The Monmouth inquirer. [volume] (Freehold, N.J.) 1865-1933, 1923-03-15
HUGHES UPHOLDS
TYNE U. S. CONSUL
Correspondence Reveals Finding
Charges BaseIeSS; Demands
ENJOYS Be Reinstated.
AMERICA REJECTS EVIDENCE
Nothing Illegal Done, Secretary Of
State Insists, to Warrant Rritain's
Action-strone Retort ana In
sists on British Amends.

sists on British Amends.
Washington.-By direction OF the
Foreign Office, the British embassy
made public a statement and one OF
the series of British diplomatic COM
munications bearing on the Newcastle
consulate incident The State De-
partment Immediately made public
all of the American communications
and statements relating to that case.
Though there are gaps in the inter
change between the two governments
due to the lack of British notes not
made public, the whole correspond
ence and the accompanying state
ments throw into sharp relief the fact
that the American position in defense
of Consul Slater and Vice-Consul
Brooks is based primarily on the cir
cumstance that charges against them
we're given publicity in London. The
British correspondence fatty dis
claims responsibility for that pub
licity.
The British note signed by Marquis
Curzon and dated December II, 1922,
was prefaced by the following state
ment issued by the embassy:
'The official pronouncement on the
subject of the United States Con-
sulate at Newcastle, which appeared
in the newspapers of the fourth in
slant, contained statement to the
effect that the British government, by
specifying the reasons why the Amer
lean consular officers at that post mad
become unacceptable, had in erect
invited a discussion these reasons.
"In order to remove the misappre-
hension which appears to exist on TINS
point. the British Foreign Once are
causing statement to be published
In which they repeat the declaration
already made in their published note
of March / to the effect that IN Iur-
nishing a reason for their action IN
withdrawing the exequatur OF the
United States Consul they were not
inviting a discussion of the grounds
on which their decision was taken,
but were merely complying with the
terms of Article of the commercial
convention between Great Britain and
the United tSates of July 8, 1913,
which provides that the "onended
government shall assign to the other
government it's reasons for sending
4, aone,,Ior Offioor
"In order that the procedure fol-
lowed by his majesty's government IN
this matter may be better understood,
the British Foreign Office are COM
municating to the press note al
dressed on December 81 last to the
American Chage d'Affaires in London,
the reply to which already has been
published by the State Department"
The American correspondence,
which is voluminous and Includes
specific instructions sent to all Amer
lean consular agents under date or
December 80, was accompanied by
the following official American sum-
mary of the situation;
"The Department of State has tax
en- the position that since the British
government has charged the Ameri-
can consular officers at Newcastle
with improper conduct in the per-
Torrance of their consular functions
and has allowed these charges to
become public, it is incumbent upon
the department to investigate care
fully the charges, in order to deter
mine whether or not the officers were
guilty and, if guilty, the extent of
the discipline required
with a view to reaching con-
clusion a very careful investigation
of all the facts was at once under
taken, with the result that the de-
partment reached the conclusion that
the charges against the officers had
not been substantiated. In these cir
cumstances the department saw no
alternative but frankly to advise the
British government of the result of
it's investigation and to express the
hope that the charges would be with
drawn"