United States ARMAMENT REDUCTION LONDON NAVAL TREATY OF 1930 By a communication dated March 3, 1933, the Secretary of the Navy informed the Secretary of State of the completion on February 15, 1933, of the U.S.S. Portland. The particulars with respect to the vessel are given as follows: Classification: Cruiser Standard displacement: 9,800 tons (9,957 metric tons) Extreme beam at or below water line: 66 feet 1 inch This information has been furnished, in conformity with article 10 of the London naval treaty, to the signatory governments, namely, Australia, Canada, France, Great Britain, India, Irish Free State, Italy, Japan, New Zealand, and South Africa. WASHINGTON NAVAL TREATY OF 1922 By a note dated April 13, 1933, the British Ambassador at Washington informed the Secretary of State, in accordance with the provisions of article 16 of the Washington naval treaty of 1922, of the completion of the sloop Gonçalo Velho, constructed for the Portuguese Government at Hebburn-on-Tyne, England.2 The particulars on completion of this vessel are given as follows: Standard displacement: 1,045 tons (1,062 metric tons) Extreme beam: 35 feet 7% inches Mean draft at standard displacement: 8 feet 11 inches INTERNATIONAL LAW CONVENTION DEFINING THE RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF AMERICAN STATES IN THE EVENT OF CIVIL STRIFE 3 Uruguay The American Minister to Uruguay informed the Secretary of State by a telegram dated April 27, 1933, that the President of Uruguay "in the exercise of his extraordinary powers has approved the ratification" of the convention defining the rights and duties of American states in the event of civil strife, adopted at the Sixth International Conference of American States, Habana, February 20, 1928. 2 See Bulletin No. 30, November 1931, p. 4. 3 See Bulletin No. 42, March 1933, p. 4. ORGANIZATION COVENANT OF THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS The Secretary General of the League of Nations circulated to the Council and members of the League, by C.211.M.103. 1933.VII., of March 27, 1933, the communication from the Japanese Government giving notice of the intention of Japan to withdraw from the League of Nations, and the reply thereto by the Secretary General, as follows: "The Secretary-General has the honour to circulate to the Members of the League: "1. A telegram of the Japanese Government, dated March 27th, 1933; "2. Reply by the Secretary-General of the same date. "I. Telegram from the Japanese Government. "TOKIO, March 27, 1933. "The Japanese Government believe that the national policy of Japan, which has for its aim to ensure the peace of the Orient and thereby to contribute to the cause of peace throughout the world, is identical in spirit with the mission of the League of Nations, which is to achieve international peace and security. It has always been with pleasure, therefore, that this country has for thirteen years past, as an original member of the League, and a permanent member of its Council, extended a full measure of co-operation with her fellowmembers towards the attainment of its high purpose. It is indeed a matter of historical fact that Japan has continuously participated in the various activities of the League with a zeal not inferior to that exhibited by any other nation. At the same time, it is and has always been the conviction of the Japanese Government that in order to render possible the maintenance of peace in various regions of the world, it is necessary in existing circumstances to allow the operation of the Covenant of the League to vary in accordance with the actual conditions prevailing in each of those regions. Only by acting on this just and equitable principle can the League fulfil its mission and increase its influence. "Acting on this conviction, the Japanese Government, ever since the Sino-Japanese dispute was, in September, 1931, submitted to the League, have, at meetings of the League and on other occasions, continually set forward a consistent view. This was, that if the League was to settle the issue fairly and equitably, and to make a real contribution to the promotion of peace in the Orient, and thus enhance its prestige, it should acquire a complete grasp of the actual conditions in this quarter of the globe and apply the Covenant of the League in accordance with these conditions. They have repeatedly emphasised and insisted upon the absolute necessity of taking into consideration the fact that China is not an organised State,-that its internal conditions and external relations are characterised by extreme confusion and complexity and by many abnormal and exceptional features,and that, accordingly, the general principles and usages of international law which govern the ordinary relations between Nations are found to be considerably modified in their operation so far as China is concerned, resulting in the quite abnormal and unique international practices which actually prevail in that country. In "However, the majority of the members of the League evinced in the course of its deliberations during the past seventeen months a failure either to grasp these realities or else to face them and take them into proper account. Moreover, it has frequently been made manifest in these deliberations that there exist serious differences of opinion between Japan and these Powers concerning the application and even the interpretation of various international engagements and obligations including the Covenant of the League and the principles of international law. As a result, the report adopted by the Assembly at the Special Session of 24 February last, entirely misapprehending the spirit of Japan, pervaded as it is by no other desire than the maintenance of peace in the Orient, contains gross errors both in the ascertainment of facts and in the conclusions deduced. asserting that the action of the Japanese army at the time of the incident of 18 September and subsequently did not fall within the just limits of self-defence, the report assigned no reasons and came to an arbitrary conclusion, and in ignoring alike the state of tension which preceded, and the various aggravations which succeeded, the incident for all of which the full responsibility is incumbent upon China-the report creates a source of fresh conflict in the political arena of the Orient. By refusing to acknowledge the actual circumstances that led to the foundation of Manchuko, and by attempting to challenge the position taken up by Japan in recognising the new State, it cuts away the ground for the stabilisation of the Far Eastern situation. Nor can the terms laid down in its recommendations-as was fully explained in the statement issued by this Government on 25 February last-ever be of any possible service in securing enduring peace in these regions. "The conclusion must be that in seeking a solution of the question the majority of the League have attached greater importance to upholding inapplicable formulae than to the real task of assuring peace, and higher value to the vindication of academic theses than to the eradication of the sources of future conflict. For these reasons, and because of the profound differences of opinion existing between Japan and the majority of the League in their interpretation of the Covenant and of other treaties, the Japanese Government have been led to realise the existence of an irreconcilable divergence of views, dividing Japan and the League on policies of peace, and especially as regards the fundamental principles to be followed in the establishment of a durable peace in the Far East. The Japanese Government, believing that in these circumstances there remains no room for further cooperation, hereby give notice, in accordance with the provisions of Article 1, paragraph 3, of the Covenant, of the intention of Japan to withdraw from the League of Nations. "TOKIO, March 27th, 1933. "COUNT YASUYA UCHIDA, "Minister for Foreign Affairs of Japan." "II. Reply by the Secretary-General. "GENEVA, March 27th, 1933. "The Secretary-General of the League of Nations has the honour to acknowledge the receipt of the telegram of the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Japan, dated the 27th March. "At the conclusion of that telegram the Japanese Government gives notice of the intention of Japan to withdraw from the League of Nations in accordance with the provisions of Article I, paragraph 3 of the Covenant, which runs as follows: "Any Member of the League may, after two years' notice of its intention so to do, withdraw from the League, provided that all its international obligations and all its obligations under this Covenant shall have been fulfilled at the time of its withdrawal.' "The Secretary-General will not fail to communicate immediately the telegram from the Japanese Government together with his reply to the Members of the League. Cuba "DRUMMOND "Secretary-General." PAN AMERICAN UNION CONVENTION +4 The Director General of the Pan American Union transmitted to the Secretary of State with a communication dated April 17, 1933, a certified copy of the instrument of ratification, together with a certified copy of the procès-verbal of deposit of the instrument, by Cuba, of the convention relating to the organization of the Pan American Union, adopted at the Sixth International Conference of American States, Habana, February 20, 1928. The deposit took place on April 5, 1933. Uruguay The American Minister to Uruguay informed the Secretary of State by a telegram dated April 27, 1933, that the President of Uruguay has approved the ratification of the convention relating to the organization of the Pan American Union, adopted at Habana February 20, 1928. RESTRICTION OF WAR CONVENTION RELATING TO THE TREATMENT OF PRISONERS OF WAR Denmark In compliance with article 85 of the convention relating to the treatment of prisoners of war, signed at Geneva July 27, 1929, the Swiss Minister at Washington transmitted to the Secretary of State with a note dated April 5, 1933, a copy of the official Danish translation of this convention. 'See Bulletin No. 40, January 1933, p. 10. 173561-33-1 POLITICAL BOUNDARIES CONVENTION BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND MEXICO FOR FLOOD CONTROL AND RECTIFICATION OF THE RIO GRANDE CHANNEL 1 On April 25, 1933, the Senate gave its advice and consent to the ratification by the President of the convention between the United States and Mexico for flood control and rectification of the Rio Grande channel, signed February 1, 1933. SOVEREIGNTY JUDGMENT RENDERED BY THE PERMANENT COURT OF INTERNATIONAL JUSTICE CONCERNING THE LEGAL STATUS OF CERTAIN TERRITORIES IN EASTERN GREENLAND There is quoted below communiqué No. 782 (unofficial) dated April 5, 1933, from the Permanent Court of International Justice: "A.-On April 5th, 1933, the Permanent Court of International Justice delivered judgment in the case concerning 'the legal status of certain parts of Eastern Greenland', between Denmark and Norway. The text of the judgment was read by the President at a public sitting held for the purpose on the morning of that day. It will be remembered that on July 10th, 1931, Norway announced that she had occupied certain territories in Eastern Greenland; whereupon Denmark filed with the Court an Application praying for judgment to the effect that the occupation was unlawful and invalid in that it constituted a violation of the existing legal situation. "By 12 votes to 2, the Court gave judgment in accordance with the submissions of the Danish Government, and rejected the opposing submissions of the Norwegian Government. Of the two dissenting judges one-M. Anzilotti, titular judge-arrives at the same conclusion as the Court, though for different reasons, whilst the otherM. Vogt, judge ad hoc-holds that the Danish claim should be rejected. Two judges, MM. Schücking and Wang, titular judges, whilst concurring in the judgment, have appended thereto some brief observations. "Each party is to bear its own costs. "The statement of fact and of law upon which the Court's decision is based may be summarised as follows: "B.1)-After some geographical data with regard to Greenland as a whole and the territory forming the subject of the present suit in particular, the Court recalls that the island of Greenland was discovered about 900 A.D. and that, a century later, Nordic settlements 1 See Bulletin No. 41, February 1933, p. 6. |