called the Platt Amendment,10 it will be seen that the purpose of the high contracting parties has not animated the subsequent acts. However, my Government does not aspire to anything else but to find a solution for the future, that will be of common interest. My Government wishes to save from a possible ruin the Cuban wealth, which is in part, wealth pertaining to American interests, and to favor further, in just reciprocity the exportations of the United States to Cuba. To this effect, on December 15th, 1927, I sent a note to Your Excellency" outlining ideas for a new commercial agreement. I proposed in this note that a part of Cuban sugar should receive a preferential treatment, while another part would be subject to the present tariff. Now, taking into consideration the report of the Tariff Commission which Your Excellency sent me, I am able to state that my Government would be willing to enter into an understanding on the basis of a reciprocal interest, whereby Cuba be granted the free entry of her sugar for a limited quantity. An arrangement could be reached easily as to the quantity and also with respect to benefiting some other articles. The customs revenues of the United States, and perhaps those of Cuba, would be the only ones to be subject to the consequences of an arrangement of this nature, but all concerned from both countries would greatly profit by it, without detriment to domestic producers of the United States, and without increase of the cost of the articles to the consumers. The solution would be of mutual advantage and would tend to consolidate the economic unity that in fact exists today, although endangered by customs measures. My Government considers that this is the right moment for reaching an agreement, not only in its own interest, owing to the serious crisis which its principal product has been going through for the last three years, but also in behalf of the American exporters. They are seeing their volume of business with Cuba decreasing more and more every day, which market might be largely lost by them in a short time. Accept [etc.] 611.3731/304 ORESTES FERRARA The Secretary of State to the Cuban Ambassador (Ferrara) WASHINGTON, February 20, 1929. EXCELLENCY: I have the honor to inform you that the Department received in due time the note of January 10, 1929, in which you 201 See the President's message to Congress, March 27, 1902, Foreign Relations, 1902, p. 320; also the treaty between the United States and Cuba, May 22, 1903, ibid., 1904, p. 243. 11 Ibid., 1927, vol. I, p. 508. state that your Government has carefully examined the Department's note of June 13, 1928 and its enclosed study by the United States Tariff Commission regarding the effects of the Reciprocity Treaty. Your observation has been noted that the statements made in the study coincide in part with your Government's views but to a certain extent do not; and your belief has also been noted that an analytical examination of the statistics and deductions "would not be conducive to the success of these negotiations" since, you observe, the differences that could be found are due to differing appreciations of the facts. Your allusions to the intimate and cordial relations both political and commercial which, ever since the establishment of the independence of Cuba, have subsisted between our countries have been read with appreciation as has also your statement that your Government "does not aspire to anything else but to find a solution for the future that will be of common interest"; and I wish to assure you that my Government also desires that the relations between the two countries shall be mutually advantageous. With reference to the suggestion, on page 17 of the English translation which you supplied with your note, that your Government "would be willing to enter into an understanding on the basis of a reciprocal interest, whereby Cuba be granted the free entry of her sugar for a limited quantity", I wish to say that careful consideration is being given to the matter and that another communication will be addressed to you as soon as adequate study shall have been given to this suggestion and to your explanations and arguments. Accept [etc.] FRANK B. KELLOGG REPRESENTATIONS AGAINST PROPOSED LEGISLATION CONTRAVENING THE RIGHT OF AMERICAN INTERVENTION IN CUBA 837.00/2730 The Secretary of State to the Ambassador in Cuba (Judah) No. 359 WASHINGTON, April 23, 1929. SIR: The Department has received your despatch No. 615 of March 21, 1929,12 wherein you called attention to the provisions of a bill which has been introduced in the Lower House of the Cuban Legislature for the amendment of Article 134 of the Penal Code so that it shall provide, among other things, that "(a) Any Cuban who induces a foreign power to declare war on Cuba or who negotiates with such a power to that end shall be pun"Not printed. ished with life imprisonment or death, if war is declared, otherwise with a long term or life imprisonment. "(b) Any Cuban who seeks the intervention or interference of a foreign power in the internal or external development of the national life shall likewise incur the penalty of a long term or life imprisonment. "(c) The Cuban who, with the same purpose, carries on propaganda, oral, written or of any other kind, shall be subjected to a long term of imprisonment." It can hardly be doubted that the above quoted provisions under (b) and (c) are designed to render it more difficult for the United States to exercise the rights of intervention which it has in the affairs of Cuba and which the Cuban Government has recognized by the incorporation of the Platt Amendment in the Constitution of Cuba and the Treaty of Relations with the United States of 1903.13 The enactment of the proposed bill would be justly regarded by the world as a measure of affront by Cuba directed at the United States and of attempted repudiation by Cuba of the consent heretofore given to the exercise of the rights of intervention inhering in the United States. It must be obvious that to fulfill its duties in the premises, the Government of the United States must have free access to the sources of information and naturally citizens of Cuba constitute most important sources upon such questions as whether Cuban independence is threatened; whether the Government of Cuba, at a given time, is adequate for the protection of life, property and individual liberty, and whether the Government of Cuba is properly discharging the obligations imposed by the Treaty of Paris 14 on the United States and thereafter assumed and undertaken by the Government of Cuba. In this relation it is not too much to say that the enactment of the proposed legislation would be strong evidence that the existing government is not appropriately protecting individual liberty. In view of the foregoing, the Department desires you to seek an early interview with President Machado and say to him that, while you do not suppose that there is any likelihood of the enactment of the proposed legislation, yet, out of abundance of caution you desired to point out to him the very unfortunate impression which its enactment would create in the United States. The Department does not desire you to leave any written memorandum with the President, but you may orally present to him the foregoing considerations and incidentally point out, unless you perceive 13 Signed May 22, 1903; Foreign Relations, 1904, p. 243. 24 Treaty of peace between the United States and Spain, signed December 10, 1898, ibid., 1898, p. 831. serious objection to making such statements, that the rights of intervention inhering in the United States were not created by the inclusion of the Platt Amendment in either the Cuban Constitution or the Treaty of 1903, but merely recognized thereby, and that such rights date back to the general obligations which the United States assumed before the world by expelling the Spanish Power from Cuba and turning the Government over to the Cubans, and to the specific obligations which the United States assumed in the Treaty of Paris, and are not necessarily comprehensively stated in the Treaty of Relations with Cuba. I am [etc.] 837.00/2743 HENRY L. STIMSON The Ambassador in Cuba (Judah) to the Secretary of State No. 653 HABANA, May 2, 1929. [Received May 6.] SIR: Referring to your instruction No. 359 of April 23, 1929, and your telegram No. 40, April 30, 5 PM,15 I have the honor to say that I today called upon President Machado and, in view of your telegram, I did not leave a copy of the instruction with him, nor did I read him the instruction, but orally presented to him the considerations contained therein except the last paragraph thereof. President Machado replied that any Congressman could introduce a bill in the Cuban Congress but that the presentation of the bill did not mean that it would be passed. He said that he would use his influence to see that the bill in question was not passed and that, if it were passed, he would veto it. This means, in my opinion, that the bill will not be passed. President Machado further said that I could assure the Secretary of State that no bill would be passed by the Cuban Congress which would impair in any way the political relations between the United States and Cuba. I did not present to the President the considerations contained in the last paragraph of your instruction for the reason that there is, at the present time no political movement here to do away with any rights of the United States created by the terms of the Platt Amendment, and no public discussion, in the Press or otherwise, regarding the same. I have [etc.] Telegram not printed. NOBLE BRANDON JUDAH AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND CUBA TO SUBMIT THE CLAIM OF CHARLES J. HARRAH TO ARBITRATION 15a 437.11H23/5 The Secretary of State to the Ambassador in Cuba (Crowder) No. 720 WASHINGTON, June 12, 1926. SIR: The Department has before it for consideration the claim of Mr. Charles J. Harrah, an American citizen, against Cuba for damages growing out of the alleged illegal demolition of his railroad and appurtenances located on the beaches of Marianao, Jaimanitas and Santa Ana in the vicinity of the Province of Marianao, and the consequent destruction of the business for which the railway was built. It is averred on behalf of the claimant that in 1908 he obtained a permit from the Cuban Government for the extraction of sand from that part of the coast known as the "Maritime Zone", under the Ports Law (Ley de Puertos); that in order to provide for the transportation of the sand the claimant constructed twelve kilometers of railway of a fixed and permanent character, beginning at the town known as Playa de Marianao, running along the shore, passing through the town of Jaimanitas and ending at the town of Santa Fe or Santa Ana; and that the claimant fully equipped the railway with motive power, rolling stock, extensive terminals and complete switching and interchange facilities with the United Railways of Habana. It is stated that the railroad was constructed entirely upon public domain, under surveys authorized by the Department of Public Works; that it was of a fixed and permanent character, with a solid roadbed protected from the action of the sea by a concrete wall and breakwater, the bridges over the Quibu and Jaimanitas Rivers supporting the track being especially of a solid and enduring character; that in the construction of the road more than 30,000 square meters of swamp land were filled in and reclaimed, a portion of the roadbed being built upon this reclaimed land, as were also many of the terminal facilities and buildings; and that the project was in every way a permanent and fixed structure. It is also stated that, while the railway was primarily intended for the transportation of sand and stone, it served a public purpose in the transportation of drinking water to the inhabitants of Jaimanitas and other towns, and that for this service no charge was made. It is alleged on behalf of the claimant that in the construction of the road he complied with all the legal requirements pertaining to such undertakings, including the procuring of the validation of "The records of the arbitration are printed in the Department of State Arbitration Series No. 1: Arbitration of the Claim of Charles J. Harrah. |