867n.01/400
The Ambassador in Great Britain (Kellogg) to the Secretary of
State
London, July 24,
1924.
[Received August 4.]
No. 606
Sir: Referring to the Department’s telegraphic
instruction No. 108, April 28, 5 p.m., 1924, and the Department’s mail
instruction No. 182 of May 2, 1924,40 concerning the proposed convention between the
United States and Great Britain respecting Palestine, I have the honor
to enclose a copy, in triplicate, of the reply of the
[Page 208]
British Government, under date of July 17,
1924, to my representations in the premises.
In this connection I am informed orally by the Foreign Office that the
reply of His Majesty’s Government with regard to the proposed B Mandate
Convention will be forthcoming shortly.
I have [etc.]
For the Ambassador:
F. A.
Sterling
Counselor of
Embassy[Enclosure]
The British Secretary of State for Foreign
Affairs (MacDonald) to the
American Ambassador (Kellogg)
[London,] 17th July,
1924
No. E 5825/1354/65
Your Excellency, His Majesty’s Government
have given their attentive and sympathetic consideration to the
draft convention respecting the British Mandate in Palestine
enclosed in Your Excellency’s note No. 187 of the 30th of
April,41 and I am now happy to inform you that they
accept, subject to certain minor textual amendments, the United
States Government’s draft of the convention, with the exception of
the second half of article 6, dealing with the privileges to be
accorded to United States consular officers in Palestine. His
Majesty’s Government regret that they do not see the necessity for
the insertion in the convention of any such stipulation as that
proposed, since the Palestine Administration have every intention of
treating United States consular officers in as favorable a manner as
the consular representatives of other states.
- 2.
- As regards the remainder of the draft, I beg leave to suggest
certain slight alterations in the wording to avoid all risk of
ambiguity. It would be preferable that the second paragraph of
the preamble should be amended to read “…Covenant of the League
of Nations in the Treaty of Versailles”. Article 1 would also be
clearer if it were worded “Subject to the provisions of the
present convention the United States consent to the
administration of Palestine by His Britannic Majesty, pursuant
to the mandate recited above”. The first half of article 6 might
with advantage be altered to “… and conventions which are or may
be in force between the United States and Great Britain and the
provisions of any treaties which are or may be in force …”.
Lastly I suggest that the final sentence of article 8 should
begin “The present Convention shall take effect …”.
- 3.
- As regards the penultimate paragraph of your note, His
Majesty’s Government agree that the present convention shall be
applicable
[Page 209]
to such
territory as may be under British mandate to the east as well as
to the west of the River Jordan. They regret, however, that they
cannot concur in the interpretation put by the United States
Government on article 7 of the draft convention as regards
changes in the administration of Trans-jordania, as it is
essential that they be allowed latitude to make changes in the
administration of that territory in such manner as may appear
necessary, provided that such action does not conflict with the
terms of the mandate.
- 4.
- The concluding paragraph of your note dealt with the question
of most-favoured-nation treatment. I desire to assure the United
States Government that American nationals in Palestine will
receive most-favoured-nation treatment, but as no exchange of
notes has yet taken place as regards the proposed assurances to
be given to the Italian Government I regret that His Majesty’s
Government are not in a position to give the specific assurance
asked for in the last sentence of your note.
I have [etc.]
