« PreviousContinue »
agree to anything. It is evident that British opinion is not unanimous on this subject. I enclose you an article published by a man by the name of Bywater who I understand is an authority in Great Britain on naval affairs. I cannot say that this represents a majority of British opinion. I do not think it does. I think the majority of the British opinion is that Great Britain ought to have supremacy on the sea. I do not know what effect this is going to have on our building program before the Congress but I think there is a pretty strong feeling that we should extend our building program. Faithfully yours,
FRANK B. KELLOGG
PARTICIPATION OF THE UNITED STATES IN THE WORK OF THE THIRD AND FOURTH SESSIONS OF THE PREPARATORY COMMISSION FOR THE DISARMAMENT CONFERENCE
The Secretary of the American Representation on the Preparatory
Commission (Marriner) to the Secretary of State No. 190
BERNE, December 9, 1926.
[Received December 23.] Sir: I have the honor to refer to the second paragraph of the Department's telegram No. 79, of December 4, 1 p. m., relating to the submission of a written communication to the Secretariat of the League commenting on the report of the Joint Commission. It had not been my intention to submit any communication in writing without specific instructions from the Department and I had intended to embody my suggestions on this subject in the general report on the work of this session of Subcommittee “B”. However, as the pressure of work for translators in the Secretariat has been very great due to the meeting of the Council, the Legation has not yet received the documents incident to the session in question. Therefore, inasmuch as any communications to be submitted should be in the possession of the Secretariat by December 31st, I have decided not to await the receipt
* Hector Charles Bywater, naval correspondent for the English Daily News and Observer, and European naval correspondent for the Baltimore Sun; enclosure not printed.
* For correspondence concerning the first and second sessions, see Foreign Relations, 1926, vol. I, pp. 40 ff. For proceedings of the third and fourth sessions and related documents, see League of Nations, Documents of the Preparatory Commission for the Disarmament Conference entrusted with the Preparation for the Conference for the Reduction and Limitation of Armaments, Series IV (C.310.M.109.1927.IX) and Series V (C.667.M.225.1927.IX).
The report of the Joint Commission is printed in League of Nations, Preparatory Commission for the Disarmament Conference: Sub-Commission B, Report No. 1 (C. P. D. 29), p. 4.
of the procès-verbaux and copies of the report before submitting my suggestions on this particular subject.
As stated in the first paragraph of my telegram No. 159, November 29, 6 p. m.,' the preamble of the report of Subcommission “B” reserves “for all the governments represented on it the right to make any observations that they may think fit, either in documents to be submitted before December 31st for distribution to the Preparatory Commission, or orally in the course of the discussions which will take place in the Preparatory Commission on the questions dealt with in the report”. The position of the American Delegation was made especially clear by the inclusion in the same section of the report of the following sentence:
"In particular, the United States Delegation, having had no connection with the work of the Joint Commission and hence no opportunity to express its views, desires to make it clear that the views of the United States Delegation on each of the questions referred to Subcommission 'B' are those set forth by it on each of these questions in the report of Subcommission 'A'.” 10 Therefore, since the relation of the American Government to the report of the Joint Commission is made clear, and since all rights for either oral or written comment in the future are reserved, it does not seem to me that there is any necessity of submitting written comment on the subject matter of the Joint Commission report before December 31st. However, in the event that the Department should desire to make any observations in writing at this time and to amplify in any such document the statements of the American Delegation already contained in the report of Subcommission “B”, I am giving below, for the Department's convenience, and as a possible basis for such a communication, specific references to the position of the American Delegation as set forth in the report of Subcommission “A” on each of the questions dealt with in the report of the Joint Commission.
With reference to Sections I and II of the Joint Commission report, “with regard to the Proposal submitted by the Belgian Delegate to the Preparatory Commission” relating to the insertion in any possible convention of provisions similar to those contained in the Statute of the International Labor Office (Articles 411-420 of the Treaty of Versailles), the point of view of the American Delegation is contained in a text submitted by the delegations of Chile, Italy, Japan and the United States on page 8 of document C. P. D. C. A. 170 (f), and in a declaration by the delegations of
10 The report of Subcommission A is printed in League of Nations, Preparatory Commission for the Disarmament Conference: Report of Sub-Commission A (Military, Naval and Air) (C.739.M.278.1926.IX.-C.P.D.28).
the British Empire, Chile, United States, Italy, Japan and Sweden on the same subject on page 16 of the same document."
In connection with Section III of the Joint Commission report "with regard to the proposal submitted by the Delegate of the British Empire to the Preparatory Commission” concerning poison gases, the position of the American Delegation is contained in document C. P. D. C. A. 170 (d) of the report on the same subject by Subcommission “A”.12
With reference to Section IV of the Joint Commission report “with regard to the Note relating to the Preparatory Commission's Commentary on Questions II (6) and III", which deals with the question of military expenditure, the position of the American Delegation has been set forth in the statement of the delegations of the Argentine, Germany, Japan, the Netherlands and the United States of America on page 49 of document C. P. D. C. A. 170 (i) and in the declaration of the delegations of Germany, the Argentine, Japan, the Netherlands, Sweden and the United States of America on page 97 of the same document.18
With reference to Section V of the report of the Joint Commission "with regard to the Preparatory Commission's Commentary on Question V (a)”, concerning the principle on which it is possible to draw up a scale of armaments taking into account certain specified factors, the American Delegation's position is contained in documents C. P. D. C. A. 170 (6) 14 and C. P. D. C. A. 73 (8) page 3.
With reference to Section VI of the Joint Commission report “with regard to Question I (a)" on the influence of the material resources of a country on its war strength, the point of view of the American Delegation is to be found in the text submitted by the delegations of the British Empire, Bulgaria, Finland, Germany, the Netherlands, Spain, Sweden and the United States of America on page 2 of document C. P. D. C. A. 170 and in the explanatory statement of the Delegation of the United States on pages 9 to 14, inclusive, of the same document.15
In connection with Section VIII of the Joint Commission report “with regard to Question VII” on the subject of regional selfsufficiency, the attitude of the American Delegation has been set forth in a statement of the Delegation of the United States on page 8 of document C. P. D. C. A. 170 (c).16
Should the Department desire to submit any written communication containing comment on the report of the Joint Commission, it will be necessary that I be so informed by telegraph in order that the document may reach the Secretariat before December 31st. I have [etc.]
J. THEODORE MARRINER
500.A15 b/39 : Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Secretary of the American Representation on the Preparatory Commission (Marriner)
WASHINGTON, December 29, 1926–6 p.m. 85. Your despatch No. 190, December 9, and your telegrams Nos. 159 and 160, November 29 and December 1, 1926,17 regarding Subcommittee B and Joint Commission report. Please address immediately to the Secretariat a letter in the following general terms, with the request that it be circulated to the governments concerned:
Refer to the decision of Sub-committee B of the Preparatory Commission for the Disarmament Conference providing for the submission in writing before December 31 of the views of the governments on the Joint Commission Report. State that your government has received copies of the Joint Commission report only within the past few days, and has not yet had sufficient time to study it and make, before December 31, a detailed statement of its views thereon, as it will desire to do. Therefore, your Government hopes that when its views have been transmitted to the Secretariat, which it hopes will be within a month, the Secretariat will cause these views to be circulated to the various governments. Pending the above-mentioned submission of its detailed views on the Joint Commission report, your Government wishes to draw attention to the statement in regard to the American position appearing in the preamble to the report of Sub-committee B (page 2 your despatch No. 190),18 and to add that, while this statement refers to the American position in regard to those questions considered both by Sub-committee A and the Joint Commission, there were certain questions before the Joint Commission which were not before Sub-committee A. With respect to these latter questions your Government wishes you to make it abundantly clear that it does not accept the conclusions of the Joint Commission's report, and that in its forthcoming commentary concerning the Joint Commission's report, it will set forth its detailed views as to the whole of the report in question.
Department will endeavor to forward by pouch, to reach you not later than the end of January, statement in question.
17 Telegrams not printed.
500.A15 P 43/115b
The Secretary of State to the Chairman of the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives (Porter)
WASHINGTON, January 11, 1927. MY DEAR MR. PORTER: I learn that certain Members of Congress feel some misgiving as to the desirability of appropriating funds for our further participation in the work of the Preparatory Commission on the Limitation and Reduction of Armaments, which was recommended in the President's message of January 7.19 These misgivings appear to be based on the feeling that the Preparatory Commission has achieved nothing in the way of the limitation and reduction of armaments. It is clear that this is due to a misapprehension as to the task of the Preparatory Commission and it seems to me that I can not do better than to outline briefly for your information the purpose of the Preparatory Commission and the work thus far performed by it.
In the first place, the Preparatory Commission was not convened for the purpose of concluding agreements for the reduction and limitation of armaments. It was felt that if the representatives of all governments met in a conference to seek a solution of the complicated problems of disarmament on land, sea, and in the air, and conclude definite agreements for the limitation and reduction of armaments it would prove to be a hopeless task and no definite results could be achieved. It was therefore considered desirable to convene the representatives of a limited number of states to conduct a preliminary survey of the general problems involved and to draw up, if possible, an agenda which could serve as the basis of discussion of a final conference. The American Government felt that it could not fail to give its full cooperation to any effort of this sort, particularly in view of the fact that it has at all times earnestly advocated practical measures looking to the effective reduction and limitation of armaments, and accordingly a full and well equipped delegation was sent to Geneva with instructions to cooperate in the most generous and friendly spirit.
You are doubtless familiar with the questions which were submitted for the study of the Preparatory Commission and I need not, therefore, go into them in detail. However, a copy of the Questionnaire is transmitted herewith for your convenience in reference.20 It cannot be justly said that there has been no progress although it is as yet too soon to prophesy with any certainty as to how far definite achievement will prove practicable, but it is the view of this Government that so long as there is any hope of attaining definite results
* S. Doc. 192, 69th Cong., 2d sess.; also Congressional Record, vol. 68, p.1201.
Not printed, but see memorandum incorporating the questionnaire, transmitted to the Chargé in Switzerland, Apr. 29, 1926, Foreign Relations, 1926, vol. I, p. 89.