893.113/1212
The Secretary of State to the Minister in China (MacMurray)
Sir: The Department refers to its telegram No. 327, dated October 5, 1929, 6 p.m., and to previous correspondence regarding a proposal to modify the requirement set forth in the Department’s telegram No. 139 of April 27, 1929, 2 p.m., paragraph 2, that before the exportation of arms and munitions of war for the use of the Chinese Government shall be authorized, such exportation shall have been requested by the Chinese Government through its diplomatic representative at Washington. In the Department’s telegram No. 327 of October 5, you were informed that this requirement would be continued.
In this connection, the Department directs your attention to Chapter II, Article 2 of the Convention for the Supervision of the International Trade in Arms and Ammunition and in Implements of War, which was signed at Geneva on June 17, 1925.95 A copy of this Convention was sent you under cover of the Department’s confidential instruction No. 10 of August 1, 1925.96 For convenience of reference Article 2 of Chapter II is quoted below:
“The High Contracting Parties undertake not to export or permit the export of articles covered by Category I, except in accordance with the following conditions:
- 1.
- The export shall be for a direct supply to the Government of the importing State or, with the consent of such Government, to a public authority subordinate to it;
- 2.
- An order in writing, which shall be signed or endorsed by a representative of the importing Government duly authorised so to act, shall have been presented to the competent authorities of the exporting country. This order shall state that the articles to be exported are required for delivery to the importing Government or public authority as provided in paragraph 1.”
You will observe that the requirement imposed as a condition precedent to the issuing of a license for the exportation of arms to China, as set forth in the Department’s telegram No. 327 of October 5, 1929, is in substantial accord with the article of the Convention quoted above. The Department’s decision with regard to the matter in question was arrived at independently of the existence of these provisions. It is understood that this Convention is not yet in force.
The Department is of the opinion that this procedure tends toward centralization of responsibility in so far as Chinese official action is [Page 534] concerned, will relieve the Department’s officers in the field of what might become embarrassing responsibility, and will ensure the Department against the charge which might under some circumstances be made that it was interfering in China’s internal politics.
I am [etc.]
- Foreign Relations, 1925, vol. i, pp. 61, 64.↩
- Not printed.↩