directed by the consular officer of the country to which the vessel belongs and within whose district the wreck may have occurred, or by some other person authorized thereto by the law of that country. Pending the arrival of such officer, who shall be immediately informed of the occurrence, or the arrival of such other person, whose authority shall be made known to the local authorities by the consular officer, the local authorities shall take all necessary measures for the protection of persons and the preservation of wrecked property. The local authorities shall not otherwise interfere than for the maintenance of order, the protection of the interests of the salvors, if these do not belong to the crews that have been wrecked and to carry into effect the arrangements made for the entry and exportation of the merchandise saved. It is understood that such merchandise is not to be subjected to any customhouse charges, unless it be intended for consumption in the country where the wreck may have taken place.

The intervention of the local authorities in these different cases shall occasion no expense of any kind, except such as may be caused by the operations of salvage and the preservation of the goods saved, together with such as would be incurred under similar circumstances by vessels of the nation.

ARTICLE XXVIII

Subject to any limitation or exception hereinabove set forth, or hereafter to be agreed upon the territories of the High Contracting Parties to which the provisions of this Treaty extend shall be understood to comprise all areas of land, water, and air over which the Parties respectively claim and exercise dominion as sovereign thereof, except the Panama Canal Zone and Svalbard.

ARTICLE XXIX

The present Treaty shall remain in full force for the term of three years from the date of the exchange of ratifications, on which date it shall begin to take effect in all of its provisions.

If within one year before the expiration of the aforesaid period of three years neither High Contracting Party notifies to the other an intention of modifying by change or omission, any of the provisions of any of the Articles in this Treaty or of terminating it upon the expiration of the aforesaid period, the Treaty shall remain in full force and effect after the aforesaid period and until one year from such a time as either of the High Contracting Parties shall have notified to the other an intention of modifying or terminating the Treaty.

The present Treaty shall, from the date of the exchange of ratifications be deemed to supplant, as between the United States and Norway, the Treaty of Commerce and Navigation concluded by the United States and the King of Norway and Sweden on July 4, 1827.

ARTICLE XXX

The present Treaty shall be ratified, and the ratifications thereof shall be exchanged at Washington as soon as possible.

In witness whereof the respective plenipotentiaries have signed the same and have affixed their seals thereto.

Done in duplicate, in the English and Norwegian languages at Washington, this 5th day of June 1928.

The United States of America and the Kingdom of Norway by the undersigned, the Secretary of State of the United States and the Minister of Norway at Washington, their duly empowered Plenipotentiaries, agree as follows:

Notwithstanding the provision in the third paragraph of Article XXIX of the Treaty of Friendship, Commerce and Consular Rights between the United States and Norway, signed June 5, 1928, that the said treaty shall from the date of the exchange of ratifications thereof be deemed to supplant as between the United States and Norway the treaty of Commerce and Navigation concluded by the United States and the King of Norway and Sweden on July 4, 1827, the provisions of Article I of the latter treaty concerning the entry and residence of the nationals of the one country in the territories of the other for purposes of trade shall continue in full force and effect.

The present additional Article shall be considered to be an integral part of the treaty signed June 5, 1928, as fully and completely as if it had been included in that treaty, and as such integral part shall be subject to the provisions in Article XXIX thereof in regard to ratification, duration and termination concurrently with the other Articles of the treaty.

Done, in duplicate, in the English and Norwegian languages, at Washington this 25th day of February, 1929.

711.572/73

The Norwegian Minister (Bachke) to the Secretary of State

WASHINGTON, June 5, 1928. MR. SECRETARY OF STATE: During the negotiations relating to the conclusion of the Treaty of Friendship, Commerce and Consular Rights, which to-day has been signed, I was given to understand that under the present tariff laws of the United States Norwegian Sardines are accorded the same tariff treatment as sardines imported from any other country and that such equality of treatment would be continued under the most favored nation provision of the Treaty. Upon the request of my Government I have the honor to inform Your Excellency that my Government would appreciate very much to receive, if this be found possible, a communication from Your Excellency, stating that the tariff treatment of the Norwegian Sardines is as above mentioned.

Please accept [etc.]

711.572/73

H. H. BACHKE

The Secretary of State to the Norwegian Minister (Bachke)

WASHINGTON, June 5, 1928.

SIR: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your note of this day's date, stating that during the negotiations relating to the conclusion of the Treaty of Friendship, Commerce and Consular Rights between the United States and Norway, which you have this day signed with me, you were given to understand that under the present tariff laws of the United States, Norwegian sardines are accorded the same tariff treatment as sardines imported from any other country, and that such equality of treatment would be continued under the most-favored-nation provision of the treaty.

In reply I am happy to confirm the correctness of your understanding, as above recited, of the equality of treatment which is now accorded under the tariff laws of the United States, and will continue to be accorded under the most-favored-nation provision of the treaty, to Norwegian sardines.

Accept [etc.]

FRANK B. KELLOGG

PANAMA

PROPOSALS BY PANAMA TO MODIFY THE UNPERFECTED TREATY BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND PANAMA, SIGNED JULY 28, 19261

711.192/354

The Panaman Minister (Alfaro) to the Secretary of State2

[Translation "]

MEMORANDUM CONCERNING THE MODIFICATIONS SUGGESTED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF PANAMA FOR THE REVISION OF THE TREATY OF JULY 28, 1926

Preamble.

The objections that have been made to the preamble agree with the remarks that have frequently been made by the Panaman Commissioners to the American Commissioners during the negotiations. The American negotiator well knows how strongly we objected to including in the preamble the expression "sovereign rights" of the United States, which, in the form in which it stands, does not impart to the United States any new right, nor increase in any way the rights it acquired under the treaty of 1903, nor recognize that the United States holds absolute and titular sovereignty in the Canal Zone. But although this be so, and so appear from the logical, grammatical, and juridical analysis of the preamble, yet it tends to produce an impression to the contrary which is therefore erroneous. Proof of this is found by references in various newspapers of this country, the New York Times among others, to the new treaty in which this sentence occurs: "It is understood that the new treaty finally determines the sovereignty of the Panama Canal Zone."

This, and other similar utterances in the American press, formed the subject of a correction given to the press by the undersigned Minister under date of December 18, 1926. This correction was clear and specific and before it was given to the press was shown per

1 Continued from Foreign Relations, 1927, vol. III, pp. 484-490. For text of unperfected treaty, see ibid., 1926, vol. II, p. 833.

This undated memorandum was handed to Francis White, the Assistant Secretary of State, by the Panaman Minister on January 5, 1928.

File translation revised.

'Foreign Relations, 1904, p. 543.

416955-43- 49

663

sonally by the Minister to the Chief of the Latin American Division, Mr. Stabler, who did not object to it in any way. The statement ended with these words:

"It was specifically agreed during the negotiations that that language (that of the preamble) means solely a recognition of the rights conceded to the United States by article III of the treaty of 1903 and does not mean an extension of such rights.

"If the language used in the news despatches here referred to intended to express the idea that the new treaty contains any stipulation that makes or recognizes the United States as the absolute and titular sovereign of the Canal Zone, the Legation categorically declares that the treaty does not contain any such stipulation and that the Government of Panama has never shown even any intention to agree to any such stipulation."

The impression made by the language of the preamble on the mass of the public of Panama is, nevertheless, that it is intended to force upon Panama an indirect and veiled recognition of the fact that the Republic conceded to the United States absolute and unrestricted sovereignty in the Canal Zone. As Panama has stated before, during and after the negotiations, this is a proposition to which it can never agree and, as said by the undersigned Minister on more than one occasion to the American negotiator, if Panama should have to pay that price for any concessions, no matter how advantageous, it would forego obtaining them rather than pay such a price.

What has happened since the treaty was signed has brought into prominence the reason why the Panaman Commissioners objected to inserting a sentence which besides being juridically ineffective and innocuous and therefore unnecessary and useless, is likely to cause erroneous impressions that may in the future lead to conflicting constructions which it is to our interest to avoid.

The Government of Panama, therefore, considers that the preamble would directly express the original purpose of the High Contracting Parties and that neither would be injured if the first paragraph should be changed as follows:

"The Republic of Panama and the United States of America desiring to settle certain points of difference between them and desiring also to regulate certain features of their future intercourse arising from the contiguity of the Republic of Panama and the Canal Zone, have resolved to conclude a treaty and have accordingly appointed as their plenipotentiaries."

Article I.

The raison d'être for this article was Panama's complaint about the construction put by the authorities of the United States on article VI of the treaty of 1903 in that part which has reference to the appraisal of the property expropriated for Canal purposes