411.12/1790: Telegram
The Acting Secretary of State to the Ambassador in Mexico (Daniels)
60. Your cable 49 April 19, noon. Your air mail despatch No. 133697 has not been received. Taking as a basis for comment draft of Convention transmitted with instruction No. 321 of April 11, Department understands the very best you are able to obtain from the Mexican Government is a Convention in that general form but subject to the following:
First. Elimination of last sentence of paragraph 1 of Article I, on page 2.
Second. The elimination of paragraph “First” of Article IV, page 3, with respect to “claims withdrawn” as a concession to United States for the elimination of the above mentioned sentence from Article I.
Third. Paragraph 4 of Article IV to be left as in the above mentioned draft Convention with the word “prejudice” in sixth line, page 4, changed to “prejudge” and the following sentence added to the Article:
“In the latter event, the claims improperly eliminated in the opinion of the Commissioners or Umpire, shall be settled and adjusted by the same en bloc procedure prescribed by this Convention for all claims registered with the Special Commission.”
Fourth. All other articles to be left as indicated in the above mentioned draft Convention.
This Government interprets paragraph 4 of Article IV, including the added sentence quoted above, as meaning that if a particular claim [Page 465] is improperly classified by the Joint Committee as a general claim, the General Claims Commissioners or Umpire may in their judgment determine it to be a special claim rather than a general claim, without adjudicating it upon the merits, in which event the total amount claimed in that particular case shall be added to the total of all special claims for the purpose of computing the total special claims liability of the Mexican Government.
In this situation, with the foregoing interpretation of Article IV, which should be confirmed with the Foreign Office; and in view of the circumstances explained and the opinion expressed in your cable No. 49 of April 19, you are authorized to sign the Convention on these terms.
This authorization is given with reluctance principally because it is not felt that in these terms the Convention fully embodies the principle of equality of treatment which it has been understood would be accorded to the United States, and because in its present form it involves unnecessary complications of procedure requiring the pleading of certain cases twice under different circumstances for the purpose of obtaining one adjudication on the merits.
It is believed, however, that the real necessity for progress in the settlement of these long deferred matters justifies this authorization as representing apparently the least sacrifice possible, under the circumstances.
- Not printed.↩