that at the time of the entry of an order on Judge Knox' decision, plaintiff will ask for a stay pending final determination by the Supreme Court. Such stay would normally have the effect of maintaining the existing levies of attachment on the property of the Government of the United States of Mexico in New York City for many months to come. In view of the formal and complete recognition by the Government of the United States of the Government of the United States of Mexico, this litigation is, we venture to suggest, no longer private in character, and we believe the State Department should be fully advised of all further steps in the proceedings in order that appropriate action may be taken. On behalf of the Government of the United States of Mexico we respectfully request that through the customary channels the United States Attorney in New York be requested to appear before Judge Knox, in conjunction with ourselves as attorneys of record for the defendants, upon the plaintiff's application for a stay and for the maintenance of the existing levies of attachment on defendants' property. The question of whether the property of a friendly foreign sovereign should be continued in sequestration by the operation of supersedeas, as in the ordinary action at law between private litigants, is a question of public international law. We will urge upon the court the contention that as no process may issue against such a foreign government duly recognized, so therefore no process against its property should be continued in force by supersedeas under international comity and practice, and that any present order, stay or supersedeas continuing the attachment would be in the nature of a deliberate affront to the foreign sovereign. We are confident the Department will desire to consider the implications of any such step and to express its views in the usual manner at the hearing. Plaintiff's application will probably be heard about the middle of next week and if the United States Attorney here will put himself in touch with us we will be pleased to cooperate with him. Very respectfully yours, ERNEST ANGELL 702.1211/1249 The Secretary of State to Mr. Ernest Angell of Messrs. Hardin & Hess WASHINGTON, October 23, 1923. SIR: I beg to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of October 19, 1923, in which, referring to the case of the Oliver American Trading Company, Inc., v. the Government of the United States of Mexico and National Railways of Mexico still pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, you make mention of Judge Knox' recent decision for dismissal of the action and vacating of the attachment. You state that plaintiff has served notice that it will appeal the decision by writ of error to the Supreme Court of the United States, and that at the time of the entry of an order on Judge Knox' decision plaintiff will ask for a stay pending final determination by the Supreme Court. You ask that, through the customary channels, the United States Attorney at New York be requested to appear before Judge Knox, in conjunction with yourselves as attorneys of record for the defendants, upon the plaintiff's application for a stay and for the maintenance of the existing levies of attachment on defendants' property. By way of response, I have to inform you that, as Judge Knox is doubtless fully advised of the pertinent facts and is cognizant of the relevant law, I deem it unnecessary for the Department to comply with your request. I am [etc.] CHARLES E. HUGHES MOROCCO DISCUSSION OF THE FUTURE STATUS OF TANGIER 881.00/842: Telegram The Ambassador in Great Britain (Harvey) to the Secretary of State [Paraphrase] LONDON, September 22, 1923—4 p.m. [Received September 22-2:41 p.m.] 405. Incorrect news story appeared yesterday stating that the Foreign Office had been visited by a representative of this Embassy presumably to discuss informally the future status of Tangier; and today the statement appears that the Counselor of the Embassy presented the Foreign Office yesterday with an identical note to France, Great Britain and Spain urging the principle of the open door. Yesterday the Spanish Ambassador sent a Secretary to inquire if the published report was true and if this Embassy had any special instructions on Tangier that could be communicated to him. The Foreign Office here has not yet been advised that the Embassy in Washington has received a note, as described, from the Department. HARVEY 881.00/844a: Telegram The Acting Secretary of State to the Ambassador in Great Britain (Harvey) [Paraphrase] WASHINGTON, September 24, 1923—4 p.m. 261. Your No. 405, September 22, 4 p.m. For your information and for such discreet use as you may wish to make: At press conference on September 20, 1923, the question was asked whether the United States had sent a note to the interested powers in regard to Tangier. I replied that the Government of the United States had taken no recent action on this matter, but that some time ago it had sent a note which contained a statement in regard to the principle of the open door in Tangier. I was referring to the note presented to the French Foreign Office by the American Embassy in France under an instruction from this Department of September 21, 1922.1 The note dealt with the construction and administration of the harbor works at Tangier and was a protest against this concession as being contrary to the provisions of the Act of Algeciras.2 PHILLIPS 881.00/844: Telegram The Ambassador in Great Britain (Harvey) to the Secretary of State [Paraphrase] LONDON, October 1, 1923-5 p. m. 417. I am informed that the French Delegate, quite unexpectedly to the Foreign Office, has put forward a new proposal which may turn out to be a basis for agreement. In broad outline it is that, while the French Government is not willing to relinquish the claim that the Sultan of Morocco, by reason of his individual sovereignty over the whole of the Sherifian Empire under French protection, is the ruler of the Tangier zone, France is now prepared to accept the internationalization of the local municipal administration of Tangier, as well as the internationalization of the port and the introduction of mixed tribunals. It is proposed further that the Sultan's edicts are not to be operative in Tangier until they shall have been accepted by the representatives of the powers. This telegram has been repeated to Tangier, Paris and Madrid. HARVEY 881.00/851: Telegram The Ambassador in Great Britain (Harvey) to the Secretary of State LONDON, October 14, 1923-noon. [Received October 15-9:20 a.m.] 438. My 436, October 12, 1 p.m. The Foreign Office has issued the following statement: 1 Foreign Relations, 1922, vol. 1, p. 723. The text of the Act of Algeciras is printed ibid., 1906, pt. 2, p. 1495. The French representative sent to London to confer with regard to the status of Tangier. 'Not printed. "His Majesty's Government have accepted the invitation of the French Government to send representatives to the conference at Paris on October 22nd on the subject of the future status of Tangier. The conference will be limited to representatives of Great Britain, France and Spain. The British representatives will be Mr. Arnold Robertson, His Majesty's Agent and Consul General at Tangier and Mr. Gerald Villiers, Counsellor at the Foreign Office." 881.00/851: Telegram HARVEY The Secretary of State to the Ambassador in Great Britain (Harvey) WASHINGTON, October 20, 1923—1 p.m. 290. Your 438, October 14th, noon. Please bring the following informally to the attention of the Foreign Office as soon as possible and repeat for similar action to Paris and Madrid: "This Government has noted with interest that the experts now conferring in London with regard to the question of Tangier have decided that a plenary conference for the determination of the future status of Tangier should be called. While this Government has no political interest in Morocco, it is a party to the Act of Algeciras under which act nationals of the United States enjoy certain rights and privileges in Tangier. This Government takes this occasion to remind the Governments participating in the Conference regarding Tangier that its fundamental interest in Tangier is to maintain the principle of the Open Door, that is the equality of commercial opportunity and to secure adequate protection for the life, liberty and property of its citizens as stated in its ratification of the Act of Algeciras. It presumes that at the forthcoming conference nothing will be done to interfere with the maintenance of the principle above mentioned or the rights or interests of the United States." HUGHES 881.00/855 The Department of State to the Portuguese Legation 48 MEMORANDUM In replying to the Portuguese Chargé d'Affaires' Memorandum of October 22, requesting information concerning the attitude of the Government of the United States toward the proposed plenary conference to discuss the future status of Tangier, the Department of State wishes to inform him that it has taken occasion recently to remind the Governments participating in the conference that while |