Page images
PDF
EPUB

890g.6363 Wemyss, Lord/84: Telegram

The Chargé in Iraq (Sloan) to the Secretary of State

BAGHDAD, December 22, 1931-1 p. m. [Received December 22-11: 35 a. m.]

17. Your telegram No. 7, December 18, 5 p. m.25 Competent Minister stated that four tenders submitted. Taking into consideration all the circumstances British Oil Development offered Government best terms, all other tenders therefore rejected.26

SLOAN

890g.6363/316

The Ambassador in Great Britain (Dawes) to the Secretary of State No. 2479

LONDON, December 24, 1931. [Received January 6, 1932.]

SIR: I have the honor to refer to the Department's instruction No. 1011, November 27, 1931, regarding the question of oil concessions in Iraq, and to enclose a copy of a Foreign Office note, dated December 23, 1931, received in reply to an informal communication, a copy of which was transmitted to the Department with the Embassy's despatch No. 2449, December 10, 1931.27

I should appreciate instructions as to whether any further action should be taken in this matter.28

Respectfully yours,

For the Ambassador:

RAY ATHERTON

[Enclosure]

Counselor of Embassy

The British Assistant Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (Oliphant) to the American Counselor of Embassy (Atherton)

No. E 6320/5/93

[LONDON,] 23 December, 1931.

MY DEAR ATHERTON: I duly received your letter of December 9th in which you were so good as to define further the attitude of the United States Government concerning the grant of concessions in Iraq.

25

26

After sympathetic examination of the points which you have raised,

Not printed.

The convention signed on April 20, 1932, between the Iraq Government and the British Oil Development Company was ratified by Iraq on May 21, 1932 (Iraq Government Gazette, No. 27, July 3, 1932).

27 Neither printed.

"In its instruction No. 1051, January 21, 1932, the Department replied that "In view of the existing situation, the Department is of the opinion that no further action need be taken in the matter at this time."

we remain of the opinion that the legal position was correctly set forth in my earlier letter of July 17th. I hope, however, that you will agree that further discussion of this point would be of academic rather than of practical importance. For, as I understand the position, the main contention of your Government is-details apartthat nationals of the United States should be given reasonable opportunities to compete for concessions in Iraq; and as was clearly shown in my letter of July 17th, such reasonable opportunities were, in fact, given to United States nationals in the particular case which has given rise to the present correspondence.

Yours very sincerely,

LANCELOT OLIPHANT

IRISH FREE STATE

ARRANGEMENT BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND THE IRISH FREE STATE REGARDING RECIPROCAL RECOGNITION OF LOAD LINE CERTIFICATES, EFFECTED BY EXCHANGE OF NOTES SIGNED SEPTEMBER 21 AND NOVEMBER 18, 1931

Executive Agreement Series No. 27

841 D. 8561/5

The American Chargé in the Irish Free State (Denby) to the Minister for External Affairs of the Irish Free State (McGilligan)

No. 380

DUBLIN, September 21, 1931. YOUR EXCELLENCY: I have the honor to refer to the note of March 10, 1931,1 in which Your Excellency was so good as to apprize the Legation of the willingness of the Government of the Irish Free State to enter into negotiations for a reciprocal load line agreement with the Government of the United States of America.

Under instructions from my Government to whom the matter was at once referred, I beg to inform Your Excellency that the competent American authorities have examined the load line regulations in force in the Irish Free State and that the said American authorities found these regulations to be as effective as the United States load line regulations.

My Government accordingly is prepared to agree that, pending the coming into force in the United States and in the Irish Free State of the International Load Line Convention signed in London on July 5, 1930, the competent authorities of the Governments of the United States and the Irish Free State, respectively, will recognize as equivalent the load line marks and the certificate of such marking of merchant vessels of the other country made pursuant to the regulations in force in the respective countries: provided, that the load line marks are in accordance with the load line certificates; that the hull and superstructures of the vessel certificated have not been so materially altered since the issuance of the certificate as to effect the calculations on which the load line was based, and that alterations have not been made so that the—

(1) Protection of Openings,

(2) Guard Rails,

(3) Freeing Ports,

4) Means of Access to Crews Quarters,

have made the vessel manifestly unfit to proceed to sea without danger to human life.

'Not printed.

'Foreign Relations, 1930, vol. I, p. 261.

Let me add that it will be understood by my Government that, on the receipt by the Legation of a note from Your Excellency expressing the concurrence of the Government of the Irish Free State in the agreement and understanding as above set forth, the reciprocal agreement will be regarded as having become effective.

I avail myself [etc.]

Executive Agreement Series No. 27 841D.8561/5

JAMES ORR DENBY

The Minister for External Affairs of the Irish Free State (McGilligan) to the American Minister in the Irish Free State (Sterling)

[DUBLIN,] 18 November, 1931.

YOUR EXCELLENCY: I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of Your Excellency's Note No. 380 of the 21st September stating that your Government, after examination by the competent authorities of the load line regulations in force in this country, are willing to enter into a reciprocal Loadline Agreement with the Government of the Irish Free State.

I have accordingly the honour to inform you that the Government of the Irish Free State on the advice of the Minister for Industry and Commerce hereby concur in the terms of the agreement as set out in Your Excellency's Note, that is to say, that pending the coming into force in the United States and in the Irish Free State of the International Load Line Convention signed in London on July 5, 1930, the competent authorities of the Governments of the United States and the Irish Free State, respectively, will recognize as equivalent the load line marks and the certificate of such marking of merchant vessels of the other country made pursuant to the regulations in force in the respective countries: provided, that the load line marks are in accordance with the load line certificates; that the hull and superstructures of the vessel certificated have not been so materially altered since the issue of the certificate as to affect the calculations on which the load line was based, and that alterations have not been made so that the—

(1) Protection of Openings,

(2) Guard Rails,

(3) Freeing Ports,

(4) Means of Access to Crews Quarters

have made the vessel manifestly unfit to proceed to sea without danger to human life.

I am to add that the Government of the Irish Free State regard the Agreement as having become effective by this exchange of Notes. I avail myself [etc.]

SEAN MURPHY For the Minister

ITALY

TREATY BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND ITALY MODIFYING THE TERMS OF ARTICLE II OF THE TREATY TO ADVANCE THE CAUSE OF GENERAL PEACE OF MAY 5, 1914, SIGNED SEPTEMBER 23, 1931

711.6512/55

The Italian Chargé (Marchetti) to the Secretary of State

WASHINGTON, September 30, 1930.

MR. SECRETARY OF STATE: I have the honor to refer to the note of the Department of State dated May 8th1 concerning the recognized opportunity of altering the provisions of the Treaty for the Advancement of Peace concluded between the United States and Italy on May 5, 1914 so as to make the terms of office of the Members of the International Commission of indefinite duration.

2

3

My Government, having carefully examined the draft of treaty 3 enclosed in said note, has some suggestions to make regarding the wording of the draft. Such suggestions, however, do not affect the substance of the text, but are only intended to render its provisions more precise.

1) In the Preamble, the reference to the Treaty of 1914 does not appear to be quite exact, inasmuch as that Treaty is referred to as "Treaty of Conciliation" while its title is "Treaty for the Advancement of Peace".

2) Concerning Article I of the draft, it appears that no mention is made of the presidency of the Commission to be constituted, nor of the eventuality of the substitution (sometimes necessary) of a Member in the same Commission before examination of a question; while both such points seem to be important and calling for a definition. It seems, moreover, that it would be advisable to render more precise the provisions concerning costs and compensations involved in the operation of the Commission. My Government suggests the opportunity of employing a formula on the like of those generally used with reference to the composition of similar Commissions, provided for in recent Arbitration Treaties, which formula would make the wording of Article I read as in the enclosed draft (in Italian).

3) Concerning Article III, my Government observes that the reference to ratification "in accordance with the constitutional requirements of the High Contracting Parties" does not seem opportune,

'Not printed.

Foreign Relations, 1915, p. 551,

'Draft not printed

« PreviousContinue »