United States has recently taken over private property on Taboga Island and in Las Minas Bay, Province of Colon, you make application for the reestablishment of the Mixed Claims Commission referred to in Articles VI and XV of the Treaty of 1903. In reply I beg to advise you that the matter has been taken up with the appropriate branch of this Government and will be given due consideration, after which the Department will take pleasure in advising you further. Accept [etc.] For the Secretary of State: NORMAN H. DAVIS 411.19 L 22/962 The Panaman Chargé (Lefevre) to the Secretary of State D-238 [Translation 18] WASHINGTON, June 6, 1921. EXCELLENCY: I have the honor to inform Your Excellency that I have received from my Government many inquiries as to the progress made by the undersigned in his application presented to Your Excellency in note D-67 of February 8, last, in which I officially transmitted my Government's request that the Mixed Commission created by the Canal Treaty be reestablished for the reasons stated in the note. I very respectfully take the liberty of asking Your Excellency kindly to let me know what steps have been taken by the United States Government in the matter dealt with in my aforesaid note D-67 of February 8, last, so as to enable me to forward to my Government the information that Your Excellency may be able to impart to me. I avail myself [etc.] J. E. LEFEVRE 411.19 L 22/961 The Secretary of State to the Panaman Chargé (Lefevre) WASHINGTON, June 24, 1921. SIR: The Department acknowledges the receipt of your communication D-238 dated June 6, 1921, and refers to its note of February 16, 1921, written in reply to your communication D-No. 67 dated February 8, 1921, in which, under instructions from your Government and on the ground that the Government of the United States File translation revised. had lately taken over private property on Taboga Island and in Las Minas Bay, Province of Colon, you made application for the reestablishment of the Mixed Claims Commission referred to in Articles 6 and 15 of the Treaty of 1903. The matter has since been taken up with the appropriate branch of this Government, and it is found that the expense of a Joint Commission is not warranted by the value of the private property taken over. It is believed, moreover, that any claims now pending or that may arise can be settled satisfactorily, speedily, and economically through diplomatic channels without the operation of a Joint Commission. Accept [etc.] CHARLES E. HUGHES 411.19 L 22/963 The Panaman Chargé (Lefevre) to the Secretary of State D-372 [Translation] WASHINGTON, August 26, 1921. EXCELLENCY: I have the honor to notify Your Excellency that as soon as I received your esteemed note of June 24 last, I sent a copy of the document to my Government for its information and proper action, as I duly informed Your Excellency. On the 8th of this month my Government answered me on the subject, stating that, while reserving the right to ask later on that the Mixed Commission provided by the Canal Treaty meet to consider the pending questions and while taking into account the fact that the owners of the condemned land in Taboga Island are inclined to settle directly with the Canal authorities in accordance with proposals made to them by the latter, my Government has decided to suspend for the present the action which it was taking through this Legation in order to have the aforesaid Mixed Commission meet; however, it has resolved at the same time to support the action of the Taboga islanders to the end that the Canal authorities, who appear to have suspended their proposals of direct settlement between them and the condemned property owners, may come to a final agreement on the subject without delays which are detrimental to the Taboga inhabitants. Accordingly my Government asks me to endeavor to secure the cooperation of the Department under Your Excellency's worthy charge for the purpose of inducing the War Department to give the necessary instructions to the said Canal authorities to reach a direct settlement with the interested Taboga islanders in the matter, on the basis which these authorities themselves had suggested and which appear to be acceptable to the Tabogans, but without this implying that Panama waives the right to ask that the Mixed Commission meet if it should be necessary. I consider that the satisfactory settlement of the questions pending in connection with the occupation of certain lands in Taboga will be mutually beneficial to our respective Governments, for which reason I doubt not that Your Excellency will see that the Secretary of War complies with this just demand of my Government, and thank Your Excellency accordingly in advance. I avail myself [etc.] J. E. LEFEVRE 411.19 L 22/963 The Secretary of State to the Panaman Chargé (Lefevre) WASHINGTON, September 21, 1921. SIR: I have the honor to acknowledge your note of August 26, 1921, in which you request this Department to suggest to the War Department that instruction be given to the authorities of the Panama Canal to enter into negotiations for a direct settlement of the claims of certain residents of Taboga Island against the Canal Zone authorities. You state that you believe that such direct negotiation would produce a satisfactory settlement of these claims, and that such a settlement would be agreeable to your Government without implying that your Government renounces the right of asking that the Mixed Commission be called together if it should prove necessary. I take pleasure in informing you that a copy of your note was forwarded to the Secretary of War, and that the Secretary of War has transmitted the correspondence in regard to the matter to the Governor of the Panama Canal with instructions to enter into direct negotiations with the residents of Taboga Island who have claims against the United States Government, along the lines previously suggested by the Canal Zone authorities. Accept [etc.] For the Secretary of State: BOUNDARY DISPUTE WITH COSTA RICA (See volume I, pages 175 ff.) PARAGUAY REPRESENTATIONS BY THE UNITED STATES IN FAVOR OF THE REVIVAL OF THE ASUNCIÓN PORT CONCESSION 834.156/112a: Telegram The Acting Secretary of State to the Minister in Paraguay (Mooney) WASHINGTON, January 6, 1921—6 p.m. 2. See previous correspondence regarding Asunción Port Concession.1 A set of financially responsible men, including Charles M. Barnett, George D. Graves, C. E. Bockus, and others, who have formed new Asuncion Port Corporation, represent to Department that they desire to take up at once work originally contemplated by concession, and that any intervening rights of International Products Company and Swift Company have been or can be entirely protected by agreement among the interested parties. They further represent they have information President of Paraguay favors resumption of work by present interested persons. Department desires you ascertain fully from Paraguayan Government if it favors a renewal of work along lines originally contemplated, also that you inform Department concerning your views as to advisability from standpoint of American commercial interests of informal action on part of Department in assisting in execution of proposed works. DAVIS 834.156/116 The Minister in Paraguay (Mooney) to the Acting Secretary of No. 738 State ASUNCIÓN, January 19, 1921. SIR: I have the honor to refer to Department's cabled instruction No. 2 dated January 6, 1921 and the cabled despatch of this Legation No. 4, dated January 19, 1921,2 both on the subject of the construction and operation of a river port at the city of Asunción under a concession heretofore granted by the Paraguayan Congress to the Construction and Engineering Finance Company of New York. As stated in my cablegram I had a personal conference with Doctor Manuel Gondra, the President of Paraguay, deeming that from such source I could learn most reliably the attitude of the Paraguayan Government in regard to the project. If, as represented to the Department by the concessionaire, Doctor Gondra favors a resumption of this activity, he probably wants it to take place under some new grant or arrangement between the port company and the Paraguayan Government, as he was quite vigorous in his defense of the decree of President Franco revoking the concession on account of default, as by him alleged, committed by the concessionaire company, and, while he did not commit himself positively, it is my opinion that he will be very reluctant to revoke that decree. He did not appear to be unfriendly to the port company, expressed much friendship for the Mr. Barnett now connected therewith, and seemed to recognize a base equity abiding in the company on account of its previous connection with the project, but, at the same time, contends that it has been guilty of such laches as to entirely lose its rights, and thinks that it should treat now de novo for the construction of the port. In such new negotiation I believe that he would be disposed to consider the port company as occupying a position of some vantage. It is bearly [sic] possible, though I consider it most. highly improbable, that sufficient pressure may be brought to bear to induce him to restore the port company to its original rights by a revocation of the Franco decree, but, if so, it is quite certain he would want to forestall public criticism by some modification of the original terms of the franchise. The Paraguayan public seems to have lost all interest in the improvement of the Asunción port, the reason being that the river traffic has been practically suspended for the past year on account of labor troubles. No passenger boats, which are also the boats carrying the mails, express, and light freight, have plied between Asunción and Buenos Aires since February 1920, and no prediction is made as to when they will resume service. The present port is of adequate capacity to accommodate the small number of cargo boats now using the same, and the activity of river transportation is now so negligible that it engages very small public attention. However it is likely that an affirmative effort to rehabilitate the port concession would probably call forth violent public protest as it did when the last attempt was made. It is my opinion that a new port in Asunción operated under American management and capital, of fairly liberal policy, imposing no unduly onerous conditions on 'Decree of Feb. 21, 1918, effective June 18, 1918. |