Government having the right to demand the continuation of the labors when these have been interrupted for reasons other than force majeure. 4.-The work should be executed in accordance with the general outlines of the project contained in the joint report of the Consulting Engineers of the International Boundary Commission attached to Minute number 129. Should a more thorough study of the location (el estudio . . . de la localización) call for any change in this project which is not fundamental, the respective work may not (sic) be carried on without the previous consent of the two Governments. The work shall be suspended at the petition of either Government, if it is proved that it is being executed under conditions not herein stipulated or not provided in the project which was approved.

5.-The cost of the work shall be met by both countries in the proportion of 88%-eighty-eight per cent for the United States, and 12%-twelve per cent for Mexico.

6.-In order duly to comply with the foregoing stipulation, Mexico shall make itself responsible for the total execution of the work along a section between Córdoba Cut and the town of Zaragoza, the length of which shall be computed from the data contained in the estimate presented so as to meet exactly 12% of the total stipulated. The United States shall be responsible for the total execution of the rest of the work.

7.-Each Government shall acquire the portions which both the right-of-way of the rectified channel and the lands segregated to one or the other side of this right-of-way may occupy in its own territory.

8.-The direction and inspection of the work shall be entrusted to the International Boundary Commission, each Government to employ for the execution of its share thereof the agency (dependencia) which, under its administrative organization, is to carry this work out. 9.-The International Boundary Commission shall prepare maps of the portions of land which the right-of-way of the rectified channel may occupy, as well as of the portions to be segregated on both sides of this channel, and within a period of thirty days from the consummation of each cut, it shall survey these portions of the terrain, preparing the respective maps, and shall declare them eliminated from the effects of Article II of the Convention of November 12, 1884, in a manner similar to that adopted by the Convention of March 20, 1905, for the elimination of Bancos. Thus, the center of the rectified channel shall be the international dividing line, and the sections which, as a result of these cuts, may fall on the Mexican side of the center of the rectified channel shall be considered as under Mexican sovereignty, and those on the opposite side shall be considered under American sovereignty, each Government reciprocally renouncing in favor of the

other rights acquired to its share of said sections situated on the opposite side of the center of the rectified channel.

(N. B.-The Spanish text of the last clause is: renunciando recíprocamente cada Gobierno a favor del otro los derechos adquiridos sobre la parte de dichas porciones situada a cada lado del eje del cauce rectificado"-of which the literal translation is: ". each Govern

ment reciprocally renouncing in favor of the other the rights acquired over the part of said portions situated on each side of the center of the rectified channel.")

10.-Should there be presented private or national claims arising from the construction or conservation of the rectified channel, or for reasons connected with the labors of rectification, each country grants to the other indemnification in this respect.

11.-The International Boundary Commission is charged with keeping the rectified channel intact (la conservación de la integridad del cauce rectificado), submitting to this end for the approval of both Governments the regulations to be issued with a view to making this conservation effective.

711.12155/459: Telegram

The Acting Secretary of State to the Consul at Ciudad Juárez (Blocker)

WASHINGTON, September 10, 1930–2 p. m. Please deliver following message to Boundary Commissioner Lawson:

"Reference telegram No. 208, September 9, 4 p. m. from American Embassy, Mexico City, to Department copy of which is stated to have been sent to you by airmail. Reference also to draft Minute referred to in telegram.

When you have received draft Minute please consult with Mexican Commissioner Serrano and send your observations thereon to the Department."

COTTON

711.12155/463

The American Commissioner, International Boundary Commission, United States and Mexico (Lawson), to the Secretary of State

EL PASO, September 20, 1930. [Received September 24.]

SIR: With reference to code message of September tenth at two p. m. thru American Consul at Juarez, and to the receipt by this office on September twelfth from American Embassy at Mexico City, of a draft of a Boundary Commission minute 66 prepared by the Foreign

66 Ante, p. 555.

Relations Department of Mexico; the American boundary commissioner in conformance with his instructions, conferred a number of times with Mexican Commissioner Serrano on the subject of the draft of minute referred to above.

At these conferences it was a concurrence of opinion of the two commissioners that the question of the form of agreement is one to be developed and finally passed upon by the two Departments. The commissioners also agreed that the actual work would be facilitated and more unhampered by the construction by Mexico of the levee system on the Mexican side beginning at Juarez and extending down stream a distance, the extent of which would be determined by the funds available under the proration.

Relative to the location of the rectified channel and boundary— whether it should be on the international boundary line south of the island or on the present river location north of the island-attention is called to the fact that the consulting engineers' report accompanying Minute No. 129 67 showed as an exhibit alternate locations. The Commissioners' report in Minute No. 129 states that the rectification will follow and straighten the present river location. If the negotiations finally include the exchange of area for the Cordova tract, and the settlement of the Chamizal question, and the practical result is obtained "That all lands to the north of the rectified channel are to [be] American territory and all lands to the south are to be Mexican territory," then it is entirely proper to consider the location of the rectified channel on the boundary line at San Elezario Island. Apparently there is no reason to inject the question of the removal of the river from its present location to the boundary line south of San Elezario unless the questions of the transfer of Cordova and settlement of Chamizal are included.

In discussions with Mexican Commissioner Serrano concerning the development of draft of a final agreement which would receive approval of both countries the American Commissioner agreed with him in the belief that much time and possibly some effort can be saved by arranging a conference at which representatives of the State Department and of the Foreign Relations Department of Mexico can act with the commissioners in reaching some final agreement. The Mexican commissioner suggests that this should be in Mexico City. Awaiting further instructions, I am [etc.]

67 Ante, p. 545.

L. M. LAWSON

711.12155/486 Telegram

The Ambassador in Mexico (Clark) 68 to the Secretary of State

[Paraphrase]

MEXICO, January 2, 1931-11 a. m. [Received 6:44 p. m.]

1. At the diplomatic dinner given by President Rubio last night I asked Acting Minister for Foreign Affairs Schiaffino whether he was now prepared to begin conferences looking to the conclusion of an arrangement covering river rectification in the Rio Grande Valley. He replied that he was ready to begin preliminary discussions, but that the conclusion of any arrangement must await the return of Minister for Foreign Affairs Estrada, probably about January 15. The El Paso meeting between Señor Estrada and myself terminated with the understanding that the finding of a formula to cover the Chamizal situation was the next step in the negotiation. At our last interview before Señor Estrada left for New York early in December last, he told me that he was in entire accord with the engineers in their report on the rectification plan. At that interview Chamizal was not specifically mentioned.

I think there may be an advantage to us in negotiating if we present the first formula. We could do this either before Señor Estrada's return or after his arrival, according as the preliminary discussions may shape themselves.

As you probably know, the people of El Paso are naturally becoming anxious to commence the work of rectification as soon as possible. I am informed that they wish to try for an appropriation at the present session of Congress. To precipitate a discussion in Congress before an agreement is reached with Mexico seems to me to be unwise. In view of the foregoing, and if it meets with the wishes of the Department, I should like to have Commissioner Lawson instructed to come to Mexico City immediately to assist in preparing for the discussions with the Mexican Foreign Office and in preparing a suggested formula for submission to the Department for its approval, so that we may begin actual negotiations as soon as possible.

CLARK

Mr. J. Reuben Clark, Jr., presented his letters of credence on November 28, 1930.

PROTECTION IN MEXICO OF THE TRADEMARKS OF THE PALMOLIVE COMPANY AND OF CHICKERING AND SONS

812.543 Palmolive Co./1: Telegram

The Secretary of State to the Ambassador in Mexico (Morrow)

WASHINGTON, November 4, 1929-6 p. m.

500. Department informed that in suit for infringement of trademark which was prosecuted by Palmolive Company through Mexican Supreme Court and in which company was represented by Basham and Ringe Supreme Court is about to publish decision in which it is stated company has no legal status in Mexican courts and which ignores provisions of Article 2, Convention for Protection Industrial Property revised at Washington June 2, 1911, although these provisions were called to Court's attention by company's attorney and would apparently be violated by such decision.

Company is desirous that decision be not published until Mexican Government has had opportunity to consider applicability and force of treaty provisions mentioned.

Please bring matter to the attention of Foreign Office informally and express the hope that if the court has failed to give proper consideration to the Convention it may yet do so.

STIMSON

812.543 Palmolive Company/3: Telegram

The Ambassador in Mexico (Morrow) to the Secretary of State

MEXICO, November 5, 1929-6 p. m. [Received 11:35 p. m.]

351. Your No. 500, November 4, 6 p. m. Palmolive Company's case has been taken up informally with the Foreign Office and with Mr. Basham, one of the company's lawyers in Mexico City. The Foreign Office has promised to investigate the point raised of possible violation of article 2 of the Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property, revised at Washington June 2, 1911, and to make informal representations to the court should they appear to be justified. Basham will furnish the Embassy with a memorandum on the case. In the meanwhile it would be helpful if the Embassy might be informed of the interpretation given in the United States to article 2 of the convention cited when it is a question of the legal capacity to sue of a foreign corporation of nations signatory to the convention when such corporation has not been "registered" in the United States.

69 Foreign Relations, 1913, p. 1363.

MORROW