GENERAL

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

Date and number

1928 Oct. 23 (286)

Subject

Page

From the Ambassador in Mexico (tel.)

221

Belief of Acting Foreign Minister that inconsistency exists between treaty provision and U. S. notes of September 24 and 26 concerning procedure for adherence; submission of matter to Department for instructions.

222

Oct. 25 (46)

Oct. 29 (86)

Oct. 30 (14)

Oct. 30 (647)

Nov. 2 (1450)

Nov. 3 (288)

Nov. 9 (79)

To the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)

Observations on Senator Molinari's remarks concerning negotiations and effect of the anti-war treaty; permission to convey these views to Molinari if the Ambassador deems it wise.

From the Minister in Ethiopia

Information that on October 28 the King of Ethiopia sealed, signed, and ratified the treaty, this act constituting complete and final ratification under Ethiopian law.

To the Minister in Egypt

Instructions to present note to Egyptian Government (text printed) expressing pleasure at Egyptian decision to adhere and appreciation for friendly sentiments expressed in its note; information, for use if occasion requires, that complete adherence may be evidenced by deposit with U. S. Government of Egyptian adherence, and that there is no need to await ratification by the signatory powers.

From the Minister in Denmark

Foreign Office note of October 29 (text printed), stating
that formal declaration of adhesion of Iceland, while reserving
its ratification, has been endorsed on one of the certified copies
which was forwarded to Danish Minister in Washington with
instructions to transmit it to the Department for deposit.
(Footnote: Transmitted by the Danish Minister on Novem-
ber 13.)

From the Chargé in Colombia

Foreign Office note of October 25 (text printed), stating that a bill has been presented to Congress to authorize Government to adhere to anti-war pact.

To the Ambassador in Mexico (tel.)

Explanation of Department's instructions with regard to adherence procedure; information that Department regarded Mexican Government's note of September 14 as notice of adherence, but that if Mexican Government wishes to deposit its perfected instrument of adherence at Washington, the U. S. Government will be pleased to receive it.

From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)

Argentine President's decision that anti-war treaty does not offer possibilities for realizing universal peace which has always been ideal and policy of Argentina; information that Ambassador talked unsuccessfully with Senator Molinari on the basis of points contained in Department's telegram No. 46 of October 25; doubt that any further representations in immediate future would cause Argentine President to change his mind.

225

226

227

228

229

230

GENERAL

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

1928 Nov. 17 (666)

Nov. 19 (123)

Nov. 19 (1402)

From the Minister in Paraguay

Foreign Office note of November 17 (text printed), declaring adherence and stating that matter will be submitted to National Congress for approval.

To the Charge in Japan (tel.)

Information that U. S. Government does not consider adherence by an unrecognized government to a multilateral treaty to which it is a party, entails recognition by U. S. Government; opinion that it is for Japanese Government to decide what the action would be on its part which would constitute recognition of the Chinese Nationalist Government; instructions to telegraph promptly if there is any likelihood that suggested reservation with regard to China will be seriously considered.

From the Chargé in Salvador

Page

231

232

233

Receipt of note from Salvadoran Government stating that it will at an opportune time issue resolution regarding its adherence.

Nov. 27

From the French Ambassador

234

Note from Afghan Acting Minister for Foreign Affairs to the French Minister in Afghanistan of October 3 (text printed), asking that decision of Afghan Government to adhere to antiwar treaty be communicated to U. S. Government.

PARTICIPATION OF THE UNITED STATES IN THE WORK OF THE FIFTH SESSION OF THE PREPARATORY COMMISSION FOR THE DISARMAMENT CONFERENCE

1927 Dec. 16 (209) (L. N.

1023)

1928 Feb. 16

(12)

From the Minister in Switzerland

Suggestions as to course to be followed by American delegation at fifth session of Preparatory Commission, to convene on March 15, 1928.

From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)

Announcement by Secretariat that provisional agenda will cover (1) progress of work of Security Committee, (2) Russian resolution regarding convention for total disarmament, and (3) progress of work of Preparatory Commission, including a full discussion of whether or not a second reading of draft convention is to take place in the session.

235

240

(Footnote: Instructions by Acting Secretary of State, February 6, 1928, that Mr. Hugh Gibson, Ambassador in Belgium, proceed to Geneva to head American representation.)

Feb. 25

From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)

240

Summary of Russian draft convention for immediate and complete disarmament.

Feb. 27

From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)

242

(14)

Desire of Gibson and Minister for instructions regarding forthcoming meeting, particularly as regards second reading of draft and U. S. attitude on Russian resolution.

GENERAL

PARTICIPATION OF THE UNITED STATES IN THE WORK OF THE FIFTH SESSION OF THE PREPARATORY COMMISSION FOR THE DISARMAment ConfeRENCE-Con.

Date and

number

1928 Feb. 28 (23)

Mar. 9

Mar. 10 (32)

Mar. 12 (2)

Mar. 12 (5)

Subject

To the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)

Instructions not to assume offensive at opening of meeting; opinion that Russian idea is so impractical that no detailed discussion is required; willingness to agree to second reading of draft if other powers so desire; information as to developments in naval limitation discussions; advice that there have been no new developments which would necessitate departure from stand previously taken on land and air armaments. From the British Embassy

Information that British Government attaches great importance to its proposals at Geneva Naval Conference regarding capital ships and plans to allude thereto in broad terms at session of Preparatory Commission.

To the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)

For Gibson and Wilson: Information concerning conversa-
tion with British Ambassador on March 9, during which the
Secretary advised the Ambassador that U. S. attitude remained
the same and that he saw no reason to take up capital ship
question at Preparatory Commission meeting.

From the Chief of the American Representation on the Prepara-
tory Commission (tel.)

Probability that point (1) of agenda will result in formal
adoption of Security Committee report. Information that feel-
ing in regard to Russian proposals is divided; also that there is
nearly unanimous feeling that more harm than good would
result from a second reading of convention before a larger
measure of agreement is reached by direct relations between
various governments.

From the Chief of the American Representation on the Prepara-
tory Commission (tel.)

Request for instructions as to questions regarding renunci-
ation of war and obligations under multilateral treaty which
may be evoked by remarks Chairman proposes to make in
opening session.

Mar. 13 To the Chief of the American Representation on the Preparatory
(1)
Commission (tel.)

Mar. 13 (3)

Mar. 19 (10)

Instructions not to make proposed speech, or any speech, on subject of pending negotiations regarding arbitration, conciliation, and Briand proposal for renunciation of war.

To the Chief of the American Representation on the Preparatory
Commission (tel.)

Instructions to state, if asked any questions regarding pro-
posed anti-war treaty, that party in question should take up
negotiations on matter at Washington.

From the Chief of the American Representation on the Prepara-
tory Commission (tel.)

Information that Commission reached discussion of Russian
proposals, and that while all delegations appear to be anxious
to dispose of the proposals promptly, none apparently has
courage to stand up against attacks of Russians; intention to
keep free of debates as far as possible.

Page

242

245

245

246

247

248

248

249

GENERAL

PARTICIPATION OF THE UNITED STATES IN THE WORK OF THE FIFTH SESSION OF THE PREPARATORY COMMISSION FOR THE DISARMAMENT CONFERENCE-Con.

Date and

number

Subject

Page

1928 Mar. 19 (11)

Mar. 20 (4)

Mar. 20 (5)

Mar. 21 (12)

Mar. 23 (16)

From the Chief of the American Representation on the Prepara-
tory Commission (tel.)

Failure of interested delegations to decide how to deal with
Soviet proposals; feeling that one course under consideration-
discussion of Russian proposals clause by clause with first
reading of draft convention-would be futile and intolerable;
suggestion that, if this course appears about to be adopted, the
Chairman be authorized to point out that limitation of arma-
ment and complete disarmament are irreconcilable, and that
the U. S. Government would have to consider whether it could
continue with any profit to participate in work of Preparatory
Commission.

To the Chief of the American Representation on the Preparatory
Commission (tel.)

Endorsement of decision to abstain as far as possible from
debate on Russian proposals.

To the Chief of the American Representation on the Preparatory
Commission (tel.)

Doubt that suggestion in telegram No. 11 of March 19 would
be advisable if it means a complete withdrawal from Prepara-
tory Commission, which would give the other powers a chance
to shift blame for failure of Conference onto U. S. Government;
suggestion that a League member of Commission might ask
League Council for instructions as to competence of Commis-
sion to consider plan for total disarmament when it was called
to consider reduction and limitation of armament.
From the Chief of the American Representation on the Prepara-
tory Commission (tel.)

Information that because American representative's con-
tinued silence on Soviet proposals was becoming conspicuous,
in view of speeches by the other powers, he had deemed it wise
to speak briefly on U. S. belief in multilateral pact as method of
approach, disbelief in Russian proposals as impracticable, and
other points in sense of Secretary's telegram No. 23 of February
28 to the Minister in Switzerland.

From the Chief of the American Representation on the Prepara-
tory Commission (tel.)

Speech of March 21 (text printed).

Mar. 23

From the Chief of the American Representation on the Prepara-
tory Commission (tel.)

(18)

Advice that when question of fixing date for next meeting arose, American representative made clear U. S. attitude toward second reading of draft and suggested that Commission Chairman be asked to follow progress of direct negotiations for purpose of harmonizing divergent views and to convoke Commission as soon as he believed second reading might have reasonable prospect of success.

250

251

251

252

253

255

23757642

GENERAL

PARTICIPATION OF THE UNITED STATES IN THE WORK OF THE FIFTH SESSION OF THE PREPARATORY COMMISSION FOR THE DISARMAMENT CONFERENCE-Con.

Date and

number

1928 Mar. 23 (19)

Mar. 24 (20)

Mar. 24 (24)

Subject

From the Chief of the American Representation on the Prepara-
tory Commission (tel.)

Introduction and discussion of various resolutions regarding
Russian proposals and second reading, without any definite
action; decision of Russians, in view of rejection of proposals, to
cooperate in partial disarmament, and their introduction of
new draft, on which ruling as to discussion was reserved. Ob-
servation that there has not yet been such an entirely futile
session.

From the Chief of the American Representation on the Prepara-
tory Commission (tel.)

Letter from British representative (text printed) setting
forth proposals regarding limitation of size and armament and
extension of life of capital ships.

From the Chief of the American Representation on the Prepara-
tory Commission (tel.)

Advice that British letter came as complete surprise, and
that because British representatives left immediately for Lon-
don, there has been no opportunity to discuss proposals or to
learn reason for their presentation.

Page

255

256

257

Sept. 18 (60)

From the Ambassador in Belgium (tel.)

257

Inquiry from Chairman of Preparatory Commission as to opinion concerning date to be fixed for next meeting; request for Department's instructions.

Sept. 19 (64)

To the Ambassador in Belgium (tel.)

258

Instructions to advise Chairman that his inquiry has been referred to Secretary of State. Information that the Secretary

must confer with the President.

Oct. 30 (104)

From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)

258

Nov. 6

Dec. 1 (79)

Dec. 6 (118)

Report that League Secretariat considers that it is time to break the deadlock on question of naval disarmament and intends to suggest that experts of the naval powers be called together for informal discussions in hope that a solution may be found.

From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)

Information that Chairman of Preparatory Commission does not intend to approach the naval powers in regard to preliminary conversation, but prefers to wait until British Government replies to American note concerning FrancoBritish naval agreement.

From the Ambassador in Belgium (tel.)

Opinion of Commission Chairman that to hold another meeting before some kind of agreement is reached between Great Britain and United States would be disastrous.

From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)

Opinion of Secretary General of League that it would be wise from a strategic point of view to call a short session in February with a limited agenda from which an attempt should be made to exclude naval questions.

259

260

260