561.35E1A/7–2444
The Commercial Counsellor of the British Embassy (Jopson) to the Chief of the Commodities Division (Haley)
Dear Mr. Haley: You will recall that as a result of my discussions with you and Mr. Phillips15 on July 13th about the renewal of the Sugar Agreement, I sent a telegram to the Foreign Office suggesting two alternative procedures: (1) that the following should be inserted in Article V of the Protocol.
“The present Protocol shall be ratified by the contracting governments in conformity with their respective constitutional procedures.”
(2) that the duly authorised United States representative, when signing the Protocol, should endorse thereon a reservation in the sense that the Protocol was subject to Senate ratification.
I asked London which of these alternatives they preferred. I have now received a reply saying that the first of the alternatives is ruled out by the time factor. The Foreign Office consider therefore that the second alternative should be adopted. It would naturally be for the State Department to decide whether they should give, in advance of signature, any notification to the other signatories of their intention to endorse a reservation of this nature on the Protocol.
I am instructed by the Foreign Office to inform you that if the United States ratification is delayed beyond August 31st, the British Government would accept it at a later date as retrospectively confirming your signature of the Protocol.
I have informed the Foreign Office by telegram that the above information has been conveyed to you and that I presume that the United Kingdom delegate to the International Sugar Council would now proceed as suggested in the last paragraph on page 1 of my letter to you of July 4th.16
Yours sincerely,