741.9411/41: Telegram The Minister in China (Crane) to the Secretary of State PEKING, June 28, 1920-noon. 150. Department's telegram June 22, 5 p.m. Chinese Government has protested against mention of China in Anglo-Japanese Alliance Treaty when renewed. I am sending a copy of the Chinese note by mail.92 CRANE 741.9411/44 The Consul General at London (Skinner) to the Secretary of State SIR: I have the honor to report that in the House of Commons on July 8, 1920, Mr. MacLean asked the Prime Minister whether, in the negotiations connected with the renewal of the Anglo Japanese Treaty of 1911, the Government has informed the Japanese Government that the provision included in the Treaty of 1911 that both Great Britain and Japan shall respect the territorial rights of the high contracting parties in China shall not be renewed until the question of the spheres of influence and treaty rights of the great Powers in China have been considered by the League of Nations. The following dialogue then took place:Mr. BONAR LAW: Negotiations in the sense indicated are not in progress and therefore the question does not arise. Mr. MACLEAN: Are any negotiations being conducted meantime between this country and Japan for a renewal of the AngloJapanese Treaty? Mr. BONAR LAW: I have said that negotiations are not being continued. I have [etc.] 741.9411/48: Telegram ROBERT P. SKINNER The Chargé in Japan (Bell) to the Secretary of State TOKYO, July 26, 1920—11 a.m. 364. My 346, July 15.92 Foreign Office has issued following communique: "In view of the fact that the term of ten years for which the Anglo-Japanese Agreement of Alliance is provided to remain in 2 Not printed. force expires on July 13, 1921, the Governments of Japan and Great Britain after an exchange of views addressed the following joint communication to the League of Nations on July 8th. "The Governments of Japan and Great Britain have come to the conclusion that the Anglo-Japanese Agreement of July 13, 1911 now existing between their two countries though in harmony with the spirit of the Covenant of the League of Nations is not entirely consistent with the letter of that Covenant which both Governments earnestly desire to respect. They accordingly have the honor jointly to inform the League that they recognize the principle that if the said agreement be continued after July 1921 it must be in a form not inconsistent with that Covenant.'" BELL EMPLOYMENT OF BRITISH CABLE SHIPS IN ILLEGAL ATTEMPT BY THE WESTERN UNION TELEGRAPH COMPANY TO LAND CABLES ON FLORIDA COAST Refusal by the United States Government to Grant the Western Union Telegraph Company Permission to Land a Cable at Miami from BarbadosEfforts by the British Authorities to Deter British Cable Ships from Attempting to Land the Company's Cable on the Florida Coast 811.73/219a The Secretary of State to President Wilson WASHINGTON, July 17, 1920. MY DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: I deem it important to invite your attention to certain serious difficulties that have arisen between the authorities of the Government and the Western Union Telegraph Company. The Company desires to land a cable at Miami, Florida, which will connect at the Island of Barbados with a cable belonging to the Western Telegraph Company, a British cable company which has a monopoly of cable facilities in Brazil, to the rigorous exclusion of competing American lines. There has been much complaint from Americans doing business in territory served by this Company, that private messages have been postponed in delivery and their contents revealed, to promote British interests at the expense of American. It has been held by the Attorney General, and his opinion has been sustained by the lower Federal Courts, that, in the absence of congressional legislation, the President has the power to control the landing of foreign submarine cables on the shores of the United States, and that he may prevent the landing or permit it on conditions which will protect the interests of this Government and its citizens. The Department of State has received information that the Company is proceeding with a view to making a connection at Miami without obtaining the required permit. It is important that appropriate steps be taken to prevent such a violation of the law, and I believe it will be in the interest of the Government to impose important conditions on the landing of a cable. The Company is evidently seeking to avoid such conditions. I therefore recommend that you authorize the cooperation of the Navy Department, the War Department, and the Department of Justice with a view to preventing the Company from landing a cable in defiance of the law. Faithfully yours, 811.73/285 BAINBRIDGE COLBY President Wilson to the Secretary of State WASHINGTON, 20 July, 1920. MY DEAR MR. SECRETARY: I have your letter of July seventeenth about the landing of the cable at Miami, Florida, and in reply suggest that we postpone such questions until the international conference on communications has discussed the whole matter and we have before us a general plan by which we can shape our various decisions in matters of this sort. I beg that you will seek the cooperation of the Departments of War, Navy and Justice in preventing the Western Union Telegraph Company from landing a cable in defiance of the law, and request that you show them this letter as their authorization to comply. Cordially and faithfully yours, WOODROW WILSON 811.73/235a The Secretary of State to the British Ambassador (Geddes) WASHINGTON, July 30, 1920. MY DEAR MR. AMBASSADOR: I deem it my duty to call your attention to the following matter as presenting some possibilities of complication and misunderstanding unless fully understood beforehand and promptly treated. The Western Union Telegraph Company, or one of its subsidiary companies, has recently applied for permission to land a cable at Miami, Florida, which is to connect at Barbados, or some point in that vicinity, with cables owned and operated by the Western Telegraph Company, Limited, thus effecting a through line to points on the east coast of South America which are served exclusively by the Western Telegraph Company, Limited. This Government has not yet seen fit to issue a license for this landing and will probably hold the matter under consideration until the International Communications Conference meets on September 13th. Information has reached the State Department that an effort may be made to effect a landing of this cable at Miami despite the fact that the license is withheld, and we are informed that the British cable steamer Colonia is on its way from Plymouth to some point near Miami, prepared to land a cable as above stated. This Government could not suffer this to be done, and measures have been taken to physically prevent it, instructions having already been issued to the Navy to safeguard the Government's position. In view of the fact that the vessel employed for this purpose is a British vessel, it would be much appreciated if a timely warning could be conveyed to its master, who is doubtless wholly unaware of the illegality of the proceeding. I would greatly regret the complications which might result if the official opposition to this landing were disregarded. I beg to remain [etc.] BAINBRIDGE COLBY 811.73/262 Memorandum by Mr. William R. Vallance of the Office of the Solicitor for the Department of State [WASHINGTON,] July 31, 1920. On July 30, 1920, at 2:30 p.m., the Secretary of War, Admiral Coontz, Acting Secretary of the Navy, Judge Ames, Acting Attorney General, the Under Secretary of State, Mr. Davis, the Third Assistant Secretary of State, Mr. Merle-Smith, the Solicitor, Mr. Nielsen, Captain Freeman of the Navy Department, and Mr. Vallance of the Solicitor's Office, attended a conference at the Office of the Secretary of State regarding steps to be taken to prevent the landing of a cable at Miami, Florida, by the Western Union Telegraph Company. The conference was held as a result of the letter of July 20, from the President directing that joint action should be taken between the Departments of War, Navy, Justice, and State to prevent the landing of this cable. Judge Ames for the Department of Justice expressed the opinion that the Executive had the power to take measures to prevent the landing of the cable in question without resort to the courts. Reference was made to the opinion of Attorney General Black dated September 29, 1857, (9 Op. Attys. Genl. 106) relative to an attempt of a railroad company to lay its tracks across a military reservation. The Secretary of War was advised that the Executive had full power to prevent the laying of the tracks in question, as it amounted to an invasion of the rights of the Executive Department. See copy of the opinion attached hereto." See also Guthrie vs. Hall, 1 Okla. 454 (1891). Secretary Baker stated that he was prepared to take necessary steps along similar lines to prevent laying the cable from the sandbar at Miami into the ocean. Admiral Coontz stated that he had already dispatched two destroyers and a sub-chaser to prevent the landing of the cable from the high seas. At Mr. Nielsen's suggestion it was agreed that the Navy Department should take no preventative action outside the three mile limit. A warning might properly be given outside the three mile limit, but no affirmative action against the cable ship Colonia. Admiral Coontz stated that the Gulf Stream came in close to the shore at the point where the cable would be laid, and that it was deep enough at two miles out for a destroyer to come, if necessary. He also stated that Admiral Decker, the Commandant at Key West, had been ordered to Miami to be on the ground to see that no cable was laid. Secretary Baker stated that he would have instructions sent to the Commandant of the Southeastern Department to cooperate with Admiral Decker, and that a sufficient military force would be dispatched to assist if necessary. Judge Ames stated that he would instruct the United States Attorney for the Florida District to go to Miami and cooperate with the Navy and War representatives, and take all necessary steps to prevent the landing of the cable. The Under Secretary of State, Mr. Davis, suggested that it might be advisable, as the Colonia was a British ship flying the British flag, to informally communicate the decision of this Government to the British Ambassador so that he would understand in advance the reason this Government prevented the British ship Colonia from proceeding to land the cable. Mr. Boal of Mr. Merle-Smith's office informs me that he has taken up with Mr. Bannerman the matter of obtaining a report from the Department's representative at Miami concerning the exact status of the construction work and laying of the cable. Colonel Kimball of the War Department, Branch 1705, informs me that orders have been prepared and are being forwarded to the Commander of the Southeastern Department this afternoon. W[ILLIAM] R. V[ALLANCE] "Not printed. |