The Acting Secretary of State to President Truman 9
My Dear Mr. President: You will recall that on July 11 we sent a telegram to the Secretary in Paris in which we informed him that in our opinion the United States should vote in favor of the admission of Trans-Jordan into the United Nations and asked for his concurrence. In that telegram we stated that it would be necessary for us to establish without delay our attitude in the matter and that we were sending a memorandum to you requesting your views.
I am attaching hereto a memorandum which discusses in some detail various factors involved in the problem and sets forth the considerations which cause the Department to feel that it would be in our national interests to support the application of Trans-Jordan for membership in the United Nations.
I would appreciate it if you would let me know whether you approve the course of action which the Department suggests. The matter may come up for discussion before the Security Council Committee on Membership within the next few days.
- Notation: “Approved Harry Truman”.↩
- For the terms of the mandate see Foreign Relations, 1924, vol. ii, pp. 213–220. For a discussion of the special character of the Palestine mandate, see Marjorie M. Whiteman, Digest of International Law, vol. i, pp. 630 and 631.↩
- The mandate of Great Britain with respect to Palestine came into force on September 20, 1923. On December 3, 1924 the United States concluded with Great Britain a convention (signed at London) defining the rights of United States nationals in Palestine; see Foreign Relations, 1924, vol. ii, pp. 212 ff., or 44 Stat, (pt. 3) 2184, or Department of State Treaty Series No. 728. For a discussion of the treaties or conventions concluded by the United States with the mandatory states defining rights of its nationals in the several mandated territories, see Whiteman, Digest of International Law, vol. i, pp. 618 ff.↩
- This separate status was established in Article 25 of the mandate agreement between the Council of the League and Great Britain; for text of this article, see Foreign Relations, 1924, vol. ii, p. 219. For a discussion of Trans-Jordan’s special status, see Whiteman, Digest of International Law, vol. i, pp. 630 and 631.↩