793.94Advisory Committee/46
The Secretary of State to the
Chargé in Switzerland (Riggs)
No. 2319
Washington, September 20, 1933.
Sir: Referring to the Department’s telegram No.
119, July 19, noon, to Minister Wilson at Geneva, and to Minister Wilson’s
telegrams from Geneva No. 203, July 22, 6 p.m., and No. 205, July 24, 11
a.m.,46 there is
enclosed a copy of a letter addressed by the Secretary-General of the League
of Nations to the Secretary of State under date June 1247 enclosing a copy
of a circular relating to the measures involved by the non-recognition of
“Manchukuo” drawn up by the Advisory Committee of the League of Nations; and
there is also enclosed the original and a copy of the American Government’s
reply to the Secretary-General’s communication.
Upon Minister Wilson’s return, it is desired that you bring this matter to
his attention. Unless he perceives substantial reason for proceeding
otherwise, in which case he should at once explain to the Department by
telegram, he should transmit to the Secretary-General of the League the
original of the American Government’s reply. In so doing he should inform
the Secretary-General that this Government requests that the text of its
reply be not made public or circularized
[Page 122]
among the states members of the League without first
obtaining the assent of this Government to such action; but that this
Government would have no objection to the Secretary-General’s disclosing in
confidence to the Advisory Committee the text of the American Government’s
reply.
Very truly yours,
[Enclosure]
The Secretary of State to
the Secretary General of the League of Nations (Avenol)
Washington, September 20, 1933.
Sir: I acknowledge the receipt of your
predecessor’s letter of June 12, 1933, enclosing a copy of the circular
relating to the measures involved by the non-recognition of “Manchukuo”,
drawn up by the Advisory Committee appointed by the Assembly of the
League of Nations to follow the situation in the Far East. This letter
expresses, under instruction of the Committee, the hope that the
American Government, exercising the independence of judgment that it has
reserved with regard to action which the Committee may recommend, will
declare its agreement to the measures which, for the purpose of giving
effect to the principle of non-recognition, this circular recommends to
the various Governments concerned.
In reply I am happy to inform you that the views of the American
Government with regard to the principle of non-recognition remain
unchanged and that the American Government concurs in general in the
conclusions arrived at by the Advisory Committee.
With regard, however, to the Advisory Committee’s suggestions on the
subject of accessions to “Open Conventions”, the American Government is
of the opinion that the procedure suggested is not under existing
circumstances essential and is open to objection from point of view both
of practicability and of policy. The American Government therefore
purposes, in so far as there are concerned “Open Conventions” for which
this Government may receive applications for accession, merely to file
such applications without acknowledgment or further action.
Also, on the subject of the procedure to be followed in reference to the
control of the traffic in narcotic drugs, the American Government finds
its views not altogether in accord with the recommendations of the
Advisory Committee. It is noted that the Committee in making its
recommendations has considered the Geneva Opium Convention of 1925.48 The American
Government is not a party to that Convention. The American Government
does, however, apply a system of import and export certificates similar
to the system prescribed under that
[Page 123]
Convention. American law prohibits the exportation
from the United States or its territories of “any narcotic drug to any
other country” unless the importing country has become a party to the
Hague Opium Convention of 1912 and its Final Protocol49 and has adopted the
safeguards prescribed by that Convention. Hence, the Advisory
Committee’s recommendations in this connection cannot under existing
laws be adopted by the United States. Furthermore, it is conceived that
acceptance in any way of an import certificate issued by “Manchukuo” as
the basis for exporting narcotics to Manchuria might readily be
construed as an implication of recognition.
The basic international convention relating to the control of the traffic
in narcotic drugs is the Hague Convention of 1912, to which the American
Government and most of the Governments members of the League are
parties. It would seem that the provisions of the Hague Convention were
not considered by the Advisory Committee, and the American Government
doubts whether the procedure suggested by the Advisory Committee would
be in conformity with that Convention.
Except for these points, the American Government believes that it will be
readily possible for it to proceed in substantial accordance with the
recommendations formulated by the Advisory Committee.
Accept [etc.]
