« AnteriorContinuar »
Salisbury, Secretary of State for India, on September 24, 1884, and a blanket concession of ninety-nine years was given the Burma Oil Company (Ltd.) on August 23, 1885, protecting this Company from all foreign competition. It is understood that the British Government states that the proclamation and concession to which reference was made are spurious.
Mr. Hughes begs to assure Sir Auckland Geddes of his entire willingness to issue a statement to this effect for the purpose of correcting any misapprehension which may have arisen from references to documents which the British Government declares not to be genuine. It is, however, to be noted that the significance of the documents, to which reference was made, lay merely in the support of the statement that American oil companies are expressly excluded from doing business in Burma. It is the understanding of the Secretary of State that that is still the fact. If this is a misunderstanding and it is the intention of the British Government, in desiring the correction, to call attention to the fact that no exclusion of American nationals or companies in India is intended, it would be particularly gratifying to the Secretary of State to be able to state that the regulations in practice in India have been, or that they may be so modified as to accord to American nationals and companies the same opportunity and treatment as those enjoyed by British nationals and companies. In this connection, it will be recalled that similar assurances, now carried out, were given by this Government with respect to foreign participation in petroleum development in the Philippines.
It is confidently believed that guarantees of reciprocal equality of treatment in the United States and in the British Empire with respect to this important resource would improve the commercial relations of the two countries and would provide further opportunities for the working out of cordial and mutual profitable cooperation between American and British interests.
The Secretary of State, while entirely willing to accept the statement of the British Government, and to make announcement to the effect that the documents above referred to are spurious, would not be able to make such an announcement with the implication that no exclusion of American nationals or companies in India is intended, unless the British Government is prepared to give an assurance to that effect; otherwise the repudiation of the documents must be accompanied with a statement, according to the information of the Secretary of State, that in fact American oil companies are excluded from doing business in Burma.
WASHINGTON, June 10, 1922.
OPPOSITION OF THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT TO THE GRANTING BY PORTUGAL OF CONCESSIONS TO AMERICAN COMPANIES FOR LANDING CABLES IN THE AZORES
The Secretary of State to the Ambassador in Great Britain
WASHINGTON, June 23, 1922—6 p.m. 184. Department reliably informed that British Minister at Lisbon is actively opposing applications of Western Union Telegraph Company and Commercial Cable Company for concessions to land and operate cables at Azores.
It is source of keen disappointment to United States Government that British Government should oppose legitimate efforts of American cable companies to obtain in Azores cable facilities which are not exclusive and which would in no way interfere with the exercise by British cable companies of privileges similar to those sought by American companies. The Department cannot reconcile statements made in Foreign Office note of May 16 copy of which accompanied Embassy's No. 1315 of May 18 70* that British Government intended to continue practice of granting all possible facilities in British territory for development of international communications with opposition to development of communication facilities in Portuguese territory.
[Paraphrase.] If at the time you think it best to do so, when you communicate the above to the Foreign Office you may say that the Department has reason to think that with reference to the cutting and diverting of the cable formerly connecting the United States and Central Europe there may be a discussion on the Senate floor regarding opposition by the British Government to American concessions in the Azores and you may express the hope that the British Government will act promptly to discontinue opposition to American projects there and that discussion by the press and in the Senate may be averted. You are to press for a reply. [End paraphrase.]
The Secretary of State to the Portuguese Minister (Alte) 70
WASHINGTON, June 23, 1922. Department informed British Minister at Lisbon is opposing applications of Western Union Telegraph Company and Commercial
Cable Company for concessions to land and operate cables at Azores.
This Government is deeply interested in having favorable and prompt action taken on applications of American companies and would appreciate any action you can take to that end.
The Portuguese Minister (Alte) to the Secretary of State
BAR HARBOR, June 24, 1922.
[Received 8:25 p.m.] I did not fail to cable my Government the substance of your telegram of yesterday in respect to cable concessions in the Azores.
811.7353b/88: Telegram The Secretary of State to the Minister in Portugal (Dearing)
WASHINGTON, June 27, 1922—7 p.m. 47. Commercial Cable Company states Cortes is likely to adjourn early in July and that unless form of concession for its landing rights at Azores is placed before Cortes for ratification before it adjourns an indefinite delay will probably result.
Urgently request Portuguese Foreign Office to submit to the Company's representative a form of concession for the landing rights at the Azores which it desires and endeavor to have concession submitted to Cortes for ratification before it adjourns.
811.7353b/91 : Telegram
The Ambassador in Great Britain (Harvey) to the Secretary of
LONDON, June 29, 1922—6 p.m.
[Received June 29—2:45 p.m.] 264. Your 184, June 23. The Foreign Office declares that it is fully aware of British Minister's activities at Lisbon in opposition to granting of concessions in the Azores to American companies for the landing and operation of cables, which concessions British companies already established there claim would cause harmful competition to them. Intimation was given that the activities of the British Minister were in accordance with instructions. I am informed by the head of the American Division of the Foreign Office that as long as the American Government continues to refuse to grant an operating permit for the line from Brazil to Florida via Barbados 780 this attitude is likely to be maintained.
811.73536/91 : Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Ambassador in Great Britain (Harvey)
WASHINGTON, July 1, 1922–1 p.m. 192. Your 264, June 29, 6 p.m.
Department is surprised at answer of Foreign Office. No relation is perceived between efforts of American companies to obtain privileges of landing and operating cables in Azores and application of Western Union to land at Miami inasmuch as United States Gov. ernment is withholding from American company privilege of establishing physical connection between United States and Foreign territory while British Government is seeking to interfere with freedom of action of Portuguese Government and is opposing efforts of American companies to obtain facilities in Portuguese territory.
Conditions on which United States Government is willing to grant license for landing at Miami have been made clear to all parties concerned and upon compliance with those conditions license will not be longer withheld. Conditions stated briefly are that British Western Telegraph Company, the associate of the American Western Union Telegraph Company in the Miami Barbados Brazil Line, shall effectively surrender its exclusive privileges in South America while similar waiver is made by the All America Cable Company. The British Company waives its exclusive or preferential privileges on East coast and the American company its similar privileges on the West coast. Furthermore, this Government is cooperating in effort of Western Telegraph Company to readjust its position in South America to the end that the license for landing at Miami may issue which further distinguishes attitude of United States Government in Miami matter from the attitude of British Government in Azores.
Communicate in sense of foregoing with Foreign Office and report fully by telegraph.
For other correspondence concerning the controversy with the Western Union Telegraph Co., see vol. I, pp. 518 ff.
811.73536/93 : Telegram
The Ambassador in Great Britain (Harvey) to the Secretary of
LONDON, July 3, 1922–6 p.m.
[Received July 3—2:52 p.m.] 270. Your 192, July 1, 3  p.m. Foreign Office states it understands British Company has fulfilled conditions set down by the Department. It calls attention to the resolution adopted by the Western Telegraph Company, Limited (see my telegram 34 January 27, 6 p.m.) red and states that British Company has gone even farther having voluntarily approached South American Governments in connection with effecting waiver of its exclusive privileges. Foreign Office inquires what condition remains unfulfilled on the part of the British Company.
The head of the American Division of the Foreign Office states that the fact that the British concern claiming that its interests would be harmed by the granting of the American concessions in the Azores is the same company which is suffering through the refusal of the Department of State to grant landing permit at Miami has led the British Government to take especial note of its present objections. It is clear however that the opposition in Lisbon is not purely retaliative as he said plainly that even were the Miami permit granted it could not be guaranteed that this opposition would
811.7353b/93 : Telegram The Secretary of State to the Ambassador in Great Britain
WASHINGTON, July 17, 1922—4 p.m. 210. Your 270, July 3, 6 p.m.
Refusal of the landing of the Barbados-Miami Beach cable until certain conditions have been complied with is in accordance with a long established policy of this Government not to allow the landing and operation in the United States of a cable running from a country which denies similar privileges to American cable concerns. The monopolies enjoyed by the Western Telegraph Company on the east coast of South America, and the monopolies enjoyed by the All-America's Company on the west coast have their foundation in bilateral agreements which can only be canceled by the action of the two parties to each agreement. Resolution of Western Tele
Telegram no. 34 not printed; for Western Telegraph Company's resolution, see telegram no. 3, Feb. 4, to the Chargé in Argentina, vol. I, p. 518.