very general discussion of the matter, dealing chiefly with the motive which had probably inspired the introduction of the bill. Although Mr. Balfour carefully refrained from any suggestion that retaliatory legislation might be passed if the United States should endeavor thus to regulate contracts between aliens and foreign vessels, entered into in foreign ports, there was a clear inference that he felt this would constitute a very radical departure from long accepted practices among nations and indicated that he might receive instructions at a later date to discuss the question more in detail with the Department along the lines of the expediency of this class of legislation. I have ascertained that the Bureau of Navigation, Department of Commerce, has not been asked by Congress for any report on the bill in question. It appears doubtful whether Congress will require a report from this Department unless it should be brought to the attention of the appropriate Committees that this class of legislation might involve us in perplexing questions with other nations. A copy of the proposed bill is attached. HOSMER 196.6/1068 The British Embassy to the Secretary of State MEMORANDUM The British Embassy understand that Senate Bill No. 2945 relating to the payment of advance wages and allotments in respect of seamen of foreign vessels, and making further provisions for carrying out the purposes of the Seamen's Act, approved March 4th, 1915, was passed by the Senate on April 24th. It appears to the Embassy that the effect of this bill is to declare unlawful the payment of advance wages abroad to seamen engaged in British and other foreign ships outside the United States. The Bill therefore appears to seek to vary forcibly the provisions of a contract made within British jurisdiction, and in many cases between British subjects, which is perfectly valid under British law, and apparently purports to regulate the manner in which the master of a British ship may engage & British crew in a British port. The effect of the bill, therefore, appears to the Embassy to be contrary to the generally accepted principles of International Law. In view of the serious effect which such a measure would have upon the ocean borne commerce between Great Britain and the United States, the Embassy desire to draw attention to the difficulties which would appear to them to follow from its enactment. WASHINGTON, April 26, 1928. 196.6/1068 The Secretary of State to the Honorable Wallace H. White, Jr.22 WASHINGTON, April 28, 1928. SIR: I have the honor to enclose for your consideration a copy of a memorandum of April 26, 1928, left at the Department by the British Ambassador,23 in which attention is drawn to the difficulties which may attend the enactment into law of an amendment to the Seamen's Act of March 4, 1915, passed by the Senate on April 24, 1928. The amendment in effect appears to declare illegal contracts for the payment of advance wages concluded by aliens without the jurisdiction of the United States in connection with the employment of alien seamen on board alien vessels and declares that "the courts of the United States shall be open to seamen for suits for payment of wages, irrespective of whether the wages were earned upon a vessel of the United States or a foreign vessel, or within or without the United States or territory subject to the jurisdiction thereof . . .". Without taking into consideration the question whether Congress has the power to declare that contracts made abroad by aliens are invalid, it is believed that the action contemplated in the amendment runs contra to generally accepted principles of law to the effect that contracts of all kinds are to be governed as to their nature, validity, and interpretation of the law of the place where they were made. While it is generally conceded that the courts of one State will not enforce a contract made in another where to do so would be in violation of their own statutes, or a settled public policy of a State, it is believed that contracts of this character are not in a true sense exceptions to the rule of universal validity being not invalid but merely unenforceable in the particular forum. I may add that a representative of the Italian Embassy, under instructions from the Ambassador, called recently at the Department to state that his Government wished to make all reserves in connection with the passage by the Senate of the amendment to the Seamen's Act and adverted to the provisions of Article 11 of the Consular Convention between the United States and Italy of 1878,24 which reads in part as follows: "Consuls-General, Consuls, Vice-Consuls, and Consular Agents . . shall alone take cognizance of questions of whatever kind, that may arise, both at sea and in port, between the captain, officers and seamen, without exception, and especially of those relating to wages and the fulfilment of agreements reciprocally made. The courts, or "Chairman of the Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, House of Representatives. Supra. 24 Malloy, Treaties, 1776–1909, vol 1, pp. 977, 980. federal, state or municipal authorities in the United States and the tribunals or authorities in Italy, shall not under any pretext, interfere in such questions, .. There would seem good grounds to fear that in so far as the amendment refers to the shipment of seamen on foreign vessels in foreign ports, it will give rise to numerous conflicts of laws, and may render the American merchant marine subject to retaliatory measures by foreign governments which in their effect may far out-weigh any advantages which might be secured by this legislation. I have deemed it proper to bring these considerations to your attention, in the event that the amendment to the Seaman's Act passed by the Senate be referred to your Committee, for such action as it may deem it appropriate to take in the matter with a view to meeting the objections discussed above. I have [etc.] The Italian Ambassador wishes to call attention to the fact that the Senate has passed a Bill (S 2945) which amends the Seaman's Act of March 4, 1915, and is relating to the payment of wages and allotments due to seamen of foreign vessels. The Italian Ambassador desires to point out that, while said Bill provides that the Courts of the United States shall be open to seamen for claims concerning payments of wages irrespective of whether these wages were earned upon a vessel of the United States or a foreign vessel, Article XI of the Consular Convention between Italy and the United States disposes that the Royal Italian Consular Officials shall alone take cognizance of such questions. WASHINGTON, April 30, 1928. 196.6/1071 The Swedish Legation to the Department of State 25 MEMORANDUM The attention of the Swedish Legation has been drawn to a bill, "S. 2945-An Act relating to the payment of advance wages and 23 Copy transmitted to the Chairman of the Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, House of Representatives, May 4, 1928. allotments in respect of seamen on foreign vessels, and making further provision for carrying out the purposes of the Seamen's Act, approved March 4, 1915," which bill passed the Senate April 20, 1928. On perusal of the bill the Swedish Legation finds that it contains stipulations which, should the bill become law, would gravely affect Swedish shipping interests, inasmuch as a contract legally entered into between Swedes on a Swedish vessel while in Sweden would fall within the jurisdiction of the Courts of the United States. Such a law would not be confined to limits over which a law-making power has jurisdiction and would therefore, according to the Swedish Government's view, be contrary to fundamental principles of law commonly acknowledged among nations. WASHINGTON, April 30, 1928. 196.6/1072 The Netherlands Legation to the Department of State 20 No. 1413 The Royal Netherland Legation is aware that a Bill introduced in the Senate by Mr. La Follette, relating to the payment of advance wages and allotments in respect of seamen on foreign vessels and making further provision for carrying out the purposes of the Seamen's Act, approved March 4, 1915, has been passed by the Senate on April 24th. The Netherland Legation has the honor to draw the attention of the State Department upon the fact, that in case this Bill is coming into force, great difficulties will result therefrom for the Netherland shipping, inasmuch as the courts of the United States will have to judge claims of wages between Dutch seamen and Dutch shipowners according to the clauses of this new Bill, but under contracts drawn up before a Dutch authority in Holland or a Dutch Consul under law terms entirely different from the American law. The shipping interests as well as the commercial relations between the United States and The Netherlands undoubtedly will suffer from these facts. The Netherland Legation is of opinion, that the provisions of the proposed Bill are contrary to the conventional understandings of International Law. WASHINGTON, May 3, 1928. 28 'Copy transmitted to the Chairman of the Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, the House of Representatives, May 10, 1928. 196.6/1075 The Danish Minister (Brun) to the Assistant Secretary of State J. No. 61. E. a/2. (8) (Castle) WASHINGTON, June 12, 1928. MY DEAR MR. SECRETARY: The Danish Minister of Foreign Affairs has directed me to call the attention of your Department informally to the provisions of Senator La Follette's bill S-2945, relating to the payment of advance wages and allotments in respect of seamen on foreign vessels, and making further provision for carrying out the purpose of the Seamen's Act, approved March 4, 1915. You are no doubt well acquainted with this bill and with the provision therein proposed which says: "(e) This section shall apply to payments of advance wages and allotments, in respect of seamen on foreign vessels, whether made within or without the United States or territory subject to the jurisdiction thereof, etc." In this respect I beg leave to state, that pursuant to the Danish Seamen's Act of May 1, 1923, Paragraphs 25 and 20 the acts of giving or receiving advance wages and allotments are legal, and that in the opinion of the Danish Government the extension of jurisdiction contemplated in the bill under discussion would conflict not only with Danish law, but also with the generally accepted principles of International law and practice on this subject, to wit: the status and rights of merchant ships in foreign ports, and with the adjustment of an International navigation policy in a practicable and desirable way. The bill was as you know passed by the Senate on April 24th last, but was not reported from the Committee of the House before the session was closed on May 29th. I presume, however, that it is to be expected that the bill will be reported or come up for discussion in the coming session of Congress next December and, with this eventuality in view, I would be greatly obliged to you, if you could see your way to advise the proper Committees of the considerations set forth above and of the difficulties that we anticipate if the bill should become law. Believe me [etc.] C. BRUN 196.6/1077 The Secretary of State to the Italian Embassy MEMORANDUM The Secretary of State refers to the memorandum of the Royal Italian Ambassador dated April 30, 1928, in which the Ambassador called attention to the provisions of Senate Bill No. 2945 relating to the payment of advance wages and allotments to seamen on foreign |