to the extension of the privilege of free importation to American and Danish Consular Officers in the country of the other under the provisions of the Convention of 1826 between the United States and Denmark.16 This note stated that "the Danish Government were unable to share the opinion of the Government of the United States with regard to the scope of Article 10" of this Convention and promised a reply at a later date concerning a reciprocal arrangement for free importation by Consular Officers similar to that existing between the United States and Germany. I have received this additional reply from Dr. Moltesen to-day, of which I enclose a copy and translation." It will be observed that this second note quotes a reply received from the Department of Customs and Consumption Duties of the Ministry of Finance to the effect that, in view of the laws now in force in Denmark, it will not be possible to grant freedom from customs duties for goods imported for the use of Consular Officers. The reply also refers to customs privileges which the Danish law allows to Consular Officers. All of these, as the Department is aware, are already enjoyed by American Consular Officers here. The note ends by the statement of Dr. Moltesen that he must agree with the opinion expressed by the Department of Customs and Consumption Duties which "considers that for the present in any case there is no possibility of having a modification of the law adopted tending to the extension of this favor to Consular Officers" and that "therefore . . . it is not possible to effect an arrangement of such an extended character as that proposed." This reply of Dr. Moltesen is scarcely a surprise in view of the statements on this question of Count Reventlow, Director-General of the Foreign Office, which have been reported in Mr. Paddock's Despatch No. 551 of July 21st, 1928,18 and in my Despatches Nos. 695 of December 20th1 and 736, above referred to. In recent conversations which I have had with him, Count Reventlow has continued to express the desire of the Foreign Office that it might be possible to conclude an agreement such as proposed and his doubt as to whether the Ministry of Finance could be induced to submit a Bill to the Rigsdag proposing the necessary modifications of the existing Law. It is possible that if a Social Democratic Government should follow the elections for the Folketing, which are to take place on the 24th proximo, a renewal of the Department's proposal would meet with a more favorable result. 659.11241/13 The Minister in Denmark (Dodge) to the Secretary of State No. 795 COPENHAGEN, April 6, 1929. [Received April 23.] SIR: Referring to my Despatch No. 792 of the 2nd instant, relative to the inability of the Danish Government to agree to the extension of the privilege of free importation to American and Danish Consular Officers in the country of the other, I have the honor to inform you that in the course of a conversation to-day with Dr. Moltesen, the Foreign Minister, I referred to his note, of which a copy and translation were enclosed in my Despatch above referred to, and he stated that he regretted greatly that the Ministry of Finance had found itself unable to agree to my Government's proposal. In a conversation also to-day with Count Reventlow, Director General of the Foreign Office, I also referred to Dr. Moltesen's note. Count Reventlow replied that he shared my regret and that in order if possible to obtain the agreement of the Ministry of Finance, he had gone further than he usually went in matters concerning another Ministry. Count Reventlow then, in reply to my enquiry regarding the reasons for the decision of the Finance Ministry, practically repeated the reasons which he had previously stated as reported in Mr. Paddock's Despatch No. 551 of July 21st and in my Despatches Nos. 695 of December 20th, 1928 and 736 of February 15th last. I may repeat these briefly as follows: new legislation would be necessary to permit the Government to consent to the proposed agreement and this would necessitate an alteration of the customs tariff. Any proposal for the alteration of the customs tariff was certain to lead to many other such propositions and accordingly to considerable difficulties for the Government. If this agreement were to be made with the American Government, it would also have to be extended to the Consular Officers of all other countries, thus leading to a slight but still perceptible diminution of customs revenue. Any such diminution at the present time, when there was much complaint about high taxes, in favor of a particular class of officials would be unpopular. Further, as the number of persons enjoying freedom of customs would be considerably increased by such an agreement the difficulty of supervising their imports would be increased as also the opportunities for the abuse of this privilege. There can be no doubt that the Foreign Office has been anxious to agree to the Department's proposal and that only the opposition of the Ministry of Finance has prevented this proposal from being accepted. I have [etc.] H. PERCIVAL DODGE EGYPT TREATIES OF ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND EGYPT, SIGNED AUGUST 27, 1929 711.8312 A/3: Telegram The Acting Secretary of State to the Minister in Egypt (Gunther) WASHINGTON, August 17, 1928-6 p. m. 27. On August 16th the Secretary handed to the Attaché of the Egyptian Legation a note1 proposing the negotiation of treaties of arbitration and conciliation between the United States and Egypt. The note was accompanied by draft texts in all respects similar to those which have been proposed during recent months to other countries. Arbitration treaties have been proposed to 29 other countries and signed with 8. Conciliation treaties have been proposed to 19 other countries and signed with 5. CASTLE 711.8312 A/11: Telegram The Minister in Egypt (Gunther) to the Secretary of State ALEXANDRIA (CAIRO), October 20, 1928–5 p. m. [Received October 20-2:45 p. m.] 41. Your instruction No. 4, August 16.1 Shaw's personal letter of August 23rd and my despatch 41, September 19, 1928.1 Under Secretary Foreign Affairs told me this morning that though treaties were still under consideration by the state legal committee he had no doubt but that it would be possible within a very brief interval to conclude these treaties with our Government through the Egyptian Minister at Washington. He observed that, as decisions of the Mixed Courts could in no way be involved by the terms of these treaties and that matters concerning third parties were not, it was felt by the Egyptian Government that no obstacle existed to their conclusion. GUNTHER 711.8312 A/13: Telegram The Secretary of State to the Minister in Egypt (Gunther) WASHINGTON, November 2, 1928–3 p. m. 33. Your 41, October 20, 5 p. m. The Department has noted the observation of the Under Secretary of Foreign Affairs that "as de 1Not printed. 931 cisions of the mixed courts could in no way be involved by the terms of these treaties," no obstacle existed as to their conclusion. Certainly as to these treaties the mixed courts are Egyptian courts and consequently the treaties have the same relation to them and to their decisions as in case of other Egyptian courts. It is not desired that you make unsought explanations to the Egyptian Government. On the other hand you should avoid leaving an incorrect impression through silence. If you have reason to believe that the Egyptian Government is relying on the decisions of the Mixed Courts being excepted from arbitration and conciliation, you are authorized orally to inform the Foreign Office in the foregoing sense. Please keep Department informed and telegraph for instructions if necessary. KELLOGG 711.8312 A/14 The Minister in Egypt (Gunther) to the Secretary of State No. 103 CAIRO, December 27, 1928. [Received January 18, 1929.] SIR: With reference to previous correspondence in regard to the proposed Treaties of Conciliation and Arbitration between the United States and Egypt, I now have the honor to report that the Minister for Foreign Affairs recently informed me that the State Legal Department had completed its examination of the Treaties, and that he would, therefore, shortly instruct the Egyptian Minister at Washington to take the matter up with you with a view to their conclusion. I have [etc.] FRANKLIN MOTT GUNTHER Treaty Series No. 850 Arbitration Treaty Between the United States of America and Egypt, Signed at Washington, August 27, 19293 The President of the United States of America and His Majesty the King of Egypt Determined to prevent so far as in their power lies any interruption in the peaceful relations now happily existing between the two nations; Desirous of reaffirming their adherence to the policy of submitting to impartial decision all justiciable controversies that may arise between them; and 'Ratification advised by the Senate, January 20 (legislative day of January 6), 1930; ratified by the President, January 23, 1930; ratified by Egypt, Jane 25, 1932; ratifications exchanged at Washington, August 24, 1932; proclaimed by the President, August 25, 1932. |