amended December, 1919, you may state that this Government would not object to the delivery of these bonds to the Reparation Commission. The Department does not perceive that the Government of the United States has an interest in the disposition of the liberation bonds such as to preclude the above expression of its attitude, although as long as our Army cost claim remains unsatisfied 1 and no procedure is decided upon for payment of American claims adjudicated by the Mixed Claims Commission,32 this Government has an interest in reparation credits. You will advise the Department of your opinion whether a claim could properly be made under the Army Costs Agreement 33 for share in cash realized from the liberation bonds. HUGHES 463.00 R 29/159: Telegram The Ambassador in France (Herrick) to the Secretary of State [Paraphrase] PARIS, March 6, 1924-3 p. m. 102. L-102. Department's L-54. 1. I have noted instructions about liberation bonds and when question comes up before Commission shall take position directed. 2. In answer to question last paragraph your telegram regarding applicability of ultimate cash payments on bonds to Army Costs Agreement, the date of maturity is not yet clearly fixed, but it is possible that this will be so remote as to fall beyond period of operation of Army Costs Agreement. Amortization beginning in 1931 and running to 1956 is now being considered. 3. I am inclined to the view that proceeds of liberation bonds may not on a proper construction of the Army Costs Agreement be claimed as subject to it. Our proper charges are: (1) against all payments made by German Government or for Germany's account where they are deliveries or transfers made by her except for items excluded in section 4 of article 2; and (2) for payments credited to reparation account of Germany which are made as or for accounts of another country from which a similar payment may be exacted. It is my opinion that true intent of that proviso was to cover payments made by former enemy countries like Austria-Hungary and Bulgaria. This construction is in words "similar" and "exacted". The liberation bonds are not cash payments and are made by Allied countries instead of former enemy powers; and they are made as part of cost of liberation of certain territory to them. It is true that there is canceled on the reparation claim against Austria and on the German C bonds an amount equivalent to the bonds, but I do not think that this cancelation constitutes a payment of reparations by a country from whom a reparation payment may be exacted as required by Army Costs Agreement. 34 4. If we have any claim to cash which may flow ultimately from these bonds, there would be probability that we may have claim against the bonds by and by, for they are a mode of payment which does not fall within the excluded classes; i. e., deliveries in kind, British Recovery Act, etc., which are not applicable to the Army Costs Agreement. Claim could only be based on cancelation of C bonds provided for in annex to Finance Ministers' Agreement of March 11, 1922. I shall not put forward any such claim, however, for reasons above stated, unless I am instructed to contrary. Logan. HERRICK CONVENTIONS FOR THE PREVENTION OF LIQUOR SMUGGLING INTO THE UNITED STATES" Great Britain, January 23, 1924 711.419/95: Telegram The Ambassador in Great Britain (Kellogg) to the Secretary of State [Paraphrase] LONDON, March 1, 1924-11 a.m. [Received March 1-10:55 a.m.] 77. A note I have just received from the Prime Minister states that to his regret he had misinformed me yesterday in regard to the status of the liquor treaty. He now states that definite assurance has been given Canada that ratification binding on the Dominion will not take place until Canadian Parliament has had opportunity to discuss the matter. In regard to the other Dominions, Imperial Conference decided at its last meeting that each Government will decide whether approval of Parliament or legislation is required before it indicates concurrence in ratification. Prime Minister adds "British and Foreign State Papers, 1921, vol. CXIV, p. 26. "For previous correspondence, see Foreign Relations, 1923, vol. 1, pp. 133 ff. that he has telegraphed Dominion Governments urging as prompt action as possible, and he hopes to have replies immediately.30 KELLOGG Treaty Series No. 685 Convention between the United States of America and Great Britain, Signed at Washington, January 23, 19243 The President of the United States of America; 37 And His Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland and of the British Dominions beyond the Seas, Emperor of India; Being desirous of avoiding any difficulties which might arise between them in connection with the laws in force in the United States on the subject of alcoholic beverages; Have decided to conclude a Convention for that purpose; And have appointed as their Plenipotentiaries: The President of the United States of America: Charles Evans Hughes, Secretary of State of the United States; His Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland and of the British Dominions beyond the Seas, Emperor of India: The Right Honorable Sir Auckland Campbell Geddes, G. C. M. G., K. C. B., His Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to the United States of America; Who, having communicated their full powers found in good and due form, have agreed as follows: ARTICLE I The High Contracting Parties declare that it is their firm intention to uphold the principle that 3 marine miles extending from the coastline outwards and measured from low-water mark constitute the proper limits of territorial waters. ARTICLE II (1) His Britannic Majesty agrees that he will raise no objection to the boarding of private vessels under the British flag outside the limits of territorial waters by the authorities of the United States, 36 The Department was informed on Mar. 15 that the Governments of Australia, Newfoundland, New Zealand, and South Africa had concurred in ratification, and on Apr. 10 that Canada and the Irish Free State had assented (file nos. 711.419/100, 108, and 109). Ratification advised by the Senate, Mar. 13, 1924; ratified by the President, Mar. 21, 1924; ratified by Great Britain, Apr. 30, 1924; ratifications exchanged at Washington, May 22, 1924; proclaimed by the President, May 22, 1924. its territories or possessions in order that enquiries may be addressed to those on board and an examination be made of the ship's papers for the purpose of ascertaining whether the vessel or those on board are endeavoring to import or have imported alcoholic beverages into the United States, its territories or possessions in violation of the laws there in force. When such enquiries and examination show a reasonable ground for suspicion, a search of the vessel may be instituted. (2) If there is reasonable cause for belief that the vessel has committed or is committing or attempting to commit an offense against the laws of the United States, its territories or possessions prohibiting the importation of alcoholic beverages, the vessel may be seized and taken into a port of the United States, its territories or possessions for adjudication in accordance with such laws. (3) The rights conferred by this article shall not be exercised at a greater distance from the coast of the United States its territories or possessions than can be traversed in one hour by the vessel suspected of endeavoring to commit the offense. In cases, however, in which the liquor is intended to be conveyed to the United States its territories or possessions by a vessel other than the one boarded and searched, it shall be the speed of such other vessel and not the speed of the vessel boarded, which shall determine the distance from the coast at which the right under this article can be exercised. ARTICLE III No penalty or forfeiture under the laws of the United States shall be applicable or attach to alcoholic liquors or to vessels or persons by reason of the carriage of such liquors, when such liquors are listed as sea stores or cargo destined for a port foreign to the United States, its territories or possessions on board British vessels voyaging to or from ports of the United States, or its territories or possessions or passing through the territorial waters thereof, and such carriage shall be as now provided by law with respect to the transit of such liquors through the Panama Canal, provided that such liquors shall be kept under seal continuously while the vessel on which they are carried remains within said territorial waters and that no part of such liquors shall at any time or place be unladen within the United States, its territories or possessions. ARTICLE IV Any claim by a British vessel for compensation on the grounds that it has suffered loss or injury through the improper or unreasonable exercise of the rights conferred by Article II of this Treaty or 112731-VOL. I-39-18 on the ground that it has not been given the benefit of Article III shall be referred for the joint consideration of two persons, one of whom shall be nominated by each of the High Contracting Parties. Effect shall be given to the recommendations contained in any such joint report. If no joint report can be agreed upon, the claim shall be referred to the Claims Commission established under the provisions of the Agreement for the Settlement of Outstanding Pecuniary Claims signed at Washington the 18th August, 1910, but the claim shall not, before submission to the tribunal, require to be included in a schedule of claims confirmed in the manner therein provided. ARTICLE V This Treaty shall be subject to ratification and shall remain in force for a period of one year from the date of the exchange of ratifications. Three months before the expiration of the said period of one year, either of the High Contracting Parties may give notice of its desire to propose modifications in the terms of the Treaty. If such modifications have not been agreed upon before the expiration of the term of one year mentioned above, the Treaty shall lapse. If no notice is given on either side of the desire to propose modifications, the Treaty shall remain in force for another year, and so on automatically, but subject always in respect of each such period of a year to the right on either side to propose as provided above three months before its expiration modifications in the Treaty, and to the provision that if such modifications are not agreed upon before the close of the period of one year, the Treaty shall lapse. ARTICLE VI In the event that either of the High Contracting Parties shall be prevented either by judicial decision or legislative action from giving full effect to the provisions of the present Treaty the said Treaty shall automatically lapse, and, on such lapse or whenever this Treaty shall cease to be in force, each High Contracting Party shall enjoy all the rights which it would have possessed had this Treaty not been concluded. The present Convention shall be duly ratified by the President of the United States of America, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate thereof, and by His Britannic Majesty; and the ratifications shall be exchanged at Washington as soon as possible. |