711.00 Statement July 16, 1937/157

The Chargé in Hungary (Travers) to the Secretary of State

No. 762

Sir: I have the honor to refer to the Department’s circular telegram of July 17, 5 [2] p.m. instructing the Legation to communicate to the Hungarian Foreign Office the statement made by the Secretary on July 16th. The Foreign Minister was out of town at the time that the Department’s telegram was received, but I saw the Acting Chief of the Political Section on Monday, July 19th, and left with him an Aide-Mémoire, copy of which is enclosed herewith.39 The written reply from the Foreign Office was received on July 24th and was forwarded to the Department through London by the Legation’s telegram No. 36 of July 24, 10 p.m. [a.m.]39

On July 21st Professor Francis Déak, a Hungarian subject who is a professor in the School of Law at Columbia University, had a long conversation with the Foreign Minister, at which time the Secretary’s statement was rather fully discussed. The Foreign Minister, after showing Professor Déak a copy of the Aide-Mémoire, asked his opinion regarding the significance of the following sentence:

“There can be no serious hostilities anywhere in the world which will not one way or another affect interests or rights or obligations of this country.”

The Foreign Minister prefaced his remarks to Déak by saying that he understood the foreign policy of most European countries, but that he sometimes failed to understand the policies enunciated by Great Britain and by the United States. He then asked Déak if he thought that the above-quoted sentence meant that the United States was prepared to enter into international consultation on questions which might be considered to affect the interests, rights, or obligations of that country. The Foreign Minister said that he realized that the United [Page 718] States was a party to the Kellogg Pact,40 but he looked upon the Kellogg Pact as merely an expression of policy and did not see that it embodied any means or methods for implementing its provisions. Déak agreed with de Kánya with respect to the Kellogg Pact, but pointed out to him that the United States was also a party to the Anti-War Treaty on Non-Aggression and Conciliation signed at Rio de Janeiro on October 10, 1933.41 Déak stated that he was of course not in a position to state what was in the mind of the Secretary of State when he wrote the above-quoted sentence, but he did believe that it was a sincere expression of American policy and that at least Mr. Hull, as Secretary of State, would be prepared to enter into any international consultations which might be expected to assist in the maintenance of world peace.

Mr. de Kánya asked if Déak thought that the United States would protest if Hungary were occupied by foreign forces and if the United States would be prepared to enter into any consultation which might take place as a result of such occupation and protest. Déak reiterated his belief that the statement of the Secretary of State was absolutely sincere and said that the United States would go at least as far in Central Europe as it had gone in the Manchurian and the Abyssinian affairs.42 He told the Foreign Minister, however, that he was perfectly sure that the United States would not send a single gunboat or soldier to Central Europe in such an eventuality as that mentioned by the Foreign Minister.

I asked Professor Déak if he gained any impression that Mr. de Kánya had consulted the Italian, German, or any other foreign Government before sending his comments on the Secretary’s statement. Déak answered in the negative.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

On July 24th Professor Déak went to see Count Stephen Bethlen,43 who also discussed the Secretary’s statement. Count Bethlen had before him a full copy of the statement which had been sent to him by the Foreign Office. Although he did not say so to Déak, it is also probable that Count Bethlen had been consulted by Mr. de Kánya with regard to the Hungarian Government’s reply as Count Bethlen had spent several hours with Mr. de Kánya on July 22nd. Count Bethlen made brief reference to the contents of the statement in his conversation with Déak and he, too, stressed the importance of the [Page 719] sentence regarding the effects on American interests, rights, and obligations of serious hostilities in any part of the world. Count Bethlen asked Déak particularly with regard to the significance of the word “obligations” which, he said, was unusual in statements of this nature made by American statesmen since the World War.

The local papers published the Secretary’s statement in full on July 17th under headlines which gave the impression that the statement was intended to apply only to the Far East. No mention was made of the fact that the Secretary had denominated it as being of world-wide application.

Respectfully yours,

Howard K. Travers
  1. Not printed.
  2. Not printed.
  3. Treaty for the Renunciation of War, signed at Paris, August 27, 1928, Foreign Relations, 1928, Vol. i, p. 153.
  4. Foreign Relations, 1933, Vol. iv, p. 234.
  5. See respectively “The Far Eastern Crisis”, Foreign Relations, 1931, Vol. iii, pp. 1 ff., ibid., 1932, Vol. iii, pp. 1 ff., and Vol. iv, pp. 1 ff.; “Ethiopian-Italian Conflict”, ibid., 1935, Vol. i, pp. 594 ff., and ibid., 1936, Vol. iii, pp. 34 ff.
  6. Hungarian political leader, and Premier April 14, 1921–August 19, 1931.