Page images
PDF
EPUB

THREE-POWER CONFERENCE at Geneva for the Limitation of Naval ArmaMENT, JUNE 20-AUGUST 4, 1927-Continued

Date and number

1927

Subject

Page

July 25 (62)

July 25

July 26 (63)

July 26 (116)

July 27 (65)

July 28 (173)

July 28 (122)

July 28 (126)

July 29

To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)

Instructions to advise how much variation from Washington treaty ratio the naval advisers would recommend, since political question involved is how much variation from the Washington treaty can be allowed without endangering treaty itself.

From President Coolidge

Commendation of the Secretary and the American delega-
tion for maintenance of U. S. position at Geneva; belief that
the United States should not deviate from its position, espe-
cially with regard to 10,000-ton cruisers and 8-inch guns, and
assertion that if the other powers cannot accept the U. S.
proposal, they will have the responsibility for its rejection.
To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)

Intention to state publicly, if British press continues to
blame possible break-down of Conference on alleged U. S.
ambitions for a big navy, that Great Britain is the only power
seeking a large naval program and that it has refused to
accept the proposed tonnage limitation figures.
From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)

Disinclination to consider several suggested alternatives: (1)
Two-power agreement between the United States and either
Great Britain or Japan, (2) nonrestriction of cruisers and
agreement only on submarines and destroyers, (3) nonrestric-
tion of small cruisers and restriction of 10,000-ton cruisers,
and (4) negotiation of an arrangement based on building
program up to 1931.

To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)

Approval of chairman's attitude toward the suggestions outlined in telegram No. 116, July 26; request for further information on the fourth proposition.

From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)

Official remarks by Chamberlain (excerpt printed), to the effect that, while his Government is willing to have a temporary arrangement concerning cruiser building, it could not permit such an arrangement to be considered so immutable as to constitute a precedent.

(Repeated to Geneva.)

From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)

Prediction that break-down of Conference cannot be avoided, in view of information that British have not made any substantial change in their demand for small cruisers and 6-inch armament.

From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)

Deadlock of Conference over 8-inch-gun question resulting from inclusion in new British proposals of the same objectionable proposal for 6,000-ton 6-inch-gun cruisers; unacceptability to British of suggested political clause; fixing of date for plenary session, at which each Government may state its position.

To President Coolidge (tel.)

Telegram to delegation at Geneva (text printed) suggesting that to avoid disastrous consequences of break-up of Conference, it might be well to abandon the scheduled plenary session and adjourn for a few months to permit time for reflection.

133

133

134

135

135

136

136

137

138

THREE-POWER CONFERENCE at Geneva for the LImitation of NAVAL ARMAMENT, JUNE 20-AUGUST 4, 1927-Continued

Date and number

1927 July 29 (71)

July 30 (137)

July 30 (76)

July 31 (82)

July 31 (139)

July 31 (141)

Aug. 1 (87)

Aug. 1 (147)

Subject

To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)

Statement by the President to the press (text printed), basing failure of Conference to reach an agreement thus far on U. S. inability to agree to British proposals calling for the building of a much larger navy than is thought necessary, but expressing opinion that such proposals may be modified in current discussions to an extent enabling the United States to agree. From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)

Request for immediate instructions as to desirability of suggesting to Japanese that they propose adjournment to American and British delegations, in order to avoid the unfavorable implications of a weakening in U. S. attitude if its delegation takes initiative in proposing adjournment.

To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)

T

Information that the President has disapproved an adjournment and has instructed that a clear, firm statement of U.S. position be given; also information that the chairman's telegram No. 137, July 30, was forwarded to the President. Instructions to advise should either Great Britain or Japan propose an adjournment.

(Footnote: Information that a telegram was received from the President at 9:20 p.m., July 30, authorizing the Secretary to use his own discretion as to instructions.)

To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)

Advice that any suggestion for a naval holiday during a provisional period, as reported in a London press despatch, should be given careful consideration before abandoning Conference.

From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)

Résumé of interviews with British delegates which demonstrate the irreconcilability of American and British views. Information that the final American statement is being prepared for presentation at the plenary session.

From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)

Suggestion that, in view of Geneva press reports that Baldwin may consult the U.S. Secretary of State in Washington as to plans to prevent collapse of Conference, Secretary may think it best that plenary session be postponed until after the interview.

To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)

Information that Secretary has not received any official indication of Baldwin's desire to confer on subject of Conference. British Ambassador's comment that naval holiday plan might offer basis on which the Governments could agree.

From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)

Information that American delegation is preparing statement to be made at plenary session; that Japanese are apparently unwilling to initiate adjournment idea; and that British seem anxious for Japanese to propose some solution, possibly of a compromise nature. Request for instructions as to attitude toward possible proposal (1) that a final act be adopted setting forth work of Conference and recommending that the whole question be considered in 1931 or (2) that each delegation address to plenary session inoffensive speeches approved in advance by the other delegations. The chairman's preference for first proposal.

Page

139

140

141

141

142

145

145

146

THREE-POWER CONFERENCE AT GENEVA FOR THE LIMITATION OF NAVAL ARMAMENT, JUNE 20-AUGUST 4, 1927-Continued

Date and number

Subject

Page

1927 Aug. 3

Aug. 3

Aug. 3

Auf 95)

Aug. 4 (155)

Aug. 4

Aug. 4

Aug. 5

Aug. 10

To President Coolidge (tel.)

Transmittal of telegram No. 149, August 1, from American delegation, quoting Japanese plan for limitation of auxiliary vessel construction up to 1931, together with delegation's comments and Secretary's reply, to effect that the plan does not appear very satisfactory but that it would be better for Great Britain to turn down the proposal than for the United States to do so (texts printed).

To President Coolidge (tel.)

Transmittal of Secretary's reply to chairman's telegram No. 147, August 1, agreeing that first proposal should be supported; of chairman's further suggestion for a joint public statement that agreement on cruisers has not been possible and that, therefore, adjournment is being agreed upon in an effort to give a chance for direct negotiations between interested Governments; and of Secretary's approval of latter course of action (texts printed).

To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)

Assurance by Senator Robinson, Democratic leader, that he will support U. S. course at Geneva.

From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)

British insistence on separate statements; procedure for the final session agreed upon by the three delegations: (1) introductory statement by chairman of the American delegation, (2) statements by British, Japanese, and American delegations, (3) prohibition on debate, and (4) the reading and approval of a joint declaration in which the three delegations recognize the deadlock which makes it wise to adjourn with a frank statement of divergent views and also state their intention to submit the matter to the respective Governments for further study.

To President Coolidge (tel.)

Joint declaration read at final session (text printed), with recommendation that 1931 Conference provided under Washington treaty be held earlier than August of that year.

To President Coolidge (tel.)

Statement to press (text printed) with regard to the final session, expressing belief that the discussions will not have been fruitless and that failure to reach agreement will not impair the cordial U. S.-British relations.

Memorandum by the Secretary of State

Conversation with the Japanese Ambassador concerning proceedings and termination of Conference.

To President Coolidge

Regret at failure of Conference; opinion that the United
States could not have prevented such an outcome in view of
British attitude. Belief that apparent British desire for naval
supremacy may influence Congress to extend the U. S. building

program.

148

150

152

152

153

155

156

157

DISARMAMENT

PARTICIPATION OF THE UNITED STATES IN THE WORK OF THE THIRD and FourTH
SESSIONS OF THE PREPARATORY COMMISSION FOR THE
CONFERENCE

Date and number

Subject

Page

1926 Dec. 9 (190)

Dec. 29 (85)

1927 Jan. 11

Feb. 10 (8)

Mar. 7 (57)

Mar. 21 (186)

Mar. 22 (95)

From the Secretary of the American Representation on the Pre-
paratory Commission

159

Specific references to American delegation's position on
questions dealt with by subcommission A (Military, Naval,
and Air), as set forth in report of subcommission A, for possible
use in preparation of written communication to League Secre-
tariat concerning report of subcommission B (Joint Commis-
sion).

To the Secretary of the American Representation on the Prepara-
tory Commission (tel.)

Instructions to address a letter to Secretariat, with request
that it be circulated to the governments concerned, informing
League that the United States is unable to submit comments
before December 31, but that when statement is submitted it
will include comments on certain questions which were in-
cluded in Joint Commission's report and not included in sub-
commission A's report, with respect to which questions U. S.
Government wishes to make clear that it does not accept the
conclusions of the Joint Commission's report.

To the Chairman of the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House
of Representatives

Information as to aims and work of Preparatory Commis-
sion, for purpose of encouraging favorable congressional action
on President's recommendation that funds be appropriated for
further participation in the Commission by the United States.
To the Secretary of the American Representation on the Prepara-
tory Commission

Memorandum for Secretary General of the League (text printed), containing American comments on the report of the Joint Commission.

(Footnote: Information that the memorandum was circulated by the Secretary General to Preparatory Commission and League members on March 10.)

From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)

Information that British will lay before opening meeting of
Commission on March 21 a draft convention embodying plan
for the high contracting parties to bring their proposals on
strength in land, sea, and air forces before the final Conference,
such proposals to be considered separately by appropriate
subcommittees.

From the Chief of the American Representation on the
Preparatory Commission (tel.)

Presentation by British delegate of draft convention, and
expression by French delegate of intention to submit alterna-
tive draft embodying French views.

To the Chief of the American Representation on the Preparatory
Commission (tel.)

Information, in event it becomes necessary to define U. S.
attitude toward an economic blockade which League Council
could declare under article XVI of the Covenant, that the
United States cannot participate in any such blockade; in-
ability of United States to become a party to an agreement in-
volving any form of international supervision or control of
armaments.

162

163

166

175

176

177

PARTICIPATION OF THE UNITED STATES IN THE WORK OF THE THIRD AND FOURTH SESSIONS OF THE PREPARATORY COMMISSION FOR THE DISARMAMENT CONFERENCE-Continued

Date and number

Subject

Page

1927 Mar. 23 (191)

Mar. 23 (194)

Mar. 24 (195)

Mar. 24 (196)

From the Chief of the American Representation on the Prepara-
tory Commission (tel.)

Outline of two possible courses which will be open to United
States after British, French, and possibly other texts have
been presented for discussion: (1) To continue to present
views on all questions with the idea that they be adopted in
draft convention, and (2) to set forth views and make known
what sort of treaty the United States could accept, leaving to
the other delegations the responsibility for adopting draft
which would make U. S. participation either possible or im-
possible; request for instructions.

From the Chief of the American Representation on the Prepara-
tory Commission (tel.)

View that if second course outlined in telegram No. 191,
March 23, is adopted, American delegation might suggest pos-
sibility of dividing the convention into two parts, the United
States to adhere to the first part containing the absolute limi-
tation and reduction of armaments, and the League members
to adhere, in addition, to the second part concerning enforce-
ment by League agencies.

From the Chief of the American Representation on the Prepara-
tory Commission (tel.)

Proposed statement to Commission (text printed), offering
the idea of a double convention, in case Department approves
the second course outlined in telegram No. 191, March 23.
From the Chief of the American Representation on the Prepara-
tory Commission (tel.)

Request for early decision as to double convention idea, in view of desire of colleagues to broach this idea which they worked out independently.

177

179

179

183

Mar. 25 (98)

To the Chief of the American Representation on the Preparatory
Commission (tel.)

184

Mar. 26 (199)

Mar. 26 (99)

Mar. 27 (201)

Preliminary comment on proposed statement, to the effect that it may be too much of an endorsement of League supervision; intention to send complete comment March 26.

From the Chief of the American Representation on the Prepara-
tory Commission (tel.)

Opinion that no other course than the one outlined in pro-
posed statement will prevent the United States from incurring
the odium of blocking the Conference; request for instructions.

To the Chief of the American Representation on the Preparatory
Commission (tel.)

Objections to statement in present form, and instructions
that any statement made should conform to U. S. position of
nonaccord with proposals for any form of supervision or control
of armaments by any international body, whether League of
Nations or any other organization.

184

186

From the Chief of the American Representation on the Prepara-
tory Commission (tel.)

188

Request for authority to revise statement so as to meet objections outlined in Department's telegram No. 99, March 26, and to present it promptly to Commission.

« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »