Evening star., 1926-11-24

Continued from First Page)
for such vested rights limited oon-
ceSsions to operate oil wells o. mines
for a period of years.
Referring to the 1923 joint COM
mission proceedings, Mr.. Kellogg said,
The paramount issue was that Of
recognition"
Recalls Assurances Given.
without the assurances received
in the course of that negotiation,
recognition could not and would not
have been extended, and my Govern
ment confidently relies upon the full
given" Mr.. Kellogg concluded.
In this reply of October 7 Aaron
Saenz. Mexican foreign minister, chal-
lenged this Interpretation.
From all the diplomatic corre-
spondence it is clearly in
ferred." he said, that the govern
ment Of Gen. Obregon Ghen Presi-
dent of Mexico) took special pains not
to admit a conditional recognition sub
ject to the outcome of the confer
ences."
The Mexican note expressed "sur-
prise" over the contention made by
oCNi 0Iu4 ACAlOSS anu CAlCu d IOlC-
gram sent by the foreign Office to
Charles E. Hughes, then Secretary of
State, on August "a, 1923. saying it
contained "a proposal to him that
the resumption of diplomatic rela-
lations and the signing of the claims
conventions negotiated at the 1923
conferences) be not simultaneous nor
very near because otherwise the first
OF those acts might unjustly be given
the false appearance of being condi-
toned"
And 1t was so DONE" the note
continued, "your excellency's govern.
ment therefore admitting that the
recognition Of the government of Gen.
Obregon was not conditioned"
Hughes Outlines Course.
Reference to previously published
correspondence reveals two messages
relating to recognition and the 1928
negotiations.
On August % Secretary Hughes
notified the foreign office that Presi-
dent Coolidge had approved the report
and recommendations of the commits
sioners. He asked to be advised of
similar approval by Gen. Obregon and
added:
I'm the event that you are able to
81 duNlSC IIIC, OC6 1CdSc " Su66CcL
the following procedure with respect
to the resumption of diplomatic rela-
tions. 1t seems advisable that we
should agree upon day on which the
resumption of diplomatic relations
should be formally announced"
In reply. the foreign Office transmit
ted Gen. Obregons approval Of the
commissions work and suggested the
following identtc language for an
nouncement Of resumption Of rela.
tions to the press, which was ac-
cepted: ~ s
that of the United States. in view of
the reports and recommendations
that their respective commissioners sub
mitted - have resolved to resume
diplomatic relations, and therefore
pending the appointment OF ambaS-
sadors. they are taking the necessary
steps to accredit their respective
charge d'affaires.
Mexican View Stated.
Minister Saenz, in the October
note. also questioned the scope OF Dip
lomatic intervention to protect ma
tionals in foreign countries, saying II
should be limited, where such nationals
waived the right to such protection, TO
cases Wn6T0 there IillSlll DO n SNooS
ouent denial of justice or other in
fringement Of international duty" He
also contended that action OF the Mex
lean supreme court in declaring article
q of the Mexican constitution non-re-
troactive in the case of certain Amer
ican-owned rights acquired before 1917
was limited to those specific cases and
was not broad Interpretation OF the
constitution.
The note then brought out the doc
trine regarding new systems of own
ership in Mexico.
I'm the matter of petroleum, the
purpose of the foreigners who believe
they have acquired rights to the SUBJ
soil antedating 1917 is that those
rights be respected" it said. THE
purpose of the Mexican government is
that the principles of the nationaliZa-
tion of the petroleum be applied. But
there cannot be two laws. one con.
cerning the rights acquired prior to
1917 and another concerning rights
acquired subsequently; and with re-
gard to the rights acquired prior to
1917. neither can there be two ways
of enforcing the law, one for the ma