of origin, and that the same applies to the United States grain inspection certificates issued under the auspices of responsible American Grain Exchanges, signed by United States grain inspectors. It is understood that the authorities here will also accept, in lieu of certificates of origin, Canadian grain inspection certificates, issued under the authority of the Canadian Government, which state on their faces that the grain which they cover is of United States origin. The new Lithuanian Regulations (Paragraph VIII), effective October 1, 1928, provide for the admission into Lithuania without certificates of origin of merchandise which unmistakably indicates by trade marks or otherwise its origin in the United States. It should be pointed out in this general connection that the purpose of the new regulations is to prevent the possible importation of material subject to maximum duties under the revised tariff, effective October 1, 1928, when originating in countries with which Lithuania has no commercial agreement providing for most favored nation treatment. The importation direct or through a third country of goods which, irrespective of their origin, fall under the minimum tariff, is apparently not of particular interest to the Lithuanian authorities and the identity of the country of origin is vital where the imports if coming from a country not enjoying a commercial accord with Lithuania would be subject to maximum duties. The United States, having a commercial accord with Lithuania, enjoys most favored nation consideration for its imports into this country. It is now stated by the Ministry of Finance that in cases of transshipment to Lithuania from the free port of Danzig, the customs authorities will not be willing to accept documents of identity issued by officials in charge of bonded warehouses or by the Chamber of Commerce, as no Lithuanian consular representative is maintained in Danzig whose certificate might be attached thereto. Documents of origin, duly certified by the appropriate Lithuanian consular or diplomatic representatives, should, therefore, cover all American goods subject to transshipment through the free port of Danzig, if they might be subject to maximum duties under the revised tariff in the event that they were confused with materials originating in countries with which Lithuania has no commercial agreement. It is understood that goods transshipped through other free ports will not be subjected to similar requirements due to the presence elsewhere of Lithuanian consular or diplomatic officers qualified to certify to their origin upon the basis of such documents as those outlined in Paragraph V of the revised Agreement between the United States and Lithuania according mutual unconditional most-favored-nation treatment in customs matters, signed December 23, 1925, Foreign Relations, 1925, vol. II, pp. 500-503. regulations, which became effective October 1, 1928. It should be added that, as the Lithuanian revised regulations provide that merchandise whose origin is unmistakably identified by trade marks or other distinguishing marks (Paragraphs IV and VIII) may enter without certificates of origin there should be no obstacle to the importation, transshipped through the free port of Danzig, of American products which are obviously of American and no other origin. The attitude of the Ministry of Finance is a liberal one as applied to the importation of merchandise of United States origin, and it is thought that, in practice, only in the event of the suspicion arising of the substitution of Polish goods through transshipment at Danzig may difficulties be anticipated in this regard. The compliance of American shippers with the requirements outlined in the regulations for the enforcement of the new Lithuanian Import Tariff Amendment, which was sent to the Department in translation in this Consulate's report No. 74, of October 8, 1928,10 should, of course, remove any obstacle to the importation into Lithuania of goods of United States origin, but it is thought that the Legation may now care to apprise the Department of the attitude of the Lithuanian Government with respect to the establishment of the origin of goods transshipped through the free port of Danzig. I have [etc.] 10 Not printed. HUGH S. FULLERTON MEXICO PROTECTION OF RIGHTS OF AMERICAN OWNERS OF OIL LANDS IN MEXICO1 812.6363/2473 The Ambassador in Mexico (Morrow) to the Secretary of State No. 215 MEXICO, December 30, 1927. SIR Referring to my despatch No. 198 of December 27, 1927, reporting the introduction of a bill by the President of the Republic in the Mexican Congress for the amendment of articles 14 and 15 of the Petroleum Law now in force, I have the honor to inform the Department that according to the local press on December 28 the Chamber of Deputies on December 27 passed the proposed legislation but with the following addition to the amended article 15: "This term having passed, those rights shall be held as renounced and there shall have no effect whatever against the Federal Government the rights the confirmation of which may not have been requested." This action was taken by the Chamber of Deputies by unanimous vote and under suspension of the rules. The report of the Second Committee on Constitutional Points recommending the passage of the legislation is enclosed herewith in translation.2 Today, I am informed that after reconsideration by both houses of Congress, the bill was passed yesterday as originally introduced with the addition of the word "confirmatory" in describing the concessions stipulated in the introductory clause of Article 14 and with the sanction recommended by the Chamber of Deputies in Article 15. I enclose herewith a copy and translation of the bill as passed for submission to the President. I have [etc.] DWIGHT W. MORROW 1 Continued from Foreign Relations, 1927, vol. 1, pp. 176–209. "Not printed. 'For text of the petroleum bill approved by the Chamber of Deputies, November 26, 1925, see Foreign Relations, 1925, vol. II, p. 531. For text of the petroleum law of December 26, 1925, see Diario Oficial, December 31, 1925. [Enclosure Translation] Bill Amending Articles 14 and 15 of the Petroleum Law SOLE ARTICLE. Articles 14 and 15 of the Law Regulating Article 27 of the Constitution in the Petroleum Branch, dated December 26, 1925, are amended in the following terms: ARTICLE 14. The following rights shall be confirmed without cost by means of the issuance of confirmatory concessions: I. Those derived from lands upon which petroleum exploitation works were commenced prior to May 1, 1917; II. Those derived from contracts entered into prior to May 1, 1917, by the owner of the surface or his representatives for petroleum exploitation purposes. Confirmations of these rights shall be granted without limit of time when they must be made in favor of the owners of the surface; and according to the time stipulated in the contract in the case of rights from contracts entered into by owners of the surface or their representatives. III. To the holders of pipe lines and refiners who may be working at present by virtue of concession or authorization issued by the Department of Industry, Commerce and Labor, and with reference to those same concessions or authorizations. ARTICLE 15. A period of one year shall be given, counted from the day following the publication of these reforms to the same day, inclusive, of the following year, to solicit the confirmation of the rights to which the preceding article refers and which have not been the object of confirmatory petitions during the period primarily set in this article. This term having expired, those rights shall be considered renounced, and rights the confirmation of which has not been solicited shall have no effect whatever against the Federal Government. TRANSITORY ARTICLE. Confirmations solicited within the year 1926 and upon which the respective title has not been issued, shall be granted, if lawful, in accordance with these reforms. Confirmatory titles already issued shall likewise be rectified in accordance therewith. 812.6363/2475: Telegram The Ambassador in Mexico (Morrow) to the Secretary of State MEXICO, January 9, 1928-7 p. m. 16. We were advised that the President today signed the recent amendment to the petroleum act referred to in my despatch No. 215 'See The Mexican Constitution of 1917 Compared With the Constitution of 1857 (Washington, Government Printing Office, 1926). and that the form of the bill as signed is as quoted in that despatch. It is expected that the official text of the bill will be printed in the Diario Oficial tomorrow. Pursuant to an arrangement made with the President and Secretary Morones the following communication was sent today by the Huasteca Company to the Secretary of Industry, Commerce and Labor: "Citizen Secretary of Industry, Commerce and Labor: H. N. Branch, representing the Huasteca Petroleum Company, very respectfully comes before you to state: that with regard to the provision of article 14 of the law of December 26, 1925, recently amended, I have the honor to approach you on behalf of my principals to beg that you be so good as to advise me whether the request for confirmatory concessions by a foreign company implies any surrender of rights acquired prior to May 1, 1917. I proffer the assurances of my courteous consideration. Mexico, D. F., January 9, 1928." To the foregoing communication the Secretary of Industry, Commerce and Labor sent the following answer: 5 "Mr. H. N. Branch, representative of the Huasteca Petroleum Company, City. In reply to your communication No. 11-28 of today I inform you as follows: The Federal Executive in compliance with the decision handed down by the Supreme Court of Justice in the amparo of the Mexican Petroleum Company proposed to the honorable Congress the amendment of articles 14 and 15 of the petroleum law of December 26, 1925, and the study of this amendment belonged to the Second Committee on Constitutional Points of the Chamber of Deputies, which rendered to the Chamber a report that says in its fundamental part: "The confirmation of a right is its express recognition in all its amplitude and with the conditions inherent therein so that no restriction whatever can be established in respect of the term or conditions imposed with relation to the rights that are confirmed, since any restriction in this respect implies a modification of the right confirmed and a retroactive application of the law, contrary to article 14 of the Constitution, since the rights confirmation of which is provided for in article 14 of the law, are prior to the date on which the fundamental law went into force.' Therefore, in view of the consideration which preceded the bill of amendment submitted by the Executive, this Department believes that the petition for confirmatory concession on the part of a national or foreign company does not imply the renunciation of rights acquired before May 1 of 1917, such confirmatory concession operating as the recognition of rights which will continue in force subject only to police regulations. I repeat to you the assurances of my courteous consideration. Effective suffrage; no reelection. Mexico, D. F., January 9, 1928, the Secretary, signed L. Morones." For the decision of November 17, 1927, see Foreign Relations, 1927, vol. III, p. 197. For the corrected text of this quoted sentence, see telegram No. 23, Jan. 12, 1928, noon, from the Chargé in Mexico, p. 295. |