New-York tribune., 1921-02-25

islands in the Pacific north Of the
equator, and in the course of said dis
cussion, President Wilson, acting on
behalf of this government, was par
ticular to stipulate that the question
of the disposition of tn, Island of Yap
should be reserved for future consider
alton. Subsequently, this government
was informed that certain of the prin-
cipal Allied and associated powers
were under the impression that the
reported decision of the Supreme Coun-
Gil, sometimes described as the Council
of Four, taken at its meeting on May
7, 1919, included or inserted the Island
OF zap in the proposed mandate to
Japan. This government in notes ad-
dressed to the governments of Great
Britain. France, Italy and Japan has
set forth at length it's contention that
Zap had in fact been excepted from
this proposed mandate and was not to
be included therein Furthermore, by
direction Of President Wilson, the re-
spectve governments above mentioned
were Informed that the government of
the United States could not concur in
the reported decision Of May z, 1919, of
the Supreme Council The information
was further conveyed that the reserva-
tions which had previously been made
by this government regarding the ISL
and of zap were based on the view
that the Island of Yap necessarily con-
stitutes an indispensable part of any
scheme or practicable arrangement of
cable communication in the Pacific, and
that its free and unhampered use
should not be limited or controlled by
any one power.
Position of u. S. Definite
"While this government has never
assented to the inclusion of the island
of zap in the proposed mandate to
Japan, it may be pointed out that, even
if one or more of the other principal
Allied and associated powers were
under a misapprehension as to the in
clusion of this island in the reported
decision of May 7, 1919, nevertheless
the notes, above mentioned, of the gov
ernment of the United States make
clear the position of this government
in the matter. At the time when the
several notes were addressed to the re-
spectlve governments above mentioned
a final agreement had not been reached
as to the terms and ALLEGATION of man
dates covering the former German
islands in the Pacific. Therefore, the
position taken in the matter By the
President on behalf of this govern
ment and clearly set forth in the notes
ASlCiicu ", necessarily ndu L1e result
of effectively withdrawing any sugges-
tion or implication of assent, mistak-
enl y imputed to this government, long
before December IT, 1920, the date of
the councils meeting at Geneva.
CAS- one of Che principal Allied and
associated powers the United States
has an equal concern and an insepa-
rable interest with the other principal
Allied and associated powers in the
overseas possessions of Germany and
concededly an equal voice in their dis
position, which it is respectfully sub
mitted cannot be undertaken or effect
uated without its assent. The gov
crnment Of the United States, there
fore, respectfully states that it cannot
regard itself as bound by the terms
and provisions OF said mandate, and de-
sires to record its protest against the
reported decision of Decsnlocr II last
OF the Council Of the League Of Ma
uons IN relation thereto, and at the
same time to request that the council.
having obviously acted under A mis-
apprehension of the facts, should re-
open the question for the further con-
slderatlon which the proper settlement
OF 1T clearly requires.
Accept, gentlemen, the assurance of
my high consideration.
"BAlNBRIDGE COLBY.
Secretary of State"