811.114 Gt. Brit./39
The British Ambassador (Geddes) to the Secretary of State
Sir: Mr. Chilton16 duly forwarded to His Majesty’s Government copy of your note of June 26th last in which certain suggestions were made for cooperation between the British and United States authorities with the object of restricting the smuggling of alcoholic liquor into the United States.
I am now directed to inform you that His Majesty’s Government have naturally been desirous of preventing, by every means within their power, any breaches of the law in the Bahamas or elsewhere in the British West Indies by persons engaged in illicit trade with the United States, and the proposals made by the United States Government with this object have received the most sympathetic consideration. With the object of preventing the development of illegal [Page 579] practices in connection with this traffic instructions had, in fact, some months before the receipt of the representations made by the United States Government, been sent to the Governor of the Bahamas, who was at that time requested to see that no irregularities of any kind should be permitted in connection with vessels clearing from that colony, and that the formalities required in connection with such clearances should be most strictly enforced. Instructions have also been given to the local Registrars of Shipping which will, it is anticipated, have the effect of preventing any future transfers of United States vessels to the British flag until a complete investigation of the circumstances can be made. Investigations, which it is hoped will shortly be concluded, are being made into the position and proceedings of the vessels, a list of which was enclosed in your note of June 26th.
In dealing with the precautions to be taken to control transfers from the United States to the British flag, the suggestion that, in such cases, the local Registrar of Shipping should require the production of a certificate from the United States Shipping Board has been carefully examined. It has been found that there would be great difficulties in the adoption on British territory of such a requirement, and it would be still more difficult to give such a requirement the force of law. With a view, however, to meeting the wishes of the United States Government on this point as far as is practicable, instructions have been given to the Registrar of Shipping at Nassau to the effect that, in transfer cases in which any possible doubt exists as to the bona fides of the parties to the transaction, the non-production of the Shipping Board certificate should be taken as a ground of suspicion, involving reference of the case to the Board of Trade in London for further directions. The delay necessitated by this procedure would, it is hoped, be in itself sufficient to reduce to a minimum the danger of transfers being successfully effected in improper cases. It may be added that if, in spite of the precautions taken, a fictitious owner secures registry and there is reason to believe that his title is open to question, an enquiry may be instituted under section 51 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1906, and if, as a result of these proceedings, it becomes clear that the transaction was fraudulent, the ship is subject to forfeiture. Proceedings under this section of the act had in fact already been instituted in some cases, and the possibility of instituting similar proceedings in the case of some of the vessels referred to in the note from the State Department is being examined.
His Majesty’s Government had thus taken steps even before the receipt of representations from the United States Government to prevent the practices, to which attention has now been drawn. They have now, as already indicated, issued supplementary instructions in [Page 580] the matter, and hope that the measures taken will prove successful in preventing any breaches of the local law. They feel, however, more difficulty in accepting the proposal that a treaty should be made authorising the authorities of each government to exercise a right of search of vessels of the other beyond the three mile limit of territorial waters up to a distance of twelve miles from the shore. His Majesty’s Government have consistently opposed any extension of the limit of territorial waters such as that now suggested. They feel that the outbreak of smuggling which has led to the proposal cannot be regarded as a permanent condition, but as one which will no doubt be suppressed by the United States authorities within the not distant future. While, therefore, they are desirous of assisting the United States Government to the best of their ability in the suppression of the traffic and in the prevention of the abuse of the British flag by those engaged in it, they do not feel that they can properly acquiesce, in order to meet a temporary emergency, in the abandonment of a principle to which they attach great importance.
In communicating the above to you I am directed to add that while His Majesty’s Government are, as already indicated, unable to acquiesce in the proposed treaty for the extension of territorial waters, they are nevertheless most desirous of taking any steps within their power to prevent any infractions of the local law by persons engaged in liquor smuggling.
I have [etc.]
- H. G. Chilton, British Chargé June 27–Aug. 10, 1922.↩