MINUTE SHEET.
Reference......[0.-7^...V.fj.......... ^
The State Departments reply is not very helpful
as it gives no answer at all to one of our questions | i.e.
what vessels would be regarded by the United States author-
ities as assimilated to warships in the matter of refueling -
and it returns a very evasive answer to the other. What
we were trying to find out was whether the United states
had decided that in applying Article XIX   of the Hague
Convention, they would be guided by the rule apparently
laid down for the Panama Canal that belligerent ships
should only be given sufficient fuel to enable them
to reach the next port open to them for refueling. The
State Department have evaded this question, and have made
no reference at all to the Panama Canal rule. Instead,
they have only told us that"it is presumed" that rules
"analagous" to those laid down in Article XIX of the Hague
Convention will be followed.   Unless of course we know
what is meant by "analagous" this does not get us any
further.
However, the position presumably is either that
the United States authorities have in fact not mafle up
their minds what action they will take in the matter or
that they do not wish to say anything now whichmLght
impair the President's and the Administration's discretion
later on.    In either case we are not likely to get anything
more definite out of them by reverting to the matter and
it is to be hoped that the Foreign Office will realise this.
PRHM:NT
[MUtO] 1WW/2M
800m 10/31 7W
G.&S «» 2>°
(RBOIMIHT)
Code 6-M-O
June 23rd, 1939.
INDEX
[OVER,
J
fevs-^-
^ 3
BP