Office of the Historian

783.003/209: Telegram

The Secretary of State to the Chairman of the American Delegation (Fish)

Washington, April 23, 1937—noon.

2. Your No. 1, April 21, 7 p.m.

1.
You will bear in mind that, in view of the present attitude of Congress respecting the World Court, any provision in the Convention [Page 643] involving this Government in World Court procedure might compromise the Convention in obtaining the advice and consent of the Senate to its ratification.
2.
The text of the substitute proposal contained in the final paragraph of your telegram under reference is objectionable for the reason that, in the event of the lapsing of our Arbitration Treaty with Egypt, disputes involving the United States would, according to your proposal, be submitted to the World Court.
3.
Your proposal would, however, be acceptable to the Department with modifications as follows:

“If any of the high contracting parties has a present existing treaty of arbitration with Egypt providing for another tribunal, this tribunal shall, during the life of this Convention, be substituted for the Permanent Court of International Justice for the purposes of this Article, even though such treaty of arbitration may cease to exist for other purposes.”

4.
The Department would likewise be willing to accept as an alternative the text of Article 9 of the draft Convention as set forth in the first paragraph of your telegram under reference, provided it be expanded to contain the following provision:

“In the case, however, of a dispute involving a High Contracting Party which has, prior to the signature of this Convention, declined to ratify the Protocol of December 16, 1920, relating to the statute of the Permanent Court of International Justice, and which is unwilling to submit to the jurisdiction of that Court, such dispute shall be submitted to an arbitral tribunal constituted in accordance with the Hague Convention of October 18, 1907, for the pacific settlement of international disputes.”

5.
The Department assumes that either of the above proposals would meet the objections of the British Delegation to your original proposal based on Article 25 of the Narcotics Convention of July 13, 1931.
Hull