New-York tribune., 1922-11-19
government rsrnsins precisely what 1t
has been" s
Hughes Issues Statement

government remains pTeefseiy WHAT II
has BEEN"
Hughes Issues Statement
The statement, authorized BY SeeTs-
tary Hughes after his attention had
been called TO dispatches Of The Agso-
ciated Press on the subjeet from Mex
leo City, follows In full: ,s.
"trhe officers of the Department OF
State were much surprised to learf, Of
tho expressions In Mexico that the
United States government was seeking
to interfere in Mexico'a internal a9~
fairs. This government has not the
slightest desire to do so. As Secretary
Hughes said In his recent speech at
Boston, IL Is not FOR US to suggest what
laws Mexico shall have relating to the
future for, OF course, Mexico must be
the Judge of her own domestic policy.
What we have said as 20 the proposed
legislation was With che understanding
that the Mexican authorities would
welcome an expression OF our Views.
1.-THE Mexcan regime desires reeognie
tion by the United states The con-
fiscatory policy Of Mexico has stood
In the way. we have said that when q
nation has invited intercourse with
other nations, has established iaws taI-
der which Investments have been law
fully made, contracts entered into and
property rights acquired by citizens Of
other jurisdictions, it is an essential
condition Of international Intercourse
met and chat there shall be no resort
to confiscation and repudiation.
Fact, Not Form, at Issue
eve have repeatedly said that we
are not particular as to the form Of
the assurance agains. confscation. We
desire the fact.
"The Mexican authorities have said
that they could not make treaty to
give this assurance against confisca-
tion. They have said that the proper
course WIS for the Mexican Congress to
regulate the application Of che consti-
tuition Of 1g1T no 40 to preclude conffs-
cation. We have said that We have
not stood in the way Of such iegisla~
tion and should be glad TO see IL.
"Recently we were informed that q
bill for this purpose had been drafted.
But the provisions of this bill, accord
ing to our advices, were utterly made
duate TO protect against confiscation
OF valid titles acquired under Mexican
laws prior to the constitution Of 1917.
OF course we did not desire TO rest
apparently satisfied with such pro-
cedure and permit the Mexican autnorl-
ties to assume that recognition by this
government would follow the passage
Of such an inadequate measure.
Thought Advice Was Wanted
1--WE were given to upnderstand that
the departments comment on che pro-
posed measure would not be unwel
come.
"We had not che slightest intention
of interfering in Mexican affairs, and
have not done SO. The Mexican Con-
grees, Of course, is entitled to pass its
laws. But IL they resort to Legislation
to interpret the constitution Of 1877
with the idea Of precluding confscasion
and obtaining recognition by this gov
ernment it is only fair that they should
know the views of this government as
to the efficacy Of the legislation for
that purpose.
Had this government in no way in
timated it's veiw before the Legislation
had been passed there doubtless would
have been complaint.
eve desire to maintain friendly re-
lations with the Mexican people and
IL is in the interest Of that friendship
that we have hoped they would And q
way Of giving protection against con-
tiscation.
Upon that .Sundarne entail question the