740.00111A.R.–N.C./153½
The American Member of the Inter-American Neutrality Committee (Fenwick) to the Under Secretary of State (Welles)
[Received December 2.]
Dear Mr. Welles: Many thanks for your letter of November 1st and the encouragement it gives me to continue with the work of the Committee.
May I submit a brief report of our proceedings to date?
At the opening session of the Committee on November 13, which was attended by the Argentine, Mexican13 and Chilean members in addition to the Chairman and myself, sub-committees were appointed to deal with the two important tasks assigned to us by the Havana Meeting, namely, the preparation of a preliminary draft convention on the Security Zone and the preparation of a draft convention on the law of neutrality.
In connection with the draft convention on the law of neutrality, obviously a task running over several years, I thought it well to start things going by introducing into the minutes an “analytical draft” of a project which I had prepared in advance. The object of this analytical draft is merely to serve as a guide to our studies on the subject. It does no more than outline in a general way the topics to be considered, without in any way suggesting solutions. I enclose a copy of it,14 with emphasis upon the fact that it is merely a preliminary survey.
Within a few weeks I shall follow up this survey draft with a more detailed draft upon specific topics. These specific topics can then be assigned for study and report to the individual members of the Committee. For the moment everyone is disposed to have me do as much of the work as I am willing to do; to which I have no objection, in as much as it enables me to organize the work in a way that I think will prove most effective.
You know the climate down here at this season, already 90° and 10° more yet to come, to which humidity is to be added. So I am trying [Page 334] to get the Committee off to a good start and have it show the twenty-one American Governments that it can do the job assigned to it. I keep insisting that the Committee is a symbol of the unity of America and must demonstrate that the American States can cooperate effectively by such means.
As for the draft convention on the Security Zone, I have prepared a tentative draft of my own for discussion by the sub-committee, and I shall forward it to you by the next air-mail, so that Mr. Hackworth, Mr. Bonsai, and others can criticise it and make suggestions. My own interpretation of the action of the Havana Meeting in this matter was that a number of American States wanted to postpone taking action on the recommendation of the Committee with regard to the zone, and the easiest way to do that was to provide for the drafting of a “preliminary project” which would have to travel a long way before it could reach the stage of requiring action. But be that as it may, the Committee must do its part in setting the machinery in motion.
Some weeks ago the Government of Brazil called the attention of the Committee to the fact that under the broad terms of its recommendation on Internment, if strictly interpreted, it would be necessary to intern British officers then present in Brazil in various commercial capacities. In consequence the Committee has given an “interpretation” of its recommendation, excluding such persons from the application of its terms. These interpretations are to be forwarded to the Pan American Union, to be transmitted by it to the various Governments for their information. I have written to Mr. Bonsai about an other question in connection with this same recommendation, which was too minor a matter to trouble you with it.
In view of certain comments made by the Navy and Treasury Departments upon the recommendation of the Committee upon the subject of Telecommunications, which were forwarded to me by Mr. Bonsai, I have asked the Committee to give an informal “interpretation” of the appropriate paragraphs of the recommendation. If you think it advisable, I suggest that the Department make a formal inquiry on the points in question. But if that is not deemed desirable, the Committee will forward its “interpretation” to the Pan American Union without reference to the source of the inquiries made concerning the meaning of the particular provisions. My preference for a formal inquiry from the Department is merely in order that we may be able to show the American Governments that the Committee is prepared to act promptly in regard to particular problems which could not have been foreseen, or were not foreseen, at the time the recommendation was adopted.
Before interpreting the recommendation on Telecommunications the Committee is asking the advice of a group of “experts”, among [Page 335] them being Lt. Commander Graves, our Naval Attaché here in Rio. I shall forward to Mr. Bonsai the results of our discussions in the matter.
With warm personal regards,
Sincerely yours,