 14 (72)	From the Ambassador in Italy (tel.) Italian acceptance of invitation (text printed).	265
Oct. 16	French Note Accepting the Invitation of the British Government To Participate in a Naval Conference Desire to participate in Conference and to exchange preliminary views with the British Government.	266
Oct. 16	From the Japanese Ambassador Copy of Japanese note to the British Government (text printed) accepting invitation to Conference.	268
Oct. 24	Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State Conversation with the Italian Ambassador in which he explained Italy’s need for parity with France.	269
Oct. 29 (84)	From the Ambassador in Belgium (tel.) Understanding that the French Government fears that a definite Anglo-American agreement has been reached, including presumably an understanding as to the forces to be allotted to France; information that Franco-Italian difficulties will be even harder to solve than Anglo-American, inasmuch as Italy is insistent on parity with France and France is just as determined that Italy should not be granted parity.	270
Nov. 11 (612)	From the British Chargé Inquiry whether Tuesday, January 21, would be agreeable date for opening of Conference; information that it is considered desirable that no technical experts be nominated as delegates.	272
Nov. 12	To the British Chargé Acceptability of the date proposed; assurance that no technical experts will be appointed as delegates.	273
Nov. 12	Memorandum by the Secretary of State Conversation with the Japanese Ambassador concerning matters dealt with in aide-mémoire printed infra; Ambassador’s disappointment on subject of the ratio.	273
[Nov. 12]	To the Japanese Ambassador Belief that change in Japanese attitude on its ratio in the cruiser class, increasing it from 5–3 to 10–7, is not likely to be conducive to success of the Conference; summary of substance of the recent Anglo-American conversations.	274
Nov. 12 (294)	To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Transmittal, for confidential information of the Prime Minister, of text of the aide-mémoire presented to the Japanese Ambassador on November 12.	278
Nov. 14 (325)	From the Chargé in Great Britain (tel.) Favorable reaction of Foreign Office to aide-mémoire presented to the Japanese Ambassador on November 12.	278
Nov. 18	From the British Chargé Aide-mémoire dated November 19 (text printed), setting forth views concerning Japanese desires for increase in ratio for large cruisers; explanation that instructions for this aide-mémoire were dispatched before British Government had opportunity to study U. S. aide-mémoire on the Japanese claim.	278
Nov. 18 (299)	To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Memorandum of questions received from French naval attaché November 15, and reply thereto (texts printed), relating to categories, percentage of transfer between categories to be considered at Conference, and extent of agreement reached in Anglo-American conversations; authorization to communicate copies to the Prime Minister and to mail copies to Paris.	281
Nov. 19 (84)	From the Ambassador in Italy (tel.) Optimistic attitude of the Foreign Minister toward possibility of reaching an understanding on parity with France.	283
Nov. 20 (305)	To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Desire of the President that Ambassador Dawes refrain from discussing the ratio with the Japanese Ambassador.	283
Nov. 21	To the British Chargé Comments on letter of November 18 and accompanying aide-mémoire.	284
Nov. 21	From the British Embassy Report of conversations, November 11 and 18, between the Prime Minister and the Japanese Ambassador, in which the Japanese claim for a 70 percent ratio was discussed.	284
Nov. 23	From the British Chargé Aide-mémoire (text printed) summarizing conversations between the Prime Minister and the French and Italian Ambassadors on November 11 and 12 concerning their views on questions to be raised at the Conference.	286
Nov. 23 (342)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Information that the French Ambassador called to report on a conversation with the Prime Minister, which is presumed to be the beginning of a Franco-British discussion as to minimum naval needs of the two countries.	287
[Nov. 29]	From the Italian Embassy Inquiries regarding certain points of the Anglo-American preliminary discussions and proposed scope of the Conference.	288
Dec. 2	Memorandum by the Secretary of State Conversation with the Japanese Ambassador concerning Japanese aims in the Conference.	288
Dec. 3 (326)	To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Information concerning discussion with the British Chargé of tentative outline of procedure for the Conference; instructions to emphasize to the Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary the necessity for insuring that in the arrangement laid down before the first meeting no opportunity be afforded for anything but speeches of a most general nature.	290
Dec. 3 (643)	From the British Chargé Formal notification that Conference will open January 21; request for list of U. S. advisers, experts, and secretaries. (Footnote: Communication of this information to the British Embassy in note of December 19.)	291
Dec. 4	To the Italian Embassy Replies to the inquiries contained in memorandum of November 29.	292
Dec. 4 (359)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Letter from the Foreign Office, December 3 (text printed), commenting on the Secretary of State’s aide-mémoire to the French Naval Attaché, November 18, and advising that if approached by the French or Italian Governments with the same inquiries, the British Government can give an almost identic reply.	292
Dec. 4 (360)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Prime Minister’s assurance that nothing will be settled concerning methods of procedure without first consulting the U. S. Secretary of State; Ambassador’s opinion that it would be desirable if Conference could convey evidence of earnestness of the powers represented and of their determination to indulge not so much in declamation as in constructive work.	294
Dec. 10 (333)	To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Concurrence in opinion that Conference should avoid all unnecessary distraction and should be devoted to the serious business in hand; desire that this view be conveyed to the Prime Minister.	295
Dec. 11 (555)	From the Chargé in France (tel.) Intimation by Tardieu, President of the Council of Ministers, of desire to discuss naval matters with Ambassador Gibson; Chargé’s opinion that a meeting might prove useful; request for Department’s decision.	295
Dec. 12 (71)	To the Ambassador in Belgium (tel.) Instructions to proceed to Paris and listen sympathetically to Tardieu’s statement of the French position. (Instructions to repeat to the Embassies in London and Paris.)	296
Dec. 12	From the British Embassy Oral message from the Prime Minister, delivered by the British Ambassador (text printed), setting forth ideas on organization of the Conference.	296
Dec. 14 (561)	From the Appointed Ambassador in France (tel.) Intention of the French to take draft of a note to London, for submittal to the Foreign Office and the American Ambassador previous to formal delivery to the interested Governments; indication that they intend at the Conference to work out something to further the work of the Preparatory Commission and to see if it will be possible to reach any figures, which, however, they would regard as subject to reservations and only tentative.	297
Dec. 14 (562)	From the Appointed Ambassador in France (tel.) Information that after Ambassador Gibson arrived it was concluded that it would be wiser to postpone interview with Tardieu until after Ambassador Edge had established his relations with the French Government.	298
Dec. 16 (409)	To the Ambassador in France (tel.) Hope that opportunity will soon be found to arrange for Ambassador Gibson to accompany Ambassador Edge to see Tardieu.	299
Dec. 20	French Memorandum Delivered to the British Government and Communicated to the Other Interested Governments Defining attitude with respect to essential questions of principle and method which will present themselves at the Conference; and suggesting an agreement of mutual guaranty and nonaggression between Mediterranean naval powers.	299
Dec. 21 (575)	From the Ambassador in France (tel.) Report of official call upon Tardieu during which French aims in the Conference were discussed.	304
Dec. 26	To the Japanese Embassy Summary of the matters discussed by the American and Japanese delegates to the Conference at meetings in Washington on December 17 and 19. (Copies sent to the British, French, and Italian Embassies.)	307
Dec. 26 (581)	From the Ambassador in France (tel.) Information that Tardieu called at the Embassy the previous day and repeated his firm opinion that the Conference would be successful; preparations for discussion with him of the French case at a luncheon conference at the Embassy on December 28.	313
Dec. 26 (430)	To the Ambassador in France (tel.) Instructions to assure Tardieu of U. S. gratification over his assurances regarding successful conclusion of the Conference.	314
Dec. 31 (588)	From the Ambassador in France (tel.) Report that virtual unanimity of debate in Parliament shows that the country supports the Government’s program for conference as outlined in the French memorandum of December 20.	315
1930 Jan. 3	From the British Embassy Inability to enter into the nonaggression treaty of Mediterranean powers suggested in the French memorandum of December 20, 1929; favorable attitude, however, toward any step which would add to the sense of security of those powers. Proposal of the Prime Minister to resume with the Secretary of State the private conversations which took place between President Hoover and Prime Minister MacDonald in Washington on the subject of the extension to other powers of the world of the principle of “consultation” contained in the four-power Pacific Treaty of 1921.	315

Conventions Concluded at Geneva, July 27, 1929, With Other Powers for (1) Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick of Armies in the Field; and (2) Treatment of Prisoners of War

Date and number	Subject	Page
1929 June 5	Memorandum by Mr. Rollin R. Winslow, Division of Western European Affairs Summary of the action taken by the Department of State on proposals for an international conference to revise the Geneva convention of July 6, 1906, for the amelioration of the condition of the wounded of armies in the field, and to formulate a code for the treatment of prisoners of war.	317
June 17	To the Chairman of the American Delegation Instructions for guidance of the delegation.	318
June 19	Press Release Issued by the Department of State Composition of the American delegation to the Conference which will meet at Geneva on July 1.	320
July 27	International Convention For the amelioration of the condition of the wounded and sick of armies in the field.	321
July 27	International Convention Relative to the treatment of prisoners of war.	336

International Conference on Safety of Life at Sea, London, April 16–May 31, 1929

[Page LVIII]

Date and number	Subject	Page
1929 Mar. 28	To the American Delegation Instructions for guidance of the delegation at the International Conference on Safety of Life at Sea to be held at London, April 16.	368
Mar. 28	To the American Delegation Instructions, in the event U. S. and Soviet representatives both sign a convention or other instruments, that appropriate reservation be made on the part of the United States to make clear that signature or ratification of such instruments does not constitute recognition of the Soviet regime.	375
Apr. 14 (84)	From the Chargé in Great Britain (tel.) Request by White, chairman of the American delegation, for instructions concerning draft rule of procedure which, by providing one vote for each country, would give the British Empire six votes.	377
Apr. 15 (84)	To the Chargé in Great Britain (tel.) Instructions to agree to the adoption of the clause providing that each country shall be entitled to one vote.	378
May 28 (131)	From the Chargé in Great Britain (tel.) From White: Information that the Russian delegate points out that the U. S. Government made no reservation in respect to the international counterfeiting convention of April 20, 1929, but that he makes no objection to proposed reservation to safety of life at sea convention; request to be advised whether instruction of March 28 shall be carried out or whether reservation shall be dropped.	378
May 29 (131)	To the Chargé in Great Britain (tel.) For White: Instructions to carry out instructions of March 28 regarding reservation; observation that the U. S. Government has not yet signed the counterfeiting convention.	378
Aug. 6	From the Chairman of the American Delegation to President Hoover Report on the work of the Conference; transmittal of copy of the convention signed May 31. (Note: Information that the text of convention may be found in the Department of State Treaty Series No. 910 or 50 Stat. 1121.)	379

Agreements for Exchange of Information Regarding the Traffic in Narcotic Drugs

[Page LIX]

Date and number	Subject	Page
1929 [Undated]	Summary of Arrangements Entered Into Between the United States and Certain Other Governments Information concerning the conclusion of informal agreements for the direct exchange, between the enforcement officers of the United States and certain other Governments, of information regarding the traffic in narcotic drugs.	389
Apr. 1 (520)	To the Chargé in Japan Instructions to inform the Foreign Office of U. S. desire to enter into an arrangement similar to an arrangement already entered into with Great Britain, whereby U. S. diplomatic and consular officers cooperate with their British colleagues or the competent British authorities, if in British territory, in the mutual exchange of information regarding seizures of narcotic drugs and persons known to be carrying on illicit traffic in drugs.	390
Sept. 9 (1270)	From the Chargé in Japan Foreign Office note of September 6 (text printed), stating that the Japanese Government welcomes the conclusion of such an arrangement and will issue appropriate instructions to its diplomatic and consular officers.	391
Dec. 7 (Dip. Ser. 887)	To Diplomatic and Consular Officers Instructions to cooperate with Japanese colleagues or, if in Japanese territory, with the competent Japanese authorities, in the same manner as with the British.	393

Conference for the Suppression of Counterfeiting Currency, Held At Geneva, April 9–20, 1929

Date and number	Subject	Page
1928 Oct. 11 (619) (L. N. 1219)	From the Minister in Switzerland Transmittal of League of Nations communication of October 8 enclosing report of the Mixed Committee for the Suppression of Counterfeiting Currency and draft convention, and requesting any observations thereon.	394
Nov. 5 (645) (L. N. 1232)	From the Minister in Switzerland Transmittal of League communication of November 3 inviting the U. S. Government to participate in a conference at Geneva, April 9, 1929, for the adoption of counterfeiting convention.	394
1929 Mar. 22 (426)	To the Minister in Switzerland Instructions for guidance of the Minister in his capacity as American delegate.	395
Mar. 22 (430)	To the Minister in Switzerland Note for the Secretary-General of the League (text printed) containing observations on the proposals of the Mixed Committee.	399
Apr. 18 (10)	From the Chief of the American Delegation (tel.) Information that the convention will probably be signed on April 20; request for instructions whether to follow the precedent already established whereby the U. S. Government, on account of the great distance and difficulty of communication, reserves the right to sign subsequently with full rights as a signatory state.	402
Apr. 20	From the Chief of the American Delegation Transmittal of text of the convention signed by 23 states; report on proceedings of the Conference.	403
July 16 (74)	To the Minister in Switzerland (tel.) Instructions to proceed to Geneva to sign the convention and protocol, but not the final act or optional protocol.	408
July 20 (57)	From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.) Signature of convention and protocol.	409
Apr. 20	International Convention For the suppression of counterfeiting currency. (Footnote: Information that the convention was not submitted to the Senate.)	409

[Page LX]

Entry Into Force of the International Convention for the Abolition of Import and Export Prohibitions and Restrictions

Date and number	Subject	Page
1929 Dec. 20	Protocol Signed at Paris Concerning the entry into force of the international convention of November 8, 1927, for the abolition of import and export prohibitions and restrictions, and of the supplementary agreement of July 11, 1928.	424

American Representation in a Consultative Capacity at the International Conference on the Treatment of Foreigners, Paris, November 5–December 5, 1929

[Page LXI]

Date and number	Subject	Page
1929 Apr. 10 (C.L.59 (a).1929. II)	From the Acting Secretary-General of the League of Nations Invitation to attend an international conference, to be held November 5, for the purpose of concluding a convention relative to the treatment of foreigners; transmittal of draft convention.	429
Oct. 11 (120)	To the Minister in Switzerland (tel.) Note for the Secretary-General (text printed), advising that Mr. George A. Gordon, First Secretary at Paris, has been designated to attend the Conference at Paris as a technical expert to cooperate in a consultative capacity.	430
Oct. 22 (4279)	To the Chargé in France Instructions for Mr. Gordon to make it clear that U. S. refusal to enter into the proposed convention is not based on disinterest or inability to accord aliens as favorable treatment as accorded by other states, but on the fact that aliens are adequately protected under the Fourteenth Amendment and that it is U. S. policy to abstain as far as possible from concluding treaties the provisions of which directly affect the police power of the several States.	430
Nov. 5 (509)	From the Chargé in France (tel.) From Gordon: Inability to locate evidence that the Secretary-General has been notified of U. S. refusal to enter into convention; information as to content of statement he proposes to make in the opening discussion.	433
Nov. 5 (368)	To the Chargé in France (tel.) For Gordon: Observation that, inasmuch as the Secretary-General was notified that Mr. Gordon would attend the Conference in a consultative capacity, it would seem obvious that the United States did not contemplate becoming a party to the convention; approval of proposed statement.	434
Nov. 7 (515)	From the Chargé in France (tel.) From Gordon: Desire of the Haitian delegate that American delegate concur in disapproving article 18, point 1, of convention which would extend to the high contracting parties, on a reciprocal basis, the more favorable conditions granted to one or more of those parties under special bilateral agreements; request for instructions.	434
Nov. 13 (523)	From the Chargé in France (tel.) From Gordon: Proposal by the Australian delegate that draft article (text printed) be inserted in protocol to provide that obligations assumed under the convention by states having federal constitutions would bind only the federal governments and not the provincial or State governments; suggested statement (text printed) in the event it becomes necessary to make formal declaration.	435
Nov. 15 (379)	To the Chargé in France (tel.) Comments on proposed statement.	436
Nov. 19	From Dr. Manley O. Hudson Opinion, in connection with Mr. Gordon’s opening statement at the Conference, that it would seem that the U. S. Government ought not to stultify itself by placing on its constitutional situation the most limited interpretation of the treaty-making power.	436
Nov. 20 (381)	To the Chargé in France (tel.) Disinclination to comment unfavorably upon article 18, point 1; instructions to advise the Haitian delegate of inability to express an opinion on this article.	437
Nov. 22	From Mr. P. T. Culbertson, of the Division of Western European Affairs, to the Under Secretary of State Understanding that U. S. policy has been adopted, not necessarily because the U. S. Government could not enter into international agreements of the sort in question, but because it seems preferable to avoid unnecessarily committing the States.	438

Continuation of Negotiations With Certain European Countries for Agreements and Treaties Regarding Naturalization, Dual Nationality, and Military Service

belgium

[Page LXII]

Date and number	Subject	Page
1929 Jan. 18 (7)	From the Ambassador in Belgium (tel.) Inquiry from the Foreign Office whether American laws would permit children born in the United States of a Belgian father, even if they continue to reside permanently in the United States, to renounce American nationality on arriving at a certain age and to retain only the father’s nationality; request for instructions.	439
Jan. 19 (7)	To the Ambassador in Belgium (tel.) Information that persons born in the United States may expatriate themselves only by taking an oath of allegiance to a foreign state or by being naturalized in a foreign state.	439
Feb. 23 (393)	From the Chargé in Belgium Receipt of Foreign Office note of February 22 requesting a more precise explanation of the bearing of American legislation on the point in question; desire for instructions as to reply.	439
Mar. 28 (23)	To the Ambassador in Belgium (tel.) Information that, while there seems to be no judicial decision directly in point, it is believed that an American citizen cannot expatriate himself while continuing to reside permanently in American territory.	440
Apr. 29 (433)	From the Chargé in Belgium Foreign Office note, April 27 (text printed), setting forth reasons why the Belgian Government is not convinced of the necessity for entering into the proposed agreements respecting termination of dual nationality and compulsory military service, but stating willingness to carry the discussions further if the Department so desires. (Footnote: Information that negotiations do not appear to have been continued.)	440

bulgaria

Date and number	Subject	Page
1928 Oct. 19 (1337)	From the Chargé in Bulgaria Request for instructions as to the interpretation which should be placed on the U. S.-Bulgarian naturalization treaty in cases of claims of naturalized American citizens of Bulgarian origin for exemption from Bulgarian taxation from the date of emigration to the United States or from any date previous to naturalization as American citizens.	444
1929 Jan. 9 (278)	To the Minister in Bulgaria Information that the tax in question is in the nature of a penalty for failure to perform military service and that any punishment inflicted on naturalized American citizens of Bulgarian origin for failure to respond to calls for military service after they have taken up a permanent residence in the United States is a violation of the treaty.	444
Apr. 24 (7)	From the Chargé in Bulgaria (tel.) Advice that former Bulgarians are released from military fines from the date of their acquisition of residence in the United States, but not from road repair and other personal taxes accrued previous to naturalization; request to be instructed whether this meets treaty obligations.	445
May 4 (5)	To the Chargé in Bulgaria (tel.) Information that the taxes mentioned do not violate the treaty. (Note: Notification by the Chargé, in despatch No. 1621, March 22, 1930, of arrangement reached with the Foreign Office for disposing of claims of former Bulgarians for exemption from Bulgarian personal taxes.)	445

[Page LXIII]

denmark

Date and number	Subject	Page
1929 May 23 (866)	From the Minister in Denmark Transmittal of Foreign Office note of May 22 advising that proposed convention regarding military service of persons having dual nationality and termination of dual nationality has been referred to the Ministry of Interior for study, and that in the meantime the Foreign Office will use its influence with the competent authorities to obtain exemptions from military service for persons making temporary visits to Denmark.	446
June 19 (156)	To the Minister in Denmark Gratification over Foreign Office assurance regarding persons of dual nationality who visit Denmark temporarily; hope that Denmark may find it possible to enter into a formal agreement.	448

estonia, latvia, and lithuania

Date and number	Subject	Page
1929 June 18 (6220)	From the Minister in Latvia Information that draft treaties of naturalization were submitted to the Governments of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania on January 7; also, that the Estonian and Latvian Foreign Offices acknowledged receipt of the Legation’s communications but that no reply has been received from the Lithuanian Government.	449
Sept. 26 (6440)	From the Minister in Estonia Note from the Estonian Foreign Office, September 23 (text printed), stating opinion that further negotiations should be postponed until the international nationality convention now being prepared under auspices of the League of Nations assumes definite form, and advising that naturalized American citizens of Estonian origin cannot be permitted temporarily to visit Estonia without being required to perform military service or other acts of allegiance. (Note: Failure of further negotiations (1930–1935) with Estonia and Latvia to effect conclusion of treaties.)	449

finland

Date and number	Subject	Page
1929 Feb. 15 (1191)	From the Minister in Finland Information that Foreign Office official has submitted proposed naturalization treaty to the Department of the Interior for examination, and that he believes a satisfactory treaty agreement can be reached.	451

[Page LXIV]

france

Date and number	Subject	Page
1929 Mar. 19 (9435)	From the Ambassador in France Concurrence in Department’s proposal that confusion resulting from dual nationality, either by birth or naturalization, should be done away with by understandings to be reached with the French Government; opinion, however, that it would seem best to accomplish the reform step by step, rather than, through attempting to effect an agreement of too broad a scope, to reach an impasse; request for further instructions.	452
May 7 (4089)	To the Chargé in France Instructions to endeavor to obtain a unilateral agreement under which the French authorities, in the case of a person born in the United States of French parents, will not require the certificate prescribed in the recruitment law of 1928 to the effect that U. S. law does not provide for obligatory military service, since a general statement to that effect by the Embassy should answer the purpose.	456
Dec. 7 (10059)	From the Chargé in France Transmittal of Foreign Office note of December 2 advising that, while the Ministry of War does not consider the proposed general statement adequate, the Foreign Office will modify the decree so that the certificate may in the future be obtained from the French representatives in foreign countries; advice that copy of modified text will be forwarded when received. (Footnote: Information that no further communication on this subject appears to have been received by the Department.)	457

great britain

Date and number	Subject	Page
1929 Jan. 26 (3323)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain Foreign Office note (text printed) stating that the British Government prefers to defer consideration of proposed convention regarding termination of dual nationality until after the subject of dual nationality has been considered by the Conference on the Codification of International Law to be held at The Hague; understanding that it would be impossible to conclude proposed convention on military service without a special act of Parliament.	457

greece

[Page LXV]

Date and number	Subject	Page
1928 Dec. 17 (751)	From the Minister in Greece Unacceptability of Greek counterdraft of proposed naturalization treaty transmitted for the Department’s instructions.	458
Dec. 21 (757)	From the Minister in Greece Additional comments on Greek counterdraft.	460
Mar. 1 (841)	From the Minister in Greece Foreign Office note (text printed) advising that proceedings because of military obligations respecting American excursionists of Greek origin will be suspended during the period March 1 to October 1.	461
July 2 (274)	To the Minister in Greece Opinion that it would not be desirable to enter into formal agreement on lines of Greek draft; desire that discussions of the subject be renewed at an opportune time.	462
Nov. 26 (1158)	From the Minister in Greece Information that order by Ministry of War, October 31, directs that no measures by reason of alleged military obligations be taken during 1930 against Greek citizens returning from America or against American citizens of Greek origin returning to Greece, and that the amnesty originally granted for the period March 1 to October 1 was recently extended to cover the remainder of the year and further extended to December 31, 1930.	464

italy

Date and number	Subject	Page
1929 Mar. 1 (2167)	From the Ambassador in Italy Information that no progress has been made in matter of the proposed naturalization convention; observation, however, that notwithstanding the opposition of the military and special considerations involving France, a steady pressure is being brought to bear on the Italian Government to modify its attitude regarding persons of Italian origin born or naturalized in American countries.	465

netherlands

Date and number	Subject	Page
1929 Aug. 29 (2010)	From the Chargé in the Netherlands Transmittal of Foreign Office note of August 19, which expresses willingness in principle to consider proposed treaty regarding status and military obligations of naturalized persons and persons with dual nationality, and commenting on draft treaty, with special objections to article 3 relating to renunciation of nationality; request for instructions.	467
Oct. 7 (750)	To the Chargé in the Netherlands Discussion of the points raised in Foreign Office note; observation that, while article 3 seems reasonable and desirable, the Department is not inclined to insist on its inclusion; instructions to bring matter again to attention of Foreign Office with a view to reaching a definite agreement.	469
Oct. 22 (2094)	From the Chargé in the Netherlands Information that Foreign Office official believes that it may be possible to negotiate a treaty such as is desired by the Department, with the omission of article 3, and that he hopes to be able to take up the matter again in the near future.	470

[Page LXVI]

norway

Date and number	Subject	Page
1929 May 29 (462)	To the Minister in Norway Inquiry concerning progress of negotiations for a treaty to exempt American-born persons of Norwegian parentage and naturalized American citizens from liability for military service while temporarily in Norwegian territory.	471
July 3 (1453)	From the Minister in Norway Transmittal of Foreign Office note of June 29 from which it appears that misapprehension exists as to the nature of the proposal submitted by the Department; intention to discuss the situation with a view to renewed consideration of the subject; opinion, however, that the Government will adhere to its present attitude with respect to an agreement regarding the termination of dual nationality.	472
Oct. 19 (1526)	From the Minister in Norway Receipt of Foreign Office note dated October 9 in which opinion is expressed that there would seem to be no need for a new treaty regarding exemption from military service of persons who visit Norway temporarily, in view of naturalization convention of 1871.	473
Dec. 13 (495)	To the Minister in Norway Assumption that reference is to article 3 of naturalization convention between the United States and Sweden and Norway, signed at Stockholm, May 26, 1869; instructions to secure assurance on this point, and to express desire to enter into a formal treaty definitely stating the conditions under which American-born persons of Norwegian parentage would be able to visit Norway temporarily without liability for military service. (Footnote: Signature, November 1, 1930, of treaty regarding military service.)	474

poland

Date and number	Subject	Page
1929 Sept. 3 (2594)	From the Chargé in Poland Transmittal of informal note from the Foreign Minister, August 14, containing views on naturalization treaty proposed by the United States; belief that informal agreement can be speedily reached to enable American-born persons of Polish parentage and naturalized American citizens to visit temporarily in Poland without fear of being punished for failure to perform military service; request for Department’s approval of draft note to be exchanged to this effect.	475

[Page LXVII]

portugal

Date and number	Subject	Page
1929 June 27 (1029)	To the Minister in Portugal Instructions to obtain a precise statement of the law under which naturalized American citizens of Portuguese origin are forced to perform military service or are taxed for failure to do so, and, if the law provides for exemption, to secure a precise statement as to the kind of evidence required; also, to call attention to the provision in naturalization treaty of 1908 by which Portugal agreed to recognize American naturalization of Portuguese nationals if they resided uninterruptedly in the United States for five years.	477
July 22 (22)	From the Minister in Portugal (tel.) Inquiry whether to consider instructions No. 958 of December 1, 1928, and No. 1029 of June 27, 1929, as dealing with two phases of the same situation, and to seek a permanent solution for both in the treaty desired by the United States.	480
Aug. 22 (1049)	To the Chargé in Portugal Opinion that a new treaty which would cover matters already covered in the 1908 treaty would be neither necessary nor desirable; instructions to renew discussions of the whole question and endeavor to ascertain the grounds on which Portuguese officials seek to justify conscription or military service taxation of naturalized American citizens.	480
Sept. 23 (2823)	From the Chargé in Portugal Information that the new Foreign Minister is sympathetic in his general attitude; expectation that particular cases of conscription or military taxation in violation of the present naturalization treaty may profitably be taken up for discussion in the near future.	481

rumania

Date and number	Subject	Page
1929 Apr. 24 (178)	From the Minister in Rumania Desire of Rumanian Government that matter of negotiating a naturalization treaty be considered in suspense until discussion and settlement of the dual nationality question by the League of Nations.	482

spain

Date and number	Subject	Page
1929 Nov. 5 (1398)	From the Chargé in Spain Transmittal of Foreign Office note of September 12 submitting a new draft of agreement regarding military service as a substitute for U. S. draft; comments thereon.	483
Dec. 2 (645)	To the Chargé in Spain Information that Spanish counterproposal is unsatisfactory.	484

[Page LXVIII]

sweden

Date and number	Subject	Page
1929 Jan. 10 (458)	From the Minister in Sweden Advice that U. S. proposals for conclusion of treaty regarding military service and agreement concerning termination of dual nationality are now under consideration by the Foreign Minister. (Footnote: Signature of treaty regarding military service on January 31, 1933.)	485

yugoslavia

Date and number	Subject	Page
1929 Jan. 24 (542)	From the Minister in Yugoslavia Information that the King and the Acting Foreign Minister approved suggestion for the proposed naturalization agreement; hope that opposition which may arise from the Minister of War may be removed and that the matter will soon be concluded.	485
Sept. 30 (199)	To the Minister in Yugoslavia Instructions to inquire whether the Yugoslav Government is now in a position to express its views in regard to the conclusion of a naturalization treaty. (Note: Information concerning further correspondence; information also that no treaty of the nature desired was concluded with Yugoslavia.)	486

Protection of Women of American Nationality Married to Aliens and Having Dual Nationality

Date and number	Subject	Page
1929 June 12	To the Vice Consul at Yunnanfu Instructions, in cases of dual nationality arising from the fact that U. S. laws do not deprive American women of citizenship merely by reason of their marriage to aliens and the fact that British law confers nationality on alien women married to British subjects, to accord proper assistance to such persons as American citizens; suggestion that American women having dual nationality be advised to provide themselves with American passports if they wish to be under protection of the U. S. Government.	487

American Participation in the Extraordinary Session of the International Commission for Air Navigation at Paris, June 10–15, 1929, To Revise the Convention of October 13, 1919

[Page LXIX]

Date and number	Subject	Page
1929 Feb. 15 (229)	From the Secretary General of the International Commission for Air Navigation Invitation to participate in an extraordinary session of the International Commission for Air Navigation to be held in Paris for the purpose of revising the text of the convention of October 13, 1919.	489
Apr. 25	To President Hoover Recommendation that invitation be accepted; suggestion as to composition of U. S. delegation.	490
Apr. 27	From President Hoover Approval of arrangements and of suggested delegation.	494
May 20	To the Chairman of the American Delegation Instructions that the conditions and understandings upon which ratification of the convention was recommended to the Senate in 1926 should still be adhered to and that effort should be made to secure revisions in conformity thereto; observation that the convention is still pending before the Senate. (Footnote: Similar instructions to the other American delegate.)	494
June 28	From the American Delegates Report on the proceedings of the session; opinion that the amendments adopted constitute a substantial improvement in the convention, but that the question of ratification by the United States should be the subject of further study by all the departments concerned.	508
Nov. 26	To the Secretary of Commerce Information that the Department of State is disposed to recommend that the convention be ratified with reservations, unless the Department of Commerce desires that the Senate further delay action. (Footnote: Sent, mutatis mutandis, to the other interested departments and agencies.) (Note: Advice that on December 11 the Department of Commerce expressed the view that ratification should be held in abeyance at least until the parties to the convention had ratified the amendments proposed at the extraordinary session; also that on January 15, 1934, the convention and accompanying papers were returned to the President by the Senate, pursuant to a request by President Roosevelt, January 12, 1934.)	515

Negotiations With Certain European Countries To Effect Arrangements Covering Certain Questions of Aerial Navigation

great britain

[Page LXX]

Date and number	Subject	Page
1928 May 7 (239)	From the British Ambassador Proposal for reciprocal issuance of transport licenses to American pilots in Great Britain and Northern Ireland and to British pilots in the United States.	518
June 14	To the British Chargé Letter from the Department of Commerce (excerpt printed) explaining the temporary U.S.-Canadian arrangement whereby each recognizes airworthiness certificates for aircraft granted by licenses to pilots of the other country, and suggesting that a similar arrangement be entered into with Great Britain.	519
July 17 (322)	From the British Chargé Request for formal note to confirm belief that British subjects are eligible to receive industrial and transport pilots’ licenses; opinion that the question of reciprocal issuance of airworthiness certificates should be dealt with separately.	520
1929 Jan. 22	To the British Ambassador Suggestion that agreement be entered into which shall include both the question of pilots’ licenses and the question of airworthiness certificates, and shall extend to the United States and its possessions on the one hand and on the other to Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the British Dominions (excepting Canada arid the Irish Free State), and to the British overseas possessions.	521
Feb. 7	From the British Embassy Adherence to the view that the two questions should be treated separately; information that matter of reciprocal issue of pilots’ licenses and airworthiness certificates is being brought to the attention of the Dominions and overseas possessions concerned; reiteration of hope that the U.S. Government will recognize, by a formal note, the existing regulations for reciprocal issuance of pilots’ licenses.	523
Apr. 3	To the British Embassy Reiteration of suggestion made in note of January 22; transmittal, for study, of draft aerial navigation agreement now under discussion between the U. S. and Canadian Governments and to be proposed to the Irish Free State.	524

italy

[Page LXXI]

Date and number	Subject	Page
1928 Dec. 20	From the Italian Ambassador Request that permission be granted for several Italian aviators to pilot certain Italian planes during demonstration flights in the United States; suggestion that a reciprocal agreement be entered into by means of exchange of notes, whereby aviators of either country would be permitted to pilot airplanes in the territory of the other.	525
1929 Jan. 30	To the Italian Ambassador Nonobjection to granting the temporary permission requested; suggestion that if the subject of reciprocity is to be discussed it should include the reciprocal validation of airworthiness certificates for aircraft as well as pilots’ licenses.	526
Mar. 28	From, the Italian Ambassador Readiness to exchange notes regarding the reciprocal recognition of pilots’ licenses and to proceed at the same time to an agreement for the reciprocal recognition of airworthiness certificates.	527
June 12	To the Italian Ambassador Transmittal of draft text of agreement now being discussed with Canada providing for the reciprocal issuance of pilots’ licenses and the mutual recognition of airworthiness certificates; inquiry whether Italy would be disposed to conclude a similar agreement.	527
Oct. 10	From the Italian Ambassador Information that the text of the proposed U. S.–Canadian agreement would be satisfactory in general as a basis for agreement between the United States and Italy.	529

irish free state

Date and number	Subject	Page
1929 Apr. 3	To the Irish Minister Transmittal of text of proposed U. S.-Canadian agreement regarding aerial navigation, with inquiry whether the Irish Free State would be disposed to conclude a similar agreement with the United States.	530
Oct. 8 (10–3/61/29)	From the Irish Minister Inquiry whether, in view of the fact that both the Irish Free State and the United States were represented at the extraordinary session of the International Commission on Air Navigation held recently, a special convention between the two Governments is still regarded as desirable.	531
Oct. 16	To the Irish Minister Opinion that it will be desirable, until such time as the United States becomes a party to the 1919 convention on aerial navigation, to enter into agreements of the nature proposed.	532

france

[Page LXXII]

Date and number	Subject	Page
1929 June 12	To the French Ambassador Transmittal of text of proposed U. S.–Canadian agreement regarding aerial navigation, with inquiry whether France would be disposed to enter into a similar agreement with the United States. (Sent, mutatis mutandis, to the German and Spanish Ambassadors, June 12, and to the Netherlands Minister, July 22.)	532
Nov. 16 (527)	From the Chargé in France (tel.) Information from the Air Ministry that favorable conclusion of the proposed agreement might be facilitated by agreement of an American airline to establish airdromes and rescue facilities between Natal and Cayenne and to permit use by French line, the carrying out of such work to be assured by the U. S. Government, and by negotiation for agreement regarding safety factors.	533
Dec. 14 (4331)	To the Chargé in France Instructions to emphasize that the agreement must be limited to questions of principle and not relate to private agreements between American and foreign interests, and to point out impropriety of making an agreement involving territory of a third nation; understanding that the French Embassy has been in telegraphic communication with the Foreign Office and that it is felt the latter now understands the position of the United States.	534

germany

Date and number	Subject	Page
1929 June 20 (Q46/29)	From the German Ambassador Approval in principle of the proposed aerial navigation convention; necessity, however, of reserving statement of position until instructions have been received.	536

netherlands

Date and number	Subject	Page
1929 Sept. 20 (2047)	From the Chargé in the Netherlands Information that the Netherlands authorities are desirous of concluding an aerial navigation agreement with the United States but that their objections to the U. S.-Canadian agreement are such as to make it difficult to use that text as a basis.	536

spain

Date and number	Subject	Page
1929 Aug. 28 (81/25)	From the Spanish Ambassador Transmittal of text of aerial navigation convention concluded with various countries, with expression of hope that the U. S. Government will study its more general and broader bases.	538
Dec. 4	To the Spanish Chargé Transmittal of text of aerial navigation arrangement concluded with Canada on October 29, with the request that it be substituted for earlier text and used as a basis for further discussions. (Similar notes, mutatis mutandis, to the British, French, German, and Italian Embassies and to the Irish and Netherlands Legations.) (Note: Information that agreements by exchange of notes were effected with Italy in 1931, with Germany in 1932, with Great Britain in 1934, with the Irish Free State in 1937, and with France in 1939; also that agreement was concluded with the Netherlands in 1932, to become effective only after ratification by the Queen; and that no arrangement was entered into with Spain.)	539

[Page LXXIII]

Unofficial American Representation at the Second International Diplomatic Conference on Private Aeronautical Law at Warsaw, Poland, October 4–12, 1929

Date and number	Subject	Page
1929 Apr. 10 (1248/29)	From the Polish Minister Invitation to send official delegates to the Second International Conference on Private Aeronautical Law, to be held at Warsaw in October.	540
Sept. 21	To the Polish Chargé Inability of the U. S. Government to send official delegates; desire, however, to send Mr. John J. Ide as an observer. (Footnote: Advice by the Chargé, September 25, that Mr. Ide’s appointment was acceptable.) (Note: Information that on October 29 the Chargé in Poland transmitted a copy of the convention on international air transportation signed October 12 by the majority of the states officially represented at the Conference, and that in 1934 the U. S. Government adhered with reservations.)	540

Diplomatic Support for American Companies Awarded Mail Contracts by the Post Office Department for Carrying Air Mail to Foreign Countries

Date and number	Subject	Page
1929 July 6	Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State Arguments for and against diplomatic support to American aviation companies which have been awarded mail contracts by the Post Office Department for carrying air mail to foreign countries in preference to companies not having such contracts; observation that policy in the past has been not to discriminate between American firms competing abroad.	542
July 12	Memorandum by the Secretary of State Information that memorandum was considered in the Cabinet meeting and telegrams to the diplomatic representatives authorized.	544
July 12 (51)	To the Minister in Honduras (tel.) Instructions to support in every proper way American companies which have been awarded contracts by the Post Office Department to obtain privileges necessary for carrying mails to Latin America. (Similar instructions to the missions in Argentina, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti, Mexico, Nicaragua, Peru, Uruguay, and Venezuela; similar instructions by mail, July 23, to the Consulates at Belize, Curaçao, Georgetown, and Nassau; similar telegram, July 23, to the Vice Consul at Port-of-Spain, Trinidad.)	545

[Page LXXIV]

Good Offices of the Department of State in Behalf of American Interests Desiring To Establish Air Lines in Latin America

pan american airways, incorporated

[Page LXXV] [Page LXXVI] [Page LXXVII] [Page LXXVIII] [Page LXXIX] [Page LXXX] [Page LXXXI] [Page LXXXII] [Page LXXXIII] [Page LXXXIV] [Page LXXXV] [Page LXXXVI] [Page LXXXVII]

Date and number	Subject	Page
1929 Jan. 18 (5)	To the Minister in Colombia (tel.) Instructions to request permission for Pan American Airways, Inc., to make survey nights along the coast with a view to extending air lines from the Panama Canal Zone along the north and west coasts of South America. (Sent, mutatis mutandis, to the missions in Ecuador and Venezuela.)	546
Jan. 18 (6)	From the Minister in Colombia (tel.) Information that permission has been requested; doubt that prompt reply will be forthcoming.	546
Jan. 23 (11)	To the Chargé in Argentina (tel.) Instructions to endeavor to delay final action on any pending air-mail contracts with non-American companies until the arrival of Pan American Airways’ representative with definite proposal guaranteeing through service within a year; information that the company holds all U. S. international mail contracts; instructions to avoid any discrimination between competing American interests.	546
Jan. 24 (7)	From the Minister in Costa Rica (tel.) Signature by the Costa Rican President of contract with Pan American Airways.	547
Feb. 2 (8)	From the Minister in Ecuador (tel.) Advice that permission for survey flight has been granted.	547
Feb. 6 (15)	From the Minister in Colombia (tel.) Urgent suggestion that, in view of Colombian authorities’ interest in press reports that Colonel Lindbergh may come to Barranquilla for Pan American Airways, he be prepared to proceed there if official permission for survey flight should be granted the following day.	547
Feb. 7 (7)	To the Minister in Panama (tel.) Repetition, for Colonel Lindbergh, of telegram No. 15, February 7, from the Minister in Colombia.	548
Feb. 7 (7)	To the Minister in Colombia (tel.) Information that telegram No. 15, February 6, has been repeated to Panama for Colonel Lindbergh; instructions to notify the Department and Legation at Panama as soon as permission for survey flight has been granted.	548
Feb. 7 (8)	To the Minister in Colombia (tel.) Possibility that time will not permit Colonel Lindbergh to make flight to Barranquilla; instructions to convey situation tactfully to the appropriate authorities.	548
Feb. 7 (19)	From the Minister in Colombia (tel.) Information that Foreign Minister has granted permission for Colonel Lindbergh’s flight to Barranquilla and has made the necessary arrangements; desire to be informed of probable time of arrival. (Repeated to Panama.)	549
Feb. 8 (4)	From the Minister in Panama (tel.) Message from Colonel Lindbergh to the Minister in Colombia, stating inability to visit Colombia due to imminence of return air-mail flight to the United States (text printed).	549
Feb. 9 (22)	From the Minister in Colombia (tel.) Information that Pan American Airways’ request for permission to make survey flight has been granted.	549
Feb. 9 (800)	From the Minister in Honduras (tel.) Resumption of newspaper attacks against Pan American Airways contract now before Congress for approval; favorable attitude, however, of the Honduran President and an influential member of Congress.	550
Feb. 18 (19)	From the Minister in Venezuela (tel.) Information that permission for survey flights has been granted.	551
Feb. 21 (8)	To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Instructions to extend to Pan American Airways, upon request, assistance in connection with formal application for air-mail concession in Brazil, but to make no discrimination between competing American interests.	551
Feb. 23 (10)	From the Minister in Ecuador (tel.) Obtention by the vice president of Peruvian Airways of personal but transferable contract for Pan American Airways service.	551
Feb. 26 (12)	To the Chargé in Argentina (tel.) Instructions to extend to Pan American Airways, upon request, assistance in connection with application for operating rights and air-mail contract in Argentina, but to make no discrimination between competing American interests.	551
Feb. 27 (58)	From the Minister in Nicaragua Advice that a Nicaraguan merchant, presumably backed by German or other foreign aviation interests, recently proposed a contract for air-mail and passenger service containing certain features which make it appear more favorable to Nicaragua than the Pan American Airways contract now before the Chamber of Deputies.	552
Feb. 27 (12)	From the Minister in Panama (tel.) Submittal to Panaman Government by Pan American Airways’ representative of contract for air-mail and general aviation concession; request for instructions in view of apparent inconsistency of this contract with plan now being studied for joint control of aviation in the Republic of Panama.	552
Feb. 28 (14)	To the Minister in Panama (tel.) Nonobjection to contract if it is provided to be subject to the joint regulations governing commercial aviation in the Republic of Panama.	553
Feb. 28 (17)	To the Minister in Honduras (tel.) Understanding that considerable opposition exists to ratification of Pan American Airways contract; instructions to report fully.	553
Feb. 28 (31)	To the Minister in Nicaragua (tel.) Instructions to render all appropriate assistance with a view to ratification of Pan American Airways contract.	553
[Mar. 7] (16)	From the Minister in Panama (tel.) Revised article 25 (text printed) stating that provisions of contract are subject to obligations undertaken by Panama with the United States through treaties, conventions, agreements, or regulations.	554
Mar. 8 (17)	From the Minister in Panama (tel.) Signature of contract.	554
Mar. 13 (3126)	From the Ambassador in Brazil Belief that Brazilian Government will not grant a subsidy to Pan American Airways but that both Federal and State Governments will furnish valuable assistance in other directions.	554
Mar. 14 (27)	From the Minister in Honduras (tel.) Unanimous disapproval by Congress of Pan American Airways contract.	555
Mar. 19 (23)	To the Minister in Honduras (tel.) Inquiry as to what effect rejection of contract will have upon operations in Honduras.	555
Mar. 21 (76)	From the Minister in Nicaragua (tel.) Congressional approval of contract and signature by the President, March 20.	555
Mar. 27 (3130)	From the Ambassador in Brazil Probability that Pan American Airways’ request for permission to operate throughout Brazil will be granted.	556
Apr. 2 (31)	From the Minister in Honduras (tel.) Hope of Pan American Airways’ representative to make working arrangement with Honduran Government after adjournment of Congress on April 10.	556
Apr. 9 (105)	To the Chargé in France (tel.) Desire of Pan American Airways, in connection with plan to extend system through the countries of the Caribbean to Cayenne, to obtain permission to fly over French Guiana, also to refuel and make minor repairs, and to deliver U. S. mail if awarded concession by the Post Office Department; instructions to request the French Government to grant temporary authorization pending conclusion of formal contract.	556
Apr. 10 (76)	To the Chargé in Great Britain (tel.) Instructions, in connection with proposed extension of Pan American Airways service, to request temporary authorization, pending conclusion of formal contract, to fly over Trinidad and British Guiana, and to deliver U. S. mail if awarded concession by the Post Office Department.	557
Apr. 19 (19)	To the Chargé in Guatemala (tel.) Instructions to render appropriate assistance to Mr. George L. Rihl, president of the Compañía Mexicana de Aviación and vice president of Pan American Airways, in negotiations with the Guatemalan Government in the interest of the latter company.	557
May 6 (48)	To the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Advice, for information of the Chilean Government, that operations under Post Office contract awarded to Pan American-Grace Airways for transporting mails south from the Panama Canal to Chile will begin immediately as far as Mollendo and will be extended to Chile as soon as necessary arrangements have been made with the Chilean Government.	557
May 11 (118)	From the Chargé in Great Britain (tel.) Information from the Foreign Office that the Governor of Trinidad has given permission for Pan American Airways planes to land in connection with an experimental survey flight but that no permanent proposal can be considered except after consultation with the British Government.	558
May 16 (80)	From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Desire of Chilean postal authorities to negotiate directly with Pan American-Grace Airways’ representative in regard to rates to be paid by Chilean Government for the transport of mails north; request for instructions as to how the U. S. Post Office desires the situation to be handled.	558
May 25 (18)	To the Minister in Venezuela (tel.) Instructions to request the Venezuelan Government to continue the temporary operating permit of Pan American Airways pending conclusion of formal contract, and to have the Venezuelan Post Office accept at Maracay mail dispatched by the U. S. Post Office.	558
May 27 (57)	To the Ambassador in Cuba (tel.) Instructions to render proper assistance, upon request, to Pan American Airways’ representative.	559
May 31 (61)	To the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Letter from the Post Office Department (text printed) requesting that the Ambassador endeavor to persuade the Chilean postal administration to utilize Pan American Airways’ service for transport of air mail to the Canal Zone and beyond, as well as to receive mail from this route.	559
May 31 (56)	From the Chargé in Honduras (tel.) Information that the Honduran President has signed a 2-year contract with Pan American Airways for the carrying of air mail, which is a provisional arrangement, pending approval by Congress, of a 25-year concession.	560
June 1 (46)	To the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.) Instructions to request, on behalf of Pan American Airways, free entry contingent upon reexportation for one Fokker monoplane, and permission to fly over and land in Argentina in making air-mail survey flights. (Sent, mutatis mutandis, to the Minister in Uruguay as No. 9.)	560
June 1 (21)	To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Instructions to request free entry contingent upon reexportation for one Fokker monoplane shipped by Pan American Airways and permission for air-mail survey flights along the coast of Brazil.	561
June 5 (86)	From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Information that Curtiss Aeroplane and Motor Corporation has made a proposal to the Chilean Government which is being used to hamper, and may defeat, the project of Pan American Airways; request for instructions concerning attitude to be taken toward the Curtiss proposal.	561
June 5 (87)	From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Intention to endeavor to obtain acceptance by the Minister of War of proposal made by the U. S. Post Office.	562
June 12 (61)	From the Chargé in Venezuela (tel.) Information that the Minister of Fomento has granted permission for one more flight; desire for instructions to repeat request for temporary operating permit.	562
June 13 (91)	From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Probability that the War Department will grant permission to Pan American-Grace Airways to operate mail service.	562
June 13 (23)	To the Chargé in Venezuela (tel.) Instructions to extend all proper assistance to Pan American Airways in its efforts to obtain operating permit.	563
June 17 (92)	From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Information that discussions are progressing satisfactorily.	563
June 19 (65)	To the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Instructions to support Pan American-Grace Airways in every proper way.	564
June 22 (96)	From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Signature of decree granting concession.	564
June 26 (98)	From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Advice that Pan American-Grace Airways expects to settle one remaining technical detail with the War Department before starting operations and to receive a satisfactory written understanding within a few days.	565
June 27 (849)	From the Chargé in Uruguay Information that permission has been accorded Pan American Airways’ Fokker plane to fly over and land in Uruguayan territory, but that free entry has not yet been granted.	565
June 30 (101)	From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Recommendation, in view of fact that text of decree varies in several substantial respects from Foreign Office assurances, that extension of service to Chile be held in abeyance until a satisfactory decree is signed.	565
July 2	To the Vice Consul at Port-of-Spain, Trinidad (tel.) Instructions to extend all proper assistance to Pan American Airways in its efforts to obtain operating permit which will enable it to bring to Trinidad U. S. mails under its contract with the Post Office Department.	566
July 2 (31)	From the Chargé in Uruguay (tel.) Information that free entry and permission to fly over and land in Uruguay, requested in telegram No. 9, June 1, have been granted.	566
July 6 (81)	From the Chargé in Venezuela (tel.) Failure of the Minister of Fomento to reach agreement with Pan American Airways regarding provisional permit; his reiteration of sincere desire to establish mutually beneficial mail service between the two countries.	566
July 9	From the Vice Consul at Port-of-Spain, Trinidad (tel.) Favorable attitude of Governor toward proposed Pan American Airways’ service; expectation that he will hear from the Colonial Office within 10 days relative to operating permit.	567
July 9 (110)	From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Press reports of U. S. Post Office announcement that airmail service to Santiago will begin on July 16; observation that such reports make more difficult the already difficult situation in connection with efforts to secure modification of certain unacceptable conditions of concession decree.	567
July 10 (73)	To the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Information that Post Office Department made the announcement at behest of Pan American-Grace Airways, who advised that they expect to have their difficulties with Chilean Government straightened out so that service can begin on July 16.	568
July 16	To the Vice Consul at Port-of-Spain, Trinidad (tel.) Instructions to render any proper assistance to Pan American Airways flight to survey air-mail route between Puerto Rico and Trinidad. (Sent, mutatis mutandis, to the Consul at Guadeloupe and the Consular Agent at Roseau.)	568
July 18 (114)	From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Obtention of provisional permission for Pan American-Grace Airways to fly and carry mail in Chile without prejudice to the efforts now being made to have the decree revised; summary of objectionable provisions of the decree.	568
July 19 (72)	From the Consul at Guadeloupe Refusal by the Governor of permission for Pan American Airways’ plane to land, on grounds that request for such permission was not received sufficiently in advance.	569
July 25 (120)	From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Information that discussions of the revised decree are proceeding, that in the meantime other foreign and American aviation interests are active, and that the Chilean Government has appointed a representative to meet with Scadta official in Lima; recommendation that the Post Office Department approve new proposal of Pan American Airways regarding financial arrangements with the Chilean post office. (Repeated to Lima.)	569
July 26 (85)	To the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Instructions to express the hope that the Chilean Government will grant as favorable terms to American companies as to any other foreign companies; advice that the company has the Post Office Department’s permission to negotiate on the modified basis.	570
July 26 (78)	To the Chargé in Peru (tel.) Repetition of telegram No. 85 sent to the Ambassador in Chile; instructions, in the event the meeting at Lima takes place, to follow situation closely and report fully to the Department.	571
July 27 (122)	From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Observation that the Lima meeting is part of a plan for international air service collaboration between foreign aviation interests.	571
July 27 (142)	From the Chargé in Peru (tel.) Desire of President Leguía to protect American aviation arrangements in Peru.	572
July 30 (143)	From the Chargé in Peru (tel.) Information that the proposed conference at Lima is of broader scope than previously reported, inasmuch as it is to be participated in by official delegates from Bolivia, Chile, Colombia, and Peru to agree upon conditions of aeronautical navigation in those countries; probability that disapproval of proposed conference by Peruvian Director General of Aviation may prevent Peruvian participation; the Chargé’s request for instructions, however, whether to discuss the matter with President Leguía and express opinion that an aviation conference of limited participation might well prove embarrassing to the established airplane communication between the United States and Peru.	573
July 31 (79)	To the Chargé in Peru (tel.) Instructions to take the action suggested.	574
Aug. 1 (125)	From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Belief that the present discussions will result in revised decree; opinion that the service is successfully inaugurated and that its permanency depends only on whether the company accepts the revised decree.	574
Aug. 1 (90)	To the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Instructions to investigate newspaper reports of derogatory statements made by the Chilean Director of Aviation regarding reasons for U. S. interest in promoting air-mail service.	575
Aug. 2 (127)	From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Information that both oral and informal written objections were made to the Foreign Minister when the statements first appeared.	575
Aug. 3 (147)	From the Chargé in Peru (tel.) Intention of President Leguía to inform the Chilean Government that the Peruvian Government is not free to participate in the proposed conference.	576
Aug. 7 (45)	To the Minister in Guatemala (tel.) Instructions to extend every proper assistance to secure assent of Guatemalan Government to proposed extension of air-mail service from Vera Cruz, Mexico, via Tapachula to Guatemala City, to be operated by the Compañía Mexicana de Aviación, 100%-owned Mexican subsidiary of the American contractor for the route.	576
Aug. 12 (258)	To the Chargé in France (tel.) Plan of Pan American Airways to extend air-mail service through the Leeward and Windward Islands to Trinidad; instructions to request the French Government to grant necessary permission for operation in and over Martinique and Guadeloupe and for exchange of air mail, pending conclusion of a formal agreement.	576
Aug. 13 (2537)	From the Minister in Guatemala Information that subject of extension of service of the Compañía Mexicana has not been taken up with the Legation by any representative of that concern.	577
Aug. 15	From the Vice Consul at Port-of-Spain, Trinidad (tel.) Issuance to Pan American Airways by the Trinidad Government of temporary operating permit pending negotiations with the British Government for a permanent permit.	577
Aug. 18 (59)	From the Minister in Salvador (tel.) Assurance by the Minister of War and Aviation that contract will be awarded to Pan American Airways.	578
Aug. 19 (106)	From the Minister in Guatemala (tel.) Request of Compañía Mexicana representative to be received for a conference; request by Pickwick-Latin American Airways’ representative that Legation oppose the granting of permission to the Compañía Mexicana to fly a route substantially paralleling their route; Minister’s doubt that Guatemala would grant the Compañía Mexicana request; request for instructions.	578
Aug. 20 (107)	From the Minister in Guatemala (tel.) Opinion that it seems undesirable that a foreign company other than one incorporated in the United States should operate an air transport line in Central America, and even less that the U. S. Government should facilitate it.	579
Aug. 24 (49)	To the Minister in Guatemala (tel.) Explanation of the reasons for decision to support the Compañía Mexicana; instructions, therefore, to make appropriate representations to the Guatemalan Government to obtain permission for the company to bring U. S. mails into Guatemala from Mexico.	579
Aug. 28 (3219)	From the Chargé in Brazil Transmittal of texts of authorization by the Minister of Communications for permission to operate airplanes over Brazilian territory granted to Pan American Airways, August 10, and similar authorization to the New York, Rio, and Buenos Aires Line, August 15.	580
Aug. 28 (212)	From the Vice Consul at Georgetown Letter from the Governor of French Guiana, July 30 (text printed), stating, in answer to letter of April 9, that he has just granted to a Pan American seaplane a permit to fly over and land at Cayenne in a survey flight to South America.	580
Aug. 30 (109)	From the Minister in Guatemala (tel.) Advice that the Pickwick Airways’ representative was informed on August 26 of the Department’s attitude expressed in telegram No. 49, August 24, and that he requests transmission to the Department of formal protest filed August 30 against assistance rendered by the Legation to a Mexican company.	581
Aug. 30 (110)	From the Minister in Guatemala (tel.) Information that the Foreign Minister has telegraphed the Guatemalan Minister at Washington to ascertain the wishes of the U. S. Government regarding the request of the Compañía Mexicana.	581
Aug. 30 (1638)	From the Minister in Costa Rica Transmittal of supplemental agreement signed between Pan American Airways and the Director of Posts regarding inauguration of the air-mail service and establishment of postal rates under the contract recently approved by the Costa Rican Congress.	582
Sept. 4 (2559)	From the Minister in Guatemala Information from Compañía Mexicana representative that negotiations with the Minister of Fomento are progressing and that he hopes to conclude a contract the following day; report of continued opposition of the Pickwick Airways.	583
Sept. 5 (167)	From the Chargé in Peru (tel.) Telegram to the Embassy at Santiago requesting information as to understanding that the Chilean Director General of Aviation expects to arrive in Lima within a few days (text printed).	583
Sept. 6 (405)	From the Chargé in France (tel.) Report, in reference to telegram No. 105, April 9, that temporary authorization has been granted for exploratory flight; also that matter of telegram No. 258, August 10, is being given further study.	584
Sept. 11 (2562)	From the Minister in Guatemala Advice from Compañía Mexicana representative that the Minister of Fomento has granted him a provisional license or contract similar to Pickwick Airways contract and has advised him in writing that until the President has approved the contract, his company may bring mail only into Guatemala from Mexico.	584
Sept. 13 (98)	To the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.) Information that Pan American-Grace Airways extension air-mail service under contract with the U. S. Post Office Department will be inaugurated October 12 by a flight from Buenos Aires to Chile, connecting there with northbound plane.	585
Sept. 13 (89)	To the Chargé in Peru (tel.) Inability of Colonel Lindbergh to continue from Paramaribo through all the South American republics; his intention to return via Venezuela, Colombia, and Central America; probability, however, that he will make another trip to South America in November.	585
Sept. 13 (105)	To the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Information concerning the inauguration, October 12, of Pan American Airways extension air-mail service.	586
Sept. 13 (148)	From the Chargé in Venezuela (tel.) Suggestion that Pan American Airways be informed that it would be helpful to them if Colonel Lindbergh were to include Venezuela in his next flight.	586
Sept. 14 (171)	From the Chargé in Peru (tel.) Report of conversation with President Leguía concerning proposed conference between the Chilean Director General of Aviation and various aviation companies to take place on September 25, in which he stated that the Peruvian Government would be unable to participate because of its existing aviation commitments; urgent recommendation that Colonel Lindbergh come to Peru, not only for the resultant favorable effect on American aviation interests in Peru, but also for the support which would be given to the President at a time when opposition to American interests will be concentrated at Lima.	586
Sept. 16 (91)	To the Chargé in Peru (tel.) Necessity, in order to consider plans for Colonel Lindbergh to go to Peru, of being informed how long the conference scheduled for September 25 will last.	587
Sept. 17 (173)	From the Chargé in Peru (tel.) Observation that it was not expected that Colonel Lindbergh could be in Lima while the conference was in session; Chargé’s desire, rather, to inform the President in advance and announce about September 25 that Colonel Lindbergh is coming to Peru in connection with Pan American-Grace Airways.	587
Sept. 17 (46)	To the Chargé in Venezuela (tel.) Plan of Colonel Lindbergh to stop in Venezuela on return flight from Paramaribo.	588
Sept. 18 (92)	To the Chargé in Peru (tel.) Authorization to inform President Leguía in confidence that Colonel Lindbergh will make a flight to South America during the winter; information that the Peruvian Embassy has extended him a tentative invitation to visit Peru; inquiry whether confidential statement to President Leguía will cover the situation or whether public announcement should be made.	588
Sept. 21 (175)	From the Chargé in Peru (tel.) Intention to inform President Leguía confidentially; hope that official announcement of Colonel Lindbergh’s trip may come first as acceptance of Peruvian invitation and be initiated from Lima; doubt, therefore, that public announcement at present would be desirable.	589
Sept. 21 (281)	From the Ambassador in Chile Letter to the Foreign Minister, September 20 (text printed), suggesting that, if the Chilean Government feels that original decree concession is not sufficiently clear to permit the international mails to proceed from Buenos Aires via Uspallata, Chile, to the United States, it give the necessary assurances to that effect so that the air mail service to Buenos Aires may be opened on October 12 as scheduled.	590
Sept. 26 (178)	From the Chargé in Peru (tel.) Gratification of President Leguía over possibility that announcement of Colonel Lindbergh’s trip may come first as an acceptance of Peruvian invitation; understanding that Pan American-Grace Airways are conferring with Curtiss interests in New York with the object of reaching some satisfactory agreement regarding the Peruvian aviation situation.	593
Sept. 28 (160)	From the Chargé in Venezuela (tel.) Hope that interviews arranged between the Lindbergh party and Venezuelan officials enabled Pan American Airways to present their case adequately.	594
Oct. 4 (188)	From the Chargé in Peru (tel.) Information that proposed aviation conference at Lima has apparently proved abortive.	594
Oct. 4 (2596)	From the Minister in Guatemala Report of conversation with the President of Pan American Airways, October 3, concerning the Guatemalan aviation situation.	595
Oct. 9 (76)	To the Minister in Honduras (tel.) Inquiry whether the present time is favorable for Pan American Airways to apply for operating concession.	598
Oct. 10 (116)	From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.) Signature of Pan American Airways contract by the President, October 9; scheduled inauguration of air-mail service from Buenos Aires to the United States, October 12.	598
Oct. 10 (1986)	From the Vice Consul at Port-of-Spain, Trinidad Inauguration of Pan American Airways air-mail service to Trinidad and British and Dutch Guiana, September 22; transmittal of temporary 6-months’ authorization, dated September 21, under which company is now operating.	598
Oct. 11 (103)	From the Minister in Honduras (tel.) Affirmative reply to telegram No. 76 of October 9.	599
Oct. 15 (298)	From the Chargé in Chile Information that the Chilean Government has stated that it has no objection to proposed extension of Pan American Airways service to Argentina, to be inaugurated October 12, and will formalize provisional authorization by means of a decree.	599
Oct. 19 (73)	From the Minister in El Salvador (tel.) Signature by the Salvadoran Government, subject to congressional approval, of contract with Pan American Airways; arrangements for provisional operating permit pending such approval; probable conclusion in the near future of a separate mail contract.	600
Oct. 20 (201)	From the Chargé in Peru (tel.) Conclusion of contract between Pan American Airways and Scadta, October 18, for the reciprocal handling and transmission of Peruvian and Colombian air mail; opinion that the United States owes a debt of genuine gratitude to President Leguía for the staunch stand in favor of American aviation interests which helped to bring about this arrangement. (Repeated to Bogotá and Santiago.)	601
Oct. 22 (74)	From the Minister in El Salvador (tel.) Issuance by the Minister of War of provisional operating permit, October 21.	602
Oct. 22	From the Second Assistant Postmaster General Declaration that the service rendered by Pan American Airways under its various contracts is very satisfactory.	602
Oct. 25 (2620)	From the Minister in Guatemala Information that Pan American Airways have revived plan to establish route from Florida, via Belize, Flores, and Guatemala City to San Salvador and on south; indication by the Minister of Fomento that he would like to see two permanent international services in Guatemala, namely, the Pickwick Airways on the west side and the Pan American coming in from the east.	602
Oct. 28 (174)	From the Chargé in Venezuela (tel.) Suggestion that Pan American Airways be advised to press their proposal actively before the French service is established.	604
Oct. 29	To the Postmaster General Information that Pan American Airways intends to bid for contract to carry the Cuban mails to the United States; intention of Department to advise Cuban Government, upon inquiry, that Pan American Airways has rendered very satisfactory service.	604
Oct. 29 (476)	To the Chargé in Cuba Instructions to reply to a possible inquiry by Cuban Government as to character of service rendered by Pan American Airways, by stating that the Post Office Department reports that service is very satisfactory.	605
Nov. 6 (79)	From the Minister in El Salvador (tel.) Approval by Cabinet of mail contract; arrangements for signature.	605
Nov. 7 (81)	From the Chargé in El Salvador (tel.) Signature of mail contract, November 6.	605
Nov. 14 (148)	From the Chargé in Guatemala (tel.) Request for instructions whether to accede to request of Compañía Mexicana official for assistance in connection with securing, in the name of Pan American Airways and its subsidiary or affiliated companies, a contract for an air service carrying mail, express, and passengers in and out of Guatemala over any route, and mail contract for the same company over all routes.	605
Nov. 18 (71)	To the Chargé in Guatemala (tel.) Authorization, provided it will not conflict with existing contracts or pending applications of other American companies, to act as requested on behalf of Pan American Airways but not on behalf of its non-American subsidiary.	606
Nov. 18 (166)	From the Chargé in Chile (tel.) Request for instructions whether to remind the Chilean Government of uniform attitude of the U. S. Government respecting the Calvo clause in contracts between the Chilean Government and American citizens and interests. (Footnote: Transmittal in despatch No. 299, October 21, of draft decree regarding extension of Pan American Airways service to Argentina, which contains clause providing that company renounces all diplomatic recourse in case of difficulties arising under the concession.)	606
Nov. 19	To the Consul at Kingston (tel.) Desire of Pan American Airways for permission to make survey flight to Jamaica from Cuba and for temporary operating permit, with right to land, refuel, make minor repairs, and deliver U. S. mail if awarded contract by U. S. Post Office; instructions to request Governor to grant these temporary permissions valid until replaced by formal contract; information that the Embassy at London has been similarly instructed.	607
Nov. 26 (2657)	From the Chargé in Guatemala Decision that, with the exception of the air-mail contract desired by Pan American Airways, Legation could support that company without conflicting with rights of the Pickwick Company; report of conversations with the Minister of Fomento and the President on the subject.	607
Dec. 3 (2667)	From the Chargé in Guatemala Information that the Minister of Fomento will sign operating contract for air transport in Guatemala with Pan American Airways on December 4.	609
Dec. 4 (156)	From the Minister in Guatemala (tel.) Signature of contract subject to approval by the Assembly and a provisional permit.	609
Dec. 5 (361)	From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Information that the Governor of Jamaica has been instructed to issue the temporary permission requested by Pan American Airways.	609
Dec. 6 (131)	To the Chargé in Peru Opinion of Post Office Department that it would be inadvisable for the U.S. Government to enter into arrangements with Pan American Airways and Pan American-Grace Airways similar to contract between the latter and Scadta.	610
Dec. 7 (73)	To the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) Receipt of information from Pan American-Grace Airways that the Lloyd Aereo Boliviano is trying to obtain a monopoly in Bolivia; instructions to express U.S. hope that no action will be taken which would prejudice pending application to connect La Paz with its established route along the west coast and the routes to be established along the east coast.	610
Dec. 10 (93)	From the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) Advice from Pan American-Grace representatives that their proposals are receiving favorable consideration and that no immediate assistance is required from the Chargé.	611
Dec. 17 (808)	From the Consul at Kingston Transmittal of original of special and temporary authorization granted by the Governor of Jamaica, December 10, to Pan American Airways in connection with survey flight.	611

tri-motors safety airways

[Page LXXXVIII] [Page LXXXIX] [Page XC] [Page XCI]

Date and number	Subject	Page
1929 Apr. 27	From the Liaison Officer of the Department of Commerce Request, on behalf of the New York, Rio, and Buenos Aires Line, Inc., a subsidiary of Tri-Motors Safety Airways, that temporary permission be asked of certain governments for three Sikorsky airplanes to carry out air mail survey flights over a route between New York and Buenos Aires, beginning about May 15.	612
Apr. 30 (39)	To the Ambassador in Cuba (tel.) Instructions to request temporary permission and free entry contingent upon reexportation for three Sikorsky airplanes to fly over and land in Cuba on air mail survey flights. (Sent, mutatis mutandis, to the missions in Argentina, Dominican Republic, Haiti, Uruguay, and Venezuela. Similar telegrams to the missions in Brazil; France, with respect to Guadeloupe, Martinique, and French Guiana; Great Britain, with respect to Trinidad and British Guiana; and the Netherlands, with respect to Dutch Guiana.)	613
May 2 (30)	From the Minister in the Dominican Republic (tel.) Information that permission has been granted.	613
May 6 (29)	From the Chargé in Haiti (tel.) Information that permission has been granted.	613
May 6 (31)	From the Ambassador in Haiti (tel.) Information that permission has been granted.	614
May 10 (33)	From the Chargé in Venezuela (tel.) Information that permission has been granted.	614
May 11 (34)	From the Chargé in Venezuela (tel.) Desire of representative of the New York, Rio, and Buenos Aires Line that there be transmitted to president of the company a message (text printed), requesting that French interests be asked to instruct their representatives to assist his representations.	614
May 13 (27)	From the Chargé in Uruguay (tel.) Probability that flight permission and free entry privileges will be granted.	615
May 13 (14)	To the Chargé in Venezuela (tel.) Inability to transmit message contained in telegram No. 34, May 11, or to extend other assistance until definite information is received regarding apparent connection of the New York, Rio, and Buenos Aires Line with foreign interests; authorization to convey this information to company’s representative.	615
May 16 (38)	To the Chargé in Argentina (tel.) Instructions, in view of reports indicating present or contemplated connection between the New York, Rio, and Buenos Aires Line and French interests, to take no action which might seem to promote such foreign interests against those of other American firms; inquiry whether any information to confirm such reports has been received. (Sent, mutatis mutandis, to the Ambassador in Brazil as No. 16.)	615
May 17 (18)	From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Information that the Foreign Office was requested on May 2 to grant permission for survey flight and is expected to reply favorably; also, that report mentioned in Department’s telegram No. 38 of May 16 has not been confirmed but is not improbable.	616
May 20 (42)	From the Chargé in Argentina (tel.) Report on Latécoère-Tri-Motors negotiations now being conducted between Paris and New York.	616
May 22	From the Vice Consul at Port-of-Spain, Trinidad (tel.) Information that temporary permission to fly over and land in Trinidad has been granted.	617
May 22 (3162)	From the Ambassador in Brazil Advice that it appeared to be too late to recall request for permission to fly over and land in Brazil.	617
May 23	Memorandum by the Chief of the Division of Latin American Affairs Conversation with the president of American International Airways, Inc., concerning merger with the New York, Rio, and Buenos Aires Line and Latécoère-Tri-Motors negotiations.	618
May 25 (128)	From the Chargé in Great Britain (tel.) Foreign Office advice, May 24, that the Governors of Trinidad and British Guiana had been instructed to grant permission to fly over and land in the two colonies and that free entry contingent upon reexportation would be accorded provided the local laws would permit.	620
May 29 (48)	From the Chargé in Venezuela (tel.) Permission by the Venezuelan Government for survey flight by one Sikorsky plane between Trinidad and Maracay.	620
May 31 (831)	From the Chargé in Uruguay Information that formal permission for flights has been granted, but that free entry privilege has not yet been accorded.	621
June 3 (3169)	From the Ambassador in Brazil Permission of Brazilian Government for flight.	621
June 5 (48)	From the Chargé in Argentina (tel.) Information that permission for Sikorsky planes has been granted.	621
June 19 (30)	From the Chargé in Uruguay (tel.) Advice that permission to land and free entry have been accorded.	622
June 22 (35)	From the Chargé in the Netherlands (tel.) Information that permission to land and free entry have been accorded.	622
July 8 (324)	From the Chargé in France (tel.) Desire of the French Government to know precise purpose of flight.	622
July 10 (227)	To the Chargé in France (tel.) Advice that flights are for survey of proposed air-mail route.	622
July 29 (363)	From the Chargé in France (tel.) Information that authorization has been granted.	623
Aug. 3 (113)	From the Chargé in Venezuela (tel.) Understanding that the Venezuelan Government has approved contract with the New York, Rio, and Buenos Aires Line on essentially the same terms as the French contract.	623
Aug. 17 (46)	To the Chargé in Brazil (tel.) Authorization to state, in the event of inquiry by the Brazilian Government, that the New York, Rio, and Buenos Aires Line is American-owned and that the Tri-Motors Safety Airways is a subsidiary entirely owned by it and with no foreign interest or control.	623
Aug. 20	From the Vice Consul at Port-of-Spain, Trinidad (tel.) Understanding that the French Government has offered the British Government airways concessions in French Indochina or French Africa in exchange for similar concessions in the British West Indies to Compagnie Generale Aéropostale.	623
Sept. 18	To the Chargé in Cuba (cir. tel.) Instructions to request permission for six Sikorsky airplanes and four Commodore airplanes belonging to the New York, Rio, and Buenos Aires Line to fly over and land in Cuba. (Sent, mutatis mutandis, to the missions in Haiti; France, with respect to Guadeloupe, Martinque, and French Guiana; Great Britain, with respect to British Guiana, Dominica, and Trinidad; and the Netherlands, with respect to Dutch Guiana. Favorable replies were received from the missions in Cuba, Haiti, and the Netherlands.)	624
Sept. 25 (449)	From the Chargé in France (tel.) Inquiry by the French Government whether the planes will arrive simultaneously or separately, and if the latter, the number of visits and at what intervals.	624
Oct. 1 (316)	To the Chargé in France (tel.) Advice that the 10 planes will go forward in separate flights at intervals of several days between October 13 and December 20, touching at Guadeloupe, Martinique, and Cayenne.	624
Oct. 1	From the Second Secretary of Embassy in France Desire, in connection with efforts to procure reliable information in relation to agreement between the British and French air ministries for the development of air transport in Africa, the Near and Far East, and South America, to be informed of understanding reported to have, been reached between Pan American Airways and Aéropostale officials, as well as of negotiations of the New York, Rio, and Buenos Aires Line and Pan American Airways with French officials in Martinique, Guadeloupe, and French Guiana concerning mail concessions.	625
Oct. 19 (483)	From the Chargé in France (tel.) Oral information from the Foreign Office, in reference to telegram No. 316 of October 1, that authorization will be granted for two months provided that during that period there be concluded an accord looking to cooperation between the French Aéropostale and the New York, Rio, and Buenos Aires Line and the Pan American Airways; also, that planes must not carry photographic equipment or fly over Fort-de-France.	626
Oct. 21 (339)	To the Chargé in France (tel.) Opinion that authorization suggested is obviously no authorization at all; instructions to discuss the matter further with French authorities, pointing out that no such impediments are placed in the way of French aviators desiring to fly over American territory.	626
Oct. 21	To the Second Secretary of Embassy in France Information as requested in letter of October 1; opinion that French attitude is both unfriendly and unjustifiable.	627
Oct. 22 (486)	From the Chargé in France (tel.) Advice that authorization is unconditioned during two months except for the stipulations regarding photography and prohibited zone, but provides that subsequent operation over the route will require that agreement must be reached with Aéropostale.	629
Oct. 26 (9957)	From the Chargé in France Transmittal of Foreign Office note of October 24 confirming authorization for flight; opinion that, although note does not reaffirm the stipulation with regard to the conclusion of an accord between Aéropostale and the two American lines, French authorities are likely to insist upon a general agreement between all the operating companies concerned before permanent concessions will be granted to either one or both of the American lines.	630
Oct. 29 (352)	To the Chargé in France (tel.) Statement of U. S. position which Chargé is instructed to present to the French Government.	630
Nov. 5 (513)	From the Chargé in France (tel.) Refusal of the French Government to recede from position that continued operation of New York, Rio, and Buenos Aires Line is contingent upon agreement with Aéropostale; probability, however, that duration permission would be granted if negotiations were begun even though not completed prior to expiration of the two months’ period; information that the French Government conceded point that permission not be contingent upon like agreement between Pan American Airways and Aéropostale. Observation that French attitude is one of bargaining rather than encouragement of reciprocal freedom of air navigation.	631
Nov. 7 (9991)	From the Chargé in France Amplification of telegram No. 513 of November 5,	632

latin american airways

[Page XCII] [Page XCIII]

Date and number	Subject	Page
1929 Apr. 3 (2349)	From the Chargé in Guatemala Information that Latin American Airways, an American concern, is negotiating for an air-mail and passenger contract; also that a representative of Pan American Airways is expected shortly.	635
May 2 (54)	From the Minister in Guatemala (tel.) Foreign Office request for financial and other data concerning Latin American Airways.	636
May 7 (57)	From the Minister in Guatemala (tel.) Information that contract granted by Fomento to Latin American Airways for air-mail service between Mariscal, Mexico, and Guatemala is pending before the Assembly; that Fomento has rejected applications by George L. Rihl, president of the Compañía Mexicana de Aviación and vice president of the Pan American Airways, for two concessions—one for the Compañía Mexicana between Tapachula, Mexico, and Guatemala, and the other for Pan American Airways to connect with Miami–Panama line; that Compañía Mexicana and Latin American Airways propose to operate under Mexican charters. Inquiry whether to give active assistance to Pan American Airways.	637
May 7 (21)	To the Minister in Guatemala (tel.) Financial and other data regarding Latin American Airways; authorization to continue to support it, especially since it was first in the field.	638
May 11 (23)	To the Minister in Guatemala (tel.) Advice that, when telegram No. 21 of May 7 was sent it was not understood that both Latin American and Pan American Airways intended to operate under Mexican charters; authorization to give appropriate assistance, upon request, to Pan American Airways, an American company whose stock is owned by Americans, in efforts to obtain right to connect with Miami–Panama line.	638
May 12 (59)	From the Minister in Guatemala (tel.) Receipt of advice from Latin American Airways’ representative, May 11, that concession will be held and operated by an American-incorporated company; intention to inform Pan American representative that, since Latin American was first in the field, the Legation is inclined to give it appropriate support but is also disposed to give appropriate assistance to Pan American.	639
May 14 (24)	To the Minister in Guatemala (tel.) Instructions to adopt a noncommittal attitude.	639
May 15 (2403)	From the Minister in Guatemala Likelihood that Guatemalan Government, with approval of the Assembly, will enter into contracts with both American companies; information that their representatives are cooperating in a friendly way; also, that Pan American representative has abandoned efforts to secure contract for the Compañía Mexicana.	640
May 22 (2416)	From the Minister in Guatemala Information that Pan American Airways’ representative has withdrawn from agreement made with Latin American Airways’ representative, and that revised contract between the latter company and the Guatemalan Government has been signed and transmitted to the Assembly. Memorandum by the Third Secretary of Legation, May 20 (text printed), of a conversation with Pan American representative concerning negotiations with the Minister for a contract made out in the name of Pan American Airways and its subsidiary companies, under which the Compañía Mexicana would be able to perform service from Mexico to Guatemala City.	643
May 29 (2426)	From the Minister in Guatemala Understanding that neither contract is likely to receive Assembly approval before adjournment and that, after close of the session, Guatemalan Government will grant temporary permits to fly.	646
May 31 (2433)	From the Minister in Guatemala Plan of Minister of Fomento to grant Latin American Airways a provisional permit to fly between Mariscal, Mexico, via Guatemala City to Salvador, and to grant Pan American a permit to fly from the eastern coast of Guatemala via Guatemala City to Salvador or Honduras and return; understanding that Pan American Airways permit may not be satisfactory to the company.	648
June 11 (2443)	From the Minister in Guatemala Conclusion of the provisional contract between Guatemalan Government and Latin American Airways representative; information that provisional contract was signed in the name of the Compañía de Transportes Aéreos Latino Americana but that request has been made for transfer to the Latin American Airways, a Delaware corporation.	649
July 9 (2500)	From the Minister in Guatemala Understanding that Latin American Airways is merging with another company now in operation and will soon begin service.	650
Aug. 7 (2535)	From the Minister in Guatemala Inauguration of service by the Compañía de Transportes Aéreos Latino Americana on August 7; report of conversation with the president of the company, August 6, concerning pending merger with the Pickwick Airways of Los Angeles, California.	650
Aug. 13 (2538)	From the Minister in Guatemala Information that transfer of Latin American Airways contract to Pickwick Airways has been effected.	652

International Conference of American States on Conciliation and Arbitration, Held at Washington, December 10, 1928–January 5, 1929: Conventions

Date and number	Subject	Page
Jan. 5	General Convention Of inter-American conciliation.	653
Jan. 5	General Treaty Of inter-American arbitration. (Note: Information concerning understanding contained in Senate resolution of April 1, 1935, giving advice and consent to ratification.)	659
Jan. 5	Protocol Of progressive arbitration.	667

Convention and Protocol Between the United States and Other American Republics Respecting Trade Mark and Commercial Protection and Registration of Trade Marks, Signed February 20, 1929

Date and number	Subject	Page
1929 Feb. 20	General Inter-American Convention For trade mark and commercial protection.	670

Arrangement Between the United States, Canada, Cuba, and Newfoundland Relative to the Assignment of High Frequencies to Radio Stations on the North American Continent

[Page XCIV]

Date and number	Subject	Page
1928 Dec. 27 (194)	From the Canadian Minister Invitation to participate in a conference at Ottawa, January 9, 1929, to discuss the allocation of short wave radio channels on the North American continent; information that invitations are being extended to the Cuban and Mexican Governments. (Footnote: Information that the conference was held at Ottawa, January 21–25, 1929, with delegations from the United States, Canada, Cuba, and Newfoundland participating; also, that Mexico was invited but not represented.)	693
1929 Undated	Suggestions for an Arrangement Between the United States, Canada, Cuba, Mexico, and Other North American Nations Relative to the assignment of frequencies on the North American continent. (Footnote: Information that this draft was prepared by a committee of the Conference and transmitted to the Department in a letter of February 11, 1929, from the chairman of the American delegation.)	693
Feb. 1	From the Chairman of the Canadian Delegation to the Chairman of the American Delegation Approval and acceptance of proposals for the distribution of channels; understanding that, approval having already been given by the U. S. delegation, the only remaining step is to approve the articles of agreement.	696
Feb. 26 (314)	From the American Minister in Canada to the Canadian Secretary of State for External Affairs Notification that the U. S. Government approves the recommendations of the Conference and will announce the agreement as being effective March 1, 1929.	696
Feb. 28 (16)	From the Canadian Secretary of State for External Affairs to the American Minister in Canada Declaration that the Canadian Government accepts the recommendations of the Conference and will announce the agreement as being effective March 1.	696
Mar. 6 (21)	From the Canadian Secretary of State for External Affairs to the American Minister in Canada Information that the Newfoundland Government accepts the recommendations of the Conference and considers the agreement effective as of March 1.	697
Mar. 15 (23)	From the Canadian Secretary of State for External Affairs to the American Chargé in Canada Information that the agreement is accepted by the Government of Cuba.	697

Official Statement of and Commentary Upon the Monroe Doctrine by the Secretary of State

Date and number	Subject	Page
1929 Feb. 28	To American Diplomatic Officers in Latin America Official statement of and commentary upon the Monroe Doctrine; instructions to be prepared to communicate this statement to the Foreign Minister when directed to do so. (Footnote: Information that the statement apparently was never communicated to the respective Foreign Ministers.)	698

[Page XCV]

Tacna-Arica Dispute: Good Offices of the United States in the Final Settlement of Issues Between Chile and Peru; Representations by Bolivia

[Page XCVI] [Page XCVII] [Page XCVIII] [Page XCIX] [Page C] [Page CI] [Page CII] [Page CIII] [Page CIV] [Page CV] [Page CVI] [Page CVII] [Page CVIII] [Page CIX] [Page CX]

Date and number	Subject	Page
1928 Dec. 1	Memorandum by the Secretary of State Conversation with the Chilean Ambassador in which he advised that the Chilean Ambassador in Peru had been instructed to offer to Peru all the territory north of a line approximately 10 kilometers north of the railroad, Chile to complete all public improvements in Tacna at its own expense, and stated that Chile would be willing to make Arica a free port to Peru.	720
Dec. 1 (84)	To the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Inquiry whether the Ambassador has had an interview with President Leguía relating to a settlement of the Tacna-Arica matter.	720
Dec. 13 (141)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Information that President Leguía is sending Colonel Moore of the American naval mission to Arica to find out whether another port could be established north of and near the port of Arica or if a small part of the north end of the Arica port would meet Peru’s requirements for an outlet from Tacna.	721
Dec. 14 (87)	To the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Opinion that it will be desirable to inform the Chilean Ambassador at Washington confidentially regarding Colonel Moore’s visit; instructions to inquire as to any objection.	721
Dec. 15 (143)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Decision of President Leguía not to send Colonel Moore.	721
Dec. 30 (148)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Inquiry whether the Secretary of State could secure permission from the Chilean Government for Ralph Cady, an American citizen and chief engineer for the Frederick Snare Corporation, and assistants to make a survey of the Tacna and Arica coast.	722
Dec. 31	Memorandum by the Chief of the Division of Latin American Affairs Conversation between the Secretary of State and the Chilean Ambassador in which the Ambassador agreed to request permission for Mr. Cady’s investigation.	722
1929 Jan. 3 (1)	To the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Advice from the Chilean Ambassador that his Government will accord Mr. Cady every possible facility to make the desired examination.	723
Jan. 4 (2)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Plan of Mr. Cady and assistant to leave Callao for Arica, January 9.	724
Jan. 18 (7)	To the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Instructions to ascertain what the Peruvian Government is willing to do to make a settlement.	724
Jan. 20 (6)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Inability of President Leguía to make any proposition until the boundary commissioners have returned from Arica and reported.	724
Jan. 22 (8)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Information that the engineers will not return until February 6.	725
Jan. 24 (8)	To the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Instructions to suggest to President Leguía that work of the Boundary Commission be further suspended until April 17 in order to give time for a possible settlement after he has received the engineers’ report; information that a similar request is being made of Chile.	725
Jan. 25 (9)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Acquiescence of President Leguía in further suspension of work of Boundary Commission.	725
Jan. 30	Memorandum by the Chief of the Division of Latin American Affairs Conversation with the Bolivian Minister in which he stated his Government’s interest in rumors that Chile and Peru are carrying on direct negotiations in Lima for a settlement of the Tacna-Arica dispute, and inquired as to the nature of the settlement which might be expected.	725
Feb. 11 (10)	To the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Assumption that the engineers have by now presented their report to President Leguía; hope that he will make a generous and practicable proposal without delay.	726
Feb. 12 (12)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Information that President Leguía does not expect a report for several days. Opinion that any proposal by him will be based on Chile’s receiving only one-quarter of a kilometer north of the railroad at certain points, although at other points she could have the ten.	726
Feb. 21 (19)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Advice that the engineers submitted their report on February 20; synopsis of report, indicating that a new port could be established about 1½ kilometers north of the more northerly of the two existing Arica piers; information that in addition there would be a division of territory whereby Peru would receive Tacna, and Chile would receive Arica except a small piece of Arica territory which Peru would receive for the new port; also that President Leguía would insist that the Morro be demilitarized and placed under the Pan American Union, which would supervise erection of a peace monument. Belief of the Ambassador that President Leguía will approve this report and plan.	727
Feb. 25 (15)	To the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Opinion that it would be advisable for President Leguía to make the proposition outlined; intention, if he does so, to urge Chile to accept.	728
Feb. 26 (21)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Plan of President Leguía to submit a report to the Chilean Ambassador on February 28; American Ambassador’s belief that President Leguía would settle the question in the manner suggested if in addition Chile would pay $3,500,000 for the construction of a new port in lieu of damages to Peruvian citizens.	728
Feb. 27 (16)	To the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Instructions to telegraph immediately when President Leguía submits report to Ambassador Figueroa; inquiry as to how he will present the proposition of $3,500,000.	728
Feb. 27 (22)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Probability that President Leguía will discuss cost of the new port when he delivers the engineers’ report to Ambassador Figueroa.	729
Feb. 28 (23)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Information that the report will be delivered at 5 p.m.	729
Mar. 1 (18)	To the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Hope that the Chilean Government will give careful and sympathetic consideration to the report presented by President Leguía.	729
Mar. 1 (24)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Information that President Leguía delivered the engineers’ report to the Chilean Ambassador with the statement that Peru would want $3,500,000 in lieu of damages to Peruvian citizens.	730
Mar. 2 (17)	To the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Instructions, unless telegram No. 19 of February 21 is an accurate statement of the engineers’ report, to telegraph text.	730
Mar. 2 (25)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Information that telegram No. 19 of February 21 is an accurate statement of the engineers’ report.	731
Mar. 2 (18)	To the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Understanding, from telegram No. 19 of February 21, that the boundary line will be just north of the railway; inquiry whether this suggestion was handed to the Chilean Ambassador on February 28.	731
Mar. 2 (26)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Confirmation of understanding; affirmative reply to inquiry.	731
Mar. 3 (27)	From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Opinion that the basis of settlement will be satisfactory to Chile and that only the details will need to be worked out; observation that the expense of the new port and the question of erection of a monument on the Morro will present difficulty.	732
Mar. 5 (20)	To the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Information that Secretary of State Kellogg will remain in office until about March 25, when his successor, Mr. Henry L. Stimson, will arrive, and that during this time he wishes to do everything in his power to further a complete settlement. (Sent, mutatis mutandis, to the Ambassador in Peru.)	732
Mar. 5 (27)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Opinion that an expression by President Hoover of non-objection to President Leguía’s saying, if he were ready to make a settlement and felt it necessary, that he had made the settlement at the suggestion of President Hoover, might be of great assistance toward securing a prompt settlement.	732
Mar. 6 (21)	To the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Hope that Chile will not permit the difficulties mentioned in telegram No. 27, March 3, to stand in the way of a definitive settlement.	733
Mar. 6 (28)	From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Explanation of the reasons for Chilean opposition to a separate port at Arica under the sovereignty of Peru. (Copy to Peru.)	733
Mar. 7 (22)	To the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Inability to see justification for Chilean opposition to a separate port at Arica for Peru; authorization to convey this view in informal conversations.	733
Mar. 9 (20)	To the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Belief that President Hoover would be willing to aid along the lines suggested.	734
Mar. 9 (31)	From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Telegram from the Chilean Government to its Ambassador at Lima (text printed), instructing him to advise President Leguía of the inacceptability of the Peruvian proposal for construction of a separate Peruvian port at the San José river, and to offer alternative proposals whereby (1) Chile would give Peru a pier, a customhouse, and a railway station at Arica, and $2,000,000, the boundary line to be drawn at Escritos, 16 kilometers north of Arica, and to run parallel to the railroad and 10 kilometers north of it, or (2) Chile would construct a new port for Peru at a cost of $3,500,000 at the Lluta river, 10 kilometers north of Arica; observation that in the latter case the boundary would run south of the new port. (Copy to Peru.)	734
Mar. 11 (21)	To the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Instructions to telegraph President Leguía’s reaction to the Chilean proposition.	736
Mar. 11 (28)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Advice that the Chileans evidently have not seen the engineers’ report; information that the proposed port at Arica could be moved to a point 300 meters north, but that the engineers say it would be impossible to locate a port farther north. (Repeated to Chile.)	736
Mar. 11 (29)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Information that President Leguía insists on a port for Tacna; opinion that if Chilean engineers can prove that a port can be constructed at the place they suggest for $3,500,000, President Leguía will agree.	737
Mar. 12 (24)	To the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Instructions to deliver to the Foreign Minister copy of telegram No. 28, March 11, from the Ambassador in Peru to the Department.	737
Mar. 12 (30)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Intention of President Leguía to inform the Chilean Ambassador of willingness to accept proposition if Chile can guarantee the erection of a proper port at the place they suggest for $3,500,000, to advise him of the opinion of the American engineers that a port at that location would be impossible, and to ask for plans of the Chilean engineers.	738
Mar. 13 (26)	To the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Request to be advised of the final points on which Chile and Peru disagree as to the settlement; information that President Hoover is anxious for an immediate settlement. (Sent, mutatis mutandis, to the Ambassador in Peru.)	738
Mar. 13 (33)	From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Suggestion that efforts be made toward a joint declaration by Chile and Peru, to be made through Secretary Kellogg, embodying the vital and essential points of the settlement; information that the Foreign Minister approves the procedure. (Copy to Peru.)	738
Mar. 14 (31)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Information that Ambassador Figueroa has telegraphed his Government for the Chilean engineers’ plans for the port at Lluta river; opinion of Peruvian engineers that the location selected by the Chileans is impracticable, and, if possible, would cost from 10 to 15 million dollars.	739
Mar. 14 (27)	To the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Report of conversation with Mr. Cady in which he expressed the opinion that the location proposed by the Chileans is unsatisfactory from both an engineering and an economic point of view. Instructions to communicate this information to the Chilean Government, stating the Secretary of State’s hope that it will accept the proposal of President Leguía instead. (Repeated to the Ambassador in Peru for information only.)	740
Mar. 14 (28)	To the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Opinion that Chile and Peru could make a brief memorandum stating that a settlement had been effected, even though certain details remained to be worked out, and that President Hoover and Secretary Kellogg would then telegraph their congratulations. (Sent, mutatis mutandis, to the Ambassador in Peru as No. 24.)	742
Mar. 14 (35)	From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Informal memorandum from the Foreign Minister (text printed), recommending a third location, farther north of Arica, as a suitable place for a port. (Copy to Peru.)	742
Mar. 15 (37)	From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Advice that location of the port is the only important point of disagreement; suggestion that it might be possible to have Chile give the money for the port to Peru, leaving her free to construct it at any place north of Punta Chacota, and also that Chile might be persuaded to increase the payment so as to cover such items as re-laying the railroad.	743
Mar. 15 (39)	From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Memorandum by the Foreign Minister (text printed) stating reasons why Chile could not accept the proposed port at San José river, or any port between the San José and Lluta rivers.	744
Mar. 15 (29)	To the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Comments by Mr. Cady on memorandum contained in telegram No. 35 of March 14; his belief that the Chileans must have in mind a small lighterage port rather than a larger port where ships could dock, as he contemplated. (Repeated to Peru.)	745
Mar. 15 (33)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Information that President Leguía refused to accept proposition for a joint declaration with Peru, stating that Peru must have a port for Tacna or no settlement is possible; also that if and when they reach agreement he intends to send the text to President Hoover, for him to send to Peru and Chile as a suggested settlement.	745
Mar. 16 (41)	From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Desire that Mr. Cady be reminded that all the ports of Chile and Peru north of Valparaiso, including Arica, are lighterage ports; observation that the Ambassador has been assuming that the proposed new port would be of the same character. (Copy to Peru.)	746
Mar. 16 (35)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Inquiry whether it would be possible to ascertain how much additional Chile would pay for railroad construction if a port is found wholly north of Escritos, and perhaps altogether outside the Province of Arica.	746
Mar. 16 (31)	To the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Information that Mr. Cady’s report envisages a port at which vessels can dock and discharge cargo—not merely a lighterage port—and that his company is willing to construct it at San José river for $3,500,000.	747
Mar. 17 (36)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) President Leguía’s assurance to the Chilean Ambassador that he would accept a suitable port at any place selected by the Chilean engineers if an investigation by American engineers proved it possible, and if it could be constructed for $3,500,000; preparations for sending Mr. George Seeley, vice president of the Frederick Snare Corporation, to Arica.	747
Mar. 17 (42)	From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Opinion that a Peruvian port at San José river superior to the port at Arica would be commercially absurd and politically impossible; doubt that President Leguía expects more than a lighterage port.	748
Mar. 17 (43)	From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Suggested joint declaration of settlement (text printed); information that the Chilean Government will accept all the stipulations contained therein.	749
Mar. 18 (28)	To the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Explanation that the suggestion about agreeing on principles was that, as soon as the formula of settlement was telegraphed, President Hoover would not only endorse it but would also propose it as a settlement to Peru and Chile.	750
Mar. 18 (32)	To the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Summary of understanding of the present situation with regard to the question of the port.	750
Mar. 18 (37)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Request for text of the agreement President Leguía should sign.	752
Mar. 19 (39)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Notification to President Leguía by Ambassador Figueroa that additional plans and a more detailed report are on their way from Chile.	752
Mar. 20 (45)	From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Information that the Ambassador again urged the Foreign Minister to give Peru a port at the San José river but received in reply the same objections.	753
Mar. 20 (40)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Advice that the Chilean engineers are due to reach Arica, and that the Peruvian engineers will leave for Arica on March 22.	754
Mar. 21 (33)	To the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Conclusion that there is nothing to do except to await the report of the engineers and find out what Chile and Peru agree upon.	754
Mar. 22 (46)	From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Foreign Minister’s hearty approval of joint declaration of settlement to be given publicity; his willingness to accept either the declaration quoted in telegram No. 43, March 17, or a shorter declaration drafted in conference with the American Ambassador (text printed); information that the shorter declaration was telegraphed to the Chilean Ambassador at Lima with instructions to submit it to President Leguía for approval; desire of the Foreign Minister that the Secretary of State submit the declaration to President Leguía.	754
Mar. 23 (31)	To the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Transmittal of text of declaration contained in telegram No. 46 of March 22 from the Ambassador in Chile; instructions not to urge this particular declaration on President Leguía until his views are known.	755
Mar. 23 (44)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Advice that the Chilean Ambassador has not yet asked for a conference.	756
Mar. 25 (34)	To the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Information that Secretary Kellogg will remain in office until March 29. (Sent, mutatis mutandis, to the Ambassador in Peru.)	756
Mar. 26 (35)	To the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Inquiry whether the engineers have reported on the results of their investigations at Escrito and northwards. (Sent, mutatis mutandis, to the Ambassador in Peru.)	756
Mar. 27 (51)	From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Information that the engineers have made their examination.	756
Mar. 27 (51)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Return of the Peruvian engineers.	757
Mar. 31 (55)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Desire for definite answer as to whether President Hoover will make the suggestion to Peru and Chile.	757
Apr. 1 (56)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Report to President Leguía by Mr. Seeley (text printed) advising that the only point at which a proper port could be built is just north of the San José river.	757
Apr. 8 (41)	To the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Delivery by the Chilean Ambassador of a telegram from his Government, dated April 4 (text printed), stating that conclusions of the Chilean engineers are in open disagreement with the American engineers’ report, and that a port could be constructed at Las Yaradas.	759
Apr. 8 (57)	From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Opinion of the Foreign Minister that Peru will accept a port at Las Yaradas costing 8 or 9 million dollars or a port 3 kilometers north of the most northerly pier of Arica costing 3½ million dollars; his unwillingness to express opinion as to what the decision of the Chilean Cabinet will be.	760
Apr. 9 (62)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Preparation by Mr. Seeley of answers to the Chilean engineers’ statements.	760
Apr. 8[9?] (63)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Memorandum by Mr. Seeley (text printed), commenting on the Chilean engineers’ report.	761
Apr. 9 (59)	From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Postponement of action by the Cabinet pending further discussion with the Chilean engineers; understanding, from cable sent to Ambassador Figueroa by the Foreign Minister, that Chile is willing to pay Peru $6,000,000 to be used for any purpose, and that, if President Leguía decides to use it for a port at Las Yaradas, Chile is willing to send her engineers to Lima for conference and to assume responsibility of constructing the port for the figure stated.	763
Apr. 10 (64)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Letter from President Leguía, April 9, stating that it is immaterial whether the proposed port is near to or some kilometers away from the port of Arica, provided that the port will be built and guaranteed by a reputable concern.	764
Apr. 11 (68)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Intention of Ambassador Figueroa to present to President Leguía details of proposal whereby Chile will build a port at Las Yaradas costing $6,000,000; advice from President Leguía that he will accept proposal only if a reputable firm will construct and guarantee the port, and pay for it and the necessary railroad connection.	765
Apr. 11 (69)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Predication of all President Leguía’s propositions or acceptances on the assumption that if and when Chile and Peru agree, President Hoover will offer the compromise as coming from him and both countries will accept it; observation that understanding is that before President Hoover makes the final proposition, both countries agree to accept its terms.	765
Apr. 11 (44)	To the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Authorization to inform President Leguía orally and confidentially that President Hoover is ready to make the suggestion of settlement on the condition that it has the prior approval of both countries.	766
Apr. 11 (70)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Information that President Leguía has turned over to Mr. Seeley, for examination and report, the details of the proposed port received from Ambassador Figueroa.	766
Apr. 12 (72)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Report by Mr. Seeley (text printed), stating that his company is unable to work out any plans for a port at Las Yaradas which it could unreservedly guarantee and which would come within the estimate of $6,000,000, and suggesting that the Chilean Government submit detailed plans and specifications which he can submit to experts in New York to determine whether the scheme is feasible; information that the plans will arrive from Chile in about 10 days.	766
Apr. 14 (73)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Information that, if a feasible and practical port can be constructed, Peru will accept; observation that examination of the Chilean plans will take time.	768
Apr. 16 (61)	From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Interest of several American concerns in securing contract for constructing the port at Las Yaradas; opinion that if the cost becomes the only question standing in the way of settlement, Chile will pay.	768
Apr. 16 (75)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Proposal by President Leguía to the Chilean Ambassador that, since it appears impossible for the Chilean and Peruvian engineers to agree, Peru would accept the customhouse, railroad station, and pier at Arica to be constructed at the expense of Chile, and $6,000,000 to connect Tacna by railroad with other portions of Peru, provided this compromise be suggested by President Hoover.	769
Apr. 17 (62)	From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Information that the Chilean Ambassador has reported concerning his conversation with President Leguía; opinion that the proposition will be acceptable to Chile.	769
Apr. 17 (63)	From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Instructions by the Chilean Government to the Chilean Ambassador in Lima to submit the draft terms of settlement (text printed), to President Leguía.	770
Apr. 19 (76)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Information that President Leguía and Ambassador Figueroa have reached agreement outlined in telegram No. 75 of April 16, and that if the Chilean Government agrees, President Leguía and Ambassador Figueroa will work out the details and transmit the text for submission to President Hoover.	771
Apr. 20 (65)	From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Preparation by the Foreign Minister of draft of proposal of settlement, which after being sent to Lima and being put into final form, will be transmitted to Washington.	772
Apr. 21 (78)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Chilean acceptance of President Leguía’s proposal that President Hoover make the compromise suggestion for settlement.	773
Apr. 23 (46)	To the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Request to be advised the exact scope of the suggestion to be made by President Hoover.	773
Apr. 24 (79)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Plan of President Leguía that President Hoover make the suggestion to both countries in detail, giving the exact wording of the agreement reached between them.	774
Apr. 24 (80)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Intention of President Leguía to consult Ambassador Figueroa as to exactly what they will ask President Hoover to do.	775
Apr. 24 (81)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Information from President Leguía that the Chilean Ambassador presented a proposed draft of the settlement agreement, but that the boundary lines previously agreed upon had been changed and would require further study.	775
Apr. 25 (47)	To the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Inquiry as to results of the interview between President Leguía and the Chilean Ambassador regarding the scope of the suggestion of settlement to be made by President Hoover.	776
Apr. 26 (82)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Advice that, owing to the dispute over the boundary line, President Leguía and the Chilean Ambassador did not agree on the scope of the suggestion to be made by President Hoover.	776
Apr. 26	Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State Conversation between the Secretary of State and the Bolivian Minister in which the latter earnestly expressed Bolivia’s desire to be considered in any proposed settlement of the Tacna-Arica matter, especially making representations against the provision of the proposed settlement agreement which specifies that neither Chile nor Peru shall transfer any part of the territory to a third party or make any changes in the international railroad system without the agreement of the other.	776
Apr. 26 (48)	To the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Instructions, in view of Bolivian protest, to telegraph exact text of proposal, and to discreetly ascertain how much importance is attached to it by both countries, as the U. S. Government, in the light of present information, would not be prepared to make a suggestion containing such a stipulation.	779
Apr. 27 (83)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Information that President Leguía’s draft contains the same provision; also that the exact text will be cabled as soon as received.	780
Apr. 27 (84)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Intention of President Leguía to ask to have the clause withdrawn immediately.	780
Apr. 27 (49)	To the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Observation that any suggestion by the United States which would contain the provision adversely affecting Bolivia might be deemed by that country as a most unfriendly act.	780
Apr. 27 (85)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) President Leguía’s draft of that part of proposed agreement which refers to President Hoover (text printed); advice that the remaining clauses are the same as contained in telegram No. 63, April 17, from the Ambassador in Chile, except that clause referring to transfer of territory or change in railroad system has been eliminated.	781
Apr. 27 (86)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Assumption that telegram No. 84 of April 27 answers both telegram No. 48 of April 26 and telegram No. 49 of April 27.	782
Apr. 29 (50)	To the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Advice that the Ambassador’s telegrams cover the Department’s telegram cited if the deletion of the provision mentioned is accepted by Chile; desire to have the full text in order to determine whether it contains any other provisions which it would be inopportune or unwise for the President to suggest.	782
Apr. 29 (68)	From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Opinion of the Foreign Minister that negotiations are progressing favorably; information as to certain additional points of agreement to be contained in the treaty or protocol.	782
Apr. 30 (87)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Report of conference between President Leguía and Ambassador Figueroa in which they reached agreement on wording; advice that after a further conference, President Leguía will give the American Ambassador the full text of the agreement. Information that Ambassador Figueroa had informed President Leguía that the Chilean Ambassador in Washington had telegraphed to the Chilean Government that President Hoover had no objection to retention of provision respecting transfer of territory or international railroads.	783
Apr. 30	From the Bolivian Foreign Minister to the Bolivian Minister (tel.) Report of conference with the Chilean Minister in which the Bolivian Foreign Minister stated his Government’s awareness of Chilean initiative to restrict the right of Chile and Peru to transfer territory and to establish international railroads; instructions to advise the U. S. Government of this conversation. (Footnote: Information that this telegram was handed to Assistant Secretary of State White by the Attaché of the Bolivian Legation, May 1.)	784
May 1 (88)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Agreement of President Leguía and Ambassador Figueroa on all points of proposed treaty except wording of the clause referring to the boundary line.	785
May 1 (51)	To the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Observation that there must be a mistake regarding Chilean information as to President Hoover’s attitude reported in telegram No. 87, April 30.	785
May 1 (69)	From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Understanding that President Leguía has asked time to consider certain points, but that probably the draft of the settlement will be sent to the Chilean Ambassador in Washington in a few days.	785
May 1 (46)	To the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Transmittal, for information, of texts of telegrams exchanged with the Ambassador in Peru concerning provision with regard to transfer of territory and international railroads.	786
May 2 (89)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Information that President Leguía and Ambassador Figueroa have now agreed on all questions and will telegraph their Ambassadors in Washington the draft of agreement which will be handed to the Secretary of State for transmission to President Hoover; transmittal of text of memorandum of agreement.	786
May 2	Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State Conversation between the Bolivian Minister and the Secretary of State, in which the former stated that he had been instructed to declare Bolivia’s interest in the Tacna-Arica matter, and the Secretary of State promised to bear in mind the Bolivian contention and point of view.	786
May 4 (91)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Memorandum from President Leguía (text printed), suggesting that President Hoover, instead of recommending that Chile and Peru accept the conditions embodied in the memorandum, make his suggestion as an award in his capacity as Arbitrator; President Leguía’s desire for President Hoover’s views.	788
May 4	From the Bolivian Minister Memorandum, dated May 3, confirming views expressed in interviews with the Secretary of State (text printed).	788
May 7 (52)	To the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Impossibility of making the proposal in the form of an award by the Arbitrator.	793
May 8 (53)	To the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Receipt from the Peruvian and Chilean Ambassadors, May 3, of identic memoranda concerning the Tacna-Arica settlement; advice that the Secretary of State suggested deletion of reference in preamble to the difficulty which arose over the proposed port at Las Yaradas and insertion of reference to the exercise of informal and unofficial good offices of the President; and that answers to these suggestions have not been received.	794
May 9 (94)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Belief of President Leguía that suggested deletion takes the heart out of the agreement; his hope that the clause may be permitted to remain; his non-objection to reference to informal and unofficial good offices.	795
May 10 (53)	To the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Information concerning suggested changes in memorandum; transmittal of the English text President Hoover proposes to use, with instructions to submit it to the Chilean Government for approval.	796
May 10 (56)	To the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Instructions to advise President Leguía that if he considers the clause relating to the port at Las Yaradas necessary, the Secretary of State will agree; also to agree if President Leguía insists upon deletion of the words “informal and unofficial” in reference to the exercise of good offices. Transmittal of the English text President Hoover proposes to use, with instructions to secure President Leguía’s assent.	796
May 11 (97)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) President Leguía’s approval of English text.	797
May 11 (77)	From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Note from the Foreign Minister (excerpt printed) stating concurrence in text to be used by President Hoover.	797
Undated	Memorandum Which the Governments of Chile and Peru Place in the Hands of His Excellency, the President of the United States Proposed stipulations for settlement of the Tacna-Arica problem. (Footnote: Information that identic notes were handed to Assistant Secretary of State White by the Chilean and Peruvian Ambassadors on May 14.)	798
May 14 (55)	To the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Instructions to transmit to the Foreign Minister the memorandum contained in telegram No. 53 of May 10, under covering note (text printed). (Sent, mutatis mutandis, to the Ambassador in Peru, mentioning Department’s telegram No. 56 of May 10.)	799
May 15	From the Chilean Minister for Foreign Affairs to the American Ambassador Acceptance of President Hoover’s proposal. (Footnote: Copy handed to Assistant Secretary of State White by the Chilean Ambassador, May 17.)	800
May 16 (104)	From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.) Foreign Office note (text printed) stating acceptance of President Hoover’s proposal.	801
May 17	Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State Conversation in which the Secretary of State advised the Bolivian Chargé that the Tacna-Arica question had been settled and that the provision regarding the future disposition of the territories and the question of the railways had been eliminated at the Secretary’s request.	802
May 17	Press Release Issued by the Department of State Announcement that Chile and Peru have accepted a proposal by President Hoover suggesting the final bases of a settlement of the Tacna-Arica question.	803
May 18	Press Release Issued by the Department of State Remarks by Secretary Stimson in press conference (excerpt printed) attributing the credit for the Tacna-Arica settlement to former Secretary of State Kellogg and to President Hoover.	804
May 22 (58)	To the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Explanation, with reference to a call from the Chilean Ambassador, May 21, in which the latter expressed concern over press reports suggesting that Bolivian claims had been considered in connection with President Hoover’s proposal, of the facts in the case; authorization to convey this information to the Foreign Minister.	804
May 29	Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State Conversation in which the Secretary of State—in reply to inquiry by the Bolivian Chargé whether the United States would join with other countries of the hemisphere in endeavoring to obtain a seaport for Bolivia, and if so, would lead the movement—advised that the matter should not be pressed until the Tacna-Arica matter has been finally settled and out of the way.	805
June 12	Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State Conversation in which the Bolivian Minister advised the Secretary of State that this Government would drop the question of a port on the Pacific for the time being.	806
June 25 (301)	From the Ambassador in Peru Transmittal of copy of treaty between Chile and Peru, signed June 3; observation that there are several changes from the text of the original agreement as proposed by President Hoover.	807
July 3	Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State Conversation with the Bolivian Minister in which the Minister stated that he understood that the provision of the Tacna-Arica arrangement about which Bolivia had protested had been inserted in a secret protocol attached to the treaty, and the Assistant Secretary replied by stating that this was the first the Department had heard about a secret protocol, but that if it should be true, he thought it would not alter Bolivia’s position in any way and that she should follow a course of patience.	807
July 5	Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State Conversation with the Bolivian Minister in which the Minister delivered copy of telegraphic instructions from his Government to the Bolivian Legation in Lima, dated July 4 (text printed), relating to rumors of the secret protocol, and advised that this statement indicated that Bolivia is following the advice of the Department and is not stirring up the question now.	809
July 6 (106)	From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Receipt of oral information from the Foreign Office that the treaty carries a protocol providing (1) that neither Chile nor Peru will transfer the territories to a third country nor change the railroad lines without the consent of the other, (2) that Peru has the right to arms through the port of Arica to and from Peruvian territory, and (3) that the Morro will be demilitarized.	810
July 8 (225)	From the Ambassador in Chile Protocol of June 3 to the Tacna-Arica treaty (text printed).	810
Aug. 2	Final Ruling of the Arbitrator in the Matter of the Tacna-Arica Arbitration Opinion that the Tacna-Arica controversy having been settled by direct negotiation between the interested parties, all proceedings incident to the arbitration under the protocol and supplementary act of July 20, 1922, are terminated. (Footnote: Transmittal to the Chilean and Peruvian representatives in Washington, August 2.)	811
Aug. 28	From the Bolivian Minister Circular note from the Bolivian Government to its legations abroad, August 1 (text printed), making formal reservations against the clause in the secret protocol which it alleges to be covenanted directly against Bolivia.	813
Sept. 12	Memorandum by the Secretary of State Conversation with the Peruvian Chargé in which the Chargé read a message expressing Peru’s hope that the Secretary of State would not do anything to encourage Bolivia in her agitation for a port on the Pacific, and the Secretary replied that that matter rested entirely with the three South American countries involved.	816

The Chaco Dispute Between Bolivia and Paraguay

adjustment of differences by commission of inquiry and conciliation following incidents of december 1928

[Page CXI] [Page CXII] [Page CXIII] [Page CXIV] [Page CXV] [Page CXVI]

Date and number	Subject	Page
1928 Dec. 19 (40)	To the Minister in Bolivia (tel.) Resolution adopted by special committee of the International Conference of American States on Conciliation and Arbitration (text printed), formulating the questions on which it desires data from Bolivia and Paraguay in order to recommend steps to be taken by the Conference in the exercise of good offices to adjust differences between the two countries; information that the Bolivian and Paraguayan Ministers are making inquiries of their Governments on each of the points. (Sent, mutatis mutandis, to the Minister in Paraguay.)	818
Dec. 21 (64)	From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.) Personal opinion of the Foreign Minister on each of the questions.	819
Dec. 22 (39)	From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.) Paraguayan note (text printed), stating non-objection to signing a protocol by virtue of the good offices of the Conference but suggesting that basis and scope of protocol be studied by a commission; advice that mobilization has been suspended and instructions given to restrain forces in the field from acts of violence, but that incidents may occur regardless.	819
Dec. 25	Reply of the Bolivian Government to the Note Sent by the Special Committee of the International Conference of American States on Conciliation and Arbitration Willingness to sign protocol formally accepting good offices of the Conference; stipulation of the bases of the protocol; assertion of Bolivian right to the Chaco, but declaration of readiness to submit the question to arbitration by the International Court of Justice of The Hague; necessity for determining the territorial zone subject to arbitration.	820
Dec. 25	From the Bolivian Minister and the Paraguayan Delegate to Their Respective Governments Information that the special committee resolved that the Bolivian and Paraguayan delegates should request instructions to sign a protocol (text printed) providing for the constitution of a commission of investigation and conciliation.	821
Dec. 27 (70)	From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.) Advice that the Bolivian Government finds the draft protocol generally satisfactory but will desire certain modifications.	823
Dec. 28 (45)	To the Minister in Bolivia (tel.) Instructions to express to the Bolivian Government, in connection with Paraguayan charges of new advances into their territory by Bolivian forces since good offices of the Conference were accepted, the U. S. Government’s hope that no action of a provocative nature will be taken and that further military activities will cease; also to emphasize the importance of prompt authorization to the Bolivian delegate for signing the protocol.	823
Dec. 28 (20)	To the Minister in Paraguay (tel.) Instructions to convey to the Paraguayan Government the hope that its representative will be authorized to sign the protocol without delay.	824
Dec. 29 (44)	To the Minister in Bolivia (tel.) Instructions to inquire of the Foreign Minister when the special committee will have Bolivia’s answer. (Sent, mutatis mutandis, to the Minister in Paraguay.)	825
Dec. 29 (72)	From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.) Explanation by the Foreign Minister that the advances complained of by Paraguay were accomplished before acceptance of good offices of the Conference, and that the Bolivian forces had been instructed to cease advancing; his intention to telegraph appropriate instructions to the Bolivian representative after committees of the House and Senate and the Council of State have considered the protocol.	825
Dec. 30 (44)	From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.) Advice that the Paraguayan delegate has been instructed to sign.	826
Dec. 30 (73)	From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.) Information that the Bolivian Minister has been instructed to sign the protocol with certain modifications.	826
Dec. 30 (45)	From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.) Information that instructions were telegraphed to the Paraguayan delegate, December 29, at 3 p.m.	827
Dec. 31 (72)	To the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.) Instructions to ascertain willingness of the Argentine Government to appoint a delegate to serve on the commission of investigation and conciliation. (Footnote: Sent, mutatis mutandis, to the Ambassador in Brazil and the Minister in Uruguay; presumption that a similar invitation was extended to the Cuban Government, although neither invitation nor acceptance has been found in the Department files.)	827
Jan. 1 (1)	From the Minister in Uruguay (tel.) Uruguayan acceptance of invitation.	828
Jan. 2 (1)	To the Minister in Bolivia (tel.) Instructions to urge the Bolivian Government to authorize its representative to sign the protocol as revised to meet the views of both Governments; information that the Paraguayan representative is ready to sign.	828
Jan. 2 (2)	To the Minister in Bolivia (tel.) Hope that the protocol may be signed before plenary session of the Conference to be held January 4; probability that the Conference will adjourn on January 5.	829
Jan. 2 (2)	From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.) Declination of Argentina to participate in the proposed commission.	829
Jan. 2 (1)	From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.) Information that the Bolivian representative has been instructed to sign the protocol with certain modifications.	830
Jan. 3 (2)	From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Foreign Minister’s note, January 2 (text printed), stating inability of Brazil to participate in the proposed commission.	831
Jan. 3 (1)	To the Minister in Colombia (tel.) Instructions to ascertain willingness of the Colombian Government to appoint a delegate to serve on the commission of investigation and conciliation. (Footnote: Presumption that a similar invitation was extended to the Mexican Government, although neither invitation nor acceptance has been found in the Department files.)	832
Jan. 4 (4)	From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Further explanation by the Foreign Minister of the reasons why Brazil was compelled to decline invitation to participate in the commission.	833
Jan. 4 (2)	From the Minister in Colombia (tel.) Colombian acceptance of invitation.	833
Jan. 5 (2)	From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.) Opinion that the Conference should insist that Bolivia and Paraguay demobilize or withdraw their troops to distant points; understanding that arms shipments from Germany, destined for Bolivia, have been received in Argentina.	834
Jan. 6	From the Secretary General of the International Conference of American Stales on Conciliation and Arbitration Protocol signed January 3 (text printed), transmitted for deposit in U. S. archives.	834
Jan. 12	Memorandum by the Chief of the Division of Latin American Affairs Conversation with the Paraguayan Chargé in which he asked for U. S. good offices as intermediary in arranging an exchange of prisoners with Bolivia. Information that the Bolivian Minister was advised of the desired exchange of prisoners and that he has requested instructions from his Government.	837
Jan. 17	Memorandum by the Chief of the Division of Latin American Affairs Conversation between the Secretary of State and the Bolivian Minister concerning the desirability of immediate appointment by Bolivia and Paraguay of their delegates on the Commission, and also possible arrangements for the exchange of prisoners.	838
Jan. 22	Memorandum by the Chief of the Division of Latin American Affairs Conversation between the Secretary of State and the Bolivian Minister, in which the latter advised reasons for delay in appointing Bolivian delegates and also stated that his Government was prepared to exchange prisoners; suggestion by the Secretary of State that any new large purchases of arms by Bolivia might have a bad effect on the situation. Subsequent conversation between the Chief of the Division of Latin American Affairs and the Paraguayan Chargé, in which the latter advised reasons for the delay in appointing Paraguayan delegates, and stated that he would ask his Government to determine a suitable place to effect the exchange of prisoners.	839
Jan. 22 (2)	To the Minister in Paraguay (tel.) Instructions to communicate to the Paraguayan Government the Bolivian proposal for immediate exchange of prisoners, urging that the exchange be consummated without delay.	840
Jan. 29	Memorandum by the Chief of the Division of Latin American Affairs Conversation with the Paraguayan Chargé in which he stated that his Government proposes Formosa, Argentina, as the place for the exchange, and requests the names of prisoners held by Bolivia. Communication of this information to the Bolivian Chargé by telephone, and his intention to make inquiry of his Government. Information that the Paraguayan Chargé has not been officially informed of reported appointment of Paraguayan delegates.	840
Jan. 29	Memorandum by the Chief of the Division of Latin American Affairs Conversation with the Bolivian Minister in which he furnished copy of telegram from his Government stating acceptance of Formosa as the place of exchange and forwarding list of Paraguayan prisoners, and requested a list of Bolivian prisoners in Paraguay. Communication of this information to the Paraguayan Chargé. Advice that it was decided that the Bolivian Minister should request his Government to arrange the date for exchange.	841
Feb. 13	Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State Conversation between the Secretary of State and the Bolivian Minister, in which the latter inquired regarding report that the U. S. Government was endeavoring to line up the other countries to prohibit the transit of arms to Bolivia, and the Secretary of State replied that no such action had been taken; the Bolivian Minister’s request that the Assistant Secretary ascertain why the Paraguayan Chargé would not sign arrangement for the exchange of prisoners. Information that the Paraguayan Chargé is awaiting authorization from his Government.	842
Mar. 11	Press Release Issued by the Department of State Announcement that the Commission of Investigation and Conciliation will hold its first meeting in Washington on March 13; composition of the Commission.	844
May 6 (26)	From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.) Information from the Foreign Minister that Paraguayan technicians engaged in surveying Vanguardia at the request of the Commission were attacked by Bolivian soldiers, May 4 and 5, and withdrew under orders not to provoke complications.	845
May 6 (22)	To the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) Information that the Bolivian delegate handed the chairman of the Commission a telegram from the Foreign Minister (text printed), instructing that energetic protest be made against Paraguayan attack on Bolivian forces near Vanguardia, May 4; inquiry as to any additional information. (Sent, mutatis mutandis, to the Minister in Paraguay.)	845
May 8 (27)	From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.) Paraguayan information that Bolivians are concentrating troops at Fort Vitrone and have established a new encampment near Vanguardia; the Minister’s opinion that incidents will occur as long as the opposing troops face each other.	846
May 8 (41)	From the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) Advice that published official version of incident agrees closely with the report quoted in telegram No. 22 of May 6; observation that several of the Minister’s colleagues and a Foreign Office official are inclined to make light of the matter.	846
May 11 (37)	To the Chargé in Argentina (tel.) Plan of the Commission to take formal action, May 13, with regard to the repatriation of prisoners, which will probably call for services of the American Military Attaché; instructions to ask him to be ready. (Sent, mutatis mutandis, to the Ambassador in Brazil.)	847
May 13	From the Secretary General of the Commission of Inquiry and Conciliation Resolution taking over negotiations for the repatriation of prisoners; resolution concerning the incident of May 4, at Vanguardia, stating that both the Bolivian and Paraguayan Governments should prevent advances of any kind in that territory; communication on behalf of the neutral members sent by the Secretary General to the Bolivian and Paraguayan Commissioners requesting them to inquire the measures already taken and to be taken to prevent friction between their forces and to transmit reply to the Commission (texts printed).	847
May 20 (40)	To the Chargé in Argentina (tel.) Advice that, upon receipt of Argentine consent to delivery at Formosa of prisoners held by Bolivia, the American Military Attaché will be asked to proceed with an Argentine officer to Formosa to assist in the repatriation.	849
May 20 (17)	To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Advice that, upon receipt of Brazilian consent to delivery at Corumbá of prisoners held by Paraguay, the American Military Attaché will be asked to proceed with a Brazilian officer to Corumbá to assist in the repatriation.	849
May 21	From the Bolivian Delegation, Commission of Inquiry and Conciliation, to the Secretary General of the Commission Reiteration of a prior statement to the effect that the Bolivian Government has established no new outpost in Vanguardia and that the incidents of May 4 and 5 were not provoked by the Bolivian garrisons.	849
May 22	From the Paraguayan Delegation, Commission of Inquiry and Conciliation, to the Secretary General of the Commission Foreign Office note to the Paraguayan delegation, May 21 (text printed), requesting that the Commission be informed that the commanders of Paraguayan forces in all zones have again been instructed to abstain from any act which might cause friction.	850
May 24	From the Secretary General of the Commission of Inquiry and Conciliation Resolution of May 23 outlining the procedure for repatriation (text printed); transmittal of memorandum containing instructions to be sent to the American Embassies in Argentina and Brazil with respect to the duties of the Military Attachés in this connection.	851
May 25 (44)	To the Chargé in Argentina (tel.) Instructions to complete the arrangements for repatriation and to direct the Military Attaché to execute them. (Similar telegram to the Ambassador in Brazil.)	854
June 11 (55)	From the Chargé in Argentina (tel.) Information that Paraguay is ready to deliver Bolivian prisoners; and that the Military Attaché is proceeding to Formosa and has requested that prisoners held by Bolivia be delivered on June 20.	855
June 12 (49)	From the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) Advice that the Military Attachés at Rio de Janeiro and Buenos Aires have telegraphed that they are proceeding to Corumbá and Formosa to receive prisoners; request for instructions, if the Commission expects to fix a date.	856
June 13 (29)	To the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) Information that arrangements and dates are to be made by the Governments concerned and the American Military Attachés, without reference to the Commission.	856
June 17 (57)	From the Chargé in Argentina (tel.) Receipt from the Chargé in Bolivia of information that Bolivia will deliver Paraguayan prisoners at Formosa, June 20, and hopes that the exchange can be effected simultaneously.	856
July 10	From the Chairman of the Commission of Inquiry and Conciliation Appreciation for assistance of the U. S. Government in successfully accomplishing the repatriation.	857
July 12	To the Chairman of the Commission of Inquiry and Conciliation Acknowledgment of note of July 10; extension of congratulations on the successful completion of the repatriation.	857
Sept. 9 (37)	To the Minister in Paraguay (tel.) Unconditional Bolivian acceptance of the bases of conciliation and accompanying supplementary explanations proposed by the neutral commissioners in the week of August 26; oral and confidential acceptance by the Paraguayan delegation pending confirmation by their Government. Instructions to express to the Paraguayan Government that it will promptly approve the action of its delegation.	858
Sept. 11 (81)	From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.) Information that Paraguay will confirm unconditional acceptance of conciliation and agree to rebuild Fort Vanguardia if the supplementary explanations accompanying statement of August 26 do not form a part of the signed agreement of conciliation.	859
Sept. 12 (50)	To the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) Resolution by the Commission (text printed), declaring that conciliation of Bolivia and Paraguay has been effected in the terms stipulated by the protocol of January 3 and stating intention to ask the Uruguayan Government to designate two officers to proceed to Fort Vanguardia and Fort Boqueron, to be present at the execution of measures to restore the state of things as they existed prior to December 5, 1928. Congratulatory remarks by the Chairman (text printed).	860
Oct. 16 (918)	From the Chargé in Uruguay Uruguayan proposal that the Bolivian and Paraguayan diplomatic representatives at Montevideo draft appropriate instructions for the Uruguayan officers; Bolivian acceptance; nonreceipt of reply from Paraguay.	861
Dec. 10 (56)	From the Chargé in Uruguay (tel.) Information that the Bolivian and Paraguayan Ministers and the Uruguayan Foreign Minister held an unsuccessful meeting; statement by the latter (text printed) explaining that in view of failure of the two Ministers to agree, he will present a new formula regarding the manner in which the evacuation of Boqueron and the delivery of Vanguardia should be carried out; advice that the Bolivian Minister declared his Government’s readiness to accept the Uruguayan proposal but that the Paraguayan Minister declined to comment.	862

proposals for settlement of the basic question

[Page CXVII] [Page CXVIII] [Page CXIX] [Page CXX] [Page CXXI] [Page CXXII]

Date and number	Subject	Page
1929 July 10	From the Chairman of the Commission of Inquiry and Conciliation Note to the Bolivian and Paraguayan delegations, June 28, requesting confirmation of their oral acceptance of proposal whereby the neutral members will proceed toward a final settlement of the fundamental question affecting the Chaco; Bolivian and Paraguayan replies, July 1; the Chairman’s acknowledgement, July 2; remarks by the Bolivian Commissioner and the Chairman at meeting of July 2 (texts printed).	863
July 12	To the Chairman of the Commission of Inquiry and Conciliation Observation that the plan does not restrict the Commission in the performance of its duties as defined in the protocol of January 3.	868
July 26 (53)	From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.) Foreign Minister’s surprise that the Commission has not initiated proceedings to prolong the time for negotiations.	869
Aug. 19 (30)	To the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) Instructions to communicate to the Bolivian Government copy of statement to the press by the Chairman (text printed), stating that the neutral members are preparing a proposal to be submitted to Bolivia and Paraguay. (Sent, mutatis mutandis, to the Minister in Paraguay.)	869
Aug. 20 (63)	From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.) Opinion that the negotiations must not fail, and that to terminate them on September 13 would be a grave mistake; suggestion that experts be sent to Paraguay to locate a practical port; doubt that any solution would be accepted at this time, as it would be premature.	870
Aug. 21 (50)	To the Chargé in Brazil (tel.) Instructions to ascertain willingness of the Brazilian Government to exert its friendly influence at Asunción and La Paz on behalf of an objective and moderate consideration of the Commission’s proposal.	870
Aug. 22 (39)	From the Chargé in Brazil (tel.) Willingness of the Brazilian Government to cooperate.	871
Aug. 24 (31)	To the Minister in Paraguay (tel.) Instructions to counsel an attitude of moderation when proposal has been made; assumption that if either of the two Governments believes extension of the life of the Commission desirable, it will make that fact known; hope that the proposal will be accorded consideration.	871
Aug. 24 (43)	To the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) Transmittal of texts of telegram No. 63, August 20, from the Minister in Paraguay, and Department’s reply No. 31, August 24; authorization to speak to the Bolivian Government in the same sense and under the same circumstances.	872
Aug. 24 (44)	To the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) Information that the Brazilian Government will be disposed to cooperate in counseling moderation at Asunción and La Paz. (Similar telegram to the Minister in Paraguay.)	872
Aug. 26 (65)	From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.) Advice that the Paraguayan Government is disposed to give sincere and conciliatory consideration to the decision of the Commission, but may be unable to do so because of the present unfavorable public opinion.	873
Aug. 30 (33)	To the Minister in Paraguay (tel.) Information that the Chairman is delivering to the Bolivian and Paraguayan delegations a formal note transmitting a draft treaty of arbitration and a supplementary protocol. (Similar telegram to the Chargé in Bolivia.)	873
Aug. 31	From the Chairman of the Commission of Inquiry and Conciliation to the Delegations of Bolivia and Paraguay Proposed convention of arbitration and supplementary protocol between Bolivia and Paraguay (texts printed).	874
Sept. 6 (74)	From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.) Inquiry by the Foreign Minister as to the procedure necessary for prolonging the negotiations.	880
Sept. 7 (36)	To the Minister in Paraguay (tel.) Information that either of the two Governments can initiate steps looking to continuance of the functions of the present or new group of commissioners.	881
Sept. 8 (77)	From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.) Foreign Minister’s request to the Mexican, Uruguayan, and Cuban representatives in Asunción to advise their Governments that Paraguay desires the extension of the life of the Commission.	881
Sept. 9	From the Bolivian Delegation to the Chairman of the Commission of Inquiry and Conciliation Inacceptability of proposed convention of arbitration because it is at variance with a reservation previously made by Bolivia that in any submission to arbitration of a territorial controversy, the zone to which the arbitration is to apply must be previously determined in the arbitral convention.	882
Sept. 9	From the Paraguayan Delegation to the Chairman of the Commission of Inquiry and Conciliation Objections to the provisions of draft convention relating to certain territorial stipulations; proposal that the convention specify two consecutive arbitrations, the first to determine the zone in dispute, and the second to decide who has a better right thereto; suggestion that the Commission consider the advisability of extending the period of its labors.	884
Sept. 12	From the Chairman of the Commission of Inquiry and Conciliation to the Delegations of Bolivia and Paraguay Explanation that both delegations attribute an intention to the provisions under reference which was not meant to be given them; suggestions for revisions to remove the obstacles; reiteration of proposal that the controversy be submitted to arbitration.	887
Sept. 13 (42)	To the Minister in Paraguay (tel.) Message for the Foreign Minister (text printed) expressing congratulations on the successful accomplishment of the Commission in effecting conciliation of the December incidents; instructions to advise that the U. S. Government has been informed of the view expressed by Paraguay in note of September 9 that the work of the Commission should be consummated in an atmosphere removed from the haste occasioned by the shortness of time, and offers the services of its Commissioner and of the Secretary General in a continued effort to assist in reaching a solution of the fundamental controversy. (Sent, mutatis mutandis, to the Chargé in Bolivia.)	892
Sept. 13 (468)	To the Chargé in Mexico (tel.) Transmittal of text of telegram No. 42; instructions to inform the Mexican Government and to express the hope that it will make a similar offer. (Sent, mutatis mutandis, to the diplomatic representatives in Colombia, Cuba, and Uruguay.)	892
Sept. 17 (68)	From the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) Advice from the Foreign Minister that Bolivia desires a direct understanding with Paraguay and thinks this might be possible with a renewal of diplomatic relations. Observation that it is evident that Bolivia does not wish the present Commission prolonged.	893
Sept. 17 (242)	From the Chargé in Bolivia Foreign Office note, September 14 (text printed), stating belief that the Commission has completely fulfilled its duties under the protocol of January 3, and advising that upon re-renewal of diplomatic relations with Paraguay, the Bolivian Government will take into consideration the suggestions of the Commission when direct negotiations are renewed.	894
Sept. 17 (88)	From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.) Paraguayan acceptance of the good offices tendered by the U. S. Government; information that good offices of the other neutral countries have been accepted, with the exception of Uruguay, which has not yet offered to continue its good offices.	896
Sept. 17	Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State Conversation with the Bolivian Minister in which he delivered a copy of telegraphic instructions from his Government (text printed), directing him to explain that the Bolivian reply was based on the belief that settlement by direct negotiations would be preferable to settlement by conference.	896
Sept. 18	Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State Conversation between the Secretary of State and the diplomatic representatives of the neutral nations, in which the Secretary suggested that an endeavor be made to secure agreement of Bolivia and Paraguay to continue the existence of a commission.	897
Sept. 20	Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State Conversation with the Uruguayan Chargé in which he explained that his Government had not made an offer of good offices because it had definite information beforehand from Bolivia that the offer would be rejected.	899
Sept. 21 (56)	To the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) Information that the Bolivian Minister called on the Secretary of State, September 19, and made a statement along the lines of the Legation’s telegram No. 68 of September 17; that the Secretary explained his feeling that some sort of neutral machinery should be maintained; and that the Minister promised to advise his Government and support this view.	900
Sept. 23	Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State Conversation between the Secretary of State and the diplomatic representatives of the neutral nations, in which the Secretary proposed a draft communication for transmittal to Bolivia and Paraguay by the neutral Governments; readiness of the diplomatic representatives to cooperate and advise their Governments of the proposal.	901
Sept. 23	To the American Diplomatic Representatives in Bolivia and Paraguay (cir. tel.) Communication to be made to Bolivia and Paraguay by the neutral Governments (text printed), suggesting that they agree to enter immediately into direct negotiations for a settlement, at the same time establishing a commission composed of members of the five neutral nations, to be available in case direct negotiations fail and also to render good offices during the course of the negotiations; instructions to be prepared to transmit it on behalf of the U. S. Government when directed to do so.	903
Sept. 23	To the American Diplomatic Representatives in Colombia, Cuba, Mexico, and Uruguay (cir. tel.) Instructions to be prepared to discuss the matter of proposed communication to Bolivia and Paraguay as soon as the Foreign Minister has received it from his representative at Washington; transmittal of the text.	904
Sept. 30 (57)	To the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) Instructions to transmit communication to the Bolivian Government on October 1. (Sent, mutatis mutandis, to the Minister in Paraguay.)	905
Sept. 30 (52)	To the Minister in Paraguay (tel.) Information that the Colombian, Mexican, and Uruguayan Governments have agreed to deliver communications to Bolivia and Paraguay on October 1, that the Cuban Government has already delivered such a communication, and that the Uruguayan representations will be made in Montevideo. (Similar telegram to the Chargé in Bolivia.)	905
Sept. 30 (59)	To the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) Instructions to state to the Foreign Minister, upon delivery of communication, that the U. S. Government earnestly hopes that the Bolivian Government will give the proposal serious consideration.	906
Sept. 30 (101)	To the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.) Transmittal of text of communication which will be handed to Bolivia and Paraguay, with instructions to deliver copy to the Foreign Minister and to explain the reasons for the present proposal.	907
Sept. 30 (58)	To the Chargé in Brazil (tel.) Transmittal of text of communication which will be delivered to Bolivia and Paraguay, with instructions to deliver copy to the Foreign Minister. (Sent, mutatis mutandis, to the diplomatic representatives in Chile and Peru.)	909
Oct. 1 (75)	From the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) Information that the Foreign Minister stated that the communication would be given serious consideration, but that he repeated his belief in the desirability of direct negotiations; also that, in response to inquiry, he replied that no arrangements had yet been made for renewing diplomatic relations with Paraguay.	910
Oct. 2	Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State Conversation between the Secretary of State and the Bolivian Minister in which the former presented an aide-mémoire concerning proposal of October 1; concurrence by the Minister in the Secretary’s views; outline by the Minister of the background regarding the commission which would explain Bolivia’s resistance to accepting the arbitration proposal of August 31.	911
Oct. 2	To the Bolivian Minister Belief that the points of view of both contending parties may be met by suggesting the opening of immediate direct negotiations and the immediate setting up of a neutral commission.	913
Oct. 2 (106)	From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.) Foreign Minister’s advice that the Argentine Government can take no part in the movement.	915
Oct. 7 (923)	From the Minister in Paraguay Foreign Office note, October 5 (text printed), accepting good offices of the United States and the neutral countries.	916
Oct. 8 (79)	From the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) Explanation by the Foreign Minister that no formal reply has been sent because the disturbed internal situation has not permitted the President to study the matter carefully. The Chargé’s understanding that there is a feeling that the American Commissioner had not been impartial toward Bolivia, due to report from the Bolivian Commissioners that they were not consulted before the formula for the settlement of the fundamental question was announced.	917
Oct. 9 (64)	To the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) Explanation of the circumstances under which the neutral Commissioners concluded with great reluctance that a direct settlement of the fundamental question was impossible, in order to enable the Chargé to rectify the misunderstanding; instructions to endeavor to have the offer of the neutral Governments accepted.	918
Nov. 15 (85)	From the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) Foreign Office note, November 13 (text printed) declaring that the functioning of the proposed commission would be premature during the period of direct negotiations, but that if direct negotiations should have to be abandoned, Bolivia expects to state that it will accept the good offices of the neutrals and will enter into an agreement to create the commission proposed.	920
Nov. 16 (87)	From the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) Comments on the Bolivian reply; information that Bolivia is interested in conducting direct negotiations with Paraguay, with the friendly assistance of the U. S. Government, and wishes to ascertain the attitude of the U. S. Government before making a formal request.	923
Dec. 6 (536)	To the Chargé in Mexico (tel.) Draft note for communication to the Bolivian Government by the neutral Governments (text printed) inquiring whether Bolivia will now act favorably either on the tender of good offices made on October 1 or on a suggestion contained herein that the Bolivian and Paraguayan diplomatic representatives at Washington be authorized to enter into direct negotiations for a definitive settlement of the questions outstanding between them; information that the representatives in Washington are communicating with their Governments but request that a copy of the English text be furnished to their Governments. (Sent, mutatis mutandis, to the diplomatic representatives in Colombia, Cuba, and Uruguay.)	927
Dec. 6 (72)	To the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) Transmittal of proposed note for the Bolivian Government; instructions not to deliver it until specific instructions to do so are received.	930
Dec. 9 (538)	To the Chargé in Mexico (tel.) Observation that the communication will not be sent until all the neutral Governments agree. (Similar telegram to the diplomatic representatives in Colombia, Cuba, and Uruguay.)	930
Dec. 23 (386)	From the Chargé in Mexico (tel.) Foreign Office note (text printed), suggesting modification in paragraph relating to the role which the diplomatic representatives in Washington are to play if direct negotiations fail and Bolivia accepts offer of good offices providing for organization of a neutral commission.	931
Dec. 27 (559)	To the Chargé in Mexico (tel.) Information that the Department concurs in the change proposed by the Mexican Government and is inquiring of the other neutral Governments to see if it meets also with their approval.	932
Dec. 27 (145)	To the Ambassador in Cuba (tel.) Advice that all the neutral Governments now agree on the proposed note with the exception of Mexico; information concerning modification proposed by Mexico; instructions to advise the Government to which accredited that the U. S. Government approves the proposed modification. (Sent also to the diplomatic representatives in Colombia and Uruguay.)	932

Boundary Disputes

colombia and nicaragua

[Page CXXIII]

Date and number	Subject	Page
1929 Feb. 2 (23)	To the Minister in Nicaragua (tel.) Inability to understand Nicaraguan opposition to the treaty signed with Colombia, March 24, 1928, recognizing Nicaraguan sovereignty over the Mosquito Coast and Great and Little Corn Islands and Colombian sovereignty over the San Andrés Archipelago; instructions to request President Moncada to urge ratification by Congress.	934
Feb. 8 (43)	From the Minister in Nicaragua (tel.) Willingness of the President to urge approval of the treaty.	934
Sept. 10 (564)	From the Minister in Colombia Hope of the Foreign Minister that the U. S. Government will use its good offices in an effort to bring about Nicaraguan ratification of the treaty.	935
Sept. 21 (1161)	From the Chargé in Nicaragua Colombian Minister’s request that the American Legation use its good offices to bring about the prompt appointment of a proposed Nicaraguan commission to study the treaty and report to Congress and the public; opinion that the Administration continues to be opposed to ratification.	935
Oct. 7 (573)	To the Chargé in Nicaragua Nonobjection to compliance with the Colombian Minister’s request.	936
Oct. 14 (96)	To the Minister in Colombia Information that the American Legation at Managua has been advised of the Department’s non-objection to compliance with Colombian request.	937

costa rica and panama

Date and number	Subject	Page
1929 June 5 (1554)	From the Minister in Costa Rica Information that the Chilean Government, at the instance of Panama, has offered to mediate in the Costa Rican-Panamanian boundary controversy; impression that President González is willing to accept if the Department of State perceives no objection to mediation by Chile; desire for instructions for use in discussing the matter with the President.	938
June 21 (45)	From the Minister in Costa Rica (tel.) Decision of the Cabinet to accept proposal by Panama for boundary negotiations under the good offices of the Chilean Minister, with the understanding that negotiations are to be held under joint good offices of the U. S. and Chilean Ministers; request for instructions.	940
June 21 (1568)	From the Minister in Costa Rica Opinion that President González may feel that negotiations at this time are inopportune and that the suggestion for participation of the Department may have been made for the purpose of delaying negotiations.	941
June 22 (25)	To the Minister in Costa Rica (tel.) Advice that the Department has no objections to either direct negotiations between the two countries or negotiations under good offices of the Chilean Minister, but that it does not desire to enter into joint action in the boundary question.	942
Sept. 2 (1641)	From the Minister in Costa Rica Intention of the Chilean Government to make its good offices available only in case both Governments jointly request its cooperation.	942

[Page CXXIV]

Dominican republic and Haiti

Date and number	Subject	Page
1929 Mar. 15	From the Haitian Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs Request that the Secretary of State ascertain whether, if it becomes necessary to do so, the President would be willing to appoint an American member to the mixed commission which may be established under certain conditions in accordance with article 7 of the Haitian-Dominican boundary treaty signed January 21.	943
May 9 (416)	To the High Commissioner in Haiti Note for the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (text printed), advising that the President will be glad to appoint an American member if it becomes necessary to form a mixed commission.	944
Aug. 14	From the Dominican Minister Letter from the Foreign Minister to the Secretary of State, July 9 (text printed), forwarding certified copy of the treaty and calling particular attention to article 7.	944
Aug. 21	To the Dominican Minister Note for the Foreign Minister (text printed), advising that the provisions of article 7 have been noted.	945

guatemala and honduras

[Page CXXV] [Page CXXVI] [Page CXXVII] [Page CXXVIII]

Date and number	Subject	Page
1929 May 23 (52)	From the Chargé in Honduras (tel.) Memorandum from the Foreign Minister, May 22 (summary printed), requesting U. S. good offices in causing Guatemala to destroy construction under way at El Cinchado and to suspend any other construction in the Motagua region pending a definite solution of the boundary question. Assurance by the Honduran President that if the Department will reply in the near future, Chachahualia will not be occupied until that time. (Repeated to Guatemala.)	946
May 28 (53)	From the Chargé in Honduras (tel.) Report that anti-Guatemalan demonstration was staged the previous day. (Repeated to Guatemala.)	948
May 29 (2428)	From the Minister in Guatemala (tel.) Hope of President Chacón that Honduras will not commit any act of aggression; his instructions to the Guatemalan Minister at Washington to urge that the arbitration suggested by the Department in June 1928 be brought about.	948
May 29 (41)	To the Chargé in Honduras (tel.) Instructions to inform the President that the U.S. Government would view with regret any action by Honduras or Guatemala in the disputed territory which might aggravate the controversy, and to report results and opinion as to Honduran attitude toward the definitive adjustment of the question. (Repeated to the Minister in Guatemala with instructions to make similar representations and report results.)	949
May 31 (65)	From the Minister in Guatemala (tel.) Assurance by the Guatemalan Government that it has aimed to refrain from any action tending to aggravate the boundary dispute and will continue to do so; Guatemalan memorandum (text printed) observing that the Government had accepted arbitration proposal of June 1928 and expressing hope that Honduras will accept it. (Repeated to Honduras.)	949
June 3 (57)	From the Chargé in Honduras (tel.) Assurance by the Honduran President that his Government is doing and will continue to do everything possible to avoid aggravating the boundary dispute; his report of Guatemalan military activity in the region. The Chargé’s opinion that, while the Government desires a settlement of the dispute, it is not likely that it will be any more favorably disposed toward the Department’s proposal of June 1928 than it was at that time. (Repeated to Guatemala.)	950
July 18	To the Minister in Honduras, Temporarily in New York Oral statement for delivery to the Honduran Foreign Minister (text printed), expressing the hope of the Secretary of State that the Honduran Government will again consider all matters connected with the boundary dispute with a view to arriving at a prompt solution.	950
Aug. 19 (932)	From the Minister in Honduras Reply of the Foreign Minister, August 16 (text printed), stating that if Guatemala will adopt the same attitude, Honduras is ready to proceed to the signature of a protocol with Guatemala providing for arbitration under the President of the United States as agreed in the Honduran-Guatemalan treaty of 1914 and in statements made by the U.S. Secretary of State at the Conference on Central American Affairs in 1923.	951
Aug. 24 (936)	From the Minister in Honduras Advice that the Acting Foreign Minister declared his willingness to consider any further suggestions or proposals the Department might wish to make.	954
Sept. 21 (63)	To the Minister in Honduras (tel.) Instructions to inquire whether Honduras would modify its proposal so that the question might be arbitrated by an American member of the Hague Court of Arbitration, designated by the President of the United States, and to state that in this event the Department would be willing to present the proposal to Guatemala and assist in an effort to find a satisfactory formula for the arbitration. (Repeated to the Minister in Guatemala for information.)	954
Sept. 24 (09858)	From the Guatemalan Minister for Foreign Affairs Request that the U.S. Government continue to lend its good offices in order that the Honduran Government may agree to submission of the question to the Central American Tribunal, as proposed by the U.S. Secretary of State in June 1928.	955
Oct. 11 (104)	From the Minister in Honduras (tel.) Note from the Foreign Minister (excerpt printed) stating willingness to accept arbitration by one of the jurists referred to, on the understanding that such arbitration shall be judicial and take into account certain specified classes of evidence.	959
Oct. 16 (57)	To the Minister in Guatemala (tel.) Instructions to inform the Foreign Minister that a reply to his note of September 24 will be forwarded in the near future; also to discuss with him informally the Honduran proposal for settlement, reporting Guatemalan views with respect to arbitration by one of the jurists referred to and to the formula proposed by Honduras. (Repeated to the Minister in Honduras.)	960
Oct. 18 (125)	From the Minister in Guatemala (tel.) Information that the Foreign Minister will discuss the Honduran proposal with the President and the Cabinet, but that in the meantime the position defined in his note of September 24 still stands. (Repeated to Honduras.)	960
Oct. 20 (128)	From the Minister in Guatemala (tel.) Report of conversations with the President, the Foreign Minister, and Mr. Carlos Salazar, from which it appears that the Honduran proposal will be inacceptable. (Repeated to Honduras.)	961
Oct. 21 (131)	From the Minister in Guatemala (tel.) Receipt from the Foreign Minister of a memorandum stating that the Honduran proposition is inacceptable, and setting forth the contention that Honduras is bound by the 1923 convention to submit the controversy to the Central American Tribunal.	962
Oct. 25 (60)	To the Minister in Guatemala (tel.) Note for the Foreign Minister (text printed) extending invitation to authorize the Guatemalan Minister at Washington or another representative to meet with a Honduran representative to confer on means of achieving further progress toward settlement of the question, and stating that U. S. representatives will be present if the two countries so request.	963
Oct. 25 (78)	To the Minister in Honduras (tel.) Note for the Foreign Minister (text printed) extending invitation to conference.	964
Oct. 28 (133)	From the Minister in Guatemala (tel.) Note from the Foreign Minister, October 26 (text printed), accepting invitation, on the understanding that U. S. representatives will be present.	965
Oct. 29 (134)	From the Minister in Guatemala (tel.) Advice that the Minister is making efforts to have acceptance modified so as to remove a reservation concerning the international treaties in force.	966
Oct. 29 (135)	From the Minister in Guatemala (tel.) Information that Foreign Minister’s note will be amended so as to leave the delegates free to consider any tribunal which may be suggested, although the delegate will be orally instructed to insist on the Central American Tribunal.	966
Oct. 30 (136)	From the Minister in Guatemala (tel.) Receipt of amended note, dated October 28; dispatch of the note to the Legation in Honduras.	967
Oct. 30 (105)	From the Minister in Honduras (tel.) Intention of Honduras to accept the proposal contained in telegram No. 78 of October 25. (Repeated to Guatemala.)	967
Nov. 7 (107)	From the Minister in Honduras (tel.) Note from the Foreign Minister, November 6 (excerpt printed), accepting invitation to confer in Washington on the understanding that negotiations shall be on the basis of the proposal that the arbitrator be one of the American members on the Hague Court of Arbitration and shall take into consideration the reservations with respect to a decision on a juridical basis, and stating desire to have U. S. representatives present; covering note from the Minister (excerpt printed) requesting U. S. good offices with Guatemala in order that the status quo of 1918 may be maintained. (Repeated to Guatemala.)	967
Nov. 12 (82)	To the Minister in Honduras (tel.) Instructions to ascertain a satisfactory date for convening the boundary conference. (Sent, mutatis mutandis, to the Chargé in Guatemala.)	969
Nov. 13 (146)	From the Chargé in Guatemala (tel.) Foreign Minister’s suggestion that the conference convene on December 12. (Repeated to Honduras.)	969
Nov. 16 (149)	From the Chargé in Guatemala (tel.) Opinion of the Foreign Minister that if text of Honduran acceptance as published in the press is correct, it precludes discussion of any other viewpoint than that of Honduras; his desire that the Honduran acceptance permit the discussion of other points of view, and that the instructions to each delegation be communicated to the Department of State for study and determination whether they admit possibility of a successful termination of the conference. (Repeated to Honduras.)	970
Nov. 17 (112)	From the Minister in Honduras (tel.) Information from the Foreign Minister, November 16, that the Honduran delegation will be ready in January. (Repeated to Guatemala.)	971
Nov. 20 (74)	To the Chargé in Guatemala (tel.) Instructions to inform the Guatemalan Government that the U. S. Government is urging both Guatemala and Honduras to give their delegates the greatest practicable freedom of action in order to permit a frank and friendly exchange of views upon all phases of the question, and is also urging the Honduran Government to withdraw any conditions or reservations made in its acceptance. (Sent, mutatis mutandis, to the Minister in Honduras.)	971
Nov. 21 (150)	From the Chargé in Guatemala (tel.) Advice from the Foreign Minister that the Guatemalan delegate will be so instructed that he will be able to discuss all phases of the problem. (Repeated to Honduras.)	972
Nov. 26 (114)	From the Minister in Honduras (tel.) Assurance by the Acting Foreign Minister, in note dated November 25, that the Honduran delegate will not be given any instructions which might prevent a frank and friendly exchange of views, but that the conditions and reservations in note of acceptance will be brought out in the explanation of its points of view. (Repeated to Guatemala.)	972
Nov. 27 (152)	From the Chargé in Guatemala (tel.) Telegram to the Legation in Honduras (text printed) stating opinion of the Foreign Minister that the Honduran reply does not make it sufficiently clear that its delegate will be given absolute freedom to discuss any phase of the boundary question and that therefore it is useless to call the conference.	972
Nov. 28 (154)	From the Chargé in Guatemala (tel.) Maintenance by the Foreign Minister of the opinion that unless the Honduran Government makes the same clear-cut statement, without any reservations, as has already been made by Guatemala, it will be useless to call the conference. (Repeated to Honduras.)	973
Nov. 29 (89)	To the Minister in Honduras (tel.) Instructions to telegraph pertinent portions of Foreign Office note of November 25; also, to endeavor to obtain a modification of the terms upon which Honduran attendance at the conference is based. (Repeated to the Chargé in Guatemala.)	973
Nov. 30 (117)	From the Minister in Honduras (tel.) Foreign Office note of November 25 (excerpt printed). (Repeated to Guatemala.)	974
Dec. 2 (155)	From the Chargé in Guatemala (tel.) Advice from the Foreign Minister that the terms of the Honduran note appear satisfactory and that Guatemala will attend the conference on January 15. (Repeated to Honduras.)	974
Dec. 3 (118)	From the Minister in Honduras (tel.) Memorandum from the Foreign Minister (text printed), stating that the Honduran delegate will be given ample powers for complete freedom of action, with the understanding that any concrete resolution reached must be submitted to the Honduran Government for approval or disapproval. (Repeated to Guatemala.)	975
Dec. 31 (85)	To the Chargé in Guatemala (tel.) Postponement of the boundary conference until January 20. (Sent also to the Minister in Honduras.)	975

[Page CXXIX]

honduras and nicaragua

[Page CXXX]

Date and number	Subject	Page
1929 July 1 (94)	To the Chargé in Nicaragua (tel.) Instructions to congratulate President Moncada on his attitude toward settlement of the boundary dispute with Honduras and to express the earnest hope that the question may be adjusted by Nicaragua’s formal acceptance of the award of the King of Spain of 1906.	975
July 5 (180)	From the Chargé in Nicaragua (tel.) Assurance by President Moncada that he accepts the award of the King of Spain and hopes to appoint a commission to locate the boundary as soon as public order has been restored along the frontier.	976
Sept. 17 (226)	From the Chargé in Nicaragua (tel.) Information that the tone of Honduran notes of September 12 and 16 to Nicaragua and the occupation by Honduran forces of the left bank of the Coco River threaten a serious crisis, and that President Moncada has asked the Department’s advice and assistance. (Repeated to Tegucigalpa.)	976
Sept. 19 (62)	To the Minister in Honduras (tel.) Instructions to urge upon the Honduran President the importance of withdrawing from any territory hitherto held by Nicaragua as a preliminary to any further negotiations.	978
Sept. 19 (131)	To the Chargé in Nicaragua (tel.) Transmittal of text of telegram No. 62 sent to the Minister in Honduras, with instructions to advise President Moncada informally of the Department’s action.	978
Sept. 20 (229)	From the Chargé in Nicaragua (tel.) Advice that President Moncada will continue to deal with the matter in a spirit of patience and moderation. (Repeated to Tegucigalpa.)	979
Sept. 22 (89)	From the Minister in Honduras (tel.) Foreign Office note, September 21 (excerpt printed), advising that Honduran soldiers were sent to the border to pursue and capture bandits, not to attack or capture Nicaraguan forces, and that they have been ordered to withdraw; also, asking that U. S. good offices be used with the Nicaraguan Government so that a commission of one engineer each from Honduras, Nicaragua, and the United States, may be named without delay. (Repeated to Nicaragua.)	980
Sept. 25 (132)	To the Chargé in Nicaragua (tel.) Instructions to report whether it would be safe for a commission of engineers to survey the boundary during the coming dry season; also, to advise whether President Moncada is prepared to go forward with the boundary survey.	981
Sept. 26 (233)	From the Chargé in Nicaragua (tel.) Opinion of the Chargé and brigade and guardia commanders that the guardia could afford the necessary protection to the proposed commission; belief that President Moncada is desirous of having the matter submitted to an arbitral commission at the earliest practicable moment. (Repeated to Tegucigalpa.)	981
Nov. 1 (259)	From the Chargé in Nicaragua (tel.) Telegrams exchanged between the Nicaraguan Minister in Honduras and President Moncada, October 30–November 1 (excerpts printed), relating to the formation of a commission and the conditions on the border, and President Moncada’s instructions to propose the formation of a commission composed of a representative of each country, and a third member as president, appointed by the Department of State. (Repeated to Tegucigalpa.)	982
Nov. 5 (106)	From the Minister in Honduras (tel.) Receipt from the Foreign Minister of copy of his reply, November 4, to the Nicaraguan Minister, stating acceptance of proposal regarding the formation of a commission of engineers to determine the boundary in conformity with the award of the King of Spain and suggesting the signature of a protocol. (Information to Managua.)	983
Nov. 8 (266)	From the Chargé in Nicaragua (tel.) Intention of President Moncada to insist that the commission should have arbitral powers to settle obscure points in the award and other questions which may arise. (Repeated to Tegucigalpa.)	983
Nov. 8 (81)	To the Minister in Honduras (tel.) Instructions to express to the Honduran Government the Department’s gratification over acceptance of proposal to establish a boundary commission, and to state readiness to designate an American engineer to serve as president of the commission when the protocol has been signed. (Similar telegram to the Chargé in Nicaragua.)	984

Attitude of the Department of State With Regard to Tariff Legislation Inconsistent With Certain Treaty Obligations of the United States

[Page CXXXI]

Date and number	Subject	Page
1929 Feb. 26	To Representative Willis C. Hawley Request that the Ways and Means Committee consider the repeal of certain provisions of the Tariff Act of 1922 which are not only inconsistent with the established policy of the United States and U. S. treaty obligations but are also a source of international friction.	985
Mar. 30	Memorandum by the Assistant Chief of the Treaty Division Suggestion that the Secretary may wish to renew the request for repeal of the objectionable provisions of the Tariff Act which was laid before the Ways and Means Committee by Secretary of State Kellogg on February 29; observations on the difficulties obstructing the progress of the Department of State’s program of negotiating commercial treaties based on reciprocal unconditional most-favored-nation treatment.	988
Apr. 15	Memorandum by the Assistant Chief of the Treaty Division Opinion that the possibility of enactment by the present Congress of a higher tariff program makes it essential that negotiations for commercial treaties containing the most-favored-nation clause be expedited.	993
June 8	To President Hoover Memorandum on the subject of foreign political reaction to the proposed tariff (text printed); opinion that the most serious of the dangers are the further building up of the imperial preference system in the British Empire and the possible creation of a European economic bloc against the United States.	998
June 26	To Senator Reed Smoot Suggestion that the Finance Committee amend provisions of the pending tariff bill which require, on certain conditions, mandatory increases in the standard tariff rates, because such provisions would violate commercial treaties containing the unconditional most-favored-nation clause; memorandum (text printed) listing the provisions deemed to be contrary to the treaties and quoting provisions of the commercial treaties which would be violated.	1001
Aug. 27	From Senator Reed Smoot Request to be advised whether any foreign country has protested against the provisions in question, and if so, to communicate their names, in which event the Finance Committee will be asked to consider those provisions.	1003
Sept. 4	To Senator Reed Smoot Information that representatives of foreign Governments have informally commented on the inconsistency of such provisions and the most-favored-nation clause of treaties; suggestion that absence of formal protests would not relieve the Government of the obligation faithfully to execute the provisions of its treaties.	1003
1930 Jan. 22	To Senator Reed Smoot Advice that the action of the Finance Committee, January 20, in striking out certain provisions of the tariff bill inconsistent with the commercial treaties, will greatly assist the Department of State in its efforts to protect and promote U. S. foreign trade.	1004

Representations by Foreign Governments With Respect to Senate Bill Relating to Payment of Advance Wages to Seamen on Foreign Vessels

[Page CXXXII]

Date and number	Subject	Page
1929 May 15 (1776)	From the Netherlands Legation Information that the remarks made in the Netherlands note of May 3, 1928, concerning the Senate bill relating to the payment of advance wages to seamen on foreign vessels, are applicable as well to the same bill now reintroduced as S. 314.	1005
Undated [Rec’d May 17]	From the German Embassy Opinion that S. 314 would jeopardize the rights and interests of German shipping companies in contracting with their crews.	1005
June 10	To Senator Wesley L. Jones Transmittal of the Netherlands and German memoranda, for consideration by the Committee on Commerce; explanation of the reasons why the Department of State considers passage of the bill undesirable.	1006
June 18 (338)	From the British Ambassador Reference to the considerations contained in British memorandum of April 26, 1928, as still appearing to hold good with respect to S. 314.	1006
June 27	From the Norwegian Legation Advice that the considerations contained in memorandum of May 11, 1928 (excerpt printed), relating to S. 2945 still hold good with respect to S. 314.	1007
July 9 (95)	From the Danish Minister Observations that the misgivings contained in Danish letter of June 12, 1928, with respect to S. 2945, are equally applicable to S. 314.	1008
July 19	To the Danish Minister Information that due note has been taken of the position of the Danish Government, but that it is deemed preferable to await the reconvening of Congress before bringing the considerations set forth to the attention of the appropriate committees of the House and Senate. (Footnote: Similar replies to the British and Norwegian memoranda.)	1009

Confirmation by Congress of Instruments of Cession of Certain Islands of the Samoan Group, Signed by the Native Chiefs on April 17, 1900, and July 14, 1904

Date and number	Subject	Page
1900 Apr. 17	Instrument of Cession Signed by the Representatives of the People of Tutuila Ceding the islands of Tutuila and Aunuu and other islands, rocks, reefs, etc., to the Government of the United States.	1010
1902 July 21	Reply of President Roosevelt to the Chiefs and People of Tutuila and Other Islands Expressing gratification for the token of friendship and confidence in the United States, and declaring that local rights and privileges will be respected.	1012
1904 July 14	Instrument of Cession Signed by the Representatives of the People of the Islands of Manua Ceding the Manua Islands to the Government of the United States.	1013
Aug. 19	Reply of President Roosevelt to the Chiefs and People of the Islands of Manua Expressing gratification for the token of friendship and confidence in the just and friendly intentions of the United States, and declaring that local rights and privileges will be respected.	1015
1929 Feb. 20	Public Resolution No. 89, 70th Congress, 2d Session Accepting, ratifying, and confirming the cessions of certain islands of the Samoan group to the United States.	1016
May 22	Public Resolution No. 8, 71st Congress, 1st Session Amending Public Resolution No. 89 to provide that the Commission to be appointed by the President for the purpose of recommending appropriate legislation with respect to the islands shall be composed of two Senators, two Representatives, and three (rather than two as originally provided) chiefs or high chiefs of the said islands.	1017