Page images
PDF
EPUB

With reference to item no. 4, Sections (a) and (b), we believe that questions of command and policy as to defense and reciprocal use in peace and war should be settled by separate agreement when such questions arise on the basis of conditions then existing and in all events should not be included in the lease. Attention is invited to the paragraph of all leases providing that the United States "shall be under no obligation or responsibility under the terms of this lease for the civil administration or defense of (name of area) or any part thereof or for the maintenance of military or naval forces within or without the leased areas".

As regards item 8 (e) we are investigating this situation and will telegraph you as soon as a final decision is reached; it seems unlikely on the basis of our present information that the bases would be considered American ports within the meaning of the United States coastwise shipping laws.

With respect to items 13 and 14, the United States has agreed to use local labor and local material to the maximum extent practicable in the construction of the bases. In view of this we see no necessity for including any provision respecting these matters in the leases.

As regards item 18 we have been discussing the question of expropriation with the British Embassy for some time and the Embassy has telegraphed a tentative formula to London for approval; presumably this would not be included in the leases.

We do not understand the purpose of item (b) in your 330 which you have proposed for discussion since any matter involving action by an American official in his official capacity would be a matter between the two Governments and not one for the local tribunals.

As regards your proposed (e), the British Government has agreed to the immediate possession without awaiting the signature of formal leases. In this connection your attention is invited to the British Embassy's note of November 22, last,82 of which you have a copy.

HULL

811.34544/654

Memorandum of Conversation, by the Under Secretary of State

83

(Welles)

[WASHINGTON,] February 25, 1941.

Lord Halifax 8 called to see me at my request.

I expressed to Lord Halifax our disappointment that so much delay was being encountered in the conclusion in London of the negotiations for the naval base leases. I said that now that the Appropriation Committees in the two Houses of the Congress have before them the

82 Not printed.

88 British Ambassador.

determination of the appropriations necessary for us to carry out the defense facilities required in these bases, it of course gave rise to a great deal of undesirable conjecture and debate when it had to be admitted that the leases had not yet been agreed upon. I said that the Department of State was going to recommend to the President that he send a personal message to Mr. Churchill expressing his hope that the leases would soon be agreed upon and explaining the serious situation which was developing on the part of American public opinion with regard to the present situation.

Lord Halifax said that he had just received a message from his Government in this regard, and asked very earnestly that the President delay sending any message to Mr. Churchill until his Government's views as just communicated to him could be given consideration. I told him that I was very glad to ask that action be delayed until we had had an opportunity of studying these views which Lord Halifax told me he would send me tomorrow in memorandum form. S[UMNER] W[ELLES]

811.34544/707

The British Ambassador (Halifax) to the Under Secretary of State

(Welles)

WASHINGTON, 26 February, 1941. DEAR MR. UNDER SECRETARY: As agreed at our conversation yesterday, I enclose herein a memorandum regarding the conversations now going on in London about the bases. This memorandum is of necessity based on rather incomplete information as the Foreign Office have not kept us informed of the details of the negotiations. It is clear, however, from the latest telegrams from the Foreign Office that they are much concerned about the matter and they very much hope that it may be possible for the United States authorities to take action in the sense suggested in the memorandum. I shall be very grateful for any help you may feel able to give.

Believe me [etc.]

[Enclosure]

The British Embassy to the Department of State

MEMORANDUM

HALIFAX

It was provided in the notes exchanged between Mr. Cordell Hull and Lord Lothian on September 2nd, 1940, that,

"His Majesty's Government in the leases to be agreed upon will grant to the United States for the period of the leases all the rights, power and authority within the bases leased, and within the limits

of territorial waters and air spaces adjacent or in the vicinity of such bases, necessary to provide access to and defence of such bases and appropriate provisions for their control.

Without prejudice to the above-mentioned rights of the United States authorities and their jurisdiction within the leased areas, the adjustment and reconciliation between the jurisdiction of the authorities of the United States within these areas and the jurisdiction of the authorities of the territories in which those [these] areas are situated shall be determined by common agreement."

In accordance with the foregoing provisions, discussions are now taking place in London with a view to deciding how the necessary "adjustment and reconciliation" between the jurisdiction of the United States authorities and that of the local British authorities can best be arranged.

85

No question of the transfer of sovereignty arises. This was made clear in the Attorney General's opinion of August 27th, and has been reaffirmed by the British Prime Minister in the House of Commons. That being so, the question to be solved would seem to be how to arrange that the United States authorities in the various territories shall obtain adequate powers to defend, control and operate their bases with the minimum disturbance to the existing British administrative and jurisdictional arrangements.

There is, of course, no suggestion that the United States Government should be denied any powers which they consider necessary for the proper defence or use of the bases. At the same time, it is felt that it is most important that the fullest consideration should be given to the interests and feelings of the local inhabitants and that the existing administrative and jurisdictional arrangements should only be disturbed if this is really essential for the proper defence of the American bases. While the British authorities are naturally particularly concerned to protect the interests of the local inhabitants for whose welfare they are responsible, it is felt that it is equally to the advantage of the United States authorities to see that the leases are drawn up in such a manner as to reduce to the minimum the possible causes of friction between the various parties concerned. The leases are to run for a period of 99 years, and that being so it is clearly necessary that their long term effect upon the well being of the local inhabitants should be taken into account. It would seem, however, that the instructions sent to the United States Delegates in London make it difficult for the latter to pay due account to the interests of the different territories and their inhabitants, and compel them to put forward demands for concessions or facilities which would not seem to be essential for the defence or control of the bases.

Two examples may be given. In the matter of jurisdiction the British authorities are prepared to allow the United States authorities

8539 Op. Atty. Gen. 484.

to exercise jurisdiction over American nationals as regards security offences committed anywhere in the territories concerned and over Americans in regard to all offences committed within the leased areas. The American Delegates have, however, been instructed to claim United States jurisdiction over all persons, including British subjects, as regards security offences committed anywhere in the territories concerned, and as regards all offences committed in the leased areas. The exercise by the United States authorities of jurisdiction over all persons, whether Americans or not, in respect of all offences committed within the leased areas would not seem to be essential to the proper defence of the bases. This would not, for example, be prejudiced by an assault by one British subject on another taking place within the leased area.

As regards shipping, the British authorities have proposed that all vessels owned by the United States Government should be granted the same privileges and exemptions from harbour dues, etc. as vessels belonging to the Royal Navy. They have also proposed that the United States coastwise shipping laws should not apply to the leased areas, and that British Merchant ships should therefore not be excluded from these areas and have asked that harbour facilities within the leased areas should be made available to British and other ships under certain conditions. In reply, the American Delegates have it appears been instructed to press for the exemption of United States ships from all dues-which might place them in a more favourable position than ships in the Royal Navy-and have made no proposals to meet the British request in regard to the United States coastwise shipping laws and facilities for British ships in the leased areas.

The exemption of United States ships from all dues and the possible exclusion of British ships from the leased areas would again hardly seem to be essential to the defence or control of the bases.

There are other points on which similar difficulty seems to have arisen; but the broad argument that it is wished to urge is one in favour of the instructions to the United States Delegates being such as to enable them to treat the matters under discussion on a wide basis from the defence aspect and to take fully into account the interests of the various territories and their inhabitants.

WASHINGTON, February 26, 1941.

811.34544/707

The Secretary of State to the British Ambassador (Halifax)

WASHINGTON, March 1, 1941.

MY DEAR MR. AMBASSADOR: I have received the Embassy's memorandum of February 26, 1941 on the conversations now proceeding in

London concerning the bases in the outlying territories and islands. I have gone into this matter with great care and I have had drawn up a memorandum of the present position of this Government on the questions you have raised. I have also indicated the tenor of the instructions with respect to these questions which have already been sent to the American delegates in London.

I cannot help but feel that the position this Government has taken with regard to the questions raised in your memorandum will be found entirely acceptable by your Government, and I would urge again, as I have before, that all possible steps be taken to expedite the termination of these negotiations, particularly in view of the current discussions in Congress concerning these bases and the possibility of misunderstandings and questions arising which would be entirely avoided by the prompt settlement and conclusion of the terms of the leases and the agreements under which the bases will be operated. I am enclosing the memorandum referred to.

Very sincerely yours,

CORDELL HULL

[Enclosure]

The Department of State to the British Embassy

MEMORANDUM

In its memorandum of February 26,86 the British Embassy raises the following questions with respect to the negotiations concerning the lease of naval and air bases:

(1) That the United States is demanding jurisdiction over all persons, including British subjects, as regards security offenses committed within the territories concerned, and as regards all offenses committed within the leased areas. It is stated that the exercise by our authorities of jurisdiction over all persons, whether American or not, in respect of offenses committed within the leased areas, would not seem to be essential to the proper defense of the bases.

In a telegram dispatched to London on February 26,87 the American negotiators were authorized to say that the Government of the United States would not exercise jurisdiction over British subjects, except as regards offenses committed within the leased area affecting the safety of the area or the security of the United States, that is to say, offenses of a military character, including treason, sabotage, espionage, or any other offense relating to the security and protection of the United States bases, equipment, or other property, or to the operations of the Government of the United States under the power

[blocks in formation]
« PreviousContinue »