Office of the Historian

835.73/138: Telegram

The Secretary of State to the Ambassador in Argentina (Riddle)52

Washington, April 6, 1922—7 p.m.

13. Your No. 17, March 14, noon.

Department is informed that Western Telegraph Company, Limited, has been advised that Argentine Government requires that Company make renunciation of rights in Argentina universal and in favor of all nationalities, and that renunciation be made by petition instead of resolution. Please ascertain whether Company has been correctly informed of attitude of Argentine Government, and whether Argentine law requires that action in such cases be in form of petition.

Renunciation by Western Telegraph Company of its exclusive privileges in Argentine Republic was undertaken by Company as part of plan to bring about mutual abandonment by the Western Company and the All Americas Company of exclusive privileges which they enjoy in various countries in South America. Department has been notified that Governments of Colombia and Peru53 have concurred in waiver made by All Americas Company; that Government of Ecuador has agreed to interpose no obstacle to plan [Page 529] pending action by Ecuadoran Congress which was deemed necessary inasmuch as modification of concession of All Americas Company was involved.54 Department has not been informed of final action in matter by Government of Brazil, but understands that favorable recommendations have been made by Brazilian authorities concerned.

Please inform Foreign Office that inasmuch as cable facilities between United States and South America are affected by existing monopolies in cable privileges, the United States Government is deeply interested in removal of those monopolies. This Government would be gratified if the Argentine Government could see its way clear to acquiesce in waiver undertaken by Western Company.

Hughes
  1. The last two paragraphs were sent, mutatis mutandis, as telegram no. 8 to the Chargé in Uruguay (file no. 833.73/75).↩
  2. See telegrams no. 15, Mar. 11, from the Minister in Colombia, and no. 23, Mar. 23, from the Chargé in Peru, pp. 525 and 527, respectively.↩
  3. See despatch no. 796, Mar. 26, from the Chargé in Ecuador, supra.↩