The Secretary of State to the Minister in Finland (Brodie)
Sir: The receipt is acknowledged of your despatch No. 774 of August 3, 1932,3 reporting the willingness of the Finnish Government to conclude a military service agreement containing the following article:
“A person born or naturalized in the territory of one party of parents who are nationals of the other party, and having the nationality of both parties under their laws, shall not, if he has his habitual residence, that is, the place of his general abode, in the territory of the State of his birth be held liable for military service or any other act of allegiance during a temporary stay in the territory of the other party.
“Provided, that if such stay is protracted beyond the period of two years, it shall be presumed to be permanent, in the absence of sufficient evidence showing that return to the territory of the other party will take place within a short time.”
At the time you discussed this matter with the Director of Juridical Affairs of the Finnish Foreign Office, you were not in receipt of the Department’s instruction of August 2, 1932, submitting a revised draft.
With respect to the Finnish counter-proposal above mentioned, the Department considers it confusing to incorporate in a single paragraph provisions relating both to persons born with dual nationality and to naturalized persons. It is not entirely clear from the Finnish counterproposal what would be the nature of the exemption from military service of naturalized persons.
You are, therefore, requested to present to the Finnish Foreign Office the draft submitted with the Department’s instruction of August 2, 1932, and to request further consideration of the proposals relating to the exemption from military service of naturalized persons.
Very truly yours,
- Not printed.↩