812.52 Agrarian Commission/160: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Ambassador in Mexico ( Daniels )
185. For Lawson. Your air mail letter June 10.21 In view of considerations mentioned in paragraphs 3 and 5 of your letter, the Department suggests following course of action with respect to the 90 claims referred to therein, unless you perceive objection.[Page 962]
- First. Following claims to be excluded from en bloc negotiations:
- Six claims withdrawn.
- Fifty-seven claims in which expropriation not established.
- Eleven claims in which American citizenship not established.
- Six claims in which claimant’s interest not established.
- Second. The following suggestions are submitted concerning five
cases classified as outside Commission’s jurisdiction:
- British owned claim should be excluded unless some American interest, other than mere American incorporation is apparent.
- Dual nationality claims should be excluded.
- Cases involving expropriation prior to August 30, 1927 should be excluded unless property expropriated subsequent to September 8, 1923, in which event request should be made to include. However it is not believed we can properly insist upon inclusion.
- Third: In connection with duplicates of claims filed with the General Claims Commission, attention is invited to the fact that on June 14, 1939, an official of the Department, in response to a request by the Mexican Ambassador that we refrain from refiling agrarian claims already filed general, orally stated to the Ambassador that this Government’s position was that it would not present to the Agrarian Commission claims already filed with the General Claims Commission provided (1) that, as was understood to be the case, the Mexican Government took the position that a provisional expropriation gave rise to a claim against Mexico within the jurisdiction of and subject to settlement by the Agrarian Commission, and (2) provided further that that Government also would take the position that the same considerations apply with respect to claims filed with the General Claims Commission involving provisional expropriations prior to August 30, 1927. If Serrano is prepared to give written assurances on both of those points, the four duplicate claims to which you refer may be excluded. In the absence of such assurances you should endeavor to have these four claims included in en bloc negotiations if final expropriation decrees in those cases were issued subsequent to August 30, 1927.
- Fourth. In the absence of information as to what is meant by term “apparent abandonment of claim”, the status of one claim so classified as D is not clear.
- Fifth. It is suggested that all cases excluded by you and Serrano, as being without merit, be separately listed and jointly disallowed by you and him. Those excluded on jurisdictional grounds, in which there is an American interest, should be reserved for later presentation as diplomatic claims. Reservation should also be sought for protection of claimants in those cases, if any, where the claimants have not in your judgment had a reasonable time in which to perfect their claims.
- Not printed.↩