I have not in my possession full data concerning the restrictive measures which the French Government either has made effective or contemplates and I cannot therefore hold views of value concerning the importance of this letter to our trade. I have requested Dr. Lyon, Commercial Attaché, to communicate with the Commercial Attaché attached to the Embassy at Paris and to request him to furnish us with material both as to the restrictive measures now in force and as to those contemplated by the French Government. On receipt of such material I will supplement this despatch.10

(11) In the course of the debates in the sessions of the Diplomatic Conference, the question was raised as to what procedure should be followed in the July conference relative to voting on reservations submitted by states between November 8th and February 1st. No clear cut decision was reached and I have subsequently talked over the matter with interested members of the Secretariat. They themselves are much troubled by the situation, pointing out that as matters now stand, any state which votes against a reservation introduced by another state, if that reservation is accepted, will be free to withdraw from the Convention. This would naturally create great uncertainty and cause many states to delay ratification awaiting action by their neighbors. Since I have discussed this matter with the Secretariat, the Legal Section has been instructed to consider the situation thoroughly and to give advice as to what should be proposed. I shall not fail to communicate further on this point as soon as I hear the result of the deliberations of the Section.

(12) Finally, I venture to call the Department's attention to the fact that both Austria and Germany in formal communications, and other states in the course of the plenary sessions, declared that they must hold themselves free to request certain exceptions provided such exceptions were requested and obtained by other states. It will be, I believe, essential for our representation to bear in mind this very important point, namely, that by granting an exception to one state, even though it looks of very little importance, the door is opened to a demand by other states for the granting of the same exception which might have great economic importance. It would seem advisable, therefore, to fight the number of exceptions as far as possible and to limit them to those clearly of the same nature as those already granted under the Convention previous to the signature of November 8th.

I have [etc.]

10 See the Minister's despatch No. 317, Feb. 29, p. 368.

HUGH R. WILSON

[Enclosure]

LETTER FOR THE SECRETARY-GENERAL [OF THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS] FROM THE FRENCH MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS 11

PARIS, January 27, 1928.

In view of the difficulties at present being experienced by the cinematograph industry in France, the French Government is considering the adoption of certain restrictive measures which will apply equally to French and foreign films.

Although these measures cannot be described as prohibitions within the strict meaning of the Convention of November 8th last, the French Government has felt bound to conform with the procedure laid down in Section IV of the Protocol of this Convention by notifying you before February 1st of its intentions.

Since these restrictive measures may to some extent hamper international and national trade, the Government desires to learn, either from the Economic Committee which is to meet on March 30th, 1928, or under the procedure laid down in Article 17 of the Convention for the Abolition of Import and Export Prohibitions and Restrictions, whether the proposed measures, which are entirely similar to those in force in certain other signatory states or adopted by certain of these States since the signature of the above-mentioned instrument, are compatible with the provisions of the Convention. For the Minister for Foreign Affairs:

CORBIN, Minister Plenipotentiary, Director of the Political and Commercial Department

560.M2/151

The Minister in Switzerland (Wilson) to the Secretary of State

No. 317

L. N. No. 1079

BERNE, February 29, 1928. [Received March 20.] SIR: I have the honor to refer to my despatch No. 294 of February 16, 1928, relative to the International Convention for the Abolition of Import and Export Prohibitions and Restrictions and particularly to item No. 10, appearing on page 7 of that despatch, concerning a letter which the French Government had sent to the Secretariat of the League of Nations relative to film restrictions.

Through the courtesy of the Commercial Attaché in Paris I am now in receipt of a copy of the law of February 18th, published in the Official Journal of the French Republic on February 19th, relative to the control of cinematograph films. Presumably both the State De

"Extract from League of Nations document C. I. A. P. 23, p. 10.

partment representatives in Paris and those of the Department of Commerce have forwarded this law with appropriate observations and I shall therefore merely consider it in its relation to the treaty in question and to the discussions which may take place regarding the French letter in the Conference to be held in July next.

The text of the law itself does not appear to violate the terms of the convention since no provision is made for the prohibition or restriction of importation. The law appears to set up merely a censorship under a body which will take into consideration "the sum total of the national interests in question and especially that of the conservation of national customs and traditions. Also when it is a question of foreign films consideration shall be given to the ease with which, in the separate countries of origin, French films may be acquired." Obviously the Powers given to the Commission are very broad and presumably under this law foreign films might be refused the visa necessary for exhibition. This might be done arbitrarily and for the sake of protecting the French film industry. Only experience will show the result of the institution of the censorship.

If the subject comes up for debate in the July meeting, the Department may desire our representative to take an occasion to call attention to the first paragraph of article 5 of the Final Act of the Convention,12 especially to those words "or hindrances of any other kind which would replace those that it is the aim of the Convention to remove." Admission might be made frankly that while this and similar laws do not violate technically the convention, they might open the door to a violation of the spirit of the convention should the authorities administering them feel so inclined. That the United States Government, however, in view of the aspirations expressed in article 5 above cited, is confident that such laws will not be used for purposes which would be a violation in effect if not in law of the convention.

I have [etc.]

560.M3/10

HUGH R. WILSON

The Chargé in Switzerland (Moffat) to the Secretary of State

No. 393

L. N. No. 1117

BERNE, April 13, 1928. [Received April 28.] SIR: Referring to my telegram No. 35, 11 a. m. of today's date,18

I have the honor to transmit herewith a communication addressed

12

For text of the final act, see League of Nations, International Conference for the Abolition of Import and Export Prohibitions and Restrictions, etc.: Proceedings of the Conference (C.21.M.12.1928.11), pp. 29, 45.

"Not printed.

to you on April 11 by the Deputy Secretary-General of the League of Nations, announcing that the International Conference for the Abolition of Import and Export Prohibitions and Restrictions will reconvene under the Presidency of Mr. Colijn on July 3, 1928, for the purpose of taking decisions with regard to the requests for exceptions submitted in accordance with Article 6 of the Convention of November 8, 1927, and the necessary conditions for putting the Convention into force. The communication closes with the request that as soon as convenient the composition of the American delegation be transmitted to the Secretariat.

I have [etc.]

PIERREPONT MOFFAT

[Enclosure]

The Deputy Secretary General of the League of Nations (DufourFeronce) to the Secretary of State

C. L. 68.1928.II GENEVA, April 11, 1928. SIR: By the terms of Article 17 of the International Convention for the Abolition of Import and Export Prohibitions and Restrictions, of which I had the honour to forward you a certified true copy in my letter of November 19th 1927, I have to summon a meeting to be held between June 15th and July 15th 1928, of the duly accredited representatives of the States on whose behalf the Convention will have been signed by June 15th 1928. This meeting will have to take decisions with regard to:

a) the requests for exceptions submitted by certain States in accordance with Article 6 of the Convention. Copies of these requests were forwarded to you with my circular letter 27.1928.II. of February 13th 1928;14

b) the necessary conditions for the putting into force of the Convention.

In agreement with M. Colijn, President of the November 1927 Conference on prohibitions, who has been invited by the Council to preside also over the proposed meeting, I have the honour to inform you that I have fixed the date for July 3rd 1928, at Geneva.

I should be grateful if you would be good enough to let me know as soon as convenient the composition of the delegation which your Government will send to the meeting on July 3rd.

I have [etc.]

14 Circular letter not printed.

ALBERT DUFOUR-FERONCE

560.M2/145: Telegram

The Secretary of State to the Minister in Switzerland (Wilson)

WASHINGTON, April 27, 1928–6 p. m. 47. Your despatch 294, February 16. Please present before May 1 the following communication to the Secretary General of the League of Nations:

"With reference to the communication of February 13 addressed to the Secretary of State of the United States by the Acting Secretary General,15 I have been instructed to present the following observations of the Government of the United States in regard to the communications received by the Secretary General pursuant to the terms of paragraph (ii) of sub-section (d) of Section IV of the Protocol to the Convention for the Abolition of Import and Export Prohibitions and Restrictions.16

The Government of the United States is greatly disappointed to note the number and extent of the exceptions requested by the signatory states, and considers that such extensive exceptions are clearly contrary to the spirit and purpose of the convention. Acceptance of the exceptions claimed would detract very materially from its usefulness, if not tend to render it nugatory. Furthermore, the Government of the United States regrets to find in certain of the declarations and observations presented a disposition to prepare the way for subsequently claiming additional exceptions.

The observations and communications of a number of governments indicate a tendency to claim for their own part the right to make exceptions that may be admitted in favor of other governments. Accordingly, exceptions specified by particular countries have to be considered not merely in relation to the foreign commerce of those countries in the articles in question, but rather in the light of the possible effect of the general application of such exceptions by other countries as well.

The Government of the United States is strongly of the opinion that every effort should be made to dispense with exceptions, and in principle is not disposed to agree to exceptions under the terms of Article 6 of the convention unless it clearly appears that such exceptions would not be contrary to the spirit and purpose of the convention. The Government of the United States therefore reserves the right to object at the appropriate time to any or all of the exceptions specified or desired by the signatory states."

Telegraph briefly and report fully by mail concerning the observations submitted by the several countries.

15 Not printed.

KELLOGG

16

For protocol, see p. 350.