Obrázky stránek
PDF
ePub

4. The Italian Company agrees in principle to a participation by the English Company in the capital to be invested by the Italian Company in that part of the Italian Company's proposed cables which lies between Fiumicino and Malaga the terms and conditions of such participation to be arranged to the mutual satisfaction of the Italian Company and the English Company with the approval so far as necessary of the Italian Government. The Italian Company undertakes that any funds so to be provided by the English Company shall be exclusively devoted towards meeting the cost of manufacturing and laying the cable from Fiumicino to Malaga.

5. The American Company has agreed to subscribe for a part of an issue of Debentures to be issued by the Italian Company and the Italian Company undertake that any funds so to be provided by the American Company shall be exclusively devoted towards meeting the cost of manufacturing and laying the cable from Malaga to the Azores.

6. The English Company will in consideration of the foregoing engagements raise no objection to the grant by the Portuguese Government to the American Company of the right to land at the Azores the cables in respect of which the American Company has already applied for landing permits.

7. This Agreement shall be read and construed in accordance with the principles of the law of Great Britain and in the event of any difference arising in respect of the construction of this Agreement or the rights hereunder of any of the parties hereto such difference shall be referred to the arbitrament of a single arbitrator under the provisions of the British Arbitration Act or any statutory amendment thereof such single arbitrator to be appointed by Agreement between the parties between whom the difference arises and failing agreement by the English Attorney General for the time being for all of which purposes the parties hereto submit to the jurisdiction of the Courts of England.

IN WITNESS Whereof the Companies parties hereto represented respectively by their duly authorised officers have hereunto set their hands the day and year first above written.

For The Western Telegraph Company Limited,

J. DENISON PENDER,

Chairman.

For Compagnia Italiana dei Cavi Telegrafici Sottomarini,
RICHARD T. DURRAN,

Attorney for the Company.

For The Western Union Telegraph Company,

S. J. GODDARD,

Vice President.

811.7353b W 52/187: Telegram

The Secretary of State to the Minister in Portugal (Dearing)

[Paraphrase]

WASHINGTON, December 26, 1923—3 p.m.

46. Your telegram 86 of December 19. Your first paragraph. The Department is gratified that British Minister to Portugal has been instructed to withdraw his opposition to the application of the Western Union. The British Government, however, has not replied to our last note protesting against its attitude. The Department has not changed its attitude as presented in its correspondence with the British Government.

Second paragraph of your telegram. It is Department's understanding that the Commercial Cable Company will continue its present efforts to have the 1913 concession revived. The Department's assistance has not been asked by the company. If present efforts fail, however, it is presumed that the company would ask the assistance of the Department in an effort to secure the direct provisional concession.

As you will remember, both American companies asked for assistance from the Department in obtaining direct concessions. Later the Commercial Cable Company tried to meet its needs by a duplication of cables under the 1899 concession and obtained Sir John Pender's aid in its present effort to have the 1913 concession revived. Our telegram 18, May 21, 6 p.m., advised you of the Department's attitude. Before the Western Union made its June offer to Pender it asked whether the Department objected. In replying, through the Embassy in London, the Department stated that it would not offer objections to the proposed agreement; that it had been the wish of the Department to obtain for the American cable companies a position in the Azores no less favorable than the British companies enjoyed, but that if it was the wish of American companies to accept less they were free to do so. In that case, however, they must assume responsibility for their actions and take the consequences.

It is presumed that withdrawal of British opposition will lead to favorable action soon with respect to the Western Union's direct concession. The Commercial Cable Company has not asked the Department to aid it in having the 1913 concession revived.

It would seem wise under these circumstances for the Legation to take no action regarding the application of either company unless

DS Not printed.

the company requests it and in that case only after consideration by the Department and instructions from it.

The above is strictly confidential for your guidance.

HUGHES

811.7353b W 52/200: Telegram

The Minister in Portugal (Dearing) to the Secretary of State

LISBON, January 24, 1924-5 p.m.

[Received 8:20 p.m.]

6. Chamber of Deputies has just approved finally Western Union contract. Report by mail. Embassies London and Rome informed. Please inform Newcomb Carlton in reply his letter 10th to me.

DEARING

DISPUTE WITH THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT OVER WITHDRAWAL OF RECOGNITION OF THE AMERICAN CONSULAR OFFICERS AT NEWCASTLE-ON-TYNE"

125.655/55a

The Secretary of State to the Ambassador in Great Britain (Harvey)

No. 812

WASHINGTON, February 12, 1923.

SIR: You are requested to deliver to Lord Curzon a note in the following sense, concerning the case of Consul Slater and Vice Consul Brooks whose exequatur and recognition, respectively, were canceled by the British Government:

"On behalf of my Government, I have the honor to inform Your Lordship of the receipt of Your Lordship's note of December 27, 1922, in which you state the decision of the British Government with regard to the cancellation of the exequatur and recognition, respectively, of Mr. Slater and Mr. Brooks, Consul and Vice Consul at Newcastle-on-Tyne.

"In the circumstances, I am instructed to inform Your Lordship that orders have been issued not to reopen the Consulate and to dispose of the lease of the Consular premises.

"May I call once more to your attention the fact that a thorough investigation, of which the British Government has been fully informed, was made of this case by officers of my Government and that the evidence secured convinced my Government that the charges preferred cannot be substantiated.

"My Government desires me, furthermore, once again to point out that although it has never questioned the right of the British Government to cancel the exequatur of an American Consul on the ground

"Continued from Foreign Relations, 1922, vol. II, pp. 392-406.

1 Ibid., p. 404.

that he is persona non grata, it considers that when specific charges are advanced it is compelled to make the most thorough investigation in order to clear or to discipline the alleged offender. My Government must, moreover, call in question the accuracy of the parallel which Your Lordship found in the cancellation in 1856 by the Government of the United States of the exequaturs of the British Consuls at New York, Philadelphia and Cincinnati. The evidence against these Consuls was developed in judicial proceedings which showed them to be guilty of violating the laws and the sovereign rights of the United States."

I am [etc.]

CHARLES E. HUGHES

125.655/66: Telegram

The Ambassador in Great Britain (Harvey) to the Secretary of

State

LONDON, March 2, 1923-4 p.m.
[Received 8:11 p.m.]

63. Your 43, February 28, 7 p.m.2 Note from the Foreign Office acknowledging receipt of our note of February 28th on Newcastle case states:

3

"With regard paragraph 3, I venture to observe that Your Excellency is under a misapprehension in stating that His Majesty's Government has been fully informed' of the thorough investigation made by officers of the United States Government. Such is not the case. A member of my Department was informed verbally in October last that such an investigation had been held and the statement was made in Your Excellency's note number 446 of November 9th last that two separate inquiries into the facts were instituted by the United States Government. His Majesty's Government were not informed of the proceedings in the inquiries, nor shown the evidence submitted, although His Majesty's Government had furnished their evidence to the United States Government in my note to Your Excellency of August 28th last."

4

As regards the accuracy of the parallel with the cancellation of the exequaturs of certain British consuls in the United States in 1856, I venture to refer Your Excellency to the quotation by the legal adviser to the [President] on that occasion from the commercial convention of July [3,] 1815, Article IV, of which provides, 'In case of illegal or improper conduct towards the laws or government of the country to which he is sent, such consul may either be punished according to law, if the laws reach the case, or be sent back,

'Not printed.

* See supra.

See telegram no. 348, Nov. 8, 1922, to the Ambassador in Great Britain. Foreign Relations, 1922, vol. II, p. 400.

B Not printed.

Malloy, Treaties, 1776–1909, vol. 1, p. 624.

the offended government assigning to the other the reasons for the same'. Reference was made to Mr. Cushing's advice to the President in my note above mentioned."

HARVEY

125.655/31 : Telegram

The Secretary of State to the Ambassador in Great Britain (Harvey)

WASHINGTON, March 9, 1923-6 p.m.

47. Your 69, March 7, 3 p.m.

9a

Department yesterday gave to press for release today and so advised British Embassy, Department's notes of August 11, November 8,9 February 28, also text of telegram No. 292, September 18, 7 p.m. substance of which according to your telegram No. 482 of October 23, 2 p.m." was conveyed by you to Foreign Office.

As a preface to the publication of the notes the following explanatory statement was made.

"The Department of State has taken the position that since the British Government has charged the American Consular Officers at Newcastle with improper conduct in the performance of their Consular functions, and has allowed these charges to become public, it was incumbent upon the Department to investigate carefully the charges, in order to determine whether or not the officers were guilty and, if guilty, the extent of the discipline required. With a view to reaching a conclusion, a very careful investigation of all the facts was at once undertaken, with the result that the Department reached the conclusion that the charges against the officers had not been substantiated. In these circumstances, the Department saw no alternative but frankly to advise the British Government of the result of its investigation and to express the hope that the charges could be withdrawn.

"Article 4, of the Convention of Commerce and Navigation of 1815 with Great Britain provides that, 'in case of illegal or improper conduct towards the laws or Government of the country to which he (a Consul) is sent, such Consul may either be punished according to law, if the laws will reach the case, or be sent back, the offended Government assigning to the other the reasons for the same'.

"The position of the Department in the present case is that, in its opinion, no illegal or improper conduct towards the laws or government of Great Britain has been committed and that the only evidence of guilt which the British Government has produced in support of its charges consisted of three unsigned statements which upon examination by the Department were not regarded as at all sufficient."

7 Senate Executive Document No. 35, 34th Cong., 1st sess., pp. 68–80. Not printed.

9 See Department's telegram no. 812, Feb. 12, 1923, ante, p. 306.

8

9

Foreign Relations, 1922, vol. II, pp. 393 and 400.

[ocr errors]

Foreign Relations, 1922, vol. II, p. 397.

" Not printed.

« PředchozíPokračovat »