ECONOMIC-Continued. Commerce_ International convention and protocol for the abolition of import International union for the protection of literary and artistic works.. Finance.. Foreign trade clearing agreement between France and Estonia.. Fisheries... Convention for the regulation of whaling.... Navigation... International load line convention. Postal... Postal Union of the Americas and Spain... ... ... .... Universal postal convention and subsidiary agreements. Statistics... International convention and protocol relating to economic statistics. MISCELLANEOUS.. Consular... Convention on consular agents.. Expositions.. International convention relating to international exhibitions. Act on the fixing of movable feasts. Page 13 13 14 14 14 14 15 15 15 15 15 15 16 16 16 17 17 18 18 18 18 18 19 21 TEXTS OF TREATIES AND AGREEMENTS. Convention for the regulation of whaling... 21 Exchange of notes between the United States and Canada regarding radio broadcasting in Canada............... 27 Foreign trade clearing agreement between France and Estonia......... 30 PROMOTION OF PEACE ARBITRATION, CONCILIATION, AND JUDICIAL BILATERAL TREATIES OF ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION Colombia-Italy According to a despatch dated April 4, 1932, from the American Legation in Bogotá, a treaty of arbitration and conciliation between Colombia and Italy was signed in Bogotá on March 18, 1932, by the Colombian Minister for Foreign Affairs and the Italian Chargé d'Affaires ad interim. The Netherlands-Turkey The American Minister to the Netherlands reported by a despatch dated April 20, 1932, that a treaty of arbitration and conciliation had been signed at Geneva on April 16, 1932, by the representatives of Turkey and the Netherlands. United States-Egypt The American Minister to Egypt forwarded to the Department of State with a despatch dated April 22, 1932, copies of the Journal Officiel, No. 33, of April 21, 1932, in which are published Law No. 7 of 1932, approving the treaty of conciliation signed at Washington August 27, 1929, and Law No. 8 of 1932, approving the treaty of arbitration signed at Washington August 27, 1932. United States Switzerland On May 9, 1932, the President ratified the treaty of arbitration and conciliation which was signed February 16, 1931, between the United States and Switzerland. The ratifications of the treaty were exchanged in Washington on May 23, 1932, and the treaty entered into force on that day. The President proclaimed the treaty on May 25, 1932. 1 1See letter from the Secretariat of the League of Nations in regard to the notification of the Netherland Government referring to the interpretation or the application of the convention and protocol for the abolition of import and export prohibitions and restrictions, post, p. 13. See Bulletin No. 22, July, 1931, p. 1. PERMANENT COURT OF INTERNATIONAL JUSTICE WITHDRAWAL OF THE RESERVATIONS MADE BY CUBA WHEN RATIFYING 3 THE PROTOCOL OF REVISION OF THE STATUTE The Acting Legal Adviser of the Secretariat of the League of Nations forwarded to the Secretary of State with a letter dated March 24, 1932, a certified copy, with English translation, of the instrument by which the President of the Republic of Cuba canceled the reservations subject to which his Government had ratified the protocol concerning the revision of the Statute of the Permanent Court of International Justice. The instrument, deposited with the Secretariat on March 14, 1932, produces the full effect of the ratification by Cuba without reservations to which it was originally subject. The text of the instrument as it appears in the official translation of the League of Nations follows: GERARDO MACHADO Y MORALES, President of the Republic of Cuba. To all who may see these presents, let it be known: That the Executive Power ratified the Protocol for the Revision of the Statute of the Permanent Court of International Justice of September 14th, 1929, with the reservations made by the Cuban Senate concerning No. 4 of the Protocol and the new text of Article 23 of the Annex to the said Procotol when it approved the latter on November 22nd, 1930; That notwithstanding the unqualified acceptance by three countries of these reservations of the Cuban Government's, the latter has taken into account the opinion of many other Governments which did not accept them, and the request to withdraw these reservations made to the Cuban Delegation at the last Assembly of the League of Nations, held in September 1931, by the majority of the delegations there assembled: That the Cuban Senate having been asked, by my message of October 29th, 1931, to re-examine the question, it agreed on January 25th last to withdraw the said reservations; That the Government considers that in allowing its action to be influenced on this occasion by the feeling of the majority of the Assembly, it will contribute to the greater success of the League of Nations and of the Organizations created by it; For the above reasons the reservations made upon ratifying the Protocol of Revision of the Statute of the Permanent Court of International Justice of September 14th, 1929, are hereby abrogated as from to-day's date, and the said ratification shall therefore take effect without the reservations to which it had been made subject. In faith whereof and for the purposes of their registration by and deposit with the Secretariat of the League of Nations, I give these presents signed by my hand, sealed with the Great Seal of Cuba and 'See Bulletin No. 29, February, 1932, p. 1. countersigned by the Secretary of State at Havana in the President's Palace this 8th day of February 1932. (SEAL) JOSE CLEMENTE VIVANCO GERARDO MACHADO ARTICLE 36 OF THE STATUTE OF THE PERMANENT COURT OF INTERNATIONAL JUSTICE* Ethiopia The following letter was addressed to the Secretary of State under date of April 29, 1932, by the Legal Adviser of the Secretariat of the League of Nations concerning the renewal of the declaration of the accession of Ethiopia to the optional clause provided in the protocol of signature concerning the Statute of the Permanent Court of International Justice: SIR, I have the honour to inform you that the Minister Plenipotentiary, Diplomatic Representative of His Majesty the Emperor of Abyssinia accredited to the League of Nations, renewed, on April 15, 1932, on behalf of his Government, the Declaration of accession of Abyssinia to the Optional Clause provided in the Protocol of Signature concerning the Statute of the Permanent Court of International Justice (Geneva, December 16, 1920), and made the following declaration: Translation. "On behalf of the Imperial Ethiopian Government, the undersigned recognises as compulsory, ipso facto and without special agreement, in relation to any other Member or State accepting the same obligation, that is to say, on condition of reciprocity, the jurisdiction of the Court in conformity with Article 36, paragraph 2 of the Statute, for a period of two years taking effect as from July 16th, 1932, excepting disputes in respect of which the parties have agreed to have recourse to another method of pacific settlement. GENEVA, April 15th, 1932. CTE LAGARDE DUC D'ENTOTTO." I have [etc.] For the Secretary-General: J. A. BUERO Legal Adviser of the Secretariat. ARMAMENT REDUCTION WASHINGTON NAVAL TREATY OF 1922 By a communication dated March 12, 1932, the Secretary of the Navy, in conformity with the provisions of the Washington Treaty for the Limitation of Naval Armament, brought to the attention of the Secretary of State the fact that the owners of the vessel Ranger, ex-U.S.S. SP 237, had made application for the approval of the transfer of the said vessel to Panamanian registry. 'See Bulletin No. 31, April, 1932, p. 3. The vessel, built as a yacht in 1910, was acquired by the Navy during the World War. It was not built for fighting purposes and was not subsequently converted in such manner as to become essentially a vessel of combatant type. It was sold to private American interests in December, 1931. At the time of sale the Navy Department included in the contract a provision which would insure compliance on the part of the new owners with the provisions of article 18 of the Washington Naval Treaty that "the contracting Powers undertake not to dispose by gift, sale, or any mode of transfer of any vessel of war in such a manner that such vessel may become a vessel of war in the Navy of any foreign Power." The present owners will retain ownership of the vessel and will conduct a business which will consist in engaging in trade for fruits and other merchandise between Central American, Mexican, and Caribbean ports, and Tampa, Fla. These facts were communicated to the Governments of France, Great Britain, Italy, and Japan on March 19, 1932. Replies have been received from them, each stating that they have no objections to make in regard to the transfer. Article 19 of the Washington Treaty for the Limitation of Naval Armament provides as follows: The United States, the British Empire and Japan agree that the status quo at the time of the signing of the present Treaty, with regard to fortifications and naval bases, shall be maintained in their respective territories and possessions specified hereunder: (1) The insular possessions which the United States now holds or may hereafter acquire in the Pacific Ocean, except (a) those adjacent to the coast of the United States, Alaska and the Panama Canal Zone, not including the Aleutian Islands, and (b) the Hawaiian Islands; (2) Hongkong and the insular possessions which the British Empire now holds or may hereafter acquire in the Pacific Ocean, east of the meridian of 110° east longitude, except (a) those adjacent to the coast of Canada, (b) the Commonwealth of Australia and its Territories, and (c) New Zealand; (3) The following insular territories and possessions of Japan in the Pacific Ocean, to wit: the Kurile Islands, the Bonin Islands, Amami-Oshima, the Loochoo Islands, Formosa and the Pescadores, and any insular territories or possessions in the Pacific Ocean which Japan may hereafter acquire. The maintenance of the status quo under the foregoing provisions implies that no new fortifications or naval bases shall be established in the territories and possessions specified; that no measures shall be taken to increase the existing naval facilities for the repair and maintenance of naval forces, and that no increase shall be made in the coast defences of the territories and possessions above specified. This restriction, however, does not preclude such repair and replacement of worn-out weapons and equipment as is customary in naval and military establishments in time of peace. |