the centenary of Brazilian independence I had no difficulty in meeting and having cordial relations with the Mexican representative although the United States had not recognized Mexico. Such private and personal relations are, of course, dependent largely on the bearing and character of others, but there need be no embarrassment to the American Government in maintaining its attitude of nonrecognition while permitting ordinary courtesies of a personal nature. You should try to conform to the above suggestions. HUGHES 707.1161/17: Telegram The Ambassador in Mexico (Sheffield) to the Secretary of State MEXICO CITY, October 30, 1924—noon. [Received 4:25 p. m.] 396. Department's circular of August 27, 1 p. m. In my capacity as dean of the diplomatic corps it may be necessary for me to present the chiefs of missions to the new President of the Republic on December 1st. Please advise what action I should take in regard to presentation of the new Soviet Minister shortly to arrive here. Please advise what action I should take [in] his case should it be necessary at any future time for me as dean to call a meeting of the diplomatic corps. SHEFFIELD 707.1161/17: Telegram The Secretary of State to the Ambassador in Mexico (Sheffield) WASHINGTON, November 3, 1924-1 p. m. 506. Your 396, October 30, noon. If the new Soviet Minister is a duly accredited diplomatic representative and you are called upon to present him to the President at the official reception on December 1, you should do so. If you are obliged, as Dean, to call meeting of the Diplomatic Corps, Soviet representative should be notified, if present in the capital. Should you have to see Soviet Minister at official affairs, the fact that we have not recognized the Moscow regime should cause you no embarrassment. Unpleasant incidents can be avoided by assuming a dignified and formal attitude. If Soviet representative calls, you may informally receive him but you should not return his call. 4 See footnote 1, p. 676. HUGHES REFUSAL BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE TO SUPPORT THE SINCLAIR EXPLORATION COMPANY AGAINST INTERFERENCE BY JAPANESE AUTHORITIES IN NORTHERN SAKHALIN' 861b.6363/102 The Sinclair Exploration Company to the Secretary of State NEW YORK, October 15, 1924. SIR: The Sinclair Exploration Company, an American corporation, desires to conduct explorations in Northern Sahalin. During the past winter the Company despatched to Northern Sahalin an expedition of engineers for the purpose of surveying the oil resources of that area. This expedition was provided with passports issued by the United States Department of State and duly vised by Japanese Consular officials in New York City. Upon reaching Northern Sahalin, however, our engineers were not only prevented by the Japanese authorities from conducting any explorations, but were immediately placed and continuously kept under military surveillance until they were landed by a Japanese Government vessel at a port of Japan. While thus excluding American industry from this territory, the Japanese Government has permitted engineers of Japanese nationality not only to make surveys in Northern Sahalin, but to undertake drilling operations which have resulted in commercial production of oil. This oil is now being exported to Japan in tank ships, a cargo of approximately 5,500 tons having reached Japan on September 13, 1924. We invite your attention to the fact that this action upon the part of the Japanese Government constitutes a clear breach of the declaration of that Government at the Washington Conference on Limitation of Armament that it would "observe the principle of nonintervention in the internal affairs of that country, as well as the principle of equal opportunity for the commerce and industry of all nations in every part of the Russian possessions"." We request the Department of State to bring this discriminatory action of the Japanese authorities to the attention of the Japanese Government, with the request that it issue instructions to the Japanese military authorities and any Japanese officials concerned direct For previous correspondence concerning refusal by the Department of State to make representations to the Japanese Government on behalf of American oil companies with interests in Russian Sakhalin, see Foreign Relations, 1923, vol. п, pp. 798 ff. Conference on the Limitation of Armament, Washington, November 12, 1921– February 6, 1922 (Washington, Government Printing Office, 1922), p. 346. ing them to refrain from any further interference with the employees of this Company in their peaceful explorations in Northern Sahalin. Yours very truly, SINCLAIR EXPLORATION COMPANY 861b.6363/102 The Secretary of State to the Sinclair Exploration Company WASHINGTON, November 7, 1924. SIRS: The Department has received the letter of October 15 in which, in further reference to your arrangements with the so-called Soviet Government of Russia for the exploration and development of oil resources in Northern (Russian) Sakhalin, you state that your engineers were prevented by the Japanese authorities in occupation of that territory from conducting any explorations; and that while preventing the operations contemplated by your company, the Japanese authorities have permitted their own nationals to carry on operations which have resulted in a commercial production of oil. You ask that this Department request the Japanese authorities to issue such instructions as would obviate further interference with the exploration of Northern Sakhalin by employees of your company. The question presented by this request was considered by the Department when, under date of February 7, 1923, you advised it of the conclusion of a contract made originally with the so-called Far Eastern Republic and thereafter confirmed by the so-called Soviet Government of Russia, and requested this Department to approach the Japanese Government with a view to facilitating operations under the contract in question. You will recall that the Department, in a reply to you dated March 17, 1923, expressed its regret that it did not feel in a position to present the matter to the Japanese Government in view of the circumstances; and the considerations the Department then pointed out still hold good. I am [etc.] 861b.6363/106 CHARLES E. HUGHES The Vice President of the Sinclair Exploration Company (A. C. NEW YORK, December 10, 1924. DEAR SIR: On October 15th we addressed a letter to you point ing out the failure of the Japanese Government to carry out the 'Foreign Relations, 1923, vol. II, p. 802. "Ibid., p. 804. assurances it gave to the American Government by its note of July 1921 and on January 23, 1922 by its authorized spokesman at the Washington Conference on Limitation of Armaments that "Nothing is further from the thought of the Japanese Government than to take advantage of the [present] helpless condition of Russia for prosecuting selfish designs" and that "It would observe the principle of non-intervention . . . and equal opportunity for the commerce and industry of all nations in every part of the Russian possessions." 10 Your attention was drawn to the fact that American nationals desired to explore Northern Sahalin and that the Japanese military authorities, while permitting their own nationals to carry on work, had refused to allow any operations by Americans. We asked that the Japanese Government be requested to issue to its officials the instructions necessary to insure the carrying out of its pledges to you. Your letter of November 8th [7th] shifts from the point of our letter of October 15th to a statement concerning your attitude to the government which is now, and for a considerable time has been, in control of Russian affairs. It was not the purpose of our letter of October 15th to enter into a discussion of the Soviet Government or its acts. The complaint made was not of any act of the Soviet Government, but of the acts of the Japanese Government and the request therein contained was based solely on the pledges of the Japanese Government to the American Government, which you have stated you interpreted to mean:-"That Japan does not seek through her military occupation [operations] . . . to obtain any unfair commercial advantages ... or to set up an exclusive exploitation either of the resources of Sahalin or the maritime provinces.” “1 The question is fundamentally one of the "Open Door" and so far as there is any conflict it is simply one of American and Japanese national interests. The essential point of our letter is whether when there is a conflict between the economic and strategic interests of Japan and the United States, the course of the American State Department is to be one which has the effect of assisting Japanese interests or vice versa. What we asked, and this request we repeat, is that the Department bring to the attention of the Japanese Government the desire of American nationals to conduct operations for oil in Northern Sahalin, pointing out that the assurances heretofore given to the American Government by the Japanese Government require, if faithfully carried out, that Japanese officials be instructed not to 10 Foreign Relations, 1921, vol. 1, p. 707. Conference on the Limitation of Armament, Washington, November 12, 1921February 6, 1922, p. 346. 11 See ibid., p. 348. interfere with American nationals in work they undertake in Northern Sahalin. Yours very truly, A. C. VEATCH 861b.6363/106 The Secretary of State to the Vice President of the Sinclair Exploration Company (A. C. Veatch) WASHINGTON, December 20, 1924. SIR: The Department acknowledges the receipt of your letter of December 10, 1924, in further reference to the exploration and development of oil resources in Northern (Russian) Sakhalin. The Department has given careful consideration to the suggestions contained in the letter under acknowledgment, and it again desires to recall to you that in a letter dated March 17, 1923,12 and reiterated in its letter of November 7, 1924, the Department expressed its regret that it did not feel in a position to present the matter to which you refer to the Japanese Government in view of the circumstances surrounding the case. I may add that the considerations which have heretofore been pointed out still hold good and the Department again expresses its regret that the circumstances would not seem to warrant it in making the representations to the Japanese Government which you suggest. I am [etc.] CHARLES E. HUGHES PROTESTS BY THE SOVIET AUTHORITIES AGAINST UNAUTHORIZED ENTRY OF AMERICAN GOVERNMENT VESSELS INTO SOVIET WATERS 811.3361/24 : Telegram The Soviet Deputy Commissar for Foreign Affairs (Litvinov) to the Secretary of State Moscow, January 31, 1924. 132. The Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics is in receipt of a report from the authorities of Kamchatka to the effect that in September last the United States warship Bear entered Kolyuchin [Bay?] in the Sinaeva Gulf without permission from the Soviet authorities. A similar report has been received from the authorities of Batum stating that on the 15th of January the American destroyer number 223 entered that port without permission. |