The Washington times., 1922-08-11
HUGHES NOTES /
OBJECTIONS T0|
OIL DECISIONS
Five Mexican Supreme Court
Findings Not Sufficiently
Comprehensive, He Holds. +,
By JOHN GOLDsTROM.
Universal Service.

Secretary Of State Hughes late
yesterday authorized q statement
DECLARING that the five Mexican SUE
preme court decisions affecting
American rights are not sufficiently
comprehensive. and pointing out
that other decisions dealing with
unsettled points are expected. The
principal points made In the state.
[ment are these:
/. The Inference from these de-
cisions is that petroleum properties
In process OF development before
May /, 1917. when the present con-
stitution took effect, are protected
from a retroactive application OF
the fourth paragraph of article 2L
Q. These decisions do not. how
ever, effectively deal with the
rights of American citizens In lands
containing petroleum or other sub
soil substances where the lands
were owned prior to May !. 1917,
but had not been developed. or. as
to which leases or contract rights
10 prospect for and work petroleum
had not been granted before that
date.
The question whether the owners
of the land In such a case have
determined by the Mexican supreme
court. II Is understood that there
are a large number of amparo pro-
ceedings before that court which
involve that question and are still
undecided.
Objections Made.
The statement says:
"The department has received
"a - n.
Mexican supreme court rendered
proceedings instituted by petroleum
companies. These four decisions
seem to be identical In all essen.
tial particulars. and together with
the similar decision OF that court
rendered August 80, 1871. In the
amparo case brought by the Texas
Company. appear TO constitute
what is called a precedent In Mex.
lean Jurisprudence.
These opinions set forth that ar.
ticle IA. OF the Mexican constitution,
providing that No law shall be given
retroactive effect to the prejudice of
any person whatsoever does not re-
late to the provisions OF the consti.
tuition itself, and that when the con-
stitution enbodies retroactive pro-
visions these must be applied retro
actively.
'Tt is further set forth that the
fourth paragraph of article 81, OF the
Mexican constitution of 1917. refer
ring to petroleum. and other subsoil
substances. cannot be considered 10
be retroactive, as II does not In.
jure previous and legitimately ac.
quired rights but II Is apparent that
the application of the principle thus
declared must depend upon what ID
considered 10 be an acquired
No Application
"The five decisions creating the
precedent In question relate exclu.
sively to cases OF leases or contracts
which were made by owners OF land
for prospecting for and working pc
troleum. and II is said that thereby
the privileges Of the owners OF the
lands were translated into positive
acts and accordingly the claimants.
as the lessees or holders OF these con.
tracts had acquired rights TO the in
Jury OF which the provisions Of the
constitution Of 1917 for the national
ization Of petroleum could not be ap-
piled" s..
Then follows the two principal
points quoted above, and the state
ment ends:
THE department has also been ad.
vised by the Mexican authorities that
the Mexican Congress has sole au-
thority to regulate by an appropriate
organic law the Interpretation of the
precepts Of the and that
no organic law for this purpose has
vat haan ann 81 Al - -