812.79600/1–145
Memorandum by the Acting Secretary of State to President Roosevelt
I refer to your letter of January 1, 1945 in regard to the establishment on December 11, 1944 of a United States Naval armed observation party and a weather reporting station at Clipperton Island.
Immediately upon receipt of your letter on January 2nd, we asked the British Ambassador to send an officer to the Department and we conveyed orally to him the information which you directed us to give to the British Ambassador. This information was confirmed in a memorandum which was sent to the British Embassy on January 3rd.23
[Page 786]On January 2nd, a telegram was sent to our Ambassador in Mexico City instructing him to convey to the Mexican authorities the information which your letter directed us to give to the authorities of that Government.
On January 11th, we had a telephone inquiry about the United States Naval establishment on Clipperton Island from Mr. Baudet of the French Embassy. We gave him, in response to his inquiry, the same general information which we had given the British and the Mexican Governments, adding that the United States Navy had notified Vice Admiral Fenard, Head of the French Naval Mission in Washington, of the establishment of this station. Mr. Baudet inquired whether the French flag was still flying over Clipperton Island. We told him frankly that we did not know here whether or not the French flag is flying over Clipperton Island but that if one was flying when our forces arrived, he could be sure it was still there. Mr. Baudet appeared to be satisfied with this and although he had spoken of a note to us, we have heard nothing further from the French Embassy on the subject.
In your letter of January 1st you refer to the fact that Mexico has long contested the claim of France to this island. Our information is that Mexico did for a great many years contest the French claim but has not done so since the award of the King of Italy on January 28, 1931,24 giving the island to France. At that time the Mexican Government indicated that it wished to study the opinion underlying the decision but the Mexican Minister of Foreign Affairs urged its acceptance on the ground that it involved the good faith of Mexico which had agreed, in the convention submitting the matter to arbitration, to accept the decision without appeal. Later the award was accepted by Mexico. Evidence of such acceptance lies in a decree elated January 10, 1934, published in the Diario Oficial of January 18, 1934 stating that “the Congress of the Mexican States, and with the approval of the majority of the State Legislatures, declares amended Article 42 of the Political Constitution” by excluding Clipperton Island from that document, which specifies the territory comprised within the Republic of Mexico.
You will recall that the United States Joint Chiefs of Staff have recommended that the United States obtain rights to establish a postwar military base on Clipperton Island and that in a letter dated January 7, 194425 to the Secretary of State you approved this and certain other similar recommendations of the Chiefs of Staff. It is our view that it would be much easier for the United States to obtain [Page 787] military base rights on Clipperton Island from the French Government than it would be for us to obtain such rights from the Mexican Government. This view is strengthened by the attitude which the Mexican Government has taken during the present war in which Mexico is, of course, a co-belligerent, in respect to similar questions.
In these circumstances we feel that it would be better for us to stand on Mexico’s recognition of the award of Clipperton Island to France and not to bring the Mexican Government into the post-war military base situation at all in respect to Clipperton Island. Will you let me know whether you agree?
- Not printed.↩
- Arbitral award of the King of Italy settling the dispute between France and Mexico regarding the sovereignty of Clipperton Island, January 1931, British and, Foreign State Papers, 1931, vol. cxxxiv, p. 842.↩
- Foreign Relations, 1944, vol. vii, p. 546.↩