The Council adopted the proposals of the British representative, and on March 29, 1926, the Secretary General of the League communicated to the signatories of the Protocol of the Statute of the Permanent Court the text of the foregoing extract from the minutes of the Council, and informed them that The Council has decided, in the first place, to propose to all the Governments which have received from the United States a copy of the Senate's resolution, among which the Government of . . being a state signatory of the Protocol in question, is no doubt included. "that a reply should be made indicating the difficulty of proceeding by way of a mere exchange of notes and the need of a general agreement.' The Council, in the second place, decided to invite all the governments signatories of the Protocol and the Government of the United States of America to appoint delegations to participate in the discussion contemplated by the above-mentioned recommendation and in the framing of a new agreement at a meeting to be held in Geneva on September 1st of the current year.1 An invitation was thereupon extended to each of the signatories of the Protocol to participate in the meeting convened at Geneva by the Council on September 1, 1926. In transmitting on the same date the foregoing text and invitation to the United States Government, the Secretary General said: You will observe from this extract that the Council, desirous of facilitating common action by the signatories of the Protocol in question with regard to the adhesion of the United States to that instrument, and after consideration of the technical aspects of the subject, has taken a decision that invitations shall be issued to the governments of the states actually signatories of the Protocol and to the Government of the United States to appoint delegations to meet in Geneva on September 1st of the current year for the purpose of discussing any questions which it may be proper for them to discuss in this connection, and for the purpose of framing any new agreement which may be found necessary to give effect to the special conditions on which the United States are prepared to adhere to the Protocol.5 The invitation was declined by the Secretary of State of the United States in a note made public at Washington on April 9, 1926, the material portion of which reads as follows: While acknowledging the courtesy of the invitation of the League of Nations to attend such a meeting, I do not feel that any useful purpose could be served by the designation of a delegate by my government to attend a conference for this purpose. The Senate gave its consent to the adherence of the United States to the Statute of the Permanent Court with certain specific conditions and reservations set forth in the resolution, which I forwarded to you as the depository of the Protocol. These reservations are plain and unequivocal and, according to their terms, they must be accepted by the exchange of League of Nations Official Journal, May, 1926, p. 721. 'League of Nations Official Journal, May, 1926, p. 722. notes between the United States and each one of the forty-eight states signatory to the Statute of the Permanent Court before the United States can become a party and sign the Protocol. The resolution specifically provided this mode of procedure. I have no authority to vary this mode of procedure or to modify the conditions and reservations or to interpret them and I see no difficulty in the way of securing the assent of each signatory by direct exchange of notes as provided for by the Senate. It would seem to me to be a matter of regret if the Council of the League should do anything to create the impression that there are substantial difficulties in the way of such direct communication. This government does not consider that any new agreement is necessary to give effect to the conditions and reservations on which the United States is prepared to adhere to the Permanent Court. The acceptance of the reservations by all the nations signatory to the Statute of the Permanent Court constitute such an agreement. If any machinery is necessary to give the United States an opportunity to participate through representatives for the election of judges, this should naturally be considered after the reservations have been adopted and the United States has become a party to the Statute of the Permanent Court of International Justice. If the states signatory to the Statute of the Permanent Court desire to confer among themselves, the United States would have no objection whatever to such a procedure, but, under the circumstances it does not seem appropriate that the United States should send a delegate to such a conference." The Department of State announced on March 22nd and April 19th that the Governments of Cuba and Greece had each respectively accepted the conditions, reservations and understandings contained in the resolution of the Senate of January 27, 1926, as a part and condition of the adherence of the United States to the Protocol and Statute of the Permanent Court of International Justice. PRELIMINARY CONFERENCE ON OIL POLLUTION OF NAVIGABLE WATERS Pursuant to the Joint Resolution of Congress, approved July 1, 1922, the Government of the United States in April last issued invitations to Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Great Britain, Greece, Italy, Japan, The Netherlands, Norway, Spain and Sweden to a preliminary conference of experts to consider the problem of oil pollution of navigable waters. The issuance of the invitations followed the presentation to the Secretary of State on March 13, 1926, of a comprehensive report by an interdepartmental committee, which was formed for the purpose of studying the problem. The committee found that practically all agencies engaged in the production, transportation, handling, or use of oil, must be regarded as actual or potential sources of oil pollution of coastal and territorial waters. The increasing use of oil as fuel by vessels, and the resulting discharge of oily mixtures near the coasts of maritime nations, have caused widespread pollution with State Dept. press notice. resulting damage to bathing beaches, harbors, and shore property, increased fire hazard, and injury to the fishing industry and to wild life. Most maritime nations have adopted laws and regulations on the subject, but experiments indicated that concentrated masses of fuel oil agitated in sea water form emulsions which may float for indefinite periods and under the action of winds and currents may be carried from non-territorial waters into territorial waters. The interdepartmental committee therefore considered measures with a view to the elimination of oil pollution originating on the high seas, and recommended that the conference of experts be called to facilitate dealing with the problem through international agreement. The conference convened in Washington on June 8, 1926, all of the countries invited being represented by delegates, except Greece. Portugal sent an observer. The conference adjourned on June 16, 1926, after agreeing upon a final act which was signed on that date by the delegates of the United States, Belgium, the British Empire, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, The Netherlands, Norway, Spain and Sweden. The conclusions of the conference may be summarized as follows: It was agreed that, while there has been some diminution of oil pollution, due both to the action of governments and the voluntary coöperation of the interests concerned, the evil remains serious in some waters and can only be satisfactorily dealt with by international action. The principal causes of oil pollution are vessels and land installations and terminals. The conference, however, only dealt with pollution caused by vessels. The only vessels viewed as important sources of oil pollution were considered to be seagoing vessels carrying crude, fuel or diesel oil in bulk as cargo or as fuel for boilers or engines. While harmful oily mixtures cannot be distinguished by hard and fast lines from those practically innocuous, the conference concluded that a mixture containing more than .05 of one per cent of the above mentioned oils should be regarded as constituting a nuisance. Such mixtures can generally be recognized by the film visible to the naked eye in daylight in clear weather produced on the surface of the sea. The conference, after careful consideration, recommended the establishment of a system of areas adjacent to the coasts of maritime nations, within which discharge of oil or oily mixtures constituting a nuisance should be prohibited. Each country would establish the areas off its own coasts, in consultation with neighboring governments if deemed necessary. The conference recommended that, in the case of governments bordering the open sea, such areas should not extend more than 50 nautical miles from the coast, except that, if such extent is in particular instances found insufficient because of peculiar configuration of the coast line or other special conditions (such as prevailing winds, currents and the extent of fishing grounds), such areas may be extended to a width not exceeding 150 nautical miles. Full information as to the extent of all areas should be circulated to all governments concerned by means of a central agency which it is proposed to set up. The conference recommended that each government require vessels flying its flag, when within any area prescribed by that or other governments as before stated, to refrain from discharging oil or oily mixtures constituting a nuisance. Already a number of vessels have been equipped with apparatus for the separating of oil from oily mixtures, and it is contemplated that the number of such vessels will increase. In order that the installation of suitable apparatus will not be hindered, the conference recommended that no penalty or disability in the matter of tonnage measurement or payment of dues be incurred by vessels fitting such apparatus, and that dues based on tonnage should not be charged in respect of space rendered unavailable for cargo by the installation of such apparatus. The above mentioned points are contained in a series of recommendations embodied in the Final Act, as well as in a draft of convention annexed thereto to be submitted to the aforementioned governments. UNITED STATES TREATY SERIES In response to many requests, the Government Printing Office, through the Superintendent of Documents, has arranged to place the Treaty Series on sale beginning August 1, 1926. In the absence of any provisions for the purchase of this series, the Department of State has hitherto been supplying it free on request. In the interests of economy and in order that there may be in the office of the Superintendent of Documents a demand sufficient to justify keeping a stock, the Department of State will, after July 31, 1926, limit its distribution of the Treaty Series exclusively to official requests, and refer all others to the Superintendent of Documents. CHRONICLE OF INTERNATIONAL EVENTS FOR THE PERIOD FEBRUARY 16, 1926-May 15, 1926 WITH REFERENCES Abbreviations: C. A. P., Collection of Advisory Opinions of Permanent Court of International Justice; C. J., Collection of Judgments of the Permanent Court of International Justice; Clunet, Journal du droit international; Cmd., Great Britain, Parliamentary papers; Commerce Reports, U. S. Commerce reports; Cong. Rec., Congressional Record; Contemp. R., Contemporary Review; Cur. Hist., Current History (New York Times); Edin. Rev., Edinburgh Review; Europe, L'Europe Nouvelle; G. B. Treaty Series, Great Britain, Treaty series; I. L. O. B., International Labor Office Bulletin; J. O., Journal Official (France); L. N. M. S., League of Nations, Monthly Summary; L. N. O. J., League of Nations, Official Journal; L. N. Q. B., League of Nations, Quarterly Bulletin; L. N. T. S., League of Nations, Treaty Series; Nation (N. Y.); N. Y. Times, New York Times; P. A. U., Pan American Union Bulletin; Press notice; U. S. State Dept. press notice; Rev. int. de la Croix-Rouge, Revue international de la Croix-Rouge; R. R., American Review of Reviews; Temps, Le Temps (Paris); Times, The Times (London); Wash. Post, Washington Post. September, 1925 21 GREECE SWITZERLAND. Signed treaty of conciliation and arbitration. L. N. M. S., Mar., 1926, p. 52. November, 1925 20-27 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON Measurement OF VESSELS IN INLAND NAVIGATION. Held at Paris. Convention, protocol of signature and final act, approved by the Conference. Texts: L. N. O. J., Mar., 1926, p. 399. December 1925 14 to January 29, 1926 GREAT BRITAIN-ITALY. Exchanged notes respecting deportation of British Somali subjects. G. B. Treaty Series, no. 4 (1926), Cmd. 2617. GERMANY-ITALY. Exchanged ratifications of treaty of commerce and navigation signed at Rome Oct. 31, 1925. Rivista di dir. int., 1926, fasc. 1, p. 138. 15 January, 1926 12 13 19 FRANCE SIAM. Exchanged ratifications of treaty of amity, trade and navigation BELGIUM-PARAGUAY. Most-favored-nation commercial treaty of Feb. 15, 1894, February, 1926 1 CZECHOSLOVAKIA-GREAT BRITAIN. Special tariff agreement arranged by exchange of notes, granting reduction of duty on certain advertising matter for British products. G. B. Treaty Series, no. 5 (1926), Cmd. 2625. 1 GERMANY-MEXICO. Announced that Mexico had abrogated treaty of friendship, trade and shipping, signed Dec. 5, 1882. Commerce Reports, Feb. 1, 1926, p. 292. 2-26 PERMANENT COURT OF INTERNATIONAL JUSTICE. Tenth session opened on Feb. 2 for hearings on certain German interests in Polish Upper Silesia. L. N. M. S., Feb.-March, 1926, pp. 37, 52. |