315.3/11–1253: Telegram
The Ambassador in the United Kingdom (Aldrich) to the Department of State
2060. Reference Deptels 2522 and 2523 November 9.1 Summary of legal points and memorandum of law left with UN Political Department and Foreign Office November 10. Although Legal Division will be given information and asked to give their considered opinion, Foreign Office stressed that UK position was reached only after consultation with highest legal offices of Crown and the UK lawyers believed that Tribunal was competent to make decisions. As one example divergence our positions, Foreign Office cited opinion British lawyers that League decision of 1946 was not true precedent since decisions of Tribunal reviewed by League were in fact decisions originally taken by League and subsequently reversed by Tribunal.
Foreign Office continued by emphasizing desire of Foreign Office to have discussion this question localized in New York “rather than coming back at us here” in view fact Lloyd has been given considerable freedom of action provided he does not give way on basic principles. Embassy Officer replied that by renewing representations in London Department wished to underline importance this issue.
Foreign Office expressed concern at press reports Congress might refuse appropriations if Assembly voted to make awards, saying that would create most difficult and serious situation.
Reply on legal points expected November 13.2
- Regarding telegram 2522, see footnote 1, p. 366. See footnote 1, infra for telegram 2523.↩
-
In telegram 2133, November 17, 6 p.m., the London Embassy cabled:
↩“UN political department Foreign Office says legal adviser has studied US memo of law but remains of opinion UK position legally correct. Foreign Office reiterated hope details this subject would be discussed with Lloyd in New York.” (315.3/11–1753)