Lapas attēli
PDF
ePub

GENERAL

TREATY FOR THE RENUNCIATION OF WAR AS AN INSTRUMENT OF NATIONAL POLICY-Continued

[blocks in formation]

Information that the British suggested to the Italians that an American juristic expert be invited to meet with juristic experts of other powers.

May 2 (43)

From the Ambassador in Italy (tel.)

May 2 (108)

May 2 (56)

To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)

Opinion that the question does not require submission to conference of jurists; instructions to use efforts to discourage idea of conference. Information that any intimation that the Secretary would go to Europe to negotiate anti-war treaty is erroneous, and that there is no need for preliminary conference of Foreign Secretaries.

To the Ambassador in Italy (tel.)

Page

45

46

47

Statement of position regarding conference of jurists, and preliminary conference of Foreign Secretaries.

May 2 (122)

To the Ambassador in France (tel.)

47

Statement of position regarding conference of jurists and
preliminary conference of Foreign Secretaries.
(Instructions to repeat to Berlin.

Sent also to Japan.)

May 2 (47)

48

May 3 (112)

May 3 (95)

May 4 (111)

May 4 (55)

May 4 (112)

May 7 (99)

From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)

Opinion of Secretary General of League that there is no inconsistency between American proposal for anti-war pact and League Covenant.

From the Ambassador in France (tel.)

Advice that Ambassador has heard nothing about either commission of technical experts or conference of Foreign Secretaries.

From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)

Discussion with Chamberlain regarding misunderstanding concerning Secretary's attitude toward conference of Foreign Secretaries, and Chamberlain's willingness to discourage proposed meeting of jurists. Desire of French Ambassador at London to talk with American Ambassador.

To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)

No objection to a talk with French Ambassador.

From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)

Unwillingness of Japan to participate in any conference of jurists or Foreign Secretaries not attended by United States. To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)

Information that the Secretary's attitude toward conference of jurists and Foreign Secretaries has been conveyed to French, British, and German Ambassadors. Information as to Japanese attitude.

From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)

French Ambassador's opinion that some sort of meeting will be necessary before treaty can be put in final form; his statement that French acceptance of treaty would be made easier if Czechoslovakia, Poland, and Yugoslavia were favorable toward signing; his suggestion that American Ambassador talk over situation with Beneš, Czechoslovak Foreign Minister; his favorable attitude toward treaty, provided Secretary's interpretation, as given in Washington speech, can be put into more precise and authoritative form.

[merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small]

GENERAL

TREATY FOR THE RENUNCIATION OF WAR AS AN INSTRUMENT OF NATIONAL POLICY-Continued

[blocks in formation]

May 8 (1682)

From the Ambassador in Italy

Foreign Minister's note of May 4 (text printed) expressing willingness to reach agreement proposed by U. S. Government, but stating desire that United States participate in a preliminary meeting of jurists.

Transmittal of Italian note of May 4; likelihood that Italy
will not prove insistent in conference matter.
(Instructions to repeat to Berlin.)

May 8 (127)

To the Ambassador in France (tel.)

May 8 (87)

May 9 (101)

From the Minister in Canada (tel.)

Canadian uncertainty as to what arrangements will be made
for Dominion participation in anti-war pact.
From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)

Information that Chamberlain is preparing a reply based
substantially on German formula, and that he expressed grati-
fication that Secretary does not wholly exclude conference of
jurists; Ambassador's assumption that Secretary felt to the
contrary.

To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)

[blocks in formation]

May 9 (116)

57

Advice that Secretary has been careful to refrain from stating flatly that U. S. Government would decline to be represented at a conference of jurists.

May 9 (52)

To the Minister in Canada (tel.)

58

Belief that question of Canadian participation in treaty is primarily one of Empire policy.

May 9 (102)

From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)

59

Report of discussions with Beneš concerning anti-war pact; opinion that Beneš is in favor of treaty and will exert his influence with the French Foreign Office.

May 10 (89)

From the Minister in Canada (tel.)

60

Canadian desire for initial inclusion in treaty, provided
Government at London agrees.

May 11 (103)

From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)

61

May 12 (119)

Arguments against Secretary's participation in any sort of conference; opinion that consultations on phraseology can be carried on under Secretary's guidance with Ambassadors at Washington.

To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)

Aide-mémoire from British Embassy, May 11 (text printed), stating that because Secretary of State was not favorably disposed toward conference of jurists or Foreign Ministers, British Foreign Secretary withdrew his suggestion.

From the Minister in Poland (tel.)

62

May 14 (29)

63

Polish Government's regret that it was not equally associated with the five powers in anti-war pact plan, and its belief that both Czechoslovakia and Poland, as signatories of Locarno pact, should be included in invitation.

1

GENERAL

TREATY FOR THE RENUNCIATION OF WAR AS AN INSTRUMENT OF NATIONAL
POLICY-Continued

[merged small][ocr errors]

Date and
number

e

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]
[merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

To the Minister in Poland (tel.)

Instructions to explain that invitations were limited to the five great powers because real difficulties might emerge if field of formal negotiations were enlarged, and to inform Foreign Minister that Secretary will cooperate in any way to the end that Poland may become one of the original signatories.

(Instructions to repeat telegram No. 29 of May 14 and this telegram to Embassy in London.)

From the Minister in Poland (tel.)

Favorable attitude of Foreign Minister, and his promise to give a definite reply within a week.

From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)

British reply (text printed) to U. S. proposal of April 13, stating readiness to enter into negotiations looking to conclusion of treaty and agreement of the Dominions and India in the general principle of proposed treaty.

To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)

Arrangements for extending through U. S. Legations invitations to Canadian and Irish Free State Governments to participate in treaty; note for Foreign Secretary (text printed) extending through him invitation to Governments of Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, and India.

From the Ambassador in France (tel.)

Gratification of French public at British note of May 19 which is taken as recognizing validity of France's position and as taking her reservations into consideration.

To the Ambassador in France

Explanation of the reason for the existence of confusion with respect to the two Habana resolutions.

From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)

Report of informal conversation in which Chamberlain explained his policy toward France and British desires with regard to the treaty in general.

[blocks in formation]

0

May 26 (66)

From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)

75

Japanese reply (text printed) stating desire to render cooperation toward conclusion of a treaty.

May 30 (11)

From the Minister in the Irish Free State (tel.)

76

Irish Free State reply (text printed) accepting U. S. invitation unreservedly.

May 30 (437)

From the Minister in Canada

77

Canadian note (text printed) accepting U. S. invitation.

June 3

From the British Ambassador

79

Objections to incorporation in treaty of a provision by which contracting parties would be liberated from their obligations toward one of their number who might become involved in war.

From the Ambassador in France (tel.)

Briand's remarks that negotiations have reached point where they can hardly fail, and his belief that reservations of views of various powers can be put in concrete form by protocol, expanded preamble, or other means.

237576 42- -3

June 6 (147)

79

GENERAL

TREATY FOR THE RENUNCIATION OF WAR AS AN INSTRUMENT OF NATIONAL POLICY-Continued

[blocks in formation]

1928 June 9 (1452)

To the Chargé in Great Britain

Page

80

Conversation with the British Ambassador in which the Secretary expressed his inability to agree to suggested inclusion by each country of reservations, provisos, or understandings.

From the Minister in Poland

June 11 Polish note (text printed) accepting U. S. invitation.

(1776)

June 12

June 18

June 19 (2853)

June 20 (179)

June 20 (157)

June 23

Memorandum by the Under Secretary of State

Conversation in which the Japanese Chargé offered certain technical suggestions as to phraseology of treaty, and reserved right to make further suggestions.

From the British Embassy

Understanding that French reservations and the views expressed by the different powers are to be included in redraft of preamble.

From the Chargé in Great Britain

Foreign Office notes of May 30, June 2, June 11, and June 15
(texts printed), stating acceptance of U. S. invitation by the
Governments of New Zealand, Australia, India, and South
Africa, respectively.

To the Ambassador in France (tel.)

Note for Foreign Office containing statement of U. S. position and transmitting a revised draft treaty containing redrafted preamble (texts printed).

(Footnotes: Instructions to repeat to missions in Great Britain, Belgium, Czechoslovakia, Germany, Irish Free State, Italy, and Poland. Sent also to Japan.

Information that, in accordance with telegraphic instructions of June 22, the note was dated June 23 and together with draft treaty was delivered to the respective Foreign Offices on that day.)

To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)

Instructions for preparing the notes to the British Government and the Dominion Governments and India.

83

84

86

87

90

95

Memorandum by the Chief of the Division of Western European
Affairs

96

Conversation in which the Secretary handed to the Japanese Chargé a copy of identic note and revised treaty draft and explained certain changes in phraseology.

June 23

Memorandum by the Under Secretary of State

97

June 28 (27)

Conversation in which the Secretary explained to the French Ambassador certain clauses in the preamble, and stated that he believed he had met all of France's views.

From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)

Press query as to reason why Brazil has not been included in invitation to participate as original signatory; Ambassador's desire for statement thereon, for use with Foreign Minister if deemed desirable.

98

GENERAL

TREATY FOR THE RENUNCIATION OF WAR AS AN INSTRUMENT OF NATIONAL POLICY-Continued

Date and

number

1928 June 29 (24)

Subject

Page

To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)

98

Explanation that original restriction to a few powers was to narrow the field of negotiations and to expedite conclusion of a treaty; reasons for inclusion of British Dominions and India and the Locarno powers.

[blocks in formation]

To the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)

Transmittal of text of telegram No. 24 of June 29 sent to Brazil, with explanation that same considerations apply to country to which Ambassador is accredited.

(Instructions to repeat to Embassies in Chile and Argen

tina.)

To the Ambassador in France (tel.)

Information that Secretary explained to French Ambassador that he could not put the interpretations as expressed in his note either into a preamble or exchange of notes as part of the treaty; similar statement to British Chargé. Instructions to telegraph if Ambassador knows what action French Cabinet has taken.

From the Chargé in Great Britian (tel.)

Understanding that British are preparing reply to latest American proposal, that British and French juridical experts are studying legal aspect at Geneva, and that British Foreign Secretary regrets that American proposal has been presented in final form, for either acceptance or refusal.

From the Ambassador in France (tel.)

Information from Briand that on his suggestion Cabinet gave its approval in principle to draft treaty, and that he stated he would continue study of situation with France's cosignatories to Locarno treaties, after which he would bring up question before Cabinet again.

To the Ambassador in France (tel.)

Expression of opinion, in response to question raised by British Chargé, that there can be no inconsistency between the proposed treaty and the League Covenant.

From the Chargé in Japan (tel.)

Foreign Office instructions to Japanese Chargé in Washington to take up question of alteration of phraseology to avoid possible objections of Privy Council when it studies matter of ratification.

To the Chargé in Japan (tel.)

Memorandum handed to Japanese Chargé (text printed), explaining that text would justify translation into phraseology acceptable to Japanese, and stating that the phraseology in question has no such significance as was attributed to it.

To the Ambassador in Spain

100

100

101

101

102

103

104

105

Information that Spanish Ambassador has expressed desire that Spain come into treaty as an original signatory.

July 11

106

(3706)

From the Ambassador in Germany

Foreign Office note (text printed), stating agreement to interpretation in Secretary of State's note of June 23 and declaring readiness to sign revised draft treaty.

« iepriekšējāTurpināt »