[Inclosure.--Translation.] The Minister for Foreign Affairs to the American Ambassador. MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS, St. Petersburg, January 25/February 7, 1912. Mr. AMBASSADOR: Your excellency has expressed the desire to be informed on the present situation in regard to Spitzbergen, and also on the project of law extending the zone of jurisdiction over the fisheries in the waters of the Archangel Government to 12 marine miles. I have the honor, therefore, to inform you that in accordance with an understanding which has just been effected between the three Powers of the North, the Governments which have taken part in the Conference sitting at Christiania this January will communicate to the Norwegian Government their observations on the project of the convention elaborated by this Conference. The Norwegian Government on its side, having received these observations, will not fail to remit to the Governments which have received the original project of the Spitzbergen Convention the texts of the convention and of the arrangement which have just been elaborated. These Governments will be invited to examine them and asked to send their replies in due time to the three Powers of the North in order that the latter may exchange views in regard to these replies before the final invitation to the conference which the Norwegian Government proposes to convoke in the near future, if possible in June of the current year. As regards the jurisdiction over the fisheries in the waters of the Archangel Government, the project relating to it is still being studied by one of the Committees of the Duma of the Empire, and it is difficult at this time to fix the date on which it will be submitted to the examination of the Duma in full sitting. Please accept [etc.] File No. 861.0145/12. SAZONOFF. The American Ambassador to the Secretary of State. No. 231.] AMERICAN EMBASSY, SIR: I have the honor to report that a telegram from Tokyo to the Russian papers stated on April 10 that, in view of the approaching opening of the fishing season, the Japanese press was protesting against the extension by Russia of its control over the fisheries in the Pacific to a twelve-mile limit from the shore. A full report on this subject was forwarded to the Department in the Embassy's dispatch No. 173, of February 3 last. Thinking, however, that the Department might desire to learn any possible further developments, the First Secretary of the Embassy, Mr. Wilson, called by my direction at the Japanese Embassy and reports that there has been practically no change in the situation since that date and nothing to cause any special protest on the part of the Japanese press, except that the approach of the fishing season rather brought the matter to public attention. The Embassy informed Mr. Wilson that no reply had been received to its formal note of protest against Russian action in the Pacific fisheries, presented to the Russian Foreign Office on October 31, 1911, and that therefore a few days ago the Ambassador took up the matter verbally with the Minister for Foreign Affairs, suggesting to him the conclusion of some sort of modus vivendi to cover the present fishing season. M. Sazonow made no formal reply to this proposition, but the Ambassador gathered from his remarks that the Russian Government would make no concessions and intended to hold to its original plan of extending its control to the twelve-mile limit. At present the matter rests at this point, and the Japanese Government, while ready and anxious to arrange some modus vivendi to cover the present fishing season, is not hopeful of a prompt or favorable acceptance of its proposal. I have [etc.] File No. 861.0145/13. CURTIS GUILD. The American Chargé d'Affaires to the Secretary of State. No. 257.] AMERICAN EMBASSY, SIR: Referring to the Embassy's despatch No. 231 of April 13 last on the subject of the extension of Russian jurisdiction to twelve marine miles in the Sea of Okhotsk, I have the honor to report that I was informed by a member of the Japanese Embassy to-day that no change has occurred in the situation during the last month. The Japanese Embassy is still carrying on pourparlers with the Russian Foreign Office with the end of at least obtaining a modus vivendi between the two Governments which will tide over the question until the present fishing season is passed. As the season begins almost at once the situation is causing anxiety and my informant considers that there will be continual conflicts between the Japanese fishermen and the Russian authorities if some sort of agreement is not immediately reached. The Japanese Government is therefore pressing the matter with energy. My informant further stated that the report which appeared in the London Times of May 5, i. e., that the question is soon to be arbitrated at The Hague and that Japanese cruisers have been sent to the fishing grounds, is without foundation. His Government would be glad to have the matter decided by The Hague Tribunal, but to this Russia has not yet assented. I have [etc.] File No. 861.0145/14. CHARLES S. WILSON. The American Chargé d'Affaires to the Secretary of State. No. 313.] AMERICAN EMBASSY, St. Petersburg, July 19, 1912. SIR: Referring to previous correspondence on the subject of the extension of the area of territorial waters to twelve miles by the Russian Government, I have the honor to enclose herewith a copy of a note which I have been able to procure-a note from the Russian Imperial Ministry of Foreign Affairs in reply to the protest entered by Japan against this extension in the Pacific Ocean. While this note is not of recent date, having been sent to the Japanest Embassy a year ago last March, it may prove of interest to the Department. I have [etc.] CHARLES S. WILSON. [Inclosure. Translation.] The Minister for Foreign Affairs to the Japanese Ambassador to Russia. In reply to the note verbale of relative to the limits of customs surveillance along the Russian coasts the Imperial Ministry of Foreign Affairs has the honor to draw the attention of the Imperial Embassy of Japan to the fact that in modern international law there exists no generally accepted rule concerning the limits of territorial waters within which sovereign state authority may be exercised. The question has been given widely different solutions either by international treaties or the municipal laws of a state, and very often in an unequal manner for the various protected interests (customs regulations, fisheries, criminal or civil jurisdiction, sanitary observation, etc.). Thus an examination of the laws dealing with the question shows that a great many States in Europe and America exercise undisputed jurisdiction within limits that exceed the so-called ordinary zone of three nautical miles. Sections 2760, 2867, and 3067 of the Revised Statutes of the United States of America, for instance, fix the limit of the jurisdiction of American customs officers at 4 marine leagues (12 nautical miles), exactly the distance set by the new Russian law of 1909. The jurisdiction of British officers in all customs and quarantine cases also covers (under Article XXIII of chap. 35 of the British Act 9 Geo. II; Article XII of chap. 80 of Acts 39 and 40 Geo. III; and Article I of chap. 47 of Act 24 Geo. III) a 4 marine-league zone. Finally, under the law of March 27, 1817, the customs marine zone of France reaches out 2 myriameters from the coast. Taking into consideration the above-cited provisions of laws against which no State appears to have protested, together with the fact that Russia is not bound by any international treaty fixing the 3-mile zone for the territorial waters and that therefore its area cannot be measured from the viewpoint of international law except by the range of the cannons on the coast (which now even exceed the 12-nautical-mile limit) the Imperial Government is unable to admit that the Russian law of December 10, 1909, conflicts with international law. Lastly, the Imperial Ministry deems it its duty to recall to the Japanese Embassy's memory that the Institute of International Law (whose authority on such questions is unquestionable) did not hesitate to declare (as far back as 17 years ago, when it met at Paris, in 1894) that the "usually adopted" distance of three miles was absolutely insufficient. Fully concurring in that view, the Netherlands Government soon thereafter (1895) took the initiative of an international conference (unfortunately never going beyond the stage of being contemplated) which was to give special attention to the question of territorial waters and accurately define the law common to all States, the lack of which the Imperial Government is not the last to deplore. It might perhaps be possible, should all the States interested therein arrive at an agreement thereon, to include that question, of such importance to international life, in the program of the approaching Third Peace Conference that is to meet at The Hague about 1915. File No. 861.0145/15. The American Chargé d'Affaires to the Secretary of State. No. 367.] AMERICAN EMBASSY, St. Petersburg, September 10, 1912. Referring to previous correspondence between the Department and the Embassy on the subject of the extension of Russian jurisdiction to 12 marine miles in the Sea of Okhotsk, I have the honor to report that, in reply to inquiries, I have been informed by a member of the Japanese Embassy, that notes on the subject are still being exchanged between the two Governments. Early in the summer Russia finally agreed to modify the application of this law, under certain conditions, though what these con ditions were the Japanese Embassy naturally refused to state. This proposal the Embassy refused about a month ago, by a note, to which the Russian Government has not yet replied. Up to the present time no Japanese fishermen have been arrested, nor suffered any embarrassment, and the law has not been rigidly enforced, nor, in the opinion of the Japanese Embassy, will be, until a definite understanding is reached between the two Governments. In conversation with a member of the British Embassy, which is kept pretty fully informed by the Japanese Embassy as to the progress of the matter, I was told that probably neither Russia nor Japan were inclined just at present to press the question. I further gathered that this was to some extent connected with the understanding which the Russian and Japanese Governments seemed desirous to reach in regard to all questions in dispute between them. I have [etc.] CHARLES S. WILSON. SALVADOR. POLITICAL DISTURBANCES-ATTITUDE OF THE UNITED STATES. File No. 816.00/144a. The Secretary of State to the American Minister to Guatemala.1 No. 116.] DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, December 12, 1911. SIR: In September last the Government of the United States received information that the President of Guatemala. having previously given secret aid to the Manuel Bonilla revolutionist movement against the Dávila Government in Honduras, was actively supporting General Bonilla for the presidency of that country under an agreement by which, after the elections of October 29 in Honduras, the two of them would undertake to lend assistance in the subversion of the Governments of Salvador and Nicaragua by disaffected elements in those two countries, the ultimate aim being, it is alleged, to place Estrada Cabrera in a dominating position in those Republics. Thereafter the Department received corroborative information that Prudencio Alfaro, a Salvadoran revolutionist, was in Guatemala, near the capital, in frequent communication with Estrada Cabrera; that Guatemalan troops were being mobilized on the Salvadoran frontier: that cart roads were being constructed and telegraph and telephone offices opened at strategic points along the border for the entry of Salvadoran emigrados from Guatemala and Honduras; that unusually large shipments of military supplies were being received: that mules and elements of war were being sent from Chiquimula, in Guatemala, to Ocotepeque, in Honduras; that certain vessels, notably the Emma and Siren, used in the recent revolution against the Dávila Government, were being overhauled and put into commission by Guatemala and Honduras, respectively; that complaints were being made by Guatemala and Honduras of violation by Salvador of the Washington Conventions for the purpose, on the complainants' part. of securing the arrest of Honduran emigrados in Salvador who might otherwise interfere with the plans of Estrada Cabrera and Bonilla: and, finally, that other incidents, unimportant in themselves, if taken in connection with the above matters indicated the existence of a well-laid plan for a joint attack from Guatemalan and Honduran territory against the Government of Salvador, which, as far as the Department knows, is giving a peaceful and orderly administration of affairs in that Republic satisfactory to the majority of its people. This Government has also received, from time to time, information of countermovements to bring about the subversion of the Govern 1 Copies sent to the Legations at San José, Tegucigalpa, Managua, and San Salvador. |