III.

Each member nation agrees to maintain radio facilities for the handling of official messages of the League of Nations, and official messages between members of the League of Nations at a uniform rate.

Section 2. Each member nation agrees to handle through its radio service a reasonable amount of commercial press matter of general interest at a uniform rate. Section 3. Each member nation holds itself ready to negotiate with other member nations for establishment of commercial radio communications.

IV.

Section 1. With special reference to communication by telephone, telegraph, cable and radio the League of Nations is authorized: to investigate complaints arising in connection therewith; in case of international disputes to determine rates, practices and schedules; to fix the rates indicated in Paragraph III, Sections 1 and 2; to act as a center for the exchange of technical information; to call special conferences, or to recognize existing conferences such as the International Telegraph Convention and International Radio-Telegraph Convention.

CONCLUSION.

The steady extension of democratic forms of government and the increasing closeness of contact between all parts of the world point to the conclusion that the ultimate basis of world peace is common knowledge and understanding between the masses of the world. Hence the distribution of intelligence in the form of news becomes of the utmost importance.

The extent of news dissemination is determined largely by availability of wire and radio facilities and by rates charged for press matter. The existence of adequate facilities and low rates to all parts of the world would bring about a generous flow of news.

Inadequate facilities and high rates leave a situation

where the press of many parts of the world remains provincial owing to lack of general news and at the same time leave the press of such sections easy victims to the propagandist.

Modern business with its world-wide ramifications likewise demands an extension of communication facilities. Abuses in connection with existing communication facilities should be removed and adequate facilities established with rates that are fair to every user.

If statesmanship has the vision and the organizing ability, the most widely separated communities can be made neighbors, trading with each other, interested in each other, understanding each other, learning from each other.

DOCUMENT 64.

Letter of Walter S. Rogers, communications expert of the American Commission to Negotiate Peace, to President Wilson, dated May 2, 1919, discussing the problem of the disposition of the captured German oceanic cables.

AMERICAN COMMISSION

TO NEGOTIATE PEACE.

DEAR MR. PRESIDENT:

Paris, May 2, 1919.

As I see the matter, the problem regarding the German cables can be summarized as follows:

1. The German cable systems have been largely broken up. Certain of the cables have been cut or sealed; others are being used in situ by the Allies; others have been taken up and used elsewhere; others have been diverted to new points; on at least one cable (PernambucoMonrovia) an ally has spent considerable money.

2. While it is very questionable whether the Allies have any legal justification for their actions, nevertheless the dispersal of the German cable systems has been carried to a point where it is quite impossible to return the cables to Germany in anything like their former condition. Nor can it be forgotten that German cables were laid partly for political reasons.

3. The British attitude is largely influenced by a desire to retain the former Emden-Azores-New York cable, which has been diverted to Land's End-Azores-Halifax. This cable can be of considerable importance to Canada, for the Dominion, like the United States, needs additional cable facilities. Should the Canadian and British Governments operate this cable in such a way as to force down. trans-Atlantic cable rates, the United States would benefit.

4. As to the question arising over the ownership of the other trans-Atlantic cables, the immediate ownership of a cable or group of cables is not especially significant. Every cable is a part of the world system of communications, and as such it is operated in conjunction with other telegraph and cable administrations. The cable business has grown up without plan or supervision, so that every cable company is enmeshed in a snarl of inter-relationships which limit individual action. Speaking generally, it is true that the British cable companies dominate the cable business. A certain amount of governmental supervision is exercised over cable companies through the control of landing rights. The American operated trans-Atlantic cables could not live a day except for their arrangements with the British Government telegraph system for the interchange of business.

5. The Japanese attitude is largely influenced by their desire to retain the cable running from Shanghai to Yap to Menado and the cable connecting Guam and Yap. The Japanese Government owns other cables and no doubt wants the German cables to further Japanese trade and influence in the Dutch East Indies and beyond. These German cables do not pay; incorporated in a well worked out system of Pacific cables, they probably would prove profitable.

6. The French attitude is largely influenced: (a) By a desire to retain the former Emden-Azores-New York cable, which now runs Brest-Azores-New York. There are already two French cables crossing the Atlantic, both inefficiently operated. These French cables have not been used to bring down rates or to force an improvement of service. (b) By a desire to retain the PernambucoMonrovia cable or to be reimbursed for money expended upon it.

7. Looking at the cable situation broadly, there is a great human need for more cables, for lower rates and for better service. Low, uniform rates and adequate service would do much to bring about a common understanding throughout the world. Every country should have direct, unfettered communication with every other

country. Cable development is checked largely by British control of gutta-percha, by combinations between present telegraph and cable administrations, and by exclusive landing rights held by certain companies.

8. As a step toward giving the world better cable facilities, the German cables and the new lines based on them might well be turned over to the "Big Five" as trustees with power to own and operate them or, if later thought advisable, to dispose of them.

9. If the trustee arrangement is not agreed upon, there is nothing left but to divide the cables among the powers. In any such arrangement the United States should insist that guarantees be given (a) that every cable user be given equal service and equal rates and that there be no secret or preferential rates; and (b) that assurances be given that arrangements will be made for the interchange of traffic upon a uniform basis with all telegraph, cable and radio administrations. These provisions will be in the direction of introducing into the cable business now generally recognized principles of fair dealing. In any parcelling out of the cables the United States should insist as a very minimum upon having a half interest in the Yap-Guam cable, the ownership of the Brest-AzoresNew York cable, and assurances of cable connections from Brest to Emden. If the Japanese should obtain the Yap-Guam cable, they would insist upon going to Guam a strategic point now closed to all outsiders. Ownership of the Brest-Azores-New York cable would give the American Government a certain amount of power over the trans-Atlantic cable situation, such as Great Britain and Canada would obtain through retaining the Land's End-Azores-Halifax cable. The French Government, through the present French cables, already has such a lever, and then it is presumed that France would receive the Pernambuco-Monrovia cable. The United States should also receive the former German cable now derelict off New York.

10. It is probable that to the suggestion that the German cables be turned over to the Big Five as trustees, that Great Britain will insist on keeping out of the trust the