411.12/1063
The Ambassador in Mexico (Morrow) to
the Secretary of State
Mexico, August 7, 1930.
[Received, August
14.]
No. 2678
Sir: I have the honor to transmit herewith a
memorandum prepared by Mr. Lane of this Embassy with respect to remarks
made in my presence by the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Señor Genaro
Estrada,
[Page 497]
giving his views in
regard to the non-functioning of the Special Claims Commission, United
States and Mexico.
In view of Mr. Estrada’s statements, the importance of an en bloc
settlement being reached prior to the expiration of the life of the
existing General and Special Claims Conventions28a should be
emphasized.
Respectfully yours,
[Enclosure]
Memorandum by the Counselor of Embassy (Lane)
At a dinner at the Ambassador’s residence in Cuernavaca on July 27th,
Señor Genaro Estrada, Minister for Foreign Affairs, inquired of the
Ambassador: “Why does the Government of the United States object to
the Special Claims Commission’s meeting?”
The Ambassador having requested me to answer the question, I said
frankly that if the Special Claims Commission should meet in Mexico
and if the American Agent made no attempt to re-open the Santa
Isabel case,29 it would be very difficult for the
United States Government to answer to the claimants and their
representatives. These claimants considered that their claim was one
of the most valid of those presented by the United States. What
excuse could the United States give to them for not endeavoring to
re-open the case? On the other hand, I said, if the Commission
should meet and attempt to re-open the Santa Isabel case, at a time
when other negotiations with Mexico are pending, Mr. Estrada knew as
well, if not better, than we what the result would be.
Mr. Estrada then said that in August, 1931, when the life of the
existing Special Claims Commission would expire, at which time the
United States Government would probably propose that the Convention
be re-extended, what excuse could he make to Congress in requesting
an appropriation to carry the personnel and officers of the
Commission, when the Commission had virtually not been functioning
since the early part of 1926? Mr. Estrada said that, of course, if
the United States wished the Special Claims Commission to function,
that would be another matter, but he did not see how he could
justify asking for additional appropriations, or even an extension
of the Convention, when such an extension was merely a meaningless
formality.
It was then suggested that this situation would be taken care of if
an en bloc settlement of claims were arrived at.
Arthur Bliss Lane
Mexico, August 7, 1930.
