Office of the Historian

811.203/578: Telegram

The Secretary of State to the Ambassador in the Soviet Union (Harriman)

Washington, July 3, 1944—9 p.m.

1611. Embassy’s 1903, May 27. When occasion offers, you may informally advise Vyshinski that members of the armed forces of the United States committing offenses against Soviet law, such as speculation and barter, can be punished by court martial under the 96th Article of War for bringing discredit upon the military service of the United States by disobedience of local law, or the Commanding General can issue an order forbidding offenses denounced by local law after which the offender can be tried for disobedience of such order. Such is the practice in other countries where our forces are serving.

Vyshinski may also be informed that the exclusive jurisdiction which this Government desires to exercise over members of its armed forces stationed in the Soviet Union would apply to all offenses committed by them whether such personnel are on duty at the time an offense is committed or not. Such jurisdiction would not cover offenses committed by service personnel not stationed in the Soviet Union but who may be visiting there.93

Hull
  1. On the part of the United States, an act to implement the jurisdiction of service courts of friendly foreign forces within the United States had been passed by Congress and approved on June 30,1944; 58 Stat. 643.↩