740.00111A.R.–N.C./86: Telegram
The Ambassador in Brazil (Caffery) to the Secretary of State
[Received 11:20 a.m.]
165. From Fenwick for the Under Secretary. Suggestion that I made last week, namely, that Government set aside certain mail and guarantee to the belligerents that it contains no contraband and then insist upon complete inviolability now meeting favorable response [Page 297] from Committee. Idea would be to set up an optional system by which businessmen wishing to keep their correspondence from being read by belligerents would have it certified by their Government as not containing bank notes, checks, or other forms of contraband that might be sent in sealed letters. A fee might be charged for this service to prevent post office from being burdened. No question of admitting legality of search by belligerents of other mail but this guaranteed mail could be assured complete inviolability. Please inform me if the Department is adhering to the position of Secretary Lansing taken during the World War. Department’s note of January 2,56 suggests that Lansing’s position was not being followed. British reply of January 1757 cites Lansing’s position and our own war practice. Neutrality Committee is still divided as to whether to insist upon absolute inviolability in all cases except parcel post or to recognize the facts of World War practice and present practice. Committee’s recommendation would not in any case embarrass the Department but the Department’s views would be helpful to me if they can be stated. [Fenwick.]
- For text of note, see telegram No. 1664, December 22, 1939, 9 p.m., to the Chargé in the United Kingdom, Foreign Relations, 1939, vol. ii, p. 270.↩
- See telegram No. 146, January 17, 1940, noon, from the Chargé in the United Kingdom, ibid., 1940, vol. iii, p. 79↩