511.4A6/395: Telegram
The Minister in Switzerland (Wilson) to the Acting Secretary of State
[Received July 14—4:55 p.m.]
89. Your 22, July 13, 5 p.m., to Caldwell. Under reserve of my lack of technical knowledge on this subject I submit certain considerations in favor of immediate signature. From personal conversation with representative of the manufacturers of the United States I know that the document is highly satisfactory to them. I learn indirectly and from unofficial sources that it is regarded as a great advance over existing agreements by unofficial Americans, keenly interested in the subject, now in Geneva. In its essence the treaty embodies largely our views and, such modifications therefrom as exist, are relatively unimportant but were essential in the give and take of multilateral negotiations. Twenty-eight states including all great states of the [Page 672] world with the exception of ourselves have already signed and undue delay on our part might have the effect of influencing certain smaller states that have not yet signed to withhold their signature, particularly certain Latin American states and China which have repeatedly indicated during the negotiations their desire to act in accordance with us in this matter.
I have gone through the treaty with Caldwell and after this conversation submit for your consideration certain thoughts.
- 1.
- Article 14, paragraph 3, section 2 should be read with care as well as the paragraphs in reference in the Geneva Convention. An analogous though not identical type of supervision is envisaged in the Permanent Disarmament Commission in the draft convention for the limitation of armaments. The pertinent paragraphs in the Geneva Convention would appear to confer on us certain rights of appeal to the Council of the League which the American Government could exercise or not as it saw fit but does not seem to put us under any obligation to consult the Council. Action by the Senate on the Narcotics Treaty would furnish a valuable guide for the negotiations on disarmament in 1932.
- 2.
- Final Act, paragraph 4. While our present system has certain of the attributes of a state monopoly, in view of the general American attitude towards monopolies, you may desire our delegates on signing to make some reference to this matter.