List of Papers
[Unless otherwise specified, the correspondence is from or to officials in the Department of State.]
GENERAL
The London Naval Conference, January 21–April 22, 1930
| Date and number | Subject | Page |
| 1930 | [Note: Names of governments represented at the London Naval Conference; list of the American delegates and advisers.] | 1 |
| Jan. 19 (4) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Report of conversation with the British Prime Minister regarding proposed procedure of the Conference and attitude of the various delegations; opinion that the British delegation will cooperate fully. |
2 |
| Jan. 20 (8) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Information that friendly and satisfactory conferences have been had with the French and Italian delegations. |
5 |
| Jan. 23 (16) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Completion of conference organization at morning’s plenary session; information that speeches of the delegations, except the French, were general in character. |
6 |
| Jan. 24 (18) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Decision of heads of delegations to hold daily meetings to discuss procedure for disposing of the various questions coming before the conference. |
8 |
| Jan. 25 (11) | From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.) For repetition to London: Observation that the 10–7 ratio insisted upon by Japan is undoubtedly considered only in connection with war with the United States. |
9 |
| Jan. 28 (22) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Information that a plenary session has been scheduled for January 30 for the purpose of discussing appointment of a committee to consider the several methods of naval limitation. |
10 |
| Jan. 31 (14) | From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.) For repetition to London: Indication from Japanese of desire that the American Ambassador make some authoritative statement to dispel the popular opinion in Japan that possibility of war between Japan and the United States over China is basis for U. S. opposition to an increase in Japanese ratio. |
11 |
| Feb. 1 (25) | To the Ambassador in Japan (tel.) Importance of taking the utmost care, both as to substance and phraseology, in any attempt to explain America’s policy in relations with Japan in terms of American and Japanese policy in regard to China. (Repeated to London.) |
12 |
| Feb. 4 (35) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) For the President: Substance of naval strength proposals prepared by the American delegation and recommended for submittal to the British and Japanese delegations (text printed); desire for criticisms. |
13 |
| Feb. 5 (55) | To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) President’s approval of suggestions contained in telegram No. 35, February 4. |
18 |
| Feb. 5 (36) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Request that substance of telegram No. 35 of February 4 be communicated to the Acting Secretary of the Navy, for discussion with the President only; also that substance of the proposal be communicated to Senators Swanson and Hale, with messages endorsing the proposal from Senators Robinson and Reed of the American delegation. |
18 |
| Feb. 6 (39) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Message from Senator Robinson to Senator Swanson (text printed), observing that American proposal is based on Senator Swanson’s suggestion for giving options to permit Great Britain and the United States to duplicate each other’s cruiser fleets exactly if they so desire. |
19 |
| Feb. 6 (41) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Statement for the press (text printed) concerning nature of the American delegation’s proposal. |
19 |
| Feb. 7 (42) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Information that the statement was well received by the British press; inquiry as to Senator Swanson’s reaction. |
21 |
| Feb. 7 (67) | To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) Opinion that statement was favorably received; also that Senator Swanson seemed pleased. |
21 |
| Feb. 8 (75) | To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) Hope that at some appropriate time the delegation will propose to the British that they reconsider the proposed special category of police cruisers. |
22 |
| Feb. 10 (84) | To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) Hope of the President that the figure of 200,000 tons of destroyers may be cut down to 150,000 tons. |
22 |
| Feb. 12 (60) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Opinion, after conference between the American and British delegations, that it will be easy to arrive at an agreement provided France or Japan does not interpose difficulties. |
23 |
| Feb. 13 (36) | To the Ambassador in Japan (tel.) Information that the American delegation is apparently standing firm until after the forthcoming Japanese elections, and that they seem obdurate against any concession to Japanese point of view; request for comments. |
24 |
| Feb. 14 (27) | From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.) For repetition to London: Advice that American refusal to consider the 10–7 ratio desired by Japan is interpreted as an indication that the United States foresees the probability of war; but that the Ambassador has repeatedly pointed out that Japan’s demands for a higher ratio may equally be taken by the American people as proof of belligerent intentions on the part of Japan. |
24 |
| Feb. 16 (67) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) For the President and the Acting Secretary of State: Intention of making clear to the Japanese delegation that American delegation is opposed to any change in the large cruiser ratio and is opposed to modification of the Washington battleship treaty unless successful treaty covering all auxiliary vessels is negotiated. |
26 |
| Feb. 18 (121) | To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) Lack of any particular suggestions to offer; doubt that results of the Japanese elections will make any substantial changes in the Japanese position. |
27 |
| Feb. 19 (73) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Adjournment of Conference until February 26, owing to inability of French delegation to participate until a new government is formed. |
27 |
| Feb. 22 (131) | To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) Desire for more information as to the Chairman’s feeling about the Conference. |
28 |
| Feb. 23 (80) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Information that continuance of informal negotiations with the British has resulted in a situation where agreement could be reached at once unless upset by the French figures; that if French will not reduce their figures the next problem will be the question of making a three-power agreement with a withdrawal clause to protect Great Britain against France. |
28 |
| Feb. 24 (32) | From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.) For repetition to London: Advice that the elections have resulted in a decisive victory for the Government, which now has an unassailable position and is expected to prosecute its foreign and domestic policies in a decisive manner. |
30 |
| Feb. 25 (34) | From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.) For repetition to London: Press report that British and American delegates will propose a three-power conference if the French do not reduce their demands; statement by the Japanese Foreign Minister that his Government would give favorable consideration to the idea. |
30 |
| Feb. 26 (149) | To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) Assumption that consideration is being given to possibility of a three-power agreement with a political clause in the event of menacing building. |
31 |
| Feb. 27 (91) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Information that informal conversations with the Japanese continue but that no figures have been accepted as yet. (Request for repetition to Tokyo.) |
31 |
| Feb. 28 (95) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Information that a tentative agreement with the British has been reached and that active negotiations with the Japanese are taking place. |
32 |
| Feb. 28 (154) | To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) Development of French propaganda for a Presidential statement of policies in regard to the Kellogg Pact with a view to giving the French some sort of American political security assurances. |
32 |
| Feb. 28 (97) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Report of meetings looking toward a treaty to regulate use of submarines in warfare; proposal by American delegation of the adoption of the first four articles (Root resolutions) of the submarine treaty signed at Washington Conference in 1922; and request for views of Mr. John Bassett Moore and Mr. Elihu Root on three specified points. |
33 |
| Mar. 3 (35) | From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.) Press reports reaching Japan in regard to American-Japanese conversations at the Conference; request for information. |
35 |
| Mar. 3 (41) | To the Ambassador in Japan (tel.) Statement that telegram No. 35 has been repeated to London since the Department does not have the desired information. |
36 |
| Mar. 3 (103) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Opinion that possibility of making treaty may ultimately depend upon question of political security; belief that French may suggest reduction in naval armament in the shape of an amendment to the Kellogg Pact; request for President’s views as to how far support should be given to a possible conference resolution calling on all signatories of the Kellogg Pact for a consultative amendment to that pact. |
36 |
| Mar. 3 (167) | To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) Suggestion by the President that consideration be given to making proposal that parity should exist among all naval powers on destroyers and submarines. |
39 |
| Mar. 3 (168) | To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) [From the President.] Interpretation of American public opinion in regard to expansion of the Kellogg Pact and entanglement in political guarantees; disposition not to expand the Kellogg Pact as the price of French cooperation. |
40 |
| Mar. 4 (171) | To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) Disinclination to be involved in amending of Kellogg Pact; opinion that American delegation should take the offensive against French proposals by demanding a reduction in such categories as submarines and destroyers. |
41 |
| Mar. 4 (107) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) For the Ambassador in Japan: Present status of conversations with Japanese delegation. |
43 |
| Mar. 4 (108) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Belief that parity suggestion should be discussed with British before being introduced to Conference; other reasons why it will take time and opportunity. |
45 |
| Mar. 5 (178) | To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) Points to be considered in regard to parity plan for reducing destroyer and submarine strength. |
46 |
| Mar. 5 (111) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) British agreement with U. S. attitude in regard to amending the Kellogg Pact; Prime Minister’s intention of proceeding with other powers if France refuses to join. |
47 |
| Mar. 5 (175) | To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) For Senator Reed from his secretary: Disinclination of Senator Moses to share view that consultative treaty could not be put through the Senate. |
48 |
| Mar. 6 (181) | To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) Conversations with Senators Borah and Swanson, neither of whom favored any kind of political pact. |
48 |
| Mar. 7 (39) | From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.) For repetition to London: Conversation with the Foreign Minister in regard to figures being discussed at the Conference; Japan’s willingness to sign either the Washington submarine treaty or a new one with the United States alone. |
49 |
| Mar. 7 | From Mr. Elihu Root Expression of views on submarine treaty as requested by the chairman of the American delegation in his telegram No. 97, February 28. |
51 |
| Mar. 8 (121) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Report that negotiations with Japan are progressing; that the American delegation opposes any serious reduction in aircraft carriers. |
52 |
| Mar. 8 (122) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) For repetition to Tokyo: Information that in the negotiations with the Japanese the matter of the application of 20,000 tons is now the narrow margin of difference. |
53 |
| Mar. 9 | From Mr. John Bassett Moore Expression of views on submarine treaty as requested by the chairman of the American delegation in his telegram No. 97, February 28. |
54 |
| Mar. 10 (126) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) British-French-American conversations in which the American position on modification of the Kellogg Pact was made clear; opinion that a consultative pact would not reduce French figures, that what France wants is a security pact of mutual military assistance; report that negotiations with the Japanese progress slowly. |
55 |
| Mar. 11 (198) | To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) Approval of course being pursued; tentative suggestion that it would be helpful to public opinion if the information should leak out that what France wants is a security pact of military assistance. |
56 |
| Mar. 11 (199) | To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) Views on submarine treaty and on Mr. Root’s letter of March 7. |
57 |
| Mar. 12 (128) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Conference with the press at which the U. S. position as to political pacts was explained; conclusion that as a tactical maneuver it would be wise to proceed with drafting of a two-power treaty with Great Britain. |
57 |
| Mar. 13 (207) | To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) Request for opinion as to whether the President should issue a public notice in regard to the American position. |
59 |
| Mar. 13 (133) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) For repetition to Tokyo: Status of negotiations with Japanese; intention, if agreement is not reached soon, to proceed with two-power treaty establishing parity in auxiliary categories between America and Great Britain. |
60 |
| Mar. 13 (134) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) For repetition to Tokyo: Agreement with Japanese as to figures which they will recommend to their delegation and to Tokyo and which Americans will recommend to U. S. delegation, to Washington, and to the British. |
61 |
| Mar. 14 (211) | To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) Approval of recommendation to Japan. |
62 |
| Mar. 14 (136) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Details of agreement with Japanese; report on various American-British-French-Italian conversations; belief that statement by the President would help. |
62 |
| Mar. 14 (44) | From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.) For repetition to London: Policy followed in conversations with Foreign Minister concerning Conference. |
64 |
| Mar. 17 (140) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Information concerning French-Italian difficulties; opinion that Presidential statement should not be made now, since three-power pact is almost achieved and since France has given up the idea of a consultative pact. |
64 |
| Mar. 18 (48) | From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.) For repetition to London: Unfortunate situation caused by publication of a statement giving the figures of the tentative agreement fairly accurately but interpreting them most unfairly; efforts of the Foreign Minister to remedy situation. |
66 |
| Mar. 19 (145) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Hope that Japanese will ratify agreement although it is reported that there is a real controversy between Japanese civil government and naval party; differences of opinion as to whether French are protecting their position or trying to break up Conference. |
67 |
| Mar. 19 (147) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Change in submarine treaty suggested by British Foreign Office (text printed); request for Mr. Root’s views. |
67 |
| Mar. 20 (51) | From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.) Press report of conversation between the Prime Minister and the chief of the Naval Staff, who proposed that the Government explore the possibility of a political treaty to cover the Pacific and to include Japanese-American relations with respect to China. |
68 |
| Mar. 20 (53) | To the Ambassador in Japan (tel.) Hope that the Japanese will not propose a political treaty relating to the Pacific, since it would serve no useful purpose and would be offensive to China. (Information transmitted to London.) |
69 |
| Mar. 20 (54) | To the Ambassador in Japan (tel.) Suggestion that it be emphasized to Japanese that the present naval proposals are the limit of American concessions. |
69 |
| Mar. 21 (53) | From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.) For repetition to London: Efforts of the Foreign Minister to obtain ratification of the tentative agreement. |
70 |
| Mar. 21 (149) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) For repetition to Tokyo: Intention, if the agreement is repudiated by Tokyo, to begin immediate preparations for a two-power agreement with Great Britain on auxiliary categories, at the conclusion of which the American delegation will return to Washington. |
71 |
| Mar. 22 (152) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Advice from British Ambassador in France that French believe they can do nothing further in London so long as Britain will not enter into a security pact and so long as Italy continues to demand parity. Opinion that the attempt to secure a five-power pact is almost at an end. |
72 |
| Mar. 22 (54) | From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.) For repetition to London: Report that the Japanese Government has not considered proposing a political treaty relating to the Pacific. |
73 |
| Mar. 22 (244) | To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) Opinion that the only thing to do is to press for a three-power agreement. |
73 |
| Mar. 22 (245) | To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) Mr. Root’s opinion that the Washington treaty is superior to the submarine treaty suggested by the British Foreign Office but that the change would be compensated for by French ratification. |
74 |
| Mar. 23 (55) | From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.) For repetition to London: Information that chief of Japanese delegation has given out a statement that the agreement under consideration is not an American proposal but an agreement reached by three delegations. |
74 |
| Mar. 23 (155) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Sent to the Ambassador in Japan: Message for delivery to the Prime Minister if the Ambassador and the Foreign Minister think it wise (text printed). |
75 |
| Mar. 23 (156) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Statement that two fundamental controversies exist, (1) between British and French, and (2) between French and Italians, in neither of which can America take a leading part; explanation to French of U. S. attitude in regard to a consultative pact. |
75 |
| Mar. 25 (161) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Conference with British in regard to respective positions on political pacts. |
79 |
| Mar. 25 (258) | To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) Receipt by peace societies of three telegrams asserting that American delegates have stated that everything would be settled if the President would offer a consultative pact; request for information. |
81 |
| Mar. 25 (259) | To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) Further information concerning cables being sent from London to various groups in the United States; statement by the President to the press that no government has proposed a consultative pact to the United States. |
81 |
| Mar. 25 (260) | To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) Emphasis on seriousness of situation set forth in telegrams Nos. 258 and 259, March 25. |
82 |
| Mar. 26 (162) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Press release issued March 25 (text printed) to refute rumors that U. S. delegation has changed its views on consultative pacts. |
83 |
| Mar. 26 (163) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Assurances that nothing of the nature mentioned in Department’s telegram No. 258, March 25, has been said by any U. S. delegate. Trend in favor of five-power pact; possibility that France and Britain may reach a security agreement; likelihood that consultative pact as set forth in telegrams Nos. 156 and 161 may be brought up. |
84 |
| Mar. 26 (265) | To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) Points for consideration with respect to question of a consultative pact. |
85 |
| Mar. 27 (165) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Ideas being considered by delegation for limitation on possible consultative pact. |
86 |
| Mar. 27 (167) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Suggestion by Morrow, Robinson, Reed, and Dawes for a consultative clause (text printed) to be placed in the naval treaty. |
87 |
| Mar. 27 (269) | To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) Indications of Senate opposition to consultative pact; attitude of Department. |
88 |
| Mar. 28 (271) | To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) President’s position regarding a consultative pact; statement of difficulties involved; and a suggested formula (text printed). |
89 |
| Mar. 28 (171) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Sent to the Ambassador in Japan: Statement suggested by Japanese and adopted by heads of delegations, March 25 (text printed), making clear that compromise proposal emerged from U. S.-British-Japanese negotiations. |
91 |
| Mar. 28 (172) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) From the Ambassador in Japan: Japanese public opinion concerning the naval agreement; desire to know real attitude of Japanese delegation. |
91 |
| Mar. 29 (274) | To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) New draft formula for consultative pact which has been suggested (text printed). |
92 |
| Mar. 29 (177) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Analysis and summary of various forms of political pacts which have been given support during week past. |
92 |
| Mar. 31 (280) | To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) Message which may be delivered as a personal message from the President to Briand and Tardieu (text printed). |
96 |
| Mar. 31 (281) | To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) Assumption that British statement of March 30 ends possibility of five-power pact; belief that every effort should be made to effect three-power agreement. (Footnote: Quotation from British statement to the effect that any further military or naval commitments are impossible.) |
98 |
| Mar. 31 (282) | To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) Suggestion that if there is no longer hope for a five-power agreement a message might be conveyed to the Prime Minister from the President on the possibilities of a three-power treaty. |
98 |
| Apr. 1 (181) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Belief that there is still hope for a five-power treaty and that the British statement of March 30 has cleared the atmosphere. |
99 |
| Apr. 1 (186) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) From the Ambassador in Japan: Information that instructions are being sent to Japanese delegation; opinion that agreement will be accepted with slight change. |
99 |
| Apr. 2 (195) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Information that the reply of the Japanese Government has been presented and that it is substantially a complete acceptance of the compromise agreement; belief that British-French negotiations are hopeful. |
100 |
| Apr. 3 (199) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Report that, following meeting with the British and Japanese, there seem to be no serious obstacles to agreement with Japan; and that the President’s message has been read to Briand. |
101 |
| Apr. 4 (300) | To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) Impression that a three-power pact is the inevitable conclusion and that there might be danger in extending five-power negotiations too long. |
102 |
| Apr. 4 (200) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Propositions under consideration by the British and French in regard to security agreement. |
102 |
| Apr. 5 (202) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Report that Briand is taking security plan to Paris for consideration of French Government, that there is yet hope for five-power treaty, but that three-power treaty is also being discussed. |
103 |
| Apr. 9 (207) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Information that French-British negotiations continue but that French-Italian deadlock remains; report that all five powers have adopted the declaration regarding protection of lives from submarine attack which was submitted to Root in telegram No. 147, March 19. Possible outline for a five-power treaty on other subjects should the five-power agreement on auxiliary tonnage fail. |
104 |
| Apr. 10 (211) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Report that all questions have been settled with Japanese; that British have practically given up hope of agreement with Italy and France on auxiliary tonnage; and that, to forestall acrimonious termination of the Conference, a composite treaty on basis outlined in telegram No. 207 has been proposed. |
105 |
| Apr. 10 (212) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Statement that agreement has been reached with British and Japanese and that attempt is being made to reach agreement with French and Italians so that work may be embodied in a single treaty. Skeleton of proposed five-power treaty. (Request for repetition to Tokyo.) |
106 |
| Apr. 11 (323) | To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) By instruction of the President: Congratulations on success of result achieved. |
107 |
| Apr. 22 (253) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) For the President: Notification that the naval treaty is signed. |
107 |
| Apr. 22 | Treaty for the Limitation and Reduction of Naval
Armament Text of treaty signed by the United States, France, Great Britain, Italy and Japan. |
107 |
| May 20 (127) | To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Proposal for exchange of notes (text printed) to clear up possible misunderstanding of article 19. (Footnote: Sent also to Ambassador in Japan, mutatis mutandis, on same date.) |
126 |
| May 24 (66/T1) | From the Japanese Minister for Foreign Affairs to
the American Ambassador in Japan Desired statement of Japan’s understanding of article 19. |
126 |
| June 5 (A 3861/1/45) | From the British Secretary of State for Foreign
Affairs to the American Ambassador in Great Britain Desired statement of Great Britain’s understanding of article 19. |
127 |
| Oct. 3 (16) | To the Minister in the Irish Free State (tel.) Understanding that, since Japan has ratified treaty, Australia, New Zealand, and India will ratify promptly; instructions to take up matter with Free State in the interests of immediate action. (Footnote: Information that Japan ratified treaty on October 2.) |
127 |
| Oct. 22 (265) | From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Press communiqué (text printed) concerning deposit of ratifications at Foreign Office on October 27. |
128 |
| Oct. 27 | Procès-Verbal of Deposit of
Ratifications Text of procès-verbal. |
128 |
| Oct. 27 (25) | From the Minister in the Irish Free State (tel.) Advice by President of Irish Free State that treaty will not be ratified until Dail meets in November. (Footnote: Information that ratification was deposited on December 31, 1930.) |
130 |
| [Note: Statement issued by Department on September 30, 1941, concerning the termination of certain parts of the treaty and the ratification of part IV without limit of time by France, Italy, and various other countries.] | 130 |
Negotiations Looking Toward a Solution of the Problem of French and Italian Naval Construction
| Date and number | Subject | Page |
| 1930 May 16 (42) | From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.) Report of statement by Italian Minister for Foreign Affairs, Grandi, that Italy intends to equal French 1930–31 naval program but is willing to retard, reduce, or stop building to the same extent that France will do likewise while the two Governments attempt to solve the difficulties arising from their naval programs. |
132 |
| Aug. 11 (181) | From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Information that French and Italians have arranged for informal conversations to begin in Paris on August 15. |
132 |
| Sept. 6 (281) | From the Ambassador in France (tel.) Understanding that nothing definite was accomplished in French-Italian conversations, the essential obstacle being Italy’s insistence on parity and France’s inability to concede it. |
133 |
| Sept. 26 (87) | From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.) Provisions of French proposal of September 19; Italian attitude that it represents a retrogression. Indications that the next session of the Preparatory Commission for the Disarmament Conference will begin with the matter unsettled. |
133 |
| Oct. 8 (927) | From the Ambassador in France Statement of the French position by the President of the Council of Ministers. |
135 |
| Oct. 14 (324) | From the Ambassador in France (tel.) Information obtained by Acting Military Attaché concerning French naval program for 1931. |
137 |
| Oct. 15 (258) | To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Information that officials of the Department have proposed to the British and Japanese representatives that the three countries suggest to France and Italy that they defer the parity issue until 1936, in the meantime issuing unilateral declarations of their naval programs which, presumably, would have been worked out beforehand and which would constitute no threat to the levels set forth in the London Naval Treaty. Explanation of U. S. Government’s desire not to be alone in its efforts. |
137 |
| Oct. 16 (190) | To the Ambassador in Japan (tel.) Summary of October 15 conversation with the Japanese Ambassador, at the close of which the Secretary stated his intention of taking up the matter with the French and Italian Ambassadors in the near future and expressed his hope that the Japanese Foreign Minister might do something of the same sort. |
138 |
| Oct. 16 (260) | To the Ambassador in France (tel.) Account of conversation with the French Ambassador in which the Secretary made his proposal for unilateral declarations of naval programs; similar conversations with the Italian, British, and Japanese Ambassadors, urging them to join in representations. (Footnote: Sent also to Ambassador in Great Britain.) |
140 |
| Oct. 16 (91) | To the Ambassador in Italy (tel.) Conversation with the Italian Ambassador in which the Secretary stressed the importance of a French-Italian agreement before the November 6 meeting of the Preparatory Commission. |
141 |
| Oct. 16 (261) | To the Ambassador in France (tel.) Instructions to take Mr. Gibson, who will arrive in Paris October 24, to see the Prime Minister and the Foreign Minister for the purpose of discussing Department’s telegram No. 260, October 16. (Footnote: Information that a similar telegram was sent to the Ambassador in Italy instructing him to take Mr. Gibson to see the Italian Foreign Minister, and that the Embassy in Japan was informed of these steps.) |
142 |
| Oct. 20 (334) | From the Chargé in France (tel.) Conversation with the Counselor of the British Embassy in regard to the source of U. S. information on the French naval program. |
142 |
| Oct. 22 (197) | From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.) Information that the Japanese Ambassadors in France and Italy have been instructed to express verbally the views outlined by the Secretary to the Japanese Ambassador in the United States. (Footnote: Statement that on October 30 the Japanese Ambassador reported to the Department the steps taken by his Government.) |
143 |
| Oct. 22 (337) | From the Chargé in France (tel.) Opinion of the Counselor of the British Embassy that the French have no intention for the present of making any announcement regarding a building program the effect of which might be unfortunate. |
143 |
| Oct. 23 (268) | To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Account of telegram received by the British Ambassador from his Government concluding that joint representation might do more harm than good; explanation that U. S. suggestion was not for joint action; belief that British are overly optimistic in believing that rumors concerning French naval program are unfounded; instructions to discuss the matter with the Prime Minister. (Repeated to Embassy in France.) |
145 |
| Oct. 23 (270) | To the Chargé in France (tel.) Belief that the French Ambassador has not put across true gist of Secretary’s suggestions; instructions that Mr. Gibson should emphasize each point as if the French Government had no previous knowledge of the subject. (Footnote: Repeated to the Ambassador in Great Britain.) |
146 |
| Oct. 24 (271) | From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Prime Minister’s statement that matter had never been presented to him as outlined on the basis of Department’s No. 268, October 23, and that he intended to take it up with Foreign Minister in detail. |
147 |
| Oct. 24 (98) | From the Ambassador in Italy (tel.) Account of Japanese Chargé’s conversation with Grandi. |
147 |
| Oct. 25 (339) | From the Chargé in France (tel.) From Gibson and Wilson: Report that British, French, and Japanese Governments have apparently misunderstood Secretary’s suggestion; clarifying conversations with British Ambassador, who now agrees as to widsom of suggested course, and with Japanese Ambassador, who now states that he will take similar action. |
148 |
| Oct. 26 | From the British Ambassador Instructions issued to British Ambassadors in France and Italy (text printed) to express British interest in the reaching of a French-Italian naval accord and to tender good offices of British Government to that end. |
149 |
| Oct. 26 (100) | From the Ambassador in Italy (tel.) Advice from the British Ambassador that he has received his instructions and will make representations to the Italian Government. |
150 |
| Oct. 28 | Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of
State Conversation, October 27, with the Italian Ambassador, who stated that Italy had taken the initiative in presenting compromise proposals but that Mussolini felt that a one-sided Italian declaration might be too dangerous, since there was no proof that France would not continue her building program. |
150 |
| Oct. 27 (340) | From the Chargé in France (tel.) From Gibson and Wilson: Information from British Ambassador that he has carried out his instructions, and that Foreign Office official replied that first step toward resumption of negotiations must come from Italy. |
151 |
| Oct. 27 (277) | From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Report of representations made by British Ambassadors in France and Italy. |
152 |
| Oct. 27 (278) | To the Chargé in France (tel.) For Gibson: French Ambassador’s inquiry as to what kind of French-Italian compromise the Secretary would recommend, in reply to which the Secretary reiterated his suggestion that, until 1936, Italy lay aside her insistence upon parity and France her insistence upon the exact figures of the loi navale, with the idea that a modus vivendi might then be worked out and announced in unilateral declarations. |
152 |
| Oct. 27 (341) | From the Chargé in France (tel.) From Gibson: Explanation of the Secretary’s plan to the President of the Council of Ministers, who, when he understood what was really intended, expressed approval of the idea. |
153 |
| Oct. 27 (342) | From the Chargé in France (tel.) From Gibson: Assertion by the President of the Council that the real obstacle to naval agreement is to find levels which will satisfy the British, but that negotiations are now going on which he hopes will soon be successfully concluded. |
155 |
| Oct. 28 (343) | From the Chargé in France (tel.) From Gibson: The Japanese Ambassador’s account of his conversation with the Secretary General of the Ministry for Foreign Affairs, who thought that the only way to break the deadlock was for the United States, Britain, and Japan to consult with France to fix a level in auxiliary craft satisfactory to parties to the London Treaty and to France, after which the Italian problem would be simpler. |
155 |
| Oct. 28 (344) | From the Chargé in France (tel.) From Gibson: Supplement to telegram No. 341, October 27, giving full summary of remarks to the President of the Council. |
156 |
| Oct. 28 (345) | From the Chargé in France (tel.) From Gibson: Discussion with a Foreign Office spokesman in which the spokesman urged that Italy be informed that France is anxious to resume conversations at any time, and also set forth the terms of an arrangement regarding auxiliary tonnage now being discussed with the British (text printed). |
159 |
| Oct. 30 (349) | From the Chargé in France (tel.) Report of press telegram to the effect that Washington says Gibson has a free hand to try to bring France and Italy together and may visit Rome; request for instructions as to handling of anticipated inquiries. |
160 |
| Oct. 30 (283) | To the Chargé in France (tel.) Information that Secretary has refused either to affirm or deny press inferences; suggestion that discussion of the subject be avoided as far as possible. |
160 |
| Oct. 30 | Memorandum by the Secretary of
State Conversation with the Italian Ambassador in which the Secretary said that Gibson was going to Rome to confer with Grandi and expressed his hope that Grandi would hear him with the careful attention which the importance of the situation demanded; and in which the Ambassador presented a memorandum (text printed) with reference to the French contention that France must defend herself on two seas. |
161 |
| Oct. 30 (101) | From the Ambassador in Italy (tel.) From Gibson: Report that message has been delivered to Grandi but that Grandi expressed no views as to the possibilities of a solution by the method suggested and seemed to have little hope of an agreement. |
163 |
| Oct. 31 (102) | From the Ambassador in Italy (tel.) From Gibson: Interview with the press, whose information regarding naval conversations was so inaccurate that it could be denied and a statement made that the agenda of the Preparatory Commission was being discussed. Explanation that the agenda has been discussed in detail and that it has been made clear to France and Italy that the naval conversations involve only a repetition of the substance of the Secretary’s conversations with the French and Italian Ambassadors. |
164 |
| Oct. 31 (103) | From the Ambassador in Italy (tel.) From Gibson: Account of two conversations with Foreign Office officials who seemed more optimistic, and of a courtesy call on Mussolini during which the naval problem was not mentioned. Intention to leave shortly for session of Preparatory Commission at Geneva. |
165 |
| Nov. 1 (95) | To the Ambassador in Italy (tel.) For Gibson: Reported British suggestion for solution of naval problem. |
166 |
| Nov. 1 (104) | From the Ambassador in Italy (tel.) From Gibson: Request for reassurance that line taken with the press agrees with the Secretary’s. |
166 |
| Nov. 1 (97) | To the Ambassador in Italy (tel.) For Gibson: Information, in reply to telegram No. 104, that the the Secretary has not denied categorically that French-Italian difficulties are being discussed but has denied any suggestion of good offices, mediation, or set formulae, and has emphasized connection between Gibson’s visit and forthcoming meeting of Preparatory Commission. |
166 |
| Nov. 2 (105) | From the Ambassador in Italy (tel.) From Gibson: Comments from various sources on Secretary’s suggested method of solution. |
167 |
| Nov. 3 (98) | To the Ambassador in Italy (tel.) For Gibson: Possible desirability of suggesting to the French that they issue a unilateral declaration on basis of figures acceptable to the British, with a proviso that they will be observed up to 1936 unless some other power’s naval construction should render alteration necessary. (Footnote: Repeated to the Ambassador in Great Britain.) |
167 |
| Nov. 3 (107) | From the Ambassador in Italy (tel.) From Gibson: Pessimistic attitude of Grandi as a result of a statement by the French Ambassador that France would continue conversations if Italy would abandon the idea of parity. Conviction that Italians sincerely desire an agreement and will make substantial sacrifices if they can avoid the appearance of diplomatic defeat. |
168 |
| Nov. 5 (2) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation on the
Preparatory Commission (tel.) Suggestion that in the event of a French-Italian deadlock a proposal based upon a differentiation between replacement and construction might be put forth. |
171 |
| Nov. 6 (3) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation on the
Preparatory Commission (tel.) Efforts to correct misunderstanding between French and Italian Governments in regard to message delivered by French Ambassador to Grandi as reported in telegram No. 107, November 3. |
172 |
| Nov. 6 | Memorandum by the Secretary of
State Conversation with the French Ambassador who put forth the proposition that if France should build three battleships, as she had a right to do under the Washington Treaty, this would establish the desired superiority over Italy and permit France to be generous to Italy in the matter of auxiliary vessels. |
173 |
| Nov. 6 (1) | To the Chairman of the American Delegation on the
Preparatory Commission (tel). Account of conversation with the French Ambassador of same date; indications that plan proposed is more acceptable to the French Admiralty than to the Prime Minister. Approval of suggestion set forth in telegram No. 2, November 5. |
174 |
| Nov. 7 (9) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation on the
Preparatory Commission (tel.) Opinion that it may be possible to exercise conciliatory influence in French-Italian negotiations, explanation that it is being made clear, however, that the United States has no desire to exercise mediation or good offices. |
175 |
| Nov. 8 (361) | From the Chargé in France (tel.) Indications of great confidence of the French in Gibson’s ability and disinterestedness. |
175 |
| Nov. 11 (14) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation on the
Preparatory Commission (tel.) Various points discussed by French and Italian officials; information that the possibility of a distinction between replacement and new construction is being examined by Britain and France. |
176 |
| Nov. 13 (17) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation on the
Preparatory Commission (tel.) Italian delegate’s description of his recent conversations with the British and the French. |
177 |
| Nov. 13 | Memorandum by the Secretary of
State Conversation with the Italian Ambassador in which the Ambassador expressed Grandi’s doubts that the French wished to make an agreement, in reply to which the Secretary stated that he was confident that the French were ready to make a fair agreement and that he hoped the Italians would not block it. |
178 |
| Nov. 13 (20) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation on the
Preparatory Commission (tel.) Three possibilities for solution of French-Italian difficulties as set forth by British delegate (Craigie); misgivings in regard to plan for France to reach agreement with Britain and enter London treaty without Italy. |
179 |
| Nov. 20 (31) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation on the
Preparatory Commission (tel.) Suggestion by Craigie to Italian and French delegates of new plan for auxiliary vessels. |
180 |
| Dec. 6 (58) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation on the
Preparatory Commission (tel.) Information that French-Italian discussions are adjourned while French Cabinet is being reconstituted. Conversation with Italian delegate, who brought the matter up to date, including statement in figures of Craigie’s latest plan, and his attitude concerning it. |
181 |
| Dec. 9 (59) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation on the
Preparatory Commission (tel.) Craigie’s opinion that the additional 8,000 tons of submarines which the Italians demand is now the only important point between France and Italy. |
183 |
| Dec. 16 (101) | From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.) Information that Craigie has been invited to Rome to discuss his proposal; possibility that Japanese may object to submarine levels set forth therein. |
184 |
| Dec. 21 (124) | From the Ambassador in Italy (tel.) Italian official’s private assurance to Craigie that Italy will be able, if France does the same, to accept his proposal with the exception of the submarine tonnage and the scrapping of pre-Washington cruisers; Craigie’s hope that negotiations can be concluded before January 16 meeting of the Council of the League of Nations. (Repeated to Brussels and Berne.) |
184 |
| Dec. 23 (424) | From the Chargé in France (tel.) Craigie’s statement that it is difficult for the French to concentrate on negotiations because of political crisis. (Repeated to Brussels, Berne, and Rome.) |
185 |
| Dec. 30 (41) | To the Ambassador in Belgium (tel.) Italian Ambassador’s assertion that Craigie’s proposal is being cordially considered by the Italian Government but that the situation is made more difficult by the malevolent attitude of the French press. Authorization to proceed to London and/or Paris for any appropriate action. |
185 |
| 1931 Jan. 1 (1) | From the Ambassador in Belgium (tel.) Doubt that it would be wise to proceed either to London or to Paris at the present time. |
186 |
Participation of the United States in the Work of the Preparatory Commission for the Disarmament Conference, Sixth Session, Second Part, November 6–December 9, 1930
| Date and number | Subject | Page |
| 1930 Oct. 16 | To the American Delegates to the Preparatory
Commission Designation of Hugh S. Gibson and Hugh R. Wilson as delegates, list of advisers and technical assistants, and general instructions. |
187 |
| Nov. 15 (23) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Request for advice on broad escape clause (text printed) which it is proposed to circulate in advance as a proposed “American amendment.” |
190 |
| Nov. 17 (6) | To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) Approval of the text of escape clause with two possible changes (text printed). |
191 |
| Nov. 18 (26) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Desire to know what comment on the amendment the Department proposes to make to the press, in view of second suggested change. |
191 |
| Nov. 18 (7) | To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) Suggestion that, to avoid undue comment, the phraseology of the second suggestion might be made identical with that of London Naval Treaty, or that United States might refrain from making any proposal whatever regarding the escape clause. |
192 |
| Nov. 18 (27) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Inquiry regarding slight modification of Department’s suggested wording. |
192 |
| Nov. 19 (8) | To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) Opinion that phraseology of London Naval Treaty should be used or that no American proposal regarding escape clause should be made. |
193 |
| Nov. 19 (29) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Decision that it would be better not to circulate an American escape clause at present but to let it come out in the course of the debates; further suggestions in regard to form of clause, with request for comments. |
193 |
| Nov. 20 (9) | To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) Enumeration of four alternative plans of action in regard to an escape clause, in the order of the Department’s preference, and request that the Department be informed as to which plan is finally decided upon. |
194 |
| Nov. 21 (33) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Account of conversations with other delegates which have confirmed the opinion that the best course is the one indicated by the Department as first in the order of preference; draft of clause which it is planned to circulate the following day (text printed). |
195 |
| Nov. 22 (10) | To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) Approval of draft clause set forth in delegation’s telegram No. 33, November 21. |
197 |
| Nov. 26 (39) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Discussion of texts drawn up by the special subcommittee dealing with chapter V of the convention relating to the Permanent Disarmament Commission; opinion that they meet U. S. views in most of the essentials; request for permission to express approval of texts at third reading and willingness to accept them as basis for discussions at the General Disarmament Conference. |
197 |
| Nov. 28 (45) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Report of rapid progress toward third reading; explanation that these texts should be regarded as constituting only a memorandum as a starting point for discussions in the final Conference. |
199 |
| Nov. 28 (13) | To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) Approval of texts as telegraphed, on the understanding that such approval does not prejudice Department’s attitude at final Conference when figures are under discussion. |
200 |
| Dec. 1 (49) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Report of progress toward approval of final drafting and report. |
200 |
| Dec. 4 (54) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Fear that there will be an excessive amount of self-congratulation on results achieved by draft convention, with resultant disillusionment; information that in order to sound a note of warning as to realities a speech has been prepared which is being submitted for Department’s approval. |
200 |
| Dec. 4 (55) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Text of speech referred to in telegram No. 54, December 4. |
201 |
| Dec. 5 (20) | To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.) Approval of tenor and purpose of speech; suggestion that one quotation be omitted. (Footnote: Information that speech was altered as suggested by Department before being delivered December 9.) |
203 |
| Dec. 9 (60) | From the Chairman of the American Delegation
(tel.) Information that Commission adjourned on the afternoon of December 9. |
203 |
Conference for the Codification of International Law, Held at The Hague, March 13–April 20, 1930, and Text of Protocol Relating to Military Obligations in Certain Cases of Double Nationality.
| Date and number | Subject | Page |
| 1929 Oct. 15 (C. L. 271. 1929. V.) | From the Secretary General of the League of
Nations Invitation to the first Codification Conference, which is to meet at The Hague on March 13, 1930, to consider the questions of: (1) nationality, (2) territorial waters, and (3) the responsibility of states for damages caused in their territory to the persons or property of foreigners. |
204 |
| Dec. 12 | To President Hoover Recommendation that Congress be requested to give favorable consideration to the enclosed draft of a joint resolution providing for U. S. representation at the Conference. |
206 |
| Feb. 27 | To Mr. David Hunter Miller, Editor of Treaties,
Department of State. Designation of Mr. Miller as chairman of the American delegation and of Mr. Hackworth as alternate chairman. |
208 |
| Feb. 27 | To the Chairman of the American Delegation and the
Alternate Chairman Information that according to present advice it is not expected that conventions will be signed; instructions not to sign a convention without prior cable authorization. |
209 |
| Mar. 1 (16) | To the Minister in Switzerland (tel.) Communication for the Secretary General of the League giving names of delegates and technical advisers (text printed). |
209 |
| Mar. 24 (37) | From the Minister in the Netherlands (tel.) From Miller: Report that after a week of daily meetings the progress is limited and slow. |
210 |
| Mar. 31 (42) | From the Minister in the Netherlands (tel.) From Miller: Statement that there is no possibility that Conference will adopt as a clause of a nationality convention the proposal of National Woman’s Party that there be no distinction based on sex; suggested form of a resolution by the Conference (text printed) recommending the principle to the study of the Governments. (Footnote: Department’s approval of form of resolution.) |
210 |
| Apr. 5 (46) | From the Minister in the Netherlands (tel.) From Miller: Opinion that the proposed convention on nationality should not be signed because of certain features not acceptable to United States. |
211 |
| Apr. 6 (49) | From the Minister in the Netherlands (tel.) From Miller: Information that nationality convention will be open for signature until December 31, 1930; opinion, however, that it is better to say at this Conference that United States will not sign. |
213 |
| Apr. 6 (50) | From the Minister in the Netherlands (tel.) From Miller: Present belief that result of the Conference will be a set-back to the idea of codification of international law, as nationality agreement will be limited, and others, if reached at all, will also be limited. Opinion that discussions have been valuable, however. |
213 |
| Apr. 7 (25) | To the Minister in the Netherlands (tel.) For Miller: Instructions to inform Conference that delegation has recommended against signature of nationality convention even though signature is permitted until end of 1930. |
214 |
| Apr. 7 (53) | From the Minister in the Netherlands (tel.) From Miller: Proposal to commission on territorial waters that the commission abandon idea of a signed convention and submit to the Governments for future consideration a report of commission’s studies and deliberations; information that this plan will be followed. |
214 |
| Apr. 8 (54) | From the Minister in the Netherlands (tel.) From Miller: Recommendations adopted by commission on nationality (text printed): comments and recommendations thereon. |
215 |
| Apr. 8 (55) | From the Minister in the Netherlands (tel.) From Miller: Various protocols adopted by commission on nationality (texts printed); recommendation that the protocols not be signed. |
217 |
| Apr. 9 (28) | To the Minister in the Netherlands (tel.) For Miller: Approval of recommendations in telegrams Nos. 54 and 55 of April 8. |
218 |
| Apr. 10 (60) | From the Minister in the Netherlands (tel.) From Miller: Recommendation that U. S. delegation be given authorization to sign the Final Act of the Conference; explanation that it will contain nothing of a contractual nature. |
219 |
| Apr. 10 (30) | To the Minister in the Netherlands (tel.) For Miller: Telegram from chairman of Inter-American Commission of Women (text printed) stating that U. S. delegation is not fighting to prevent adoption of nationality convention based on sex discrimination and is supporting two articles based on inequality; request for information concerning the two articles mentioned. |
220 |
| Apr. 10 (32) | To the Minister in the Netherlands (tel.) For Miller: Information that feminine lobby is working for postponement of any convention on nationality; reiteration of view that none of these subjects is ready for world codification and that satisfactory conventions have not been expected; suggestion that view might be expressed that U. S. Government deems it unwise for the Conference to attempt to legislate on questions where there is real conflict of opinion. |
220 |
| Apr. 10 (33) | To the Minister in the Netherlands (tel.) For Miller: Authorization to sign Final Act provided it is merely a record and binds no one. |
220 |
| Apr. 11 (67) | From the Minister in the Netherlands (tel.) From Miller: Texts of the articles referred to in telegram No. 30, April 10, and reasons for action taken; opinion that action of the Conference on nationality has not crystallized the views of other countries in opposition to U. S. policy but that, on the contrary, the discussions have shown world opinion to be in a state of flux with the trend toward U. S. policy. |
221 |
| Apr. 12 (73) | From the Minister in the Netherlands (tel.) From Miller: Report on last two sessions of the Conference, the last session being devoted to the signing of a nationality convention, three protocols, and the Final Act, of which the U. S. delegation signed only the Final Act. |
223 |
| Dec. 27 (112) | To the Minister in Switzerland (tel.) Instructions to proceed to Geneva to sign the protocol relating to military obligations in certain cases of double nationality (full powers being forwarded by mail). (Footnote: Signature of protocol on December 31, 1930.) |
223 |
| Apr. 12 | Protocol Relating to Military Obligations in Certain
Cases of Double Nationality Text of protocol signed at The Hague. |
224 |
| 1937 Feb. 24 | Procès-Verbal Text of procès-verbal regarding the deposit of the ten ratifications or accessions referred to in article 11 of the protocol relating to military obligations in certain cases of double nationality, signed at the Hague, April 12, 1930. |
230 |
Attitude of the United States Regarding a Proposed Amendment to the Covenant of the League of Nations
| Date and number | Subject | Page |
| 1930 May 22 | From the British Embassy Information concerning proposed amendments to the Covenant of the League; inquiry as to whether the proposed new paragraph 7 bis in article 15 is likely to affect adversely the prospects of the U. S. Senate’s accepting the Protocol of Accession of the United States to the Permanent Court of International Justice; and indication that in such event the British Government would be inclined to oppose the new paragraph. |
232 |
| May 27 | To the British Embassy Advice that the new paragraph 7 bis would effect a fundamental change in the situation which existed at the time of the Senate reservation and at the time the protocol of accession of the United States to the Permanent Court of International Justice was signed. |
233 |
| May 27 | Memorandum by the Chief of the Division of Western
European Affairs Conversation with the Counselor of the British Embassy in which the Counselor was informed that the statement supra was the Department’s only observation concerning the new paragraph, since the United States did not wish to prevent the League from carrying out its wishes in the matter. |
234 |
Policy of the United States Regarding the Bank for International Settlements
| Date and number | Subject | Page |
| 1930 Mar. 5 (1336) | From the Chargé in Switzerland Request for instructions as to the attitude and duties of the Legation and the Consulate in respect to the Bank for International Settlements to be opened at Basel on April 1. |
234 |
| Apr. 29 (873) | To the Chargé in Switzerland Instructions as to the attitude of the Legation in regard to the new bank, with reference also to instructions being sent to the Consul at Basel. |
235 |
| Apr. 29 | To the Consul at Basel Instructions with regard to the new Bank for International Settlements, with explanation that the Consul is charged with no special mission toward the Bank and that the United States is not a party to the international agreements pursuant to which it was founded. |
235 |
Presence of American Unofficial Observers at Geneva During the International Conferences for a Tariff Truce, February–March 1930 and November 1930
| Date and number | Subject | Page |
| 1930 Jan. 18 (C.L.9. 1930. II.) | From the Secretary General of the League of
Nations Information concerning the Conference to convene on February 17, 1930. |
238 |
| Feb. 8 (12) | To the Chargé in Switzerland (tel.) Note for the Secretary General (text printed) conveying U. S. Government’s intention not to participate in Conference but to follow its action with sympathetic interest; instructions to inform Secretary General that Mr. Edwin C. Wilson is being associated with the Consulate at Geneva to follow the proceedings. |
239 |
| Feb. 8 (31) | To the Ambassador in France (tel.) For Wilson: Instructions to proceed to Geneva for the duration of the Conference to assume charge of the political and economic work of the Consulate insofar as it relates to the Conference. |
240 |
| Feb. 28 | From the Consul at Geneva (tel.) From Wilson: Report that the subject being discussed which is of principal interest to the United States is the question of the effect of multilateral economic agreements upon the most-favored-nation clause in bilateral treaties; summary of position of the question. |
241 |
| Mar. 25 | From the Consul at Geneva (tel.) From Wilson: Description of three documents signed at final plenary session, March 24; information that a conference will be held in November to decide whether and when the commercial convention is to come into force. |
242 |
| Oct. 9 (1692 L. N. 1824) | From the Chargé in Switzerland Transmittal of a letter from the Deputy Secretary General of the League stating that a second Conference of Concerted Economic Action is to meet at Geneva November 17, and offering facilities to a U. S. representative or observer. |
243 |
| Oct. 14 (98) | To the Minister in Switzerland (tel.) Instructions to advise Secretary General that the American Consul at Geneva will be instructed to follow the proceedings. |
244 |
| Nov. 18 | From the Consul at Geneva (tel.) Convening of the Second Conference; report that the date for ratifications of the commercial convention of March 24 will probably be extended and the fixing of the time for its coming into force will probably be postponed until the January meeting. |
244 |
| Nov. 28 | From the Consul at Geneva (tel.) Information that Conference, which ended November 28, is considered to have been a failure as far as negotiations with a view to ameliorating present tariff conditions are concerned; summary of results of Conference. |
245 |
Criticism of Certain Provisions in American Tariff Legislation
| Date and number | Subject | Page |
| 1930 Apr. 11 | To Senator Reed Smoot Provisos in the pending tariff bill which are inconsistent with the most-favored-nation treaties of the United States; suggested provisions for reconciling the bill with U. S. treaty obligations. |
246 |
| May 6 | From the Under Secretary of State to the Secretary
of State Memorandum by the Chief of the Treaty Division (text printed) enumerating provisos of bill which violate treaty obligations, and suggesting a means of avoiding such violation. Declaration that the memorandum is correct but that the Department has done all it can in the matter. |
247 |
| May 12 | From the German Embassy Expression of grave concern felt by German industries over the effect the new tariff bill will have on their trade. |
248 |
| July 3 (676) | From the Ambassador in France Letter from the French Minister of Commerce, July 2, concerning unfortunate repercussions on French opinion of U. S. actions, particularly concerning laces, and Ambassador’s reply of July 3 (texts printed); opinion that it is important that consideration be given to the matter if a possible tariff war is to be prevented. |
249 |
Representations by Foreign Governments Regarding Senate Bills for the Deportation of Certain Alien Seamen
| Date and number | Subject | Page |
| 1930 Jan. 23 | From the British Embassy Representations against Senate bill 1941 which is identical with Senate bill 717 of the 70th Congress; opinion that it would conflict with well-established international practice and would discriminate against foreign vessels trading in U. S. ports. |
252 |
| Apr. 1 | From the Canadian Legation Expression of concern in regard to possible passage of Senate bill 1941 and House bill 7763. |
253 |
| Apr. 8 (1280) | From the Netherlands Legation Request that Legation’s note verbale of January 17, 1928, be considered applicable to the bill (S. 202) providing for the deportation of certain alien seamen, which was ordered reported favorably from the Senate Committee on Immigration on April 7, 1930. |
254 |
| Apr. 15 | From the German Embassy Statement that the apprehension expressed by the German Government on January 21, 1928, with regard to Senate bill 717 also applies to bills S. 202, S. 1941, and H. R. 7763. |
255 |
International Conference on Load Lines, Held at London, May 20–July 5, 1930
| Date and number | Subject | Page |
| 1929 Dec. 21 (664) | From the British Ambassador Information that a committee had been appointed 2½ years before to review work previously done on load lines, to consider certain special problems, etc.; inquiry whether, in the opinion of the U. S. Government, the report of the committee would form a suitable basis for international discussion. |
255 |
| Feb. 7 | To the British Ambassador Opinion that an international meeting to discuss load lines would be desirable and that the committee’s report would properly form the basis for discussion. |
256 |
| Feb. 7 (63) | From the British Ambassador Invitation to the conference looking to the conclusion of a convention on load lines, to be convened in London, May 20, 1930. |
257 |
| Apr. 29 | To the American Delegation Instructions to U. S. delegates, including plenary powers to negotiate, conclude, and sign a convention on load lines. |
258 |
| May 8 | To the British Ambassador Formal acceptance of invitation; list of names of delegates and technical advisers. |
260 |
| May 8 (357) | To the Ambassador in Great
Britain Information as to action taken, and instructions to follow proceedings of Conference with care since the Department is not represented on the delegation. |
261 |
| July 5 | International Load Line Convention and Final
Protocol Text of convention and protocol signed by the United States and 29 other countries. |
261 |
| July 5 | Final Act of the Load Line Conference Text of the Final Act signed by the United States and 29 other countries. |
273 |
Disinclination of the United States To Act To Secure Ratification of Draft Convention on Oil Pollution of Navigable Waters
| Date and number | Subject | Page |
| 1929 Aug. 22 | From the British Embassy British Government’s interest in the adoption of the oil pollution convention prepared as a result of the conference at Washington in 1926; inquiry whether the U. S. Government, if officially approached, would be willing to exert its good offices on behalf of the draft convention. |
275 |
| 1930 May 23 | From the British Ambassador Request for reply to Embassy’s aide-mémoire of August 22, 1929. |
277 |
| June 7 | Memorandum by the Chief of the Division of Far
Eastern Affairs Request for authorization to explain orally to an officer of the British Embassy that the U. S. Government is not at present disposed to make any move in the matter. (Footnote: Information that the request is marked “O. K.” by the Under Secretary of State.) |
277 |
| June 12 | Memorandum by the Chief of the Division of Far
Eastern Affairs Conversation with the Second Secretary of the British Embassy in which it was explained that those especially interested thought that it would be well for the United States first to regulate the matter in its own waters by domestic legislation and then to revert to discussion of an international agreement. |
278 |
Cooperation of the United States With Several Other Governments in Reconnaissance Surveys for an Inter-American Highway
| Date and number | Subject | Page |
| 1930 July 1 (31) | To the Minister in Panama Notification of the departure for Cristobal of the members of the Technical Committee on Inter-American Highway Reconnaissance Surveys; information that Panama has not requested U. S. cooperation in the surveys; and instructions to bring the matter to the attention of the appropriate officials in order that such cooperation may be made available if the Panaman Government so desires. Formal instructions for delivery to the members of the Committee (text printed). (Footnote: Information that instructions in regard to the same matter were sent on July 22 and 23 to American diplomatic missions in Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, and Nicaragua.) |
279 |
| July 11 (46) | From the Minister in Panama (tel.) Report that the Panaman Government is taking steps to request cooperation of the Technical Commission and has offered the Commission office quarters in the National Palace; request for instructions as to acceptance. |
286 |
| July 12 (33) | To the Minister in Panama Advice that the Department perceives no objection to the Commission’s acceptance of the office quarters. |
286 |
| July 16 (49) | To the Minister in Panama (tel.) Receipt of formal notification of Panama’s desire for U. S. cooperation in the survey; instructions to present the members of the Commission to the appropriate authorities for that purpose. |
287 |
| July 21 (119) | From the Minister in Panama Official presentation of members of the Commission and expression of appreciation for office quarters made available. |
288 |
| Aug. 27 (133) | From the Minister in Nicaragua Nicaraguan desire for survey to begin there as soon as engineers find it convenient, and expression of gratitude for U. S. cooperation. |
289 |
| Sept. 2 (83) | From the Minister in Honduras (tel.) Honduran acceptance of the cooperation of the U. S. engineers. |
289 |
| Oct. 1 (40) | To the Minister in Honduras Instructions to ascertain whether it will be agreeable to Honduras to have the surveys begun there as soon as the engineers are able to proceed to that country. |
289 |
| Oct. 7 (2834) | From the Chargé in Mexico Note from Foreign Office declining U. S. offer, stating that the National Commission of Roads will do the work in Mexico, and naming the places where the Inter-American Highway will cross the Mexican frontier. |
290 |
| Oct. 10 (69) | From the Minister in Panama (tel.) Request for verification of press reports that Honduras has requested cooperation; Committee’s desire for Honduras to be informed that engineers can begin about November 1. |
291 |
| Oct. 10 (195) | From the Minister in Guatemala Guatemalan pleasure in receiving U. S. cooperation if it occasions no expense. |
291 |
| Oct. 11 (61) | To the Minister in Honduras (tel.) Request for reply to instruction No. 40, October 1, in view of engineers’ availability to begin survey in Honduras November 1. |
292 |
| Oct. 11 (68) | To the Minister in Panama (tel.) Advice that Honduras has requested cooperation but that no reply has been received as to time. |
292 |
| Oct. 11 (227) | From the Minister in Panama Desire of Technical Committee to continue its survey into Costa Rica from Panama; request for information as to attitude of Costa Rica and also of Salvador. |
292 |
| Oct. 19 (102) | From the Minister in Honduras (tel.) Honduran willingness for the engineers to come about November 1. |
293 |
| Oct. 21 (74) | To the Minister in Panama Notification of Honduran agreement to November 1st date; instructions to ask if Committee has mailed first quarterly report to Department; and information that Costa Rican Government has not as yet requested cooperation. |
293 |
| Oct. 28 (248) | From the Minister in Panama Report that the Costa Rican Minister in Panama has recommended to his Government that the cooperation of the U. S. engineers be requested at an early date. |
294 |
| Nov. 20 (274) | From the Chargé in Panama Memorandum by the chairman of the Technical Committee (text printed) of a conversation with the Costa Rican Minister in Panama in regard to the proposed survey work. |
294 |
| Dec. 27 (132) | To the Minister in El Salvador Instructions concerning cooperation needed from El Salvador even though that section of the Highway has already been located and partially or completely constructed. |
296 |
Convention on the Regulation of Automotive Traffic, Signed at Washington, October 6, 1930
| Date and number | Subject | Page |
| 1930 Oct. 6 | Convention on the Regulation of Automotive
Traffic Text of convention signed at the Pan American Union in Washington. (Footnote: Principal objections on the part of U. S. Government to this convention, which was never submitted to the Senate.) |
297 |
| Dec. 1 | From the Chairman of the American Delegation to the
Pan American Conference on the Regulation of Automotive
Traffic Report on the Conference under the headings of: (1) antecedents of the convention, (2) the Conference at Washington, and (3) the Inter-American Highway. |
302 |
The Chaco Dispute Between Bolivia and Paraguay
acceptance by bolivia and paraguay of the uruguyan formula fob carrying out the terms of the conciliation agreement of september 12, 1929
| Date and number | Subject | Page |
| 1929 Dec. 12 (957) | From the Chargé in Uruguay Report on negotiations being carried on in Montevideo between the Bolivian and Paraguayan Ministers and the Uruguayan Foreign Minister regarding the manner of exchanging Forts Vanguardia and Boquerón; Foreign Minister’s statement concerning the Uruguayan proposal for conciliation (text printed); and information that the Bolivian Minister has stated that his Government would accept the proposal, but that the Paraguayan Minister has declined to comment. |
309 |
| 1930 Jan. 3 (2) | From the Chargé in Uruguay (tel.) Bolivian intention of breaking off negotiations in view of Paraguayan refusal to accept Uruguayan proposal; Foreign Minister’s plan to request Bolivia to postpone action and to urge Paraguay to cooperate in preventing break-down of negotiations; and Foreign Minister’s hope that U. S. Government will make similar representations to Paraguay. |
311 |
| Jan. 6 (5) | To the Chargé in Uruguay (tel.) Information that Legation at Asunción has been instructed to express hope that Paraguay will find it possible to accept Uruguayan proposal. |
311 |
| Jan. 8 (3) | From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.) Foreign Office note (passages printed) setting forth Paraguay’s objections to the Uruguayan proposal. |
312 |
| Jan. 9 (6) | To the Chargé in Uruguay (tel.) Instructions to cable the text of the Uruguayan proposal as made to Paraguay. |
313 |
| Jan. 10 (5) | From the Chargé in Uruguay (tel.) Text of the Uruguayan proposal to Paraguay. |
313 |
| Jan. 13 (6) | From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.) Report that Uruguayan mission favors acceptance of proposal offered by Paraguay, and that a new arbitration agreement is now being drafted. |
314 |
| Jan. 30 (5) | To the Minister in Paraguay (tel.) Information that Paraguayan Chargé has presented reasons why his Government could not agree to Uruguayan formula; U. S. hope that Paraguayan Government will see its way clear to accept the Uruguayan proposal. |
314 |
| Feb. 11 (7) | To the Minister in Paraguay (tel.) Request for opinion as to whether there is a likelihood that Paraguay will accept Uruguayan proposal. |
315 |
| Feb. 13 (7) | From the Chargé in Uruguay (tel.) Foreign Minister’s efforts to work out formula satisfactory to Paraguay. |
315 |
| Feb. 14 (10) | To the Chargé in Uruguay (tel.) Instructions to tell the Foreign Minister that the United States has been urging Paraguay to accept Uruguay’s proposal and has suggested to other neutral countries that they do likewise. |
316 |
| Feb. 15 (22) | From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.) Conversations with the Foreign Minister, who states confidentially that Uruguay has accepted new formula mentioned in telegram No. 6, January 13, but desires to add a declaration to which the Foreign Minister is at present inclined to object. (Repeated to La Paz and Montevideo.) |
316 |
| Feb. 18 (8) | From the Chargé in Uruguay (tel.) Attitude of the Foreign Minister that action in exchanging forts could not be more simultaneous than that provided for in Uruguayan proposal. |
318 |
| Mar. 6 (11) | To the Chargé in Uruguay (tel.) Understanding that the Foreign Minister of Paraguay has suggested that a protocol be signed at Montevideo which does not set forth in detail the procedure for the execution of the obligations; opinion that this would put the matter back into the hands of Uruguay and give tacit consent for that country to proceed on the basis of its own formula. |
318 |
| Mar. 10 (10) | From the Chargé in Uruguay (tel.) Foreign Minister’s opinion that article 5 of the conciliation agreement did not give Uruguay full liberty of action in carrying out the protocol, and his intention to propose that Bolivian and Paraguayan representatives make a declaration that they interpret article 5 as permitting Uruguay the necessary liberty of action. |
320 |
| Mar. 10 (11) | From the Chargé in Uruguay (tel.) Foreign Minister’s decision to propose that Bolivian and Paraguayan Ministers sign a protocol to the effect that in accordance with article 5 they grant the Uruguayan Government authorization to give ample instructions for the fulfillment of the Washington protocol. |
321 |
| Mar. 14 (12) | From the Chargé in Uruguay (tel.) Advice from Foreign Minister that Paraguay has accepted his proposal and that a favorable reply is expected from Bolivia; protocol which he has proposed that they sign (text printed). |
321 |
| Mar. 22 (13) | From the Chargé in Uruguay (tel.) Information that the Bolivian Minister has been authorized to sign protocol, amending it to fix May 1 instead of April 10 as date for renewal of diplomatic relations. |
322 |
| Mar. 27 (17) | From the Chargé in Uruguay (tel.) Report that, because of the slight changes in wording, Paraguayan Minister transmitted amended text to his Government nine days ago; and that Uruguayan Foreign Minister declares that unless Paraguay accepts, Uruguay will make no further efforts in the matter. |
322 |
| Mar. 28 (15) | To the Chargé in Uruguay (tel.) Department’s hope that Uruguay will revert to original suggestion if Paraguay does not accept the modified formula. |
323 |
| Mar. 29 (20) | From the Chargé in Uruguay (tel.) Information that Paraguay has accepted Uruguayan protocol with Bolivian amendment in the form set forth. |
323 |
| Apr. 10 (1018) | From the Chargé in Uruguay Report of final negotiations; protocol of April 4, signed on behalf of Bolivia, Paraguay, and Uruguay (text printed). |
324 |
| July 24 (51) | From the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) Notification that the final act in accordance with the Washington agreement was signed July 23 and that Forts Boquerón and Vanguardia were returned in the presence of Uruguayan officers. |
327 |
acceptance by bolivia and paraguay of the proposal of the neutral nations to institute direct negotiations in washington for the settlement of the basic question
| Date and number | Subject | Page |
| 1930 Jan. 6 (2) | To the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) Agreement of five neutral Governments to present to Bolivia on January 9 the note proposing that the basic question outstanding between Bolivia and Paraguay be settled by direct negotiations between their representatives in Washington or, failing that, by the good offices of a commission appointed by the five neutral Governments; instructions to proceed in accordance with agreement; and information that Mexican modification of note was accepted by all the neutral Governments. |
327 |
| Jan. 14 (2) | From the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) Information that note has been presented but probably will not be considered seriously by President Siles due to internal political situation; opinion that President will endeavor to remain in office instead of calling elections, and that Paraguayan delay in effecting the Washington conciliation agreement will be utilized to make the appearance of a national danger. |
328 |
| Jan. 21 (11) | From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.) Foreign Minister’s intention to notify the League of Nations of the recent Bolivian movement toward war. |
329 |
| Jan. 22 (14) | From the Chargé in Peru (tel.) Conversation between the American Ambassador in Argentina and the President of Peru in which the latter stated his views regarding the role of the United States in Latin American affairs and stressed his opinion that the United States should take the Chaco dispute in hand and address the two Governments very firmly. |
329 |
| Jan. 22 (7) | To the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) Instructions, unless it appears inadvisable, to express U. S. Government’s hope that reports regarding imminent Bolivian attack on Paraguay are unfounded. |
330 |
| Jan. 24 (3) | From the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) Report on military action of January 16; opinion that attack was provoked by Bolivia to create national emergency which would justify the President in postponing elections. |
330 |
| Jan. 24 (10) | From the Chargé in Switzerland (tel.) Message from Acting President of the Council of the League of Nations to Bolivia, Paraguay, and members of Council (text printed) expressing hope that no incident will compromise success of pacific procedure. |
331 |
| Jan. 25 (9) | To the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) Instructions to make representations regarding the recent hostilities and the possibility of the acceptance of one of the suggestions made by the neutral Governments in their note of January 9. |
332 |
| Jan. 27 (4) | From the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) Report of representations made and of Foreign Minister’s statement that he had not studied note of neutral Governments because he was awaiting results of the Uruguayan representations relative to completion of the conciliation agreement. |
333 |
| Jan. 28 (11) | To the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) Explanation that there is no connection between the Uruguayan proposal for the exchange of Forts Vanguardia and Boquerón and the neutral Governments’ suggestion for a settlement of the fundamental question; instructions to call this to the attention of the Foreign Minister. |
334 |
| Feb. 1 (8) | From the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) Report that, in spite of his statements and promises, President Siles has not yet considered the neutral note of January 9. |
334 |
| Feb. 8 | From the Brazilian Ambassador Explanation of Brazil’s unostensible role in the Bolivian-Paraguayan controversy, and expression of wishes for the success of U. S. diplomacy. |
335 |
| Feb. 13 (12) | From the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) Manifesto issued by the Nationalist Party (text printed) expressing belief that the President’s term of office should be extended; opinion that the President will continue to delay consideration of neutral note, since the national crisis provides the principal reason for his continuance in office. |
336 |
| Feb. 19 | To the Brazilian Ambassador Expression of appreciation for the friendly interest of Brazilian Government. |
337 |
| Feb. 25 (13) | From the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) Report that a special Cabinet meeting has been called to draft answer to neutral note but has been postponed; information that manifesto concerning continuance of President’s term has now been formalized and that only the President’s consent is needed. |
337 |
| Feb. 27 (15) | From the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) Bolivia’s acceptance of the neutral Governments’ proposal for conversations between the diplomatic representatives of Bolivia and Paraguay at Washington. |
338 |
| Feb. 27 (16) | From the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) Reply of the Bolivian Government, February 25 (text printed), to the neutral Governments’ note of January 9. |
338 |
| Mar. 5 (16) | To the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) Instructions to call on the President and express U. S. gratification at Bolivian decision. |
342 |
| Mar. 8 (18) | From the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) President’s readiness to start direct negotiations at Washington as soon as conciliation agreement is fulfilled. |
343 |
| Aug. 19 (67) | From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.) Information from Bolivian representative in Paraguay that Bolivian junta does not favor beginning of conversations in Washington until after installation of civil government, but that it will yield if United States desires that they begin without delay. |
343 |
| Sept. 12 (70) | From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.) Foreign Minister’s desire for Department’s opinion as to best time for opening conversations at Washington. |
343 |
| Sept. 13 (22) | To the Minister in Paraguay (tel.) Indication that any time agreeable to Paraguay and Bolivia will be satisfactory to U. S. Government, as the conciliation agreement has now been fulfilled. |
344 |
Boundary Disputes
guatemala and honduras
| Date and number | Subject | Page |
| 1930 Apr. 25 (47) | To the Minister in Guatemala (tel.) Advice that boundary conference [held at Washington, January 20–July 16, 1930] is making advances but is hampered by unyielding attitude taken by both delegations under instructions from their Governments. Description of a boundary line thought to be acceptable to Honduras; and instructions to bring it to the attention of the Guatemalan Government and, if it is rejected, to endeavor to have delegation given as much latitude as possible to arrive at a solution. |
344 |
| Apr. 28 (56) | From the Minister in Guatemala (tel.) Report that President and Foreign Minister have rejected the line mentioned and maintain that the delegation has full powers. |
345 |
| May 21 (24) | To the Chargé in Honduras (tel.) Information concerning progress of conference, and instructions to take up with Honduran Government the desirability of giving its delegation ample authority to negotiate a settlement. |
346 |
| May 22 (29) | From the Chargé in Honduras (tel.) Telegram from the President to the delegation in Washington (text printed) confirming powers to discuss boundary question in all its aspects. |
347 |
| June 4 (34) | From the Minister in Honduras (tel.) Indication by the President of what he would and would not be willing to concede; Foreign Minister’s proposal that the Department suggest a line. (Footnote: Information that discussions to reach an agreement on a boundary line continued until June 12, when the chairman announced that on June 13 the conference would pass to a discussion of a possible treaty of arbitration to end the boundary question.) |
348 |
| June 17 (46) | From the Minister in Honduras (tel.) Willingness of Honduran Government to accept Department’s suggestion that the Arbitral Commission be composed of one delegate proposed by Honduras and one by Guatemala, presided over by the Chief Justice of the United States. |
348 |
| June 19 (29) | To the Minister in Honduras (tel.) Advice that suggestion as to composition of Arbitral Commission was not made by Department, and explanation of how it came to be agreed upon; also that difference of opinion between the two delegations concerns the competency of the Central American Tribunal established by treaty of 1923. |
349 |
| June 25 (51) | From the Minister in Honduras (tel.) Notification that the Honduran delegation has informed the President that it has accepted Department’s proposal that the competency of the Central American Tribunal be submitted to a special tribunal. |
350 |
| July 7 (151) | To the Ambassador in France (tel.) Communication for the Chief Justice of the United States (text printed) inquiring as to his willingness to be the third and presiding member of a special tribunal to determine the competency of the Central American Tribunal; explanation that in the event the special tribunal decides that the Central American Tribunal is competent, it will constitute itself the Central American tribunal to determine the question at issue. |
351 |
| July 11 (214) | From the Ambassador in France (tel.) Telegram from the Chief Justice accepting designation (text printed). |
352 |
| July 19 | Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of
State Treaty of arbitration between Guatemala and Honduras, signed at Washington, July 16, and supplementary convention (texts printed). |
352 |
| [Note: Exchange of ratifications October 15, 1931; appointment of Chief Justice of the United States to form and preside over Arbitral Tribunal.] | 361 |
honduras and nicaragua
| Date and number | Subject | Page |
| 1930 May 21 (1) | To the Minister in Honduras Understanding that procedure now contemplated for adjusting boundary dispute embraces the signature of a protocol of agreement based upon the 1906 award of the King of Spain and providing for a commission of engineers composed of one Honduran, one Nicaraguan, and one American who is to act as president; advice that Department is prepared to authorize U. S. Ministers in both countries to collaborate in preparing protocol; general outline of protocol (text printed) to be submitted if and when it seems propitious. (Footnote: The same, mutatis mutandis, to the Minister in Nicaragua.) |
361 |
| June 13 (70) | From the Minister in Nicaragua (tel.) President Moncada’s conviction that the creation of a boundary commission is the best way of solving frontier difficulties, including banditry; concurrence in President’s view, and opinion that negotiations should be reopened promptly. |
363 |
| June 14 (111) | From the Minister in Honduras (tel.) President Colindres’ statement that he would be pleased if negotiations were reopened and a boundary commission created as soon as possible. |
364 |
| June 19 (71) | From the Minister in Nicaragua (tel). Report that President has instructed Foreign Minister to draft protocol; desire for authorization to proceed with offer of collaboration. |
365 |
| June 19 (54) | To the Minister in Nicaragua (tel.) Instructions to proceed with offer of collaboration. (Similar instructions sent to Tegucigalpa.) |
365 |
| June 25 (74) | From the Minister in Nicaragua (tel.) President’s indication that he would welcome Department’s assistance in preparing draft protocol. Telegram sent to Minister in Honduras (text printed) stating intention of submitting Department’s outline of protocol as soon as Minister in Honduras is prepared to take similar action. |
365 |
| June 27 (53) | From the Minister in Honduras (tel.) Telegram sent to Minister in Nicaragua (text printed) reporting Honduran acceptance of U. S. offer of assistance, and Minister’s intention of submitting Department’s outline. |
366 |
| July 2 (80) | From the Minister in Nicaragua (tel.) Notification that Department’s outline of draft protocol was submitted to Nicaraguan Government this date. (Repeated to Tegucigalpa.) |
366 |
| July 3 (57) | From the Minister in Honduras (tel.) Notification that the Department’s outline of draft protocol was submitted to Honduran Government on July 2. (Repeated to Managua.) |
366 |
| July 7 (58) | From the Minister in Honduras (tel.) Note from the Foreign Minister, July 5 (excerpt printed), accepting the Department’s outline of the protocol and inquiring as to place at which it is to be signed. |
367 |
| July 8 (34) | To the Minister in Honduras (tel.) Advice that the selection of the place at which the protocol is to be signed is a matter for agreement between Honduras and Nicaragua. (Similar telegram sent to Managua.) |
367 |
| July 9 (83) | From the Minister in Nicaragua (tel.) Information that Nicaragua will probably propose the addition of a provision to protect property rights in transferred territory. (Repeated to Tegucigalpa.) |
367 |
| July 14 (88) | From the Minister in Nicaragua (tel.) Telegram sent to Tegucigalpa (text printed) explaining that some of President’s advisers think that Nicaragua is making all the concessions, and requesting advice as to any concessions which Honduras claims to be making. |
368 |
| July 14 (60) | From the Minister in Honduras (tel.) Telegram sent to Managua (text printed) stating that Honduras does not object to the additional provision which Nicaragua will suggest, and inquiring whether Nicaragua would accept an invitation from Honduras to sign the protocol at Tegucigalpa. |
368 |
| July 31 (95) | From the Minister in Nicaragua (tel.) Telegram sent to Tegucigalpa (text printed) setting forth changes and additions desired by Nicaragua in the draft protocol, and inquiring as to their acceptability to Honduras. |
369 |
| July 31 (96) | From the Minister in Nicaragua (tel.) President Moncada’s desire that the protocol be signed in Managua. (Repeated to Tegucigalpa.) |
370 |
| Aug. 1 (69) | From the Minister in Honduras (tel.) Intention, if Department does not object, to submit to Honduran Government for approval the changes and additions desired by Nicaragua. |
371 |
| Aug. 4 (39) | To the Minister in Honduras (tel.) Authorization to submit changes to Honduran Government. |
371 |
| Aug. 18 (76) | From the Minister in Honduras (tel.) Information that Foreign Minister has submitted a counterproposal which has been sent to the Minister in Nicaragua; statement of points upon which there is likely to be greatest disagreement. |
371 |
| Aug. 20 (86) | To the Minister in Nicaragua (tel.) Authorization to present Honduran counterproposal to Nicaraguan Government. (Repeated to Minister in Honduras.) |
372 |
| Sept. 16 (115) | From the Minister in Nicaragua (tel.) Telegram sent to Tegucigalpa (text printed) stating that Nicaragua accepts the Honduran counterproposal with the omission of article 5, and pointing out that opposition in Nicaragua would be lessened if protocol were signed in Managua. |
372 |
| Sept. 18 (87) | From the Minister in Honduras (tel.) Telegram sent to Managua (text printed) conveying information that Honduras agrees to omission of article 5 and signature of the protocol in Managua. |
373 |
| Sept. 25 (120) | From the Minister in Nicaragua (tel.) Telegram sent to Tegucigalpa (text printed) setting forth Government’s desire to postpone signature of protocol until after November elections in order to avoid its becoming involved in party politics. |
373 |
| Nov. 21 (157) | From the Minister in Nicaragua (tel.) Report of conversation with the Foreign Minister concerning the President’s desire for definite assurance of cooperation of Honduras in suppression of banditry before signing the boundary protocol. (Repeated to Tegucigalpa.) |
374 |
| Nov. 22 (158) | From the Minister in Nicaragua (tel.) Information from Minister in Honduras that Honduran forces on the border have been increased and that vigorous pursuit of bandits in Honduras can be expected. |
375 |
| Nov. 29 (163) | From the Minister in Nicaragua (tel.) Opinion of the Foreign Minister that the boundary protocol will be signed before the end of the year. |
375 |
| Dec. 5 (135) | To the Minister in Nicaragua (tel.) Instructions to express to the President the Department’s hope that he may see his way clear to have the protocol signed at an early date. |
376 |
| Dec. 6 (167) | From the Minister in Nicaragua (tel.) Notification that Nicaragua is prepared to sign the protocol in Managua at the end of December. |
376 |
| Dec. 8 (136) | To the Minister in Nicaragua (tel.) Instructions to inform the President that the Department is gratified at his decision and is notifying the Minister in Honduras in order that appropriate action may be taken. (Footnote: Information that the protocol was signed at Managua, January 21, 1931.) |
377 |
ARGENTINA
Revolution in Argentina
| Date and number | Subject | Page |
| 1930 June 26 (899) | From the Chargé in Argentina Factors in the current situation which may produce an upset in government. |
378 |
| Aug. 29 (111) | From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.) Report that the coup d’état in Peru has made a strong impression in Argentina and may have been used in an attempt to persuade the President that his life is in danger and that his only safeguard is to resign. |
379 |
| Sept. 5 (120) | From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.) Information that the President has delegated his authority to the Vice President and that martial law is expected to be declared shortly. |
379 |
| Sept. 7 (124) | From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.) Account of the coup whereby General Uriburu emerged as head of a provisional government pledged to remain in power only until elections can be held; opinion that the provisional government is composed of honest patriots and that its action had the approval of the majority of the population; and recommendation that the U. S. Government be prepared to recognize this government at an early date. |
379 |
| Sept. 8 (125) | From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.) Further indications of popular approval of the actions of the provisional government, and renewal of recommendation for an early U. S. recognition. |
381 |
| Sept. 9 (126) | From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.) Receipt of note signed by new Foreign Minister giving official notice of coup and its purposes. |
381 |
| Sept. 11 (100) | To the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.) Information that there appears to be no possibility of immediate recognition; also that a proposal has been made that Great Britain and the United States discuss the matter. |
382 |
| Sept. 11 (286) | From the Ambassador in France (tel.) Report of Foreign Office press statement that France will await action of the United States. |
382 |
| Sept. 11 (129) | From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.) Information that several governments are prepared to extend recognition but are disposed to await U. S. action; opinion that the United States would gain by extending recognition first without waiting for British action. |
382 |
| Sept. 13 (131) | From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.) Report that Chile has recognized the provisional government and that Norway only awaits U. S. action to do likewise. |
384 |
| Sept. 13 (101) | To the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.) Request for information concerning control of provisional government over provinces, and its relations with other political parties. |
384 |
| Sept. 14 (132) | From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.) Description of provisional government’s relations with provinces and with other parties, all of which attest to the popularity of the movement. |
384 |
| Sept. 15 | From the Assistant Secretary of State to the Under
Secretary of State and the Assistant Secretary of
State Conversation with the British Ambassador, who stated that his Government intends to recognize both Peru and Argentina on September 17, and expressed his hope that the U. S. Government would do likewise at the same time; opinion that it would be unwise not to do so. |
385 |
| Sept. 16 | From the Assistant Secretary of State to the
Secretary of State Two telephone conversations: (1) with the British Ambassador, who was informed that the U. S. Government is considering the matter of recognition; (2) with the Counselor of the British Embassy, who stated that Great Britain is postponing action until September 18. |
386 |
| Sept. 16 (134) | From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.) Notification that Germany and Paraguay have recognized the new government. |
386 |
| Sept. 16 (104) | To the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.) Instructions incident to recognition September 18; information that similar action will be taken as to Bolivia and Peru. |
386 |
| Sept. 16 (114) | From the Minister in Colombia (tel.) Information that Colombia will recognize Argentina, Bolivia, and Peru on September 18. |
387 |
| Sept. 17 | Press Release Issued by the Department of
State Statement by the Secretary of State concerning U. S. policy in connection with the recognition of Argentina, Bolivia, and Peru on September 18. |
387 |
| Sept. 17 (136) | From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.) Plans to comply with Department’s instructions as of September 18; report that Denmark, France, Italy, Norway, Spain, Sweden, and the Vatican have extended recognition. |
389 |
| Sept. 18 (362) | From the Chargé in Cuba Cuban intention to recognize Argentina, Bolivia, and Peru when the United States does. |
390 |
| Sept. 20 (57) | From the Chargé in Brazil (tel.) Report that Brazil is entering into friendly relations with Argentina and Bolivia. (Footnote: Information that Brazil recognized Peru on September 20.) |
390 |
AUSTRIA
Consent to Subordination of the Austrian Relief Loan to a Proposed New Austrian Loan
| Date and number | Subject | Page |
| 1930 Mar. 12 | From the Consul at Geneva (tel.) From Wilson, American unofficial representative on the Reparation Commission: Request for instructions as to whether the Department desires the Reparation Commission to take action indicated in article 6 of the draft agreement for Austrian debt settlement or to take no action in view of imminent ratification of Hague agreement of January 20, 1930; draft decision to be taken by Reparation Commission (text printed) submitted for approval in case Department desires that such action be taken. |
391 |
| Mar. 15 | To the Consul at Geneva (tel.) For Wilson: Instruction that since draft agreement was submitted to Congress, it is desirable that Reparation Commission take decision; approval of suggested draft decision. |
392 |
| Mar. 29 (92) | From the Ambassador in France (tel.) Reparation 302: Report that the Reparation Commission has: (1) approved the plan for the repayment of Austrian relief bonds, and (2) adopted the draft decision set forth in Mr. Wilson’s telegram of March 12. |
393 |
| Mar. 31 (47/R) | From the Austrian Minister Résumé of situation, and request that U. S. Government now consent to the release from prior charge in favor of relief bonds, of certain revenues to cover service of the new investment loan; information that similar request is being submitted to Sir Frederic Leith-Ross, chairman of the Relief Bonds Committee, which represents the other Governments holding relief bonds. |
393 |
| Apr. 15 (93) | To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Instructions: (1) to ascertain what reply Sir Frederic Leith-Ross is making to Austrian request, (2) to obtain a direct statement from Government to which accredited regarding action taken with respect to subordinating its lien, and (3) to repeat the foregoing as Department’s instruction to representatives at Copenhagen, Paris, Rome, The Hague, Oslo, Stockholm, and Berne, substituting for (1) a statement of information received from Leith-Ross. |
395 |
| Apr. 17 (69) | From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Letter addressed by Leith-Ross to the Austrian Minister in London, April 16 (text printed), approving the specific securities proposed, and indicating that the release of these securities is subject to the coming into force of the Hague agreements of January 20, and to a similar release by the United States. |
396 |
| Apr. 19 (60/R) | From the Austrian Minister Advice that Austria has now complied with all the provisions of Public Resolution 81 whereby Congress authorized the settlement of Austria’s indebtedness to the United States; request that a time and place be set for the exchange of signatures of such an agreement. |
397 |
| Apr. 26 (13) | From the Minister in Sweden (tel.) Note from the Foreign Minister (excerpt printed) stating that Sweden had approved Leith-Ross’ letter of April 16 to the Austrian Minister in London. |
398 |
| May 2 (88) | From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.) Foreign Office note, May 1 (excerpt printed), stating that the Leith-Ross letter embodied the intentions of the British Government. |
398 |
| May 2 (126) | From the Ambassador in France (tel.) Statement from the French Government that Leith-Ross’ letter expresses the conditions to which it has subordinated its adhesion to the emission of the new loan. |
399 |
| May 2 (35) | From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.) Swiss statement, May 1 (excerpt printed), confirming the declarations of Leith-Ross’ letter. |
399 |
| May 6 (8) | From the Minister in Norway (tel.) Information that Norway has agreed to subordinate the lien in question on the conditions set forth in Leith-Ross’ letter. |
400 |
| May 15 (25) | From the Chargé in Denmark (tel.) Note from Foreign Minister, May 14, stating that Denmark, by the declaration made in Leith-Ross’ letter, has renounced its liens upon certain Austrian revenues on the conditions that the Hague agreement of January 20 shall come into force, and that a similar renunciation is made by the United States. |
400 |
| May 19 (25) | To the Chargé in Denmark (tel.) Inquiry as to whether Danish note states that Denmark has renounced its lien on all revenues mentioned in Leith-Ross’ letter or only on customs and tobacco revenues. |
400 |
| May 22 (26) | From the Chargé in Denmark (tel.) Information that Danish note of May 14 mentioned only customs and tobacco revenues but that a further note of May 20 includes all revenues mentioned in Leith-Ross’ letter. |
401 |
| May 22 (75/R) | From the Austrian Minister Explanation that the London relief agreement of June 15, 1928, provides that Austria must obtain the consent of the relief-creditor governments prior to settling the so-called Forfait debts; request for U. S. consent to the settlement of these debts; and information that an identical request has been submitted to the Relief Committee. |
401 |
| May 23 (170) | To the Ambassador in France Information that the French statement is not directly responsive to the Department’s inquiry; instructions to endeavor to obtain a statement that Leith-Ross’ letter is approved by the French Government and was made pursuant to its authority. |
402 |
| May 26 (37) | From the Chargé in Italy (tel.) Statement from Foreign Office (excerpt printed) giving Italian concurrence in declarations made by Leith-Ross and stating conditions of assent. |
402 |
| May 29 (43) | To the Chargé in Italy (tel.) Inquiry concerning the meaning of a phrase in the Italian statement. |
403 |
| June 3 (41) | From the Chargé in Italy (tel.) Explanation of Italian intention in the phrase to which Department referred. |
403 |
| June 20 | From the Netherlands Minister Information that the Netherlands has given its assent to the suspension of its lien upon certain Austrian Revenues. |
404 |
| June 21 (50) | From the Chargé in Italy (tel.) Note verbale from the Foreign Office, June 20 (text printed), explaining that by its former communication the Italian Government had intended to act unconditionally with regard to the letter by Leith-Ross and the request of the U. S. Embassy. |
404 |
| June 21 | From the French Ministry for Foreign Affairs to the
American Embassy in France Statement that Leith-Ross acted as the representative of the Relief Credits Committee and that his letter had the approval of the French Government. |
405 |
| June 26 (195) | From the Ambassador in France (tel.) Reparation 312: Information that, in order to comply with U. S. Treasury requirements, the Austrian section of the Reparation Commission is meeting and will probably recommend that the Commission adopt a decision to the effect that as of the date of the coming into force of the Hague agreement of January 20 the first charge on Austrian assets created by article 197 of the Treaty of St. Germain shall cease to have effect. |
406 |
| June 27 (199) | From the Ambassador in France (tel.) Reparation 313: Notification that on June 26 the Reparation Commission sent a letter to the Austrian Minister at Paris in the sense indicated in telegram of that date and that the letter will be approved by the Commission retroactively on June 28. |
406 |
| June 27 | To the Austrian Minister Statement that the U. S. Government offers no objection to the settlement by Austria of the so-called Forfait debts. |
406 |
| June 28 (202) | From the Ambassador in France (tel.) Reparation 314: Report that Reparation Commission has approved letter of June 26; receipt of certified copy of procès-verbal of deposit of ratification of the Hague agreement of January 20. |
407 |
| June 30 | From the Austrian Legation Note from Leith-Ross (text printed) giving notice of ratification of the Hague agreement of January 20 by the contracting parties; request for U. S. declaration of release of the necessary securities. |
407 |
| July 2 | From the Secretary of the
Treasury Declaration of release of lien for the payment of Austrian relief bonds held by the United States (issued by authority of Public Resolution 81). |
408 |
Treaty and Exchange of Notes Between the United States and Austria for Extradition and Commutation of Death Penalty, Signed January 31, 1930
| Date and number | Subject | Page |
| 1930 Jan. 31 | Treaty Between the United States of America and
Austria Text of treaty and exchange of notes signed at Vienna. |
408 |
BOLIVIA
Revolution in Bolivia
| Date and number | Subject | Page |
| 1930 May 29 (31) | From the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) Information that President Siles resigned May 28, turning over the Executive power to the Cabinet, and that elections for a constituent assembly to revise the Constitution have been called for June 29. |
415 |
| May 29 (32) | From the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) Note from the Foreign Minister, May 28 (text printed), giving official notice of the action taken; request for instructions regarding the question of recognition of the new government. |
415 |
| May 31 (33) | From the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) Brazilian Minister’s statement that his Government will maintain cordial relations with the provisional government but will not recognize its constitutionality or negotiate with it, and his expression of hope that the United States will take the same attitude. |
417 |
| June 2 (20) | To the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) Explanation that the Department does not desire to raise any question regarding recognition of the new regime; instructions to continue normal diplomatic relations but not to take part in any joint action of diplomatic corps; authorization to inform the Brazilian Minister. |
418 |
| June 3 (34) | From the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) Information that all the diplomatic corps received practically the same instructions as in Department’s No. 20; signs of dissension in the Cabinet and of dissatisfaction in some parts of the country. |
418 |
| June 18 (35) | From the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) Report that there have been several demonstrations in favor of Siles and smaller ones against him, that there is much communist activity, and that the Army has gained two more Cabinet posts. |
418 |
| June 22 (37) | From the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) Information that an attempt against the government, including plans for Siles’ assassination, was frustrated June 21. |
419 |
| June 25 (41) | From the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) Information that Oruro has been taken by revolutionists, that federal troops there refused to take any action, and that an early movement against the government in La Paz is expected. |
419 |
| June 30 | Press Release Issued by the Department of
State Résumé of several communications from the Chargé in Bolivia, including information regarding a military junta which will govern the country for the present. |
420 |
| July 1 (51) | From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.) Advice that Siles will arrive in Arica July 2, and that the Chilean Minister in Bolivia has been instructed to express good will to the junta but that recognition for the present is not contemplated. |
422 |
| July 2 (47) | From the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) Report that the junta remains well in control of the situation, and that the Legation has not been approached regarding recognition. |
422 |
| July 9 (48) | From the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) Advice that the junta hopes that recognition will come “spontaneously.” |
423 |
| Aug. 22 (505) | From the Chargé in Bolivia Information that the junta has announced elections for January 4, 5, and 6, 1931; description of the steps taken to secure a more popular and representative vote; and report that the three parties have committed themselves to a coalition ticket headed by Dr. Salamanca for President. |
424 |
| Aug. 23 | Memorandum by the Assistant Chief of the Division of
Latin American Affairs Conversation with the Bolivian Minister, who called to inform the Department of the coalition ticket. |
426 |
| Aug. 30 (57) | From the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) Report that the junta in Bolivia is negotiating with the junta in Peru for mutual recognition. |
426 |
| Sept. 9 (25) | From the Minister in Ecuador (tel.) Information that Ecuador has decided to give full recognition to the present Government of Bolivia. |
427 |
| Sept. 10 (59) | From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.) Desire to leave La Paz for the present because of the embarrassment created by the frequent raising of the question of U. S. recognition of the junta. (Footnote: Information that the Minister had been assigned June 4, 1930, but had not yet presented his credentials.) |
427 |
| Sept. 11 (60) | From the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) Notification that Chile recognized the Bolivian Government on September 10. |
427 |
| Sept. 16 (38) | To the Minister in Bolivia (tel.) Instructions to inform Bolivian Government on September 18 of readiness to present letters of credence and enter into full diplomatic relations. |
428 |
| Undated [Rec’d Sept. 18] (63) | From the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.) Report that instructions given in telegram No. 38 have been carried out and that arrangements are being made for the Minister to present his letters of credence. |
428 |
Disinclination of the United States To Appoint Official Representative on American Bankers Commission To Deal With Bolivian Economic and Financial Problems
| Date and number | Subject | Page |
| 1930 Oct. 13 (70) | From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.) Information that Government is planning to invite a commission of U. S. bankers to visit Bolivia for the purpose of recommending steps toward avoidance of financial collapse; suggestion that bankers be notified. |
429 |
| Oct. 18 (71) | From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.) Receipt of a memorandum representing views of the Government as to practical remedies for the threatening financial crisis; Foreign Minister’s request that invitation be transmitted to the bankers and that the Department be asked what its attitude would be toward the appointment of an official representative on the commission. |
429 |
| Oct. 20 (45) | To the Minister in Bolivia (tel.) Information that U. S. Government does not desire to have a representative on the proposed commission, but will transmit project to bankers and will be glad to cooperate informally. |
430 |
BRAZIL
Revolution in Brazil
| Date and number | Subject | Page |
| 1930 Oct. 4 (62) | From the Chargé in Brazil (tel.) Report that revolutions have broken out in Pernambuco, Minas Geraes, and Rio Grande do Sul. |
432 |
| Oct. 7 (73) | From the Chargé in Brazil (tel.) Report that the revolutionists have not made much progress and that São Paulo, Rio de Janeiro, and Bahia are quiet. |
432 |
| Oct. 9 (78) | From the Chargé in Brazil (tel.) Suggestion that the Department consider the question of having U. S. Naval vessels in the vicinity of Pernambuco, since it seems probable that a serious engagement will take place there which will endanger American lives. |
433 |
| Oct. 9 (57) | To the Chargé in Brazil (tel.) Explanation that the Department would be loath to send warships to Brazil; instructions as to various steps to be taken in attempting to assure safety of U. S. citizens. |
434 |
| Oct. 10 (83) | From the Chargé in Brazil (tel.) Report that the Department’s instructions have been transmitted to the U. S. Consuls at Pernambuco and Bahia and that the Foreign Minister has given assurances that the Federal Government will give attention to foreigners insofar as possible. |
434 |
| Oct. 11 (60) | To the Chargé in Brazil (tel.) Press statement issued by the Department (text printed) announcing that the U. S. S. Pensacola is being ordered to Guantanamo and will proceed to Brazil in case necessity arises to evacuate Americans whose lives might be in danger. |
435 |
| Oct. 12 (88) | From the Chargé in Brazil (tel.) Advice that the press notice contained in Department’s No. 60 of October 11 is giving concern to the Brazilian Government; suggestion that it would be appreciated if the Department would state to the press that Rio de Janeiro and São Paulo are quiet and that there is no danger to U. S. lives and property in those cities. |
435 |
| Oct. 14 (96) | From the Chargé in Brazil (tel.) Report that the Government has closed the port of Recife and has requested that U. S. merchant vessels not call there; information that the Consul at Recife is concerned over the food supply of the city; and request for instructions. |
436 |
| Oct. 15 (97) | From the Chargé in Brazil (tel.) Notification that several other ports have been temporarily closed by the Government to keep revolutionists from receiving munitions. |
436 |
| Oct. 15 (64) | To the Chargé in Brazil (tel.) Telegram sent to Consul at Pernambuco, October 14 (text printed), stating that the Department will not take steps to have U. S. ships call there if Brazilian authorities refuse to give them clearance for that port. |
437 |
| Oct. 17 (66) | To the Chargé in Brazil (tel.) Secretary’s statement to the press October 15 (text printed) giving notice that friendly relations with Brazil continue and that the Government of Brazil has a perfect right to buy munitions in the United States. |
437 |
| Oct. 17 (67) | To the Chargé in Brazil (tel.) Advice that the Pensacola will proceed down the coast of Brazil stopping at Pará, Pernambuco, and Bahia, and that the commander has been ordered to do nothing but get in touch with U. S. Consuls, make inquiries, and take off Americans if necessary. Advice that the Consuls at Pará, Pernambuco, and Bahia have been informed. |
437 |
| Oct. 17 (105) | From the Chargé in Brazil (tel.) Information that, in accordance with the contract between the two countries, the members of the American Naval Mission in Brazil are taking no part in the current operations. |
438 |
| Oct. 17 | From the Consul at Porto Alegre (tel.) Intention of the revolutionary government to suppress certain lighthouses. Report that U. S. lives and property are being respected and protected unusually well; request that Department issue statement to this effect in order to counteract statement to the contrary being attributed to the Consul. |
438 |
| Oct. 18 | From the Consul at Bahia (tel.) Report of tense situation and reasons why the arrival of the Pensacola will be glad news. |
439 |
| Oct. 18 (107) | From the Chargé in Brazil (tel.) Inquiry as to whether the Brazilian Government should be informed in the usual manner that the Pensacola will call at Pará, Pernambuco, and Bahia. |
439 |
| Oct. 18 | From the Consul General at São Paulo (tel.) Report of recent defeat which has left Government forces on the defensive; further report on military situation. |
439 |
| Oct. 18 | From the Consul at Bahia (tel.) Report that apparently revolutionists have invaded State of Bahia and that there are rumors of their early arrival in the city. |
440 |
| Oct. 18 (109) | From the Chargé in Brazil (tel.) Recommendation that the Pensacola proceed directly to Bahia in view of reports from there; information that the President has been urged by certain of his supporters to come to an agreement with the revolutionists but that he has refused. |
440 |
| Oct. 20 (69) | To the Chargé in Brazil (tel.) Instructions to inform Brazilian Government in the usual manner of the visit of the Pensacola. |
441 |
| Oct. 20 (70) | To the Chargé in Brazil (tel.) Approval of course of action outlined in telegram No. 105 of October 17. |
441 |
| Oct. 20 (71) | To the Chargé in Brazil (tel.) Information that, in reply to a request for instructions, the Consul at Pernambuco has been told to inform the local de facto government of the visit of the Pensacola but to omit official calls on the revolutionary authorities. |
441 |
| Oct. 20 | To the Consul at Porto Alegre (tel.) Advice that on October 18 the Secretary made the statement to the press requested in the Consul’s telegram of October 17. |
441 |
| Oct. 21 | From the Consul at Porto Alegre (tel.) Favorable arrangements made by revolutionary authorities for payment of all requisitions of U. S. property. |
442 |
| Oct. 21 (115) | From the Chargé in Brazil (tel.) Information that the German Consul at Bahia has reported the arrival of the British cruiser Delhi and that the German Minister has requested the Karlsruhe to stop at Bahia and has instructed it to get in touch with the Pensacola. |
442 |
| Oct. 22 (72) | To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Notification that at the request of the Brazilian Government the President has issued a proclamation prohibiting the export of arms and munitions of war to Brazil except under license of the Secretary. |
442 |
| Oct. 23 | Press Release Issued by the Department of
State Statement by the Secretary that the placing of the embargo is merely the usual action taken in accordance with general principles of international law and is not the expression of any personal bias. |
443 |
| Oct. 23 | From the Consul at Bahia (tel.) Report of rumor that Algoinhas has been captured; report that the British cruiser is at Bahia, that the German cruiser is outside, but that there is no news of the Pensacola. |
444 |
| Oct. 24 (122) | From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Information that Federal Government is losing control of the forts and barracks in Rio de Janeiro. |
444 |
| Oct. 24 (124) | From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Information that a military junta has taken over the government; advice that the Embassy has declined asylum to many applicants and will shelter no refugees. |
444 |
| Oct. 25 | From the Consul at Bahia (tel.) Arrival of the Pensacola October 24, 5 p.m. |
445 |
| Oct. 27 (131) | From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Communication from the junta, October 26 (text printed), giving notice of the deposition of President Washington Luis, the organization of the junta, and its intention to recognize all national obligations. |
445 |
| Oct. 28 | From the Consul at Porto Alegre (tel.) Advice that all lighthouses began to function again on October 27. |
445 |
| Oct. 31 | From the Consul at Porto Alegre (tel.) Information that the entrance to the port of Rio Grande, which had been obstructed by the revolutionists, has been officially reopened under compulsory pilotage. |
446 |
| Nov. 4 (139) | From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Report that the British Ambassador has inquired whether the Department is considering the question of recognizing the provisional government; comments on the situation. |
446 |
| Nov. 5 (141) | From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Receipt of note dated November 3 from the Foreign Ministry stating that the junta has delivered the administration of the country to Dr. Vargas as chief of the provisional government, and requesting U. S. recognition of the new government; request for instructions. |
446 |
| Nov. 5 (130) | From the Ambassador in Cuba (tel.) President Machado’s indication that Cuba desires to follow U. S. policy regarding recognition of new government in Brazil. |
447 |
| Nov. 5 (78) | To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Request for an appraisal of the present situation and for full and frank views and recommendations concerning recognition. |
447 |
| Nov. 5 (222) | From the Ambassador in Peru Report that the Peruvian junta accorded recognition to the Brazilian junta on November 1. |
448 |
| Nov. 6 (143) | From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Report of recognition by Chile, Portugal, and Uruguay, and of intention of Italy and Ecuador to do likewise. |
449 |
| Nov. 6 (79) | To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Advice from the British Ambassador that he is being instructed to say that the change in government will not cause any change in diplomatic relations between Great Britain and Brazil. |
449 |
| Nov. 7 (144) | From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Appraisal of situation as requested in Department’s No. 78 of November 5; conclusion that if by November 15 the situation is unaltered and is likely to remain so, recognition might be advantageous. |
450 |
| Nov. 7 (81) | To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Comments on views expressed in Ambassador’s No. 144 and inquiry as to whether Ambassador would be willing to advise that the de facto control of the present government is sufficiently complete for prompt recognition. |
450 |
| Undated [Rec’d Nov. 8] | From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Opinion that provisional government fully controls the country and is supported by the people and that it is not necessary to postpone recognition until after November 15. |
451 |
| Nov. 8 (82) | To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Instructions to state that the U. S. Government will be happy to continue with the new Government the same friendly relations as with its predecessors. Instruction to advise British, Colombian, and Cuban colleagues at once. |
451 |
| Nov. 8 (62) | To the Minister in Colombia (tel.) Notification of recognition of Brazilian Government. (Footnote: The same, mutatis mutandis, on the same date to the Ambassador in Cuba.) |
452 |
| Nov. 8 (83) | To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Instructions to inform the Foreign Minister that the United States is continuing the embargo under which the export of arms is prohibited except to the Government of Brazil, at the same time making clear that this action was not partisan in intent, but was required under the convention of February 20, 1928, which is now in force between the two countries. (Footnote: Information that the embargo was lifted on March 2, 1931, at the request of the Brazilian Embassy.) |
452 |
| Nov. 8 (132) | From the Minister in Colombia (tel.) Colombian recognition of Brazilian Government, November 8. |
453 |
| Nov. 8 (145) | From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Report that instructions in Department’s No. 82 of November 8 have been carried out in full. |
453 |
| Nov. 10 (146) | From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Information that Argentina, England, France, and the Vatican also extended recognition on November 8. |
453 |
| Nov. 11 (147) | From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Statement that action has been taken on Department’s No. 83 of November 8. |
453 |
Termination of Contract for American Naval Mission to Brazil, Signed July 6, 1926
| Date and number | Subject | Page |
| 1930 Oct. 21 (72) | From the Brazilian Ambassador Request that the United States renew the contract of the U. S. Naval Mission to Brazil for four more years. |
454 |
| Nov. 4 (140) | From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Desire of the provisional government that the U. S. Mission continue to operate after the end of the present contract, November 6, until the provisional government has had an opportunity to decide whether it wishes to renew the contract. |
455 |
| Nov. 5 (77) | To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Résumé of previous negotiations and conversations regarding the Naval Mission; statement that the United States is perfectly willing to have the Mission carry on until the provisional government has had an opportunity to reach a decision in the matter. |
455 |
| Nov. 14 (151) | From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Foreign Minister’s expression of his appreciation of the U. S. Government’s courtesy in allowing the Mission to remain until a decision can be made. |
457 |
| Nov. 18 (153) | From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Information that the Brazilian Government cannot renew the contract of the Naval Mission for financial reasons. |
457 |
| Nov. 20 (90) | To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Instructions to ascertain the views of Brazilian authorities and chief of Naval Mission and also to submit personal recommendations with regard to time necessary for closing official and personal business of Mission. |
457 |
| Nov. 25 (155) | From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Suggestion of January 31, 1931, as date for termination of Mission’s services. |
458 |
| Nov. 26 (91) | To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Approval of January 31 date. |
458 |
| Dec. 1 (158) | From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Desire that State and Navy Departments concur in recommendations made in despatch No. 3466, infra. |
458 |
| Dec. 1 (3466) | From the Ambassador in
Brazil Recommendation that the office of Naval Attaché be restored to the Embassy and that Lieutenant Commander Blandy be designated as Attaché. |
459 |
| Dec. 3 (94) | To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Disposition of the Departments concerned to comply with recommendations in No. 3466; desire, however, to await formal notification of Brazil’s disposition with reference to the Naval Mission. |
460 |
| Dec. 5 (3475) | From the Ambassador in Brazil Exchange of notes with the Foreign Minister, December 2–4 (texts printed), establishing formal provisions for the termination of the services of the U. S. Naval Mission on January 31, 1931. |
460 |
| Dec. 5 (162) | From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Belief that announcement of Lieutenant Commander Blandy’s appointment as Naval Attaché will have beneficial effect in Brazil. |
463 |
| Dec. 6 (95) | To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Advice by the Navy Department that Lieutenant Commander Blandy will be detailed to the Embassy February 1; instructions to inquire of Brazilian Government whether designation is agreeable. |
463 |
| Dec. 15 (167) | From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Report that Brazilian Government is agreeable to designation of Lieutenant Commander Blandy. |
463 |
| Dec. 15 (100) | To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Notification that Lieutenant Commander Blandy has been designated as Naval Attaché upon termination of Naval Mission; request that Foreign Office be informed. |
463 |
Good Offices of the Department of State on Behalf of the National City Bank in Securing Remission of Fine Imposed Upon Its São Paulo Branch
| Date and number | Subject | Page |
| 1930 Feb. 27 (6) | To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Information that the Brazilian Government intends to fine the São Paulo Branch of the National City Bank $3,000,000 for alleged illegal actions of their exchange man at São Paulo; instructions to report on situation and, unless objections are perceived, to present to authorities the Bank’s request for delay of notification of the fine. |
464 |
| Feb. 28 (5) | From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Verification of Department’s facts; and intention to use influence with Foreign Office to obtain postponement. |
465 |
| Feb. 28 (7) | To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Telegrams from Bank representatives, February 27 (texts printed), emphasizing need for action by Department, and reporting that Bank has been notified officially that it has 15 days to make deposit and defense. |
465 |
| Mar. 3 (8) | To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Instructions to investigate reported new order prohibiting the giving of guarantees instead of making a cash deposit, and to use good offices in the matter. |
466 |
| Mar. 4 (7) | From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Report that even informal diplomatic intervention would not be well received until the fine is deposited, after which it may be possible to obtain modification of the amount. |
466 |
| Mar. 5 (9) | To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Inquiry whether telegram No. 7, March 4, means that it is not possible to put up a bond instead of depositing securities or cash. |
466 |
| Mar. 6 (8) | From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Advice that matter of filing bond is yet under consideration. |
467 |
| Mar. 10 (11) | To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Desire of the Bank that efforts now be concentrated on obtaining permission for them to put up a guarantee rather than cash. |
467 |
| Mar. 11 (12) | To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Reasons why the Department considers that the fine has created a serious situation; reiteration of instructions to endeavor to obtain great reduction in amount with opportunity for Bank to file bond. |
467 |
| Mar. 11 (13) | To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Proposed method which the Bank requests be presented to the Brazilian Government for effecting payment of fine. |
468 |
| Mar. 12 (10) | From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Advice that the Foreign Minister understands the international feature of case and deplores precipitous action of bank examiner; request for friendly message which can be transmitted to the Foreign Minister. |
469 |
| Mar. 13 (14) | To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Instructions for the desired friendly message for the Foreign Minister. |
470 |
| Mar. 13 (11) | From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Foreign Minister’s assertion that U. S. good offices have succeeded in modifying attitude of Brazilian Government. |
471 |
| Apr. 1 (17) | To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Information that Bank reports that no progress is being made and feels that an informal inquiry by Ambassador would expedite matters. |
471 |
| Apr. 2 (14) | From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Assurance that Embassy is supporting the matter actively; opinion that it will be better if Bank does not press for immediate action. |
471 |
| Apr. 11 (20) | To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Instructions, if no objection is perceived, to assist Bank official in obtaining interview with President. |
472 |
| June 3 (39) | To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Report from Bank that papers regarding fine have been before the President for a month; authorization to make inquiry desired by Bank. |
472 |
| June 11 (33) | From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Action taken to promote rapid solution; suggestion that the Secretary discuss matter with Dr. Valle, Foreign Office official visiting in the United States. |
472 |
| June 14 (42) | To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Intention of Mr. Valle to cable Rio de Janeiro regarding the situation. |
473 |
| July 11 (41) | From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Advice from the President on July 10 that he had given orders to effect the cancelation of the entire fine. |
473 |
| July 24 (44) | From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Ministerial order canceling fine (extract printed). |
473 |
| July 24 (45) | From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.) Text of further provisions of the Ministerial order to the effect that the Bank shall be fined for an infringement of the stamp tax and that there shall be an investigation of an irregularity of functional procedure on the part of the broker of public funds. |
474 |
| July 25 | From the National City Bank of New York (tel.) Expression of appreciation for cooperation given. |
474 |
Arrangement Between the United States and Brazil Granting Relief From Double Income Tax on Shipping Profits
| Date and number | Subject | Page |
| 1929 Mar. 5 (1419) | From the American Ambassador in Brazil to the
Brazilian Minister for Foreign Affairs Request that vessels operated by the United States Shipping Board be exempt from payment of Brazilian income tax, since U. S. revenue laws seem to meet the requirements of Brazil’s Executive Decree No. 5,623 of December 29, 1928. |
475 |
| May 31 (NC/56) | From the Brazilian Minister for Foreign Affairs to
the American Ambassador in Brazil Letter from the Brazilian Finance Minister, May 29 (text printed), explaining that it will be sufficient for the Foreign Ministry to inform the Finance Ministry that the necessary law exists; information that the required action has been taken. |
476 |
| Sept. 17 (1467) | From the American Chargé in Brazil to the Brazilian
Minister for Foreign Affairs Request for information concerning certain points in regard to the exemption of U. S. navigation companies from Brazilian income tax. |
477 |
| 1930 Mar. 11 (NC/15) | From the Brazilian Minister for Foreign Affairs to
the American Ambassador in Brazil Information requested in the Chargé’s note No. 1467 of September 17, 1929—including statement that no income tax has been collected from U. S. vessels since December 29, 1928. |
478 |
| Aug. 21 (1526) | From the American Ambassador in Brazil to the
Brazilian Minister for Foreign Affairs Advice that as of January 1, 1929, Brazilian ships are not subject to U. S. income tax. |
478 |
| Sept, 1 (NC/72) | From the Director of Commercial and Consular Affairs
in the Brazilian Ministry of Foreign Affairs to the American
Ambassador in Brazil Expression of appreciation of Ambassador’s note No. 1526, of August 21. |
479 |
Representations Against Brazilian Policy of Requiring Brazilians of Dual Nationality To Use Brazilian Passports on Leaving Brazil
| Date and number | Subject | Page |
| 1930 Apr. 1 (462) | From the Consul General at Rio de
Janeiro Notice published by the British Consuls General at Rio de Janeiro and São Paulo (text printed) to the effect that Brazilian officials will no longer visa the British passports of persons of dual British and Brazilian nationality and that such persons will have to enter and leave Brazil on Brazilian passports. Opinion that this precedent may affect U. S. citizens. |
479 |
| Apr. 11 (471) | From the Consul General at Rio de
Janeiro Report that a case has arisen in which the Brazilian authorities refused to visa the U. S. passport of a U. S. citizen with dual nationality, and that the matter was taken up with the police, who ordered that the U. S. passport be visaed. |
480 |
| June 12 | To the Consul at Bahia Transmittal of despatches Nos. 462 and 471 from the Consul General at Rio de Janeiro and instruction to follow a procedure similar to that mentioned in No. 471 should similar cases arise. (Footnote: The same, mutatis mutandis, to the Consuls at Pará, Pernambuco, Porto Alegre, Santos, and São Paulo.) |
481 |
| June 12 (1541) | To the Ambassador in Brazil Transmittal of despatches Nos. 462 and 471 from the Consul General at Rio de Janeiro and instructions to take up the matter with the Brazilian Government. |
482 |
| July 23 (3387) | From the Ambassador in Brazil Information that the Foreign Office has instructed the Brazilian Ambassador to confer with the Department concerning the status of children born in Brazil of U. S. citizens; recommendation that, pending the solution of this matter, cases be referred to the Embassy instead of the police. |
482 |
| Aug. 30 (1562) | To the Ambassador in Brazil Advice that U. S. Consuls in Brazil are being instructed to take up such cases with the Embassy in the future. |
483 |
| Aug. 25 (58) | From the Brazilian Ambassador Explanation of the viewpoint of Brazil concerning passports issued to persons of dual nationality; belief that proper directions may be issued for the adjustment of the interests of bearers of American passports who are also citizens of Brazil. (Footnote: Information that a memorandum of the Solicitor’s office, dated October 10, stated that in view of the outbreak of revolution in Brazil it was an inopportune time to take up the matter again.) |
484 |
| Sept. 3 (3414) | From the Chargé in Brazil Information that it has been possible to secure police visas on the U. S. passports of several persons with dual nationality, but that it has been impossible to obtain action in the case of several minors. |
485 |
BULGARIA
Instructions to the Minister in Bulgaria to Refrain From Associating With His Colleagues in Giving Advice to the Bulgarian Government
| Date and number | Subject | Page |
| 1930 June 13 (11) | To the Minister in Bulgaria Instructions to refrain from associating with the British, French, and Italian representatives in giving friendly advice to Bulgaria concerning domestic affairs or relations with other European governments. |
486 |
CANADA
Proposed Convention Between the United States and Canada to Amend the Convention for the Suppression of Smuggling, Signed June 6, 1924
| Date and number | Subject | Page |
| 1930 Mar. 22 (1343) | From the Chargé in Canada Canadian note (text printed) with regard to measures under consideration for further control of smuggling operations, explaining that a bill has been introduced into the House of Commons to amend the Export Act as regards liquor, and suggesting the conclusion of a treaty with United States to amend the convention of June 6, 1924. |
488 |
| Apr. 1 (40) | To the Chargé in Canada (tel.) Note for the Canadian Government (text printed) expressing U. S. readiness to conclude a treaty amending the treaty of June 6, 1924, and stating that the U. S. Government hopes to submit a draft within a few days. |
490 |
| Apr. 4 (52) | From the Chargé in Canada (tel.) Information that Canadian Government is also preparing a draft treaty. |
490 |
| Apr. 10 (58) | From the Chargé in Canada (tel.) Report that Canadian draft will be ready about April 16; Canadian inquiry whether it would be convenient to have signature take place at Ottawa. |
491 |
| Apr. 16 (819) | To the Chargé in Canada Draft of convention (text printed), and information that full powers will be forwarded later. |
491 |
| May 22 (1428) | From the Chargé in Canada Canadian counterproposals and counterdraft of convention (texts printed). |
494 |
| June 4 (1443) | From the Chargé in Canada Report that the bill to amend the Export Act has now become law. |
500 |
| Sept. 17 (19) | To the Minister in Canada Proposed changes in language of certain articles in Canadian draft. |
500 |
| Oct. 6 (61) | From the Minister in Canada Conversation with the Under Secretary of State for External Affairs, who stated that no reply could be made to U. S. suggestions until the Government had an opportunity to give further study to the whole matter. |
502 |
| Oct. 25 (86) | From the Minister in Canada Receipt of a note from the Acting Secretary of State for External Affairs to the effect that U. S. suggestions are receiving careful consideration and that Canadian views will be expressed at an early date. |
503 |
Convention Between the United States and Canada for the Protection of the Fraser River Sockeye Salmon Fisheries, Signed May 26, 1930
| Date and number | Subject | Page |
| 1930 May 29 | To President Hoover Presentation to the President for transmittal to the Senate of a convention in substitution for the one sent to the Senate by the President on April 18, 1929, and returned to the President by the Senate by Resolution of December 13, 1929; explanation of points of difference. |
504 |
| May 26 | Convention Between the United States of America and
Canada Text of convention signed at Washington. |
505 |
| [Note: Text of protocol of exchange of ratifications, signed at Washington July 28, 1937.] | 512 |
Convention Between the United States and Canada for the Preservation of the Halibut Fishery of the Northern Pacific Ocean and Bering Sea, Signed May 9, 1930
| Date and number | Subject | Page |
| 1930 Mar. 6 (793) | To the Chargé in Canada Proposals for the revision of the Canadian draft of the halibut convention; instructions to present them to the Canadian Government along with a copy of the revised draft convention. |
513 |
| Apr. 17 (1380) | From the Chargé in Canada Canadian note, April 16 (text printed), stating that Canada is prepared to accept the U. S. draft with two minor changes. |
517 |
| May 7 (70) | From the Chargé in Canada (tel.) Slight change desired by Canadian Government; request for instructions. |
518 |
| May 8 (55) | To the Chargé in Canada (tel.) Advice that proposed change is acceptable; instructions to notify Department immediately of date and hour of signature, in order that statement may be given to press. |
518 |
| May 9 | Convention Between the United States of America and
Canada Text of convention signed at Ottawa. |
518 |
Project for Improvement of the St. Lawrence Waterway by Joint Action of the United States and Canada
| Date and number | Subject | Page |
| 1929 Mar. 1 (33) | From the Canadian Minister Information that the Canadian Government has invited the Governments of the Provinces of Ontario and Quebec to take part in a conference on the problem of the St. Lawrence development. |
522 |
| Apr. 15 | From the Minister in Canada Information that the Minister is still urging the appointment of commissioners with a view to the formulation of a convention for the St. Lawrence project. Conversation with the Prime Minister, who said that the conference with the Premiers of Quebec and Ontario would take place in May, and intimated that after the conference he would be in a position to agree to the appointment of the commissioners; request for approval of line of action. |
523 |
| Apr. 19 | To the Minister in Canada Approval of line of action. |
524 |
| Sept. 23 (1138) | From the Minister in Canada Report that the conference with the Premiers will probably be postponed until November and that the Canadian Government has inquired whether the United States would allow Canada to improve the channel from Lake Ontario to Prescott on both sides with the understanding that the United States will reimburse Canada at some future date; suggestion that the Department might say that it prefers to have the benefit of the judgment of the commission before undertaking any piecemeal improvements. |
524 |
| Oct. 25 (104) | To the Minister in Canada (tel.) Instructions to suggest to the Prime Minister that the commissioners be appointed, and to say to him that if the commissioners recommend the immediate improvement of the section proposed by Canada, the President will recommend to Congress that an appropriation be voted to carry out the works in U. S. waters. |
527 |
| Nov. 15 (222) | From the Minister in Canada (tel.) Informal conversation with the Minister of Public Works, in which the latter stated that if the United States could not agree to the reimbursement plan, Canada would certainly be permitted to do the improvement without reimbursement; request for instructions before taking the matter up formally with the Prime Minister. |
529 |
| Nov. 25 (230) | From the Minister in Canada (tel.) Presentation to Prime Minister of substance of Department’s No. 104, October 25; Prime Minister’s statement that he is arranging for the conference of Premiers in December, and his opinion, with regard to the appointment of commissioners, that it might be better to have the work done by the International Joint Commission. |
530 |
| Dec. 3 (233) | From the Minister in Canada (tel.) Information from Prime Minister that conference of Premiers cannot be held before January. |
530 |
| 1930 June 28 (130) | From the Canadian Chargé Transmittal of report on the international rapids section of the St. Lawrence by the Canadian members of the Joint Board of Engineers and the engineers representing Ontario; statement that the Canadian members of the Joint Board of Engineers are prepared to participate in further consideration of the engineering problems of this section. |
531 |
| July 9 | To the Canadian Chargé Suggestion that the Canadian Government indicate a date on which it would be convenient for the Joint Board of Engineers to convene. |
531 |
| Aug. 26 (1) | To the Minister in Canada Note for the Secretary of State for External Affairs (text printed) inquiring whether Canada is now in a position to appoint commissioners to discuss the St. Lawrence seaway and formulate an appropriate treaty. |
532 |
| Sept. 11 (31) | From the Minister in Canada Note from the Secretary of State for External Affairs, September 10 (text printed), stating that it will not be possible to deal comprehensively with the St. Lawrence question at present, but that it will be taken up again after the Imperial Conference set for September 30. |
532 |
Aviation Radio Conference Between Representatives of the United States and Canada, Held at New York, April 10–11, 1930
| Date and number | Subject | Page |
| 1930 Mar. 29 (38) | To the Chargé in Canada (tel.) Information that Federal Radio Commission suggests that a conference regarding aviation radio communication be held at New York between Canadian and U. S. representatives on or before April 10; instructions to ascertain whether Canada will agree to proposed conference. |
533 |
| Apr. 5 (53) | From the Chargé in Canada (tel.) Notification that Canada has agreed to proposed conference. |
534 |
| Apr. 15 | From the Chairman of the American
Delegation Names of U. S. and Canadian delegates, and report on the conference. |
534 |
| Undated | Minutes of Informal Canadian-United States
Conference Text of minutes of the two meetings of the conference on aviation radio held at U. S. Customs House, New York City, April 10 and 11. |
535 |
| June 19 (71) | From the Canadian Secretary of State for External
Affairs to the American Chargé in Canada Information that Canada is prepared to accept the recommendations of the conference. |
541 |
| Aug. 18 (804) | From the American Chargé in Canada to the Canadian
Secretary of State for External Affairs Advice that the U. S. Federal Radio Commission has adopted the recommendations of the conference. |
542 |
CHILE
Convention Between the United States and Chile for Prevention of Smuggling of Intoxicating Liquors, Signed May 27, 1930
| Date and number | Subject | Page |
| 1930 Feb. 17 (12) | From the Chilean Ambassador Inquiry as to whether the U. S. Government is disposed to sign with Chile a convention for the prevention of smuggling of intoxicating liquors which will permit Chilean vessels carrying such liquors to call at U. S. ports. |
543 |
| May 23 | To the Chilean Ambassador Advice that the United States will be glad to conclude such a treaty with Chile; submittal of draft treaty for consideration. |
543 |
| May 26 (40) | From the Chilean Ambassador Receipt of instructions to sign the proposed treaty. |
544 |
| May 27 | Convention Between the United States of America and
Chile Text of convention signed at Washington. |
545 |