ECONOMIC-Continued. Commerce.. Convention on the execution of foreign arbitral awards_ Copyright. Reciprocal copyright relations between the United States and Greece. Finance Convention and protocol on stamp laws in connection with cheques. Labor... Convention for the marking of the weight on heavy packages transported by vessels.. Postal Universal postal convention and subsidiary agreements.. Postal Union of the Americas and Spain. Agreement for collect-on-delivery parcel post service between the Transit.. Convention regarding the regulation of motor traffic. Visa fees.. MISCELLANEOUS Consular___. Convention on consular agents.. Expositions International convention relating to international exhibitions__ RECENT PUBLICATIONS_ Italy PROMOTION OF PEACE ARBITRATION, CONCILIATION, AND JUDICIAL BILATERAL TREATIES OF ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION The American Chargé d'Affaires ad interim at Rome forwarded to the Department with a despatch dated January 15, 1932, a copy of Royal Decree No. 1613 of November 30, 1931, approving the treaty signed on September 23, 1931, abrogating article 2 of the treaty to advance the cause of general peace between the United States and Italy of May 5, 1914, and substituting therefor new provisions in respect of the appointment of members of the international commission provided for in that article. The decree was published in the Official Gazette of January 12, 1932.1 PERMANENT COURT OF INTERNATIONAL JUSTICE 2 WITHDRAWAL OF THE RESERVATIONS MADE BY THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF CUBA WHEN RATIFYING THE PROTOCOL OF REVISION OF THE STATUTE The following undated communication, C.L.33.1932.V., has been received from the League of Nations concerning the ratification by the Republic of Cuba of the protocol concerning the revision of the Statute of the Permanent Court of International Justice: With reference to my letter C.L.4.1931.V., of January 22, 1931,3 by which I communicated to you the reservations subject to which the Government of the Republic of Cuba had ratified the Protocol concerning the revision of the Statute of the Permanent Court of International Justice, signed at Geneva, September 14, 1929, I now have the honour to inform you that, by a telegram dated February 5, 1932, the Cuban Government has informed me that they have decided to withdraw the reservations made by them when ratifying this Protocol, and which were contained in the instrument of ratification. 'See Bulletin No. 24, September, 1931, p. 1. See Bulletin No. 26, November, 1931, p. 2. For text, see Bulletin No. 19, April, 1931, p. 2. The American Ambassador at Habana forwarded to the Secretary of State with a despatch dated February 10, 1932, a copy and translation of the message of the President of Cuba to the Senate requesting that body to reconsider the reservations made by them when ratifying the protocol concerning the revision of the Statute. The President's message dated October 29, 1931, and the Senate's reply dated January 25, 1932, as translated by the American Embassy, follow: Message of the President of Cuba to the Cuban Senate, Dated October 29; 1931 TO THE SENATE OF THE REPUBLIC— On September 14, 1929, the League of Nations adopted a protocol of revision of the Statute of the Permanent Court of International Justice and an annex thereto in which were modified articles 3, 4, 8, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 23, 25, 26, 27, 29, 31, 32, and 35 of the former and effective Statute of the Court of December 16, 1930 (sic). The text of article or number 4 of the protocol and of the new drafting of article 23 of the annex, as the Senate will recall, are as follows: 4. The present Protocol shall take effect on September 1, 1930, provided that the Council of the League of Nations has been assured that the Members of the League and the States mentioned in the Annex to the Pact which may have ratified the Protocol of December 16, 1920, but whose ratification of the present Protocol may not have been received by the said date, do not present any objection as regards the taking effect of the amendments to the Statute of the Court which are specified in the Annex to the present Protocol. New drafting of article 23: The Court shall remain in session continuously, except during the judicial vacations, the times and durations of which shall be determined by the Court. Members of the Court whose homes are more than five days' ordinary journey from The Hague, shall be entitled, aside from judicial vacations, to a leave of six months, not including travel time, every three years. It is the obligation of Members of the Court to be at all times at the disposition of the Court, except during regular leave, or when prevented by illness or another serious reason duly established before the President. As is seen, by the first of the articles in question, a method differing from the usual one is established with respect to the ratification of conventions and by the new drafting of article 23 the condition of residence of the Justices is affected, in virtually obliging them to reside at a distance of not more than five days' ordinary journey from The Hague; for which reason the Government considered it advisable to oppose these two points, objecting, as regards the entrance into effect of the aforementioned protocol of revision in the form proposed in article 4 thereof, that is, treating lack of objections as if they were ratifications, that the text and spirit of No. 4 were manifestly contrary to the text and spirit of the pact, to the constitutional law of many nations and the established practice in the negotiations of peoples which make the effectiveness of treaties and conventions rest upon the express ratification or acceptance thereof by the appropriate public powers; and, as regards the obligatory sojourn of the Justices of the Court near The Hague, objecting that, aside from the fact that it might appear a continental privilege, it was impractical and unnecessary, inasmuch as nothing counselled so radical a measure. Various other objections were made by Cuba's representation to other reforms contained in different precepts which appeared in the protocol; but in order not to create more difficulties with the aforementioned objections which would prevent the entrance into effect of the projected protocol, since unanimity of votes was necessary therefor, the Government, desiring on the contrary to contribute to the success of other wise measures contained within the project of reforms, determined to submit to the consideration of the Senate, by a message dated November 24, 1930, the advisability of approving the protocol in question, although with reservations to article 4 and to the new drafting of article 23, previously analyzed, and approval of which was duly given in that form by the Upper Colegislative Chamber. With regard to the first reservation, as it was concerned with a fixed date, already passed, which was designated for the effective date of the protocol, it obviously lacks importance, inasmuch as the mere objection made thereto by Cuba's representation necessarily deprived it of efficacy, for which reason it is at present ineffective. But with regard to the second, circularized, in conformity with the usual procedure in such cases, among all the Governments represented in the League, only three of them, Bulgaria, Albania and Venezuela, did us the honor of accepting it in full; Greece, although it accepted them (sic), expressed the hope that in the future Cuba would withdraw them, and the others, while Norway, Sweden, Denmark, the Netherlands, Spain, Finland, Switzerland, Poland and Belgium were of the opinion that they should be submitted to the next Assembly and discussed therein. Portugal and Ireland considered that the subject was one which should be decided by the Permanent Court of International Justice itself, and France, Italy, England, Germany and Hungary expressed themselves openly opposed to the reservations, France and Germany stating that they hoped that Cuba would withdraw them after another examination. When that superior organization met in September last, its sessions had scarcely begun before urgent solicitations were made to our delegation by many of the representations assembled there with the purpose of obtaining Cuba's cooperation in such sense. For these reasons and in view of the fact that it might now be advantageous to the Republic to follow the tendencies of the majority of that Assembly, taking into consideration, furthermore, the 'The Assembly of the League of Nations. nature of the matter under discussion, of which the Senate is perfectly informed, and believing that in acceding to this petition contribution would be made to the greater success of the functioning of the League of Nations and of the organizations created thereby, the Executive considers it pertinent to submit it again for the study of the Higher Chamber, with a brief exposition of its antecedents, in order that the Chamber may resolve what it considers best for the national interests. GERARDO MACHADO PRESIDENTIAL PALACE, HABANA, October 29, 1931. Reply of the Cuban Senate to the President of Cuba, Dated February 25, 1932 The Senate, at a session held on this date, adopted the resolution to withdraw the reservations which it had resolved to make upon ratifying the protocol of revision of the Statute which establishes modifications in the functioning of the Permanent Court of International Justice of The Hague, which were resubmitted for the study of this Chamber by the message of the Executive Power dated October 29, 1931. Japan ARMAMENT REDUCTION LONDON NAVAL TREATY OF 1930 By two notes, each dated February 12, 1932, the Japanese Ambassador at Washington informed the Secretary of State in accordance with the terms of article 10(a) of the London Naval Treaty of the laying down of the keel of a submarine (temporarily called "No. (a)69"), and the laying down of the keel of a cruiser (temporarily called "No. 2"), both of the Imperial Japanese Navy. The particulars of the vessels are as follows: No. (a)69 Date of laying keel: December 22, 1931 Standard displacement: 1,400 tons (1,423 metric tons) Extreme beam: 8.2 meters Mean draft at standard displacement: 3.95 meters Caliber of largest gun: 10.0 centimeters. Standard displacement: 8,500 tons (8.636 metric tons) Length at water line: 190.5 meters Extreme beam: 18.2 meters Mean draft at standard displacement: 4.5 meters Caliber of largest gun: 15.5 centimeters |