In faith whereof, the undermentioned plenipotentiaries, whose full powers have been found in good and due form, have signed the present treaty. PROTOCOL OF ARBITRATION OF THE TACNA-ARICA DISPUTE1 Signed at Washington, D. C., July 20, 1922 Assembled at Washington, D. C., pursuant to the invitation of the Government of the United States of America, for the purpose of arriving at a settlement of the long-standing controversy, with respect to the unfulfilled provisions of the Treaty of Peace of October 20, 1883, the Republic of Chile and the Republic of Peru have for that purpose named their respective plenipotentiaries, that is to say: Don Carlos Aldunate and Don Luis Izquierdo, Envoys Extraordinary and Ministers Plenipotentiary of Chile on Special Mission; and Don Melitón F. Porras and Don Hernán Velarde, Envoys Extraordinary and Ministers Plenipotentiary of Peru on Special Mission; who, after exchanging their respective full powers found to be in good and due form, have agreed upon, and concluded the following articles: Article 1-It is hereby recorded that the only difficulties arising out of the Treaty of Peace concerning which the two countries have not been able to reach an agreement, are the questions arising out of the unfulfilled provisions of Article 3 of said treaty. Article 2-The difficulties referred to in the preceding article, will be submitted to the arbitration of the President of the United States of America, whose decision shall be final. The arbitrator shall give both parties opportunity to be heard, and shall take into consideration such arguments, evidence, and documents as may be presented. The arbitrator shall determine the periods within which the arguments, evidence, and documents shall be presented, and shall determine all questions of procedure. Article 3-The present protocol shall be submitted to the approval of the respective governments, and ratifications exchanged at Washington, D. C., 1 Bulletin of the Pan American Union, September, 1922, pp. 220–221. through the intermediary of the diplomatic representatives of Chile and Peru, within the maximum period of three months. In witness whereof, the respective plenipotentiaries have signed the above articles, and have hereunto affixed their seals. Done in duplicate, at the city of Washington, this twentieth day of July, in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and twenty-two. SUPPLEMENTARY ACT In order to determine with precision the scope of the arbitration stipulated in Article 2 of the protocol signed on this date, the undersigned agree to place on record the following points: 1. The following question, presented by Peru at a session of the conference held May 27th last, shall be included in the arbitration: "In order to determine the manner in which the stipulation of Article 3 of the Treaty of Ancon shall be fulfilled, it is agreed that there shall be submitted to arbitration the question whether, in the present circumstances a plebiscite shall or shall not be held." The Government of Chile may submit to the arbitrator such arguments in opposition as may be deemed appropriate for the defense of her rights. 2. In the event that the decision is in favor of the holding of a plebiscite, the arbitrator shall have full power to determine the conditions for the holding of such plebiscite. 3. Should the arbitrator decide that a plebiscite shall not be held, both parties agree, upon the request of either of them, to enter into a discussion of the situation created by the decision of the arbitrator. It is understood, in the interest of peace and good order, that in this event and pending an agreement as to the disposition of the territory, the administrative organization of the provinces shall not be disturbed. 4. In the event that no agreement is reached as a result of the abovementioned discussion, the two governments will request the good offices of the Government of the United States, in order that an agreement may be reached. 5. It is agreed that pending claims relative to Tarata and Chilcaya are also included within the arbitration, in accordance with the final disposition of the territory, as referred to in Article 3 of said treaty. This act forms an integral part of the protocol to which it refers. In witness whereof, the respective plenipotentiaries have signed the above articles, and have hereunto affixed their seals. Done in duplicate, at the city of Washington, this twentieth day of July, in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and twenty-two. CONVENTION INSTITUTING THE DEFINITIVE STATUTE OF THE DANUBE 1 Signed at Paris, July 23, 1921; all ratifications having been deposited before June 30, 1922, the convention came into force on that date. Belgium, France, Great Britain, Greece, Italy, Roumania, the Serb-CroatSlovene State and Czechoslovakia, Being desirous of determining jointly, in accordance with the stipulations of the Treaties of Versailles, Saint-Germain, Neuilly and Trianon, the general regulations by which the unrestricted navigation of the Danube shall be definitely assured, Have resolved to conclude a convention, and, for that purpose, have appointed as their respective plenipotentiaries, that is to say: His Majesty the King of the Belgians: M. Jules Brunet, Minister Plenipotentiary; The President of the French Republic: M. Albert Legrand, Minister Plenipotentiary, Delegate to the European and International Commissions of the Danube; His Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland and of the British Dominions beyond the Seas, Emperor of India: Mr. John Grey Baldwin, Minister Plenipotentiary, Delegate to the European Commission of the Danube; His Majesty the King of the Hellenes: M. André Andréadès, Professeur à la Faculté de droit de l'Université d'Athènes; His Majesty the King of Italy: Le Comte Vannutelli Rey, Counsellor of Legation; His Majesty the King of Roumania: M. Constantin Contzesco, Minister Plenipotentiary, Delegate to the His Majesty the King of the Serbs, Croats, Slovenes: M. Mihailo G. Ristitch, Minister Plenipotentiary, Delegate to the The President of the Republic of Czechoslovakia: M. Bohuslav Müller, Secretary of State in the Ministry of Public Works, Minister Plenipotentiary, Delegate to the International Commission of the Danube; who, having reciprocally communicated their full powers, found in good and due form, have, in the presence and with the participation of the duly authorized plenipotentiaries of Germany, Austria, Bulgaria and Hungary, that is to say: For Germany: Dr. Arthur Seeliger, Minister Plenipotentiary, Delegate to the International Commission of the Danube; 1 British Treaty Series 1922, No. 16 (Cmd. 1754). For Austria: Dr. Victor Ondraczek, Chef de section au Ministère fédéral des Communications publiques; For Bulgaria: M. Georges Lazaroff, Director-General, Ministry of Railways and Ports, For Hungary: His Excellency Edmond de Miklos de Miklosvar, Privy Councillor, agreed upon the following provisions: I. General Provisions. Navigation on the Danube is unrestricted and open to all flags on a footing of complete equality over the whole navigable course of the river, that is to say, between Ulm and the Black Sea, and over all the internationalized river system as defined in the succeeding article, so that no distinction is made, to the detriment of the subjects, goods and flag of any power, between them and the subjects, goods and flag of the riparian state itself or of the state of which the subjects, goods and flag enjoy the most favored treatment. These provisions shall be read with the reservations contained in Articles 22 and 43 of the present convention. ARTICLE 2 The internationalized river system referred to in the preceding article consists of: The Morava and the Thaya where, in their courses, they form the frontier between Austria and Czechoslovakia; The Drave from Barcs; The Tisza from the mouth of the Szamos; The Maros from Arad; Any lateral canals or waterways which may be constructed, whether to duplicate or improve naturally navigable portions of the river system, or to connect two naturally navigable portions of one of these waterways. ARTICLE 3 Freedom of navigation and the equal treatment of all flags are assured by two separate commissions, that is to say, the European Commission of the Danube, of which the administrative sphere, as defined in Chapter II, extends over that part of the river known as the maritime Danube, and the International Commission of the Danube, of which the administrative sphere, as defined in Chapter III, extends over the navigable fluvial Danube as well as over those waterways which are declared by Article 2 to be international. II.-Maritime Danube. ARTICLE 4 The European Commission of the Danube is composed provisionally of one representative each of France, Great Britain, Italy and Roumania. Nevertheless, any European state which, in future, is able to prove its possession of sufficient maritime commercial and European interests at the mouths of the Danube may, at its request, be accorded representation on the commission by a unanimous decision of the governments already represented. ARTICLE 5 The European Commission retains the powers which it possessed before the war. No alteration is made in the rights, prerogatives and privileges which it possesses in virtue of the treaties, conventions, international acts and agreements relative to the Danube and its mouths. ARTICLE 6 The authority of the European Commission extends, under the same conditions as before, and without any modification of its existing limits, over the maritime Danube, that is to say, from the mouths of the river to the point where the authority of the International Commission commences. ARTICLE 7 The powers of the European Commission can only come to an end as the result of an international agreement concluded by all the states represented on the commission. The statutory seat of the commission shall continue to be at Galatz. III.-Fluvial Danube. The International Commission is composed, in accordance with Articles 347 of the Treaty of Versailles, 302 of the Treaty of Saint-Germain, 230 of the Treaty of Neuilly, and 286 of the Treaty of Trianon, of two representatives of the German riparian states, one representative of each of the other riparian states and one representative of each of the non-riparian states which are, or which may be in future, represented on the European Commission of the Danube. ARTICLE 9 The authority of the International Commission extends over the Danube between Ulm and Braila and over the river system defined as international in Article 2. |