LIBRARY ABO'iiiv a

[Distributed to the Council and Q 72. M . 36. iQ25. V III. the Members of the League.] [f f -, ^ Sesgion ; p V ]

LEAGUE OF NATIONS

Geneva, February 20th, 1925.

ADVISORY AND TECHNICAL COMMITTEE FOR COMMUNICATIONS AND TRANSIT

Minutes of the Seventh Session

held at Geneva November 26th-29th, 1924.

(With Annexes.)

The Committee is at present composed as follows: Chairman :

Mr, J. G. B a l d w in (appointed by the Government of Great Britain), Representative of Great Britain on the International River Commissions. Vice-Chairmen :

His Excellency Dr. Aristides d e A g u e r o y B e t h a n c o u r t (appointed by the Cuban Govern­ ment), Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary at Berlin and Vienna. M. Bohdan W in ia r s k i (appointed by the Polish Government), Professor of Law at the University of Poznan.

M. Francisco A m u n a t e g u i (appointed by the Government of Chile), Engineer of Bridges and Roads ; Secretary-General of the Mixed Courts of Arbitration. M. Guillermo B r o c k m a n x y A b a rzu za (appointed by the Government of Spain), Inspector- General of Roads, Canals and Ports; President of the Council of Public Works. M. Gaétan D o b k e v ic iu s (appointed by the Government of Lithuania), Engineer ; Counsellor of Legation. M. Silvain D r e y f u s (appointed by the Government of France), Inspector-General of Bridges and Roads ; Member of the Central Commission for Rhine Navigation. His Excellency Dr. J. Gustave G u e r r e r o (appointed by the Government of Salvador), Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary in France and Switzerland. M. O u a n g-H a n g (appointed by the Government of China), Engineer of Railways. M. Athanase P o l it is (appointed by the Government of Greece), Technical Representative of the Hellenic Government at Paris ; former Director-General of the Hellenic Railways. M. G. P o pe sc o (appointed by the Government of Roumania), Professor ; Director-General of the Société nationale de crédit industriel. M. Henri R e in h a r d t , former Ministerial Counsellor (Austria). M. Girolamo Si n i ga l ia (appointed by the Government of Italy), formerly Chief Inspector of the Italian State Railways ; Member of the Central Commission for Rhine Navigation. M. Gabriel Sm it h (appointed by the Government of Norway), Director-General of Ports. Dr. A. S t ie v e n a r d (appointed by the Government of Belgium), Inspector of Belgian Rail­ ways. M. Yotaro S u g im u r a (appointed by the Government of Japan), Counsellor of Embassy; Assistant Director of the Japanese League of Nations Office at Paris. His Excellency Dr. Francisco José U r r u t ia (appointed by the Government of Colombia), Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary in Switzerland. One member to be appointed by the Government of Venezuela.

Secretariat :

Sir Arthur Sa l t e r , permanent representative of the Secretary-General of the League of Nations; Director of the Communications and Transit Section of the Secretariat of the League of Nations. M. Robert H a a s, Secretary-General of the Advisory and Technical Committee; Member of the Communications and Transit Section of the Secretariat of the League of Nations.

x d‘ N. 475 (A.) 525 XF.) 3/55. Imp. Kundig. S p e c ia l Co m m it t e e s a n d S u b -C o m m it t e e s .

i. Sub-Committee for Ports and Maritime Navigation.

(a) Committee for Ports: Mr. S m ith (Chairman). Mr. B a l d w in . M. B r o c k m a n n . M. St ie v e n a r d . M. B. F e r n a n d e z y M e d in a , Minister Plenipotentiary of Uruguay in Spain ; former Chairman of the Ports Committee of the Second General Conference on Commu cations and Transit. M. G. I n g ia n n i, Director-General of the Italian Mercantile Marine. M. von L a h r , Ministerial Counsellor to the Reichswirtschaftsministerium. M. P. H. W a x ie r , Director of Navigable Waterways and Maritime Ports in the French Ministry of Public Works. (b) Committee for Maritime Navigation: M. d e A g u e r o y B e t h a n c o u r t (Chairman). M. P o p e s c o . M. Su g im u r a . Sir Alan A n d e r s o n , Vice-President of the British Chamber of Shipping. M. G. B r e t o n , Director of Chargeurs Réunis. M. D. B ia n c a r d i, E xpert Adviser to the Italian Delegation in the Ports Committee of the Second General Conference. M. A. G. Iv r o l l e r , Member of the Council of the Economic Department of the Ministry for Foreign Affairs at The Hague. A member to be appointed by the Greek Government.

Secretary: M. R o m e in .

Technical Committee for Buoyage and Lighting of Coasts: M. P. H. W a t ie r , Director of Navigable Waterways and Maritime Ports at the Ministry of Public Works, France |Chairman). M. P. van B raam van V l o t e n , Chief Engineer, Technical Lighthouse Service, Netherlands. Commander (retired) G. D e l a n o (Chile). M. E. HXgc,, Director-General of Pilotage, Lighthouses and Buoys, Sweden. M. N. N a g a o k a , Secretary at the Ministry of Communications, Japan. Commander R azicotsicas (Greece). M. A. d e R o u v il l e , Chief Engineer of Roads and Bridges, France. Commander L. Tonta, Director of the Hydrographic Institute, Royal Italian Navy. Baron G. W r e d e , Director-General of Naval Administration, Finland.

Secretary: M. R o m e in .

2. Sub-Committee for Inland Navigation.

M. Silvain D r e y f u s (Chairman). Mr. B a l d w in . M. D o b k e v ic iu s . M. P o p e s c o . M. R e in h a r d t .1 M. St ie v e n a r d . M. W in ia r s k i. M. T sang-O u , Chinese Delegate to the Barcelona Conference.

Secretary : M. Romein.

Tonnage Measurement Committee :

M. B o u c k a e r t (Belgium), Director-General at the Ministry of Public Works, Brussels (Chairman). M. B e d r e a g (Roumania), Chief Engineer ; Director of the Naval Dockyards at Turnu- Severin. M. D. B o u r g e o is , Inspector-General of Bridges and Roads at the Ministry of Public W orks of France. M. O p p e r m a n n , Ministerial Counsellor at the Ministry of Communications of the Reich. M. R. V y s o c k is, Naval Engineer at the Ministry of Communications, Kaunas. A member to be appointed by the Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes. A member to be appointed by the LTnion of the Socialist Soviet Republics of Russia.

Secretary: M. R o m e in .

1 See page 22 j. Sub-Committee for Transport by Rail.

M, S in ig a l ia (Chairman). M. A m u n a t e g u i. M. B r o c k m a n n . M. O u a n g -H a n g . M. POLITIS. Sir Francis D e n t , Chairman of the Railways Committee of the Second General Conference on Communications and Transit; ex-Managing-Director of the South- Eastern and Chatham Railway (for whom Mr. M a r r io tt may act as a substitute). M. S c h w o b , Director-General of Railways in the French Ministry of Public Works (or a substitute appointed by him). M. R. H e r o l d , Director of the Railway Division of the Federal Department of Posts and Railways at Berne. M. I s a b e l l e , Engineer; Rapporteur of the Railway Committee of th e Second General Conference on Communications and Transit. Dr. Otokar L a n k a s , Director at the Ministry of Railways a t Prague. M. P. W o l f , Ministerial Counsellor at the Ministry of Transport at Berlin.

Secretary: Colonel T. A. H i a m .

4. Sub-Committee on Electric Questions.

M. D o b k e v ic iu s (Chairman). M. B r o c k m a n n . M. P o l it is . M. P. B ig n a m i, Engineer; former Under-Secretary of State (Italy). M. J. Ch u a r d , Engineer; Director of the Electrical Enterprises Bank at Zurich. M. F. W. H a n s e n , Director-General of Hydraulic Power and Canals in Sweden. M. P. A. H o l c k -Co l d in g , Director of the First Section of the Danish Ministry of Public Works. M. M a g n ie r , Director of Hydraulic Power and Distribution of Electric Energy in the French Ministry of Public Works.

Secretary: M. R omf.i n .

5. Budget Sub-Committee.

Mr. B a l d w in (Chairman). M. Silvain D r e y f u s . M. G u e r r e r o . M. O u a n g -H a n g . M. S t ie v e n a r d . M. SUGIMURA.

Secretary: M. H a a s .

6. Legal Committee.

M. U r r u t ia (Chairman). M. G u e r r e r o . M. W in ia r s k i. Jonkheer W. J. M. van E y s in g a , Professor at the University of Leyden. M. J. H o s t ie , former Legal Adviser to the Belgian Department of Marine; Secretary- General of the Central Commission for Rhine Navigation.

Secretary: M. H a a s.

7. Special Committee of Enquiry on Road Traffic.

M. S t ie v e n a r d (Chairman). M. A m u n a t e g u i. M. B il f e l d t , Head of Section at the Ministry of Justice, Copenhagen. M. E. Ch a in , Vice-President of the Automobile Club de France. M. D e l a q u is , Head of the Division of Police at the Federal Department of Justice and Police, Berne. Mr. P. C. F r a n k l in , of the Roads Department at the Ministry of Transport, London. M. E. M e l l in i, Chief Inspector of Railways, Tramways and Automobiles of the Kingdom of Italy. M. P f l u g , Ministerial Counsellor a t the Ministry of Communications of the Reich. M. Sc h ô n f e l d , Administrator at the Department of Communications, The Hague.

Secretary: M. R o m e in . 8. Special Committee of Enquiry on Telegraphic Questions.

M. B. Fernandez y Medina, Minister Plenipotentiary of U ruguay in Spain (Chairman), M. G. Angei.ini, Director of Electric Communications in the Italian Ministry of Posts. M. Broin, Director of the Telegraphic Section of the French Ministry of Posts and Telegraphs. Mr. F. J. B r o w n , Assistant Secretary of the General Post Office, London. M. H. L. E t ie n n e , Director of the International Telegraphic U nion. M. G. B o n n e t , Assistant to the Chairman.

Secretary: M. H a a s.

9. Special Committee of Enquiry into the Reform of the Calendar.

Jonkheer W. J. M. VAN E y sin g a (Chairman). The Rev. Father G. G ianfranceschi, Representative of the Holy See. The Rev. T. E. R. P h il l ip s , Representative of the Archbishop of Canterbury. Professor D. E g in it is , Director of the Athens Observatory ; Representative of the (Ecumenical Patriarchate at Constantinople. M. C. B ig o u r d a n , Director of the Bureau international de l'Heure, Paris; former Chairman of the Calendar Committee of the International Astronomical Union. Mr. Willis H. B o o t h , President of the International Chamber of Commerce.

Secretary: M. R o m e in . INDEX.

Page I. Account of the W ork of the Sub-Committees and Special Committees: First Meeting ...... 7 (a) Special Committee of Enquiry into the Reform of the Calendar : First Meeting ...... 7 Sixth Meeting ...... 27 (b) Sub-Committee for Inland Navigation: First Meeting ...... 7 (1) Application of the Resolutions of the Genoa Conference: First Meeting ...... 7 (2) Unification of Private Law in Inland Navigation: First Meeting ...... 8 Sixth Meeting ...... 27 (3) Definition of Sea-going Vessels and of Craft employed in Inland Naviga­ tion: First Meeting ...... 8 Sixth Meeting ...... 27 (4) Unification of Tonnage Measurement in Inland Navigation: First Meeting ...... 8 (5) Unification of Inland Navigation Statistics: First Meeting ...... 8 (c) Mixed Committee for Health Supervision of Traffic on Navigable Waterways : First Meeting ...... 8 (d) Sub-Committee for Ports and Maritime Navigation : First Meeting ...... 9 Question of Double Taxation: Fourth M e e tin g ...... 21 (e) Sub-Committee for Transport by Rail: Second M e e tin g ...... 10 Third Meeting ...... 13 Fourth M e e tin g ...... 19 (1) Adhesion by Great Britain to the Berne Convention: Second M e e tin g ...... 10 (2) Travelling Facilities for the Personnel of the Secretariat of the League of Nations: Second M e e tin g ...... 10 (3) Enquiry into Existing Transport Conditions as compared with the Pre- War Period: Second M e e tin g ...... 10 Third Meeting ...... 13 (4) Railway Connections between Geneva and the Various European Capitals : Second M e e tin g ...... 10 (5) Report by M. Politis on the European Conference on Time-tables: Second M e e tin g ...... i° (6) Regime of Passports: Second M e e tin g ...... 10 Fifth M e e tin g ...... 23 Sixth M eeting...... 2$ (7) Request for a Hearing submitted by the Representatives of the Railway Workers' Union: Second M e e tin g ...... 12 (8) Question raised by M. Ouang-Hang: Third Meeting ...... I 3 (9) Measures necessary for applying the Provisions of the Railway Convention: Third Meeting ...... I 3 (10) International Organisation of Information regarding Itineraries: Third Meeting ...... z3 (ri) Uniform Nomenclature of Goods: Fourth M e e tin g ...... x9 Sixth M eeting...... 27 (f) Special Committee of Enquiry on Road Traffic: Fifth M eetin g ...... 24 (1) Revision of the 1909 Convention : Fifth M eetin g ...... 24 (2) Request for a Hearing submitted by the International Syndicate of Transport Workers: Fifth M eetin g ...... 2,J Pa*p II. R a d io -T e l e g r a p h ic Q u e s t io n s : First Meeting ......

III. D i s p u t e c o n c e r n in g t h e A p p l ic a t io n o f t h e A r t ic l e s o f t h e P e a c e T r e a t y r e l a t in g to t h e O d e r a n d t h e D a n u b e : First Meeting ...... (| Third Meeting ...... I:;

IV. L e g a l O p in io n r e g a r d in g t h e Q u e s t io n o f t h e 3 p e r C e n t I r o n G a t e s G old L o a n : First M eetin g ...... a

V. R e l a t io n s w it h t h e I nternational C o m m it t e e o n L o n g -D is t a n c e T e l e p h o n y : Fourth M e e tin g ...... iq Sixth Meeting ...... 27

VI. Q u e s t io n o f a n I nternational A g r e e m e n t f o r t h e T elephotographic T ransmission o f D escriptions e m p l o y e d b y t h e V a r io u s P o l ic e S e r v ic e s : Fourth M e e tin g ...... 20

VII. L ia is o n b e t w e e n t h e I nternational R iv e r C o m m is sio n s a n d t h e C o m m it t e e f o r Communications a n d T r a n s it : Fourth M e e tin g ...... 20 Sixth Meeting ...... 27

VIII. R e s o l u t io n s o f t h e A s s e m b l y a n d t h e C o u n c il c o n c e r n in g A r b it r a t io n , S e c u r it y a n d D is a r m a m e n t : Fourth M e e tin g ...... 21

IX. Q u e s t io n o f t h e I n t e r n a l C onstitution o f t h e Co m m it t e e : R epresentation o f t h e O rganisation f o r C ommunications a n d T r a n s it o n t h e I n t e r ­ n a t io n a l A s s o c ia t io n o f N a v ig a t io n Co n g r e s s e s : Fourth M e e tin g ...... 22 Sixth Meeting ...... 28

X. R e s o l u t io n s o f t h e A s s e m b l y c o n c e r n in g R a d io -T e l e p h o n y a n d t h e U se o f E s p e r a n t o in I nternational T e l e g r a p h ic C ommunications : Fourth M e e tin g ...... 22 Sixth Meeting ...... 28

XI. Q u e s t io n o f t h e I n s t it u t e o f P r iv a t e L a w : Fourth M e e tin g ...... 23

XII. P r e s e n t S t a t e o f t h e S ig n a t u r e s a n d R atifications o f I nternational Co n v e n t io n s in r e g a r d to C ommunications a n d T r a n s it : Fifth M e e tin g ...... 26

XIII. A n n e x e s ...... 29 FIRST MEETING

Held on Wednesday, November 26th, 1924, at 10.30 a.m.

Chairm an: Mr. B a l d w in .

Present: All the members of the Committee with the exception of M. Urrutia, M. Popesco and >1. Sugimura, the latter being replaced by M. U sa m i,

Also present: M. H o s t ie , expert on the Legal Committee, and M. von Rent he F in k , Secretary-General of the International Elbe Commission.

Secretariat : M. H a a s, Secretary-General of the Committee, Colonel H iam and M. R o m e in .

The Ch a ir m a n , speaking on behalf of the Committee, welcomed M. Reinhardt, the Austrian representative, who was taking part for the first time in the work of the Committee.

The S e c r e t a r y -G e n e r a l of the Committee communicated a letter from M. Urrutia, who had been detained at Vienna by private affairs and who regretted not being able to take part in the work of the session. A telegram had also been received from M. Popesco, who was detained in Roumania for reasons of health. M. Sugimura, the Japanese representative, who was also a delegate at the Opium Conference, would be replaced when necessary by M. Usami. The Committee then proceeded to consider the agenda (see Annex I).

I. A cc o u n t o f t h e W o r k of t h e S u b -Co m m it t e e s a n d S p e c ia l Co m m it t e e s .

(a) Special Committee of Enquiry into the Reform of the Calendar.

The S e c r e t a r y -G e n e r a l of the Committee said that he had received several letters with regard to a possible increase in the membership of the Committee for the Reform of the Calendar so as to ensure the representation of certain other religious denominations. Dr. Adolf Keller, of Zurich, had been asked, for example, by American, Austrian, Belgian, Czechoslovak, Danish, Dutch, English, Esthonian, French, German, Hungarian, Irish, Latvian, Lithuanian, Norwegian, Polish, Roumanian, Scottish, Spanish, Swedish and Swiss Protestant Churches to act as their representative. It had already been decided to hear representatives of Churches which had not up to the present been represented on the Committee. Dr. Keller would, therefore, in any case have an opportunity of expressing his point of view, but a question of principle was involved. It also arose in the case of the Jewish communities, which had passed various criticisms on the proposals for the reform of the calendar. The Mussulmans had not yet asked to be represented on the Committee ; but it was not impossible that such a proposal might subsequently be made. That question, indeed, had already been raised by the Jews. The Committee for the Reform of the Calendar was not, however, competent to increase the number of its members, and it would therefore perhaps be desirable that the plenary Committee should authorise it to consider the possibility of doing so.

The Ch a ir m a n observed that the question was a very delicate one, and he was of opinion that it would be desirable to authorise the Calendar Committee to examine it at its next meeting.

M. d e A g u e r o y B e t h a n c o u r t supported the Chairman’s proposal. This proposal was adopted, and the Secretariat was asked to prepare a draft resolution to this effect.

(b) Sub-Committee for Inland Navigation.

I1) Application of the Resolutions of the Genoa Conference (see Annex 6 b to the Minutes of the Sub-Committee for Inland Navigation, First Session).

Ihe Ch a ir m a n stated that the Bureau of the Committee had already got into touch with ![’ ^’alker Hines, the American expert who had been formerly appointed for the purpose of "locating river tonnage, and had asked him to undertake the enquiry in question.

The Se c r e t a r y -G e n e r a l said that this question was to some extent a budgetary one. e negotiations had not yet been terminated, but there was reason to hope that a satisfactory !esult would be obtained. ft 1vas decided to instruct the Bureau to continue the negotiations in question. (2) Unification of Private Law in Inland Navigation (see Annex 3 b to the Minutes of the Sub­ committee for Inland Navigation, First Session).

The Se c r e t a r y -G e n e r a l observed that it had been decided by a resolution of the Advisory and Technical Committee to await the results of the examination of this question undertaken by the international river commissions. As the investigation undertaken by the Central Commission for Rhine Navigation had already produced appreciable results and as the other Commissions did not apparently intend to deal with this question in the near future, there was no object in waiting any longer.

M. Silvain D r e y f u s drew the attention of the Advisory and Technical Committee to the resolution adopted by it in March 1924. The special Committee appointed by the Central Com­ mission for Rhine Navigation having already accomplished the first stage of its work, the Sub­ committee requested the plenary Committee to authorise it to deal with this question now. This was agreed to, and the secretariat ivas asked to prepare a draft resolution to this effect.

The S e c r e t a r y -G e n e r a l referred to the fact that the Assembly of the League of Nations had agreed to the creation of an International Institute of Private Law at Rome. He asked that the proposed Committee should be authorised to get into touch with that organisation if it so desired. It was decided that the Committee should be authorised to get into touch with all organisations which were competent in the matter.

(3) Definition of Sea-going Vessels and of Craft employed in Inland Navigation.

The Ch a ir m a n said that, at the meeting of the Sub-Committee held in Brussels in July, M. Hostie considered that it would be desirable, in connection with the work undertaken regard­ ing tonnage measurement in inland navigation, to leave out of account the complicated question of mixed navigation. This question went beyond the scope of the work relating to tonnage measurement. The distinction between sea-going vessels and craft employed in inland navigation arose in all international questions relating to navigation (labour, safety, private law, etc.). M. Hostie thought that it might with advantage be made the subject of a general enquiry with a view to the international adoption of one or more criteria. Such an enquiry should be held by agreement with the Maritime Sub-Committee. The Chairman proposed to set up a Sub-Committee, consisting of experts appointed as follows : two appointed by the Maritime Sub-Committee ; two by the Sub-Committee for Inland Navigation and two by the Legal Committee. M. S in ig a l ia a n d M. d e A g u e r o y B e t h a n c o u r t supported this proposal. The proposal was agreed to, it being understood that the experts need not necessarily be chosen from the members of the Sub-Committees in question as at present constituted.

(4) Unification of Tonnage Measurement in Inland Navigation.

M. R o m e in said that the Committee for the Unification of Tonnage Measurement had met a week before and had agreed on a text which might serve as a basis for discussion and might perhaps, if it was thought desirable, be submitted to a European Conference. It was in reality the text of the Brussels Convention modified according to the recommendations of the Central Commission for Rhine Navigation. In accordance with the instructions given by the Sub- Committee for Inland Navigation, the question of registration had been left on one side. The Committee noted these declarations.

(5) Unification of Inland Navigation Statistics (see Annex 4 to the Minutes of the Sub-Committee for Inland Navigation, First Session).

M. Silvain D r e y f u s said that the secretariat had collected important data which had been communicated to the members of the Committee in order that they might take active steps in the matter in their respective countries. M. R e in h a r d t observed that the data in question were very valuable and that the Austrian Government was keenly interested in the question. The enquiry on this subject had, however, not yet terminated.

(c) Mixed Committee for Health Supervision of Traffic on Navigable Waterways.

The S e c r e t a r y -G e n e r a l said that some members of the Sub-Committee for Inland Naviga­ tion had held a joint meeting with a Sub-Committee of the Health Committee of the League of Nations to consider the question of health supervision on waterways. M. Stievenard pointed out to the Committee that those who had taken part in the woik of the Mixed Committee considered that this liaison between the delegates of the two Committees had produced very practical and quick results. Moreover, agreement had been more easil) reached between the two fractions of the Mixed Committee, and all the difficulties which woulr. no doubt, have taken up much time and given much work if treated by any other means h a d been settled rapidly and with unanimous consent, thanks to the opportunity which the representatives of each Committee had of putting forward their arguments and of discussing them w ith a know ledge of the facts. - g -

As regards the text adopted, it had been decided that this should serve not as a text to be prescribed for a general convention but as a type to b e proposed as a model for countries desirous of concluding conventions with each other. M oreover, the members of the Committee cou ld see that no fundamental change had been made in the draft which had formerly been submitted to the Advisory and Technical Committee for Communications and Transit, and the very slight alterations adopted by the Mixed Committee, which were indispensable either for reasons of logic or in order to bring the texts into agreement, had been unanimously adhered to by the delegates of the Advisory and Technical Committee. In conclusion, M. Stievenard expressed his pleasure at the cordial attitude of, and the great assistance which his fellow-delegates and he had received from , the delegates of the Health Committee.

(d) Sub-Committee for Ports and Maritime Navigation (see Minutes of the First Session of the Sub-Committee).

The Se c r e t a r y -G e n e r a l said that, at the last joint meeting of the two Committees of that Sub-Committee, the question had been raised of a possible appeal to jurists who were competent in the matter and that the Committee for Maritime Navigation had considered that it would be desirable to have the assistance of an expert from the United States; no decision had, however, been taken with regard to this question. It had been decided to appoint two technical committees : the first, which was todeal with the question of tonnage measurement in maritime navigation, would, for the moment, merely keep in touch with the Sub-Committee of the International Shipping Conference which was dealing with the matter. As the latter Sub-Committee had not yet begun its work, the appoint­ ment of the suggested Committee was not urgent. The other Committee — that was to say, the Technical Committee for Buoyage and Lighting of Coasts, presided over by M. Watier — had been appointed. The British Government was not yet represented on thisCommittee, as it was not convinced at present of the necessity of the measures in question (see Annex II) and was not prepared, without further consideration, to adhere to the conclusions set out by M. Watier in the note which he had submitted (see Annex 4 to the Minutes of the Sub-Committee for Ports and Maritime Navigation, First Session). The British Government, however, would follow with interest the progress of the work of this Committee. The British Government also thought that the question of expenditure ought not to be neglected when the unification of coast signals was under consideration.

II. R a d io -T e l e g r a p h ic Q u e s t io n s .

The S e c r e t a r y -G e n e r a l said that he had received through the International Labour Office a request, submitted by the International Federation of Wireless Operators on Vessels, asking to be heard by the Sub-Committee which was dealing with these problems. As it was a question of making a statement and not of being permanently represented, the Committee decided to authorise the Sub-Committee to hear the delegates of that Association as well as of other international associations the international character of which was guaranteed by the Inter­ national Labour Office ; Generally speaking, the Sub-Committee was at liberty to accede to requests of this kind, it being understood that, as the Committee ought not to incur any responsibility as to the choice of representative organisations of the workers or employees concerned, any request of this nature should he submitted by the International Labour Office.

II I. D is p u t e r e l a t in g to t h e O d e r a n d t h e D a n u b e .

The Ch a ir m a n said that the Mixed Committee appointed to consider the dispute regarding the application of the articles of the Peace Treaty relating to the Oder had not yet finished its work. As regards the dispute relating to the Danube, no definite reply had yet been received from the Roumanian Government, and the Roumanian delegate had been prevented on grounds of^ health from attending the meetings of the Committee. He therefore proposed to adjourn this question and to leave it to the Bureau to appoint a committee of enquiry in due course to investigate the matter. The proposal was agreed to.

IV. Legal Opinion regarding the Question o f the 3 per Cent Iron Gates Gold Loan.

At the request of M. W in ia r s k i, M. G u e r r e r o , the Chairman of the Legal Committee, made ^statement on the work of that Committee with reference to the point raised by the International Danube Commission — namely, whether the charges provided for in Article X X X III of the Danube Statute could be applied to the service of the 3 per cent Iron Gates Gold Loan. The affirmative reply of the Legal Committee had been unanimously accepted by the Danube commission, and it was probable, according to information received, that by the end of the year asum of 300,000 Swiss francs would be available for the service of the Loan. The Ch a ir m a n , on behalf of the Committee, congratulated the Legal Committee on the results of its w ork. 10 — -

SECOND MEETING

Held on Wednesday, November 26th, 1924, at 3.30 p.m.

Chairman: Mr. B a l d w in .

Present: All the persons mentioned in the Minutes of the First Meeting. Secretariat : M. H a a s, Secretary-General of the Committee, Colonel H iam and M. R omein,

I (e). Sub-Committee for Transport by Rail.

The Ch a ir m a n called upon M. Sinigalia, the Chairman of the Sub-Committee for Transport by Rail, to furnish the Committee with information on the Sub-Committee’s work. M. Sin ig a l ia gave the following explanations on the main points to which he considered it desirable to draw the attention of the Advisory and Technical Committee:

(1) Adhesion by Great Britain to the Berne Convention. The Advisory and Technical Committee would note with satisfaction the declaration in which Mr. Marriott, who was acting in place of Sir Francis Dent, had informed the Sub-Committee that the British Government was prepared to consider the possibility of adhering to the Berne Con­ vention, subject to certain modifications if necessary.

(2) Travelling Facilities for the Personnel of the Secretariat of the League of Nations. As regards the granting of travelling facilities to the personnel of the Secretariat of the League of Nations, the Sub-Committee had not been able to do more than adopt a recommendation requesting the railway administrations or the Governments concerned to do what they could to grant such facilities. It must be recognised that it was almost impossible to obtain any important results, since the special reductions suggested would involve extra financial burdens on the States Members of the League.

(3) Enquiry into Existing Transport Conditions as compared with the Pre-War Period. As regards the enquiry into the present state oi transport, from the point of view of tariffs and speed, as compared with the state of transport before the war, the Sub-Committee had agreed to ask the help of the International Chamber of Commerce, which was the organisation best quali­ fied to supply useful information. The enquiry would be conducted by the delegates of the Inter­ national Chamber of Commerce, with whom the Advisory and Technical Committee would keep in touch.

(4) Railway Connections between Geneva and the various European Capitals.

As regards the railway connections between Geneva and the various European capitals, he explained that M. Politis had been invited to state the wishes of the League of Nations at the European Conference on Time-tables which was held at Naples. M. Politis had been fortunate enough to obtain certain results. In the present state of communications it would have been impossible to obtain complete satisfaction.

(5) Report by M . Politis on the European Conference on Time-tables, held at Naples on November 20 th, 1924.

At the Chairman’s request, M. P o l i t i s read a statement regarding the work accomplished by him at the European Conference on Time-tables and the results which he had obtained (see Annex III). After reading this statement, he added that everyone whom he had met during that Conference had expressed the wish that the League should approach the various Governments with a view to the simplification of the system of Customs and passport formalities — which was an essential condition for a reform of time-tables. Some progress had been made, but it was very slight. He read a statement by the representative of the Federal Railways, included in the Minutes of the Conference, in favour of the re-establishment of the pre-war situation. At the suggestion of M. Ma iso n , the Inspector-General of French Mines, the Conference had decided to send an extract from the Minutes in question to the administrations and Governments concerned. He concluded by suggesting that the Advisory and Technical Committee might, in the manner which it considered most suitable, recommend Governments to facilitate Customs and passport formalities with a view to reducing the length of the stops at frontier stations.

(6) Regime of Passports.

M. Sin ig a l ia explained that the question of passports had been laid before the Sub-Conv mittee at the instance of the Conference on Emigration held in Rome the previous summer. The gub-Committee thought it advisable to consider this question in its general aspect and not only from the point of view of emigrants. It m ight be asked w hether the question came w ithin the competence of the Sub-Committee or even of the Advisory and Technical Committee. In view, however, of the close connection between the problem of passports and the question of railway traffic, the Sub­ committee had considered it advisable to recommend Governments to simplify to the utmost possible extent the passport regime and even, if necessary, to convene a further general conference m 1925 to examine the improvements introduced since the Conference of 1922 and to suggest the further measures required to arrive at a satisfactory state of affairs.

M. St ie v e n a r d said there was often a great difference between theory and practice. If Govern­ ments were asked to simplify the various formalities, the Governments might merely reply by enumerating the administrative and theoretical measures which they had adopted.

M. S in ig a l ia drew a distinction between various elements of the problem. First of all, the time occupied by the formalities varied as a rule according to the character of the train —■ "trains de luxe” or ordinary trains, night or day trains. Secondly, it varied according to the country, and it would be the duty of the Transit Committee to approach those Governments which had not ret adopted measures as favourable to traffic as other Governments.

The Ch a ir m a n thought it would be difficult to mention specifically Customs formalities or passport formalities, for it depended upon which of these sets of regulations caused the delay, and it would be difficult to fix the responsibility. The Committee ought to consider the matter merely from the point of view of delay in general — the only point of view with which it was concerned.

M. S t ie v e n a r d desired to explain his meaning more clearly. They would be ill advised to draw the attention ot Governments, after so short a space of time, to a difficulty which had already been brought to their notice and which they had endeavoured to remedy by the adoption of cer­ tain measures, even if these did not in practice fully come up to expectations. It would be better to collect information dealing solely with cases of delay caused by Customs or passport formalities.

M. S in ig a l ia saw no reason why this suggestion should not be accepted.

M. P o litis referred to a definite case. On the Simplon-Orient Express line it had been neces­ sary, in order to enable trains to reach Constantinople at the scheduled time, to abolish the Ostend- Milan connection. He read an extract from the minutes of the Simplon-Orient Express Conference, which showed that difficulties arose not only in the case of ordinary trains but also in the case of “trains de luxe”, and serious ones, too.

M. R o m e in mentioned another case. The Warsaw-Vienna through train was stopped on each side of the Polish-Czechoslovak frontier for 1 hour and 25 minutes, whereas the examination of passports and luggage, which was carried out in the train, was completed in 25 minutes. Was it necessary for Governments, for their Customs and police services, to ask the railway admini­ strations to keep the trains waiting so long ? Or, again, did the latter, in drawing up their time­ tables, estimate at that amount the time necessary for the Customs and passport operations ?

The Ch a ir m a n observed that the length of the stops was due to a number of factors — in particular, the necessity of reaching capitals at reasonable hours.

M. Silvain D r e y f u s shared this point of view. As regards the example quoted by M. Romein, he pointed out that, in order to establish regular time-tables, the railway systems calculate on the maximum delays.

M. R o m e in asked whether it would be possible to urge the companies to pay more regard to international connections, and referred to the case of the Budapest-Geneva carriage via Zurich which had missed a connection owing to its being r5 minutes late.

M. Sin ig a l ia observed that a large number of connections had to be taken into account. General instructions did, in fact, as a rule, exist, providing as far as possible for the ensuring of connections.

M. R e in h a r d t shared the opinion of his Italian colleague. He had actually been in the train °t which M. Romein had spoken, and, in spite of a certain amount of delay, they had caught the connection for Geneva.

M. Sin ig a l ia , reverting to the suggestion of his Belgian colleague, thought that it would be advisable to make an enquiry into cases of delay which had been recorded and to bring the facts to the knowledge of the administrations or Governments concerned. The enquiry might include an examination of the times fixed for the chief connections, in order to see whether a sufficient margin was allowed.

M. St ie v e n a r d thought that this would be better than to ask Governments to attend another conference so soon after the previous one, or to send them another questionnaire when they had only just replied to one. As regards communication between the chief capitals and Geneva, he would point out that the connections between Geneva and the great international trains were often effected by trains stopping at m any stations — which was contrary to the principle of unity ot transport.

.. M. D o b k e v ic iu s thought that it would be advisable to recommend railway companies to ct the examination of hand luggage and passports in the carriages on all corridor trains without 6xception. 12 —-

The C h a ir m a n suggested that the proposal of M. Stievenard with regard to collecting informa­ tion should be referred to the Railway Sub-Committee. As regards the general question of pass­ ports, he thought that Governments might be asked to state what improvements had been made in the system since the conference which was held five years ago. Colonel H iam thought that this might be one of the points in the questionnaire.

M. P o l it is considered it essential to deal at the same time with the question of Customs examination, for the problem they were discussing was one of Customs formalities as well as of passports. M. S in ig a l ia thought that it would serve no useful purpose to ask Governments for more than they could grant. It would be a great step forward if at least the facilities accorded before the war could be regained. It would be well to await the results of the enquiry which was to be undertaken and to fix their attention on the most important facts.

M . P o l it is thought it would be excellent to return to the pre-war system in so far as passports were concerned but not in the case of Customs formalities. As regards the latter question, it would be a step backwards, for, from the point of view of Customs formalities, the situation had greatly improved in many cases. The Ch a ir m a n shared this opinion, as did also M. St ie v e n a r d and M. Silvain D reyfus. M. d e A g u e r o y B e t h a n c o u r t said that, in the train from Vienna to Geneva, luggage was only examined at the departure and arrival stations. It was a pity that these facilities were not made general. As regards the questions to be addressed to Governments concerning the improvements introduced in the passport system since 1920, M. St ie v e n a r d asked w hether the Secretariat did not receive regular information on this point. Colonel H iam said that the Secretariat onty received semi-official information and did not receive that regularly. If other information were wanted, it would be necessary to send another questionnaire. At the Chairm an’s suggestion, it was decided to set up a special Sub-Committee to consider this question and to prepare for a Passport Conference, to meet, if possible, in 1925. As regards enquiries into cases of delay in railway services, the Ch a ir m a n suggested th a t the Railway Sub-Committee should be asked to make the necessary investigations and to furnish information relating to cases of delay without mentioning the cause (Customs or passport forma­ lities). M. P o l it is suggested that information might be obtained from the railway administrations and from international organisations such as the European Conference on Time-tables and the International Railway Union. M. G u e r r e r o thought it would be sufficient to examine the time-tables in order to see if certain stops were not too long. M. D o b k e v ic iu s shared M. Politis’ opinion.

T h e Ch a ir m a n proposed that a small Committee be appointed, composed of M. Sinigalia, M. P o l it is , M. St ie v e n a r d and Colonel H ia m , to draw up a draft resolution to be submitted to the Committee. He pointed out that the question on the Committee’s agenda related more particularly to the problem raised at Rome concerning emigration. The Sub-Committee could hear on Friday, November 28th, the representatives sent by the International Labour Office. This was agreed.

(7) Request for a Hearing submitted by the Representatives of the Railway Workers’ Union.

Colonel H iam read a letter in which M. Albert Thomas, Director of the International Labour Office, mentioned that the representatives of the Railway Workers’ Union desired to be heard by the Advisory Committee on certain questions. It was decided that the Committee should hear these representatives in accordance with the prin­ ciples already adopted.

THIRD MEETING

Held on Thursday, November 27th, 1924, at 10.30 a.m.

Chairman : Mr. B a l d w in .

Present : All the persons mentioned in the Minutes of the First Meeting, as well as M. S e e li g e k , Minister Plenipotentiary, temporary member appointed by the German Government (assisted by M. P e t e r s , former Secretary of State at the German Ministry for Public Works), and M. V e v e k k a , Minister Plenipotentiary, temporary member appointed by the Government of Czechoslovakia (assisted by M. K r b è c , Engineer, Councillor of Legation).

Secretariat: M. H a a s , Secretary-General of the Committee, Colonel H iam and M. R o m e in . — 13 —

I. (e) Sub-Committee for Transport by Rail (continuation of the discussion).

M. Sin ig a l ia said that, as regards the questions raised by the Rome Conference on Emi­ gration and Immigration, the Sub-Committee had taken steps to obtain further information.

(8) Question raised by M. Ouang-Hang.

M. Sin ig a l ia reminded the Committee that the Chinese member on the Railway Sub-Com­ mittee had raised the question of the treaties by which his country was bound. The provisions of those treaties m ade it difficult for China to ratify the Conventions concluded at the two Con­ ferences on Communications and Transit. The Railway Sub-Committee had felt that it was not competent to deal with this question but that it ought to be brought before the plenary Committee. M. O u a n g -H a n g said that this point had already been raised by the Chinese delegation at the Second Conference on Communications and Transit. The Chinese Government intended to draw up a statement showing the difficulties caused by the obligations imposed by previous treaties. It was true that this question was mainly of a political character, but he did not think that the Committee ought to ignore it. The Ch a ir m a n asked M. Ouang-Hang to state the points in respect of which difficulties had arisen. It was decided, that this question would be retained on the agenda and that the Committee would ask the Chinese representative to give fuller information with regard to the stipulations in previous treaties which he considered to be incompatible with the general Conventions.

(9) Measures necessary for applying the Provisions of the Railway Convention.

M. S t ie v e n a r d thought that the text of Annex II of the Minutes of the Fourth Session of the Sub-Committee for Transport by Rail did not give an entirely correct idea of the situation. He had seen with his own eyes that a large number of wagons circulated at the same time on the lines of Great Britain and on the Continental lines, not only in Belgium but as far as the South of Europe. Mutual goodwill had been sufficient to attain this result. True, certain modifications in rolling-stock had had to be introduced, but the desired result had nevertheless been attained and could now be developed. M. Stievenard thought that this was a matter which came so clearly within the scope of the work of the Advisory and Technical Committee — i.e. the facilitating of international communications by all possible means — that it would be worth while paying considerable attention to it. M. Sin ig a l ia said that the point submitted to the Sub-Committee was whether the Stresa agreement could be applied to the traffic in question. The Sub-Committee had asked the British representative for information. He had replied that the importance of the present traffic would appear to justify such a measure, but he reserved the right to communicate additional information to the Sub-Committee in due course. The question was therefore reserved for subsequent consideration.

(3) Enquiry into Existing Transport Conditions as compared with the Pre-War Period (conti­ nuation of the discussion).

M. St ie v e n a r d referred to Annex IV of the Minutes of the Sub-Committee for Transport by Rail (Fourth Session). He asked what exactly would be the rôle of the International Chamber of Commerce. M. S in ig a l ia replied that it had been decided at the Barcelona Conference that the Com­ mittee would keep itself informed of the general conditions of transport in Europe. That was why General Mance had been instructed to make an enquiry into the technical conditions of railway exploitation in Central Europe. The question they were now considering was th at of tariffs and the length of time occupied in transport. The Sub-Committee had considered that the Inter­ national Chamber of Commerce was the best organisation to collect the required information. It had therefore been decided that the International Chamber of Commerce should, through its national committees, collect information and that the Sub-Committee should keep in touch with it. The Committee noted this declaration and approved the method of procedure which had been adopted.

(10) International Organisation of Information regarding Itineraries.

M. R e in h a r d t drew the attention of the Committee to the difficulty experienced by many railway users who were anxious to obtain information as to the itineraries in certain countries. We would like the Railway Sub-Committee to deal with the question of organising international ^formation on this m atter. This was agreed to.

Hi- Dispu t e c o n c e r n in g t h e A p p l ic a t io n o f t h e A r t ic les o f t h e P ea c e T r e a t y r e l a t in g to t h e O d e r .

. The Ch a ir m a n said that this question had been submitted to the League of Nations b y the ntish Government. In view of the letters which had been received from the British and French — 14 —

Governments (see Annex IV), the Legal Committee, at its session of September 19th, 1924, had requested the Chairman of the Advisory and Technical Committee to appoint a Commission of Enquiry. The Chairman had consequently appointed a Commission consisting of M. H ostie General M a n ce and M. B a b in s k i. The results of the work of this Commission of Enquiry had been submitted to a joint meeting of the Sub-Committee for Inland Navigation and the Legal Committee (Report of the Com­ mission of Enquiry, Document C. 676. M. 240, 1924). Dr. G u e r r e r o , the Chairman of the Mixed Committee, then read the following statement- “In accordance with the regulations, the Sub-Committee for Inland Navigation and the Legal Committee deliberated in common on the question of the dispute concerning the tributaries of the Oder, which had been submitted to the Advisory and Technical Committee by the British and French Governments in pursuance of the Peace Treaty and of the Assembly resolutions. You are acquainted with the letters from these Governments. "In considering the matter, the two Sub-Committees had before them the results of the work of a Commission of Enquiry which had been instructed to collect, if neces­ sary on the spot, all the legal and technical information which might be necessary and to submit a report to the Mixed Committee. This Commission of Enquiry, consisting of M. Hostie as Chairman, General Mance, and Professor Babinski, presented a very- interesting report, which has been laid before you. "The Mixed Committee met with great difficulty in the course of their work. The dispute, as it arose in the International Oder Commission, was of a legal character. The solution to be applied could, in fact, be legal in character, or it could simply be an ad hoc solution or compromise. "The Mixed Committee soon realised — after examining the work of the Commission of Enquiry and after hearing, as you will no doubt also hear, an exposition of the legal theses of the riparian States of the Oder — that, on the basis of the legal discussions, there could hardly be any chance of obtaining the unanimity or quasi-unanimity which was necessary if real results were to be achieved. "For, in the case of a dispute between States, the role of the Advisory and Technical Committee is not that of a judge. It does not pronounce judgment; that must be done, if necessary, by the Permanent Court. The Advisory and Technical Committee, under the terms of the resolutions by which it was established and to which the letters of the British and French Governments refer, is an organ of conciliation. Consequently, the Mixed Committee, after realising that it was useless to continue a discussion on the legal aspects, adopted by a majority a practical compromise, and it recommends you to express a conciliatory opinion which will, it firmly hopes, enable the dispute to be settled. "The opinion which is submitted to you was not voted for by all the States con­ cerned. Nevertheless, the Mixed Committee believes, in view of the declarations accom­ panying the votes and the circumstances as a whole, that it is by no means impossible — that indeed there is every reason to hope — that this opinion will ultimately put an end to the dispute, when the Governments which are not, strictly speaking, represented here have had an opportunity of examining it and of considering their position.” The Se c r e t a r y -G e n e r a l read the draft resolution submitted by the Mixed Committee (see Annex V).

M. S e e l ig e r thanked the Committee, on behalf of his Government and on his own behalf, for allowing him to take part in the proceedings as a temporary member. At the same time, he regretted that a German member had not been invited to sit on the Commission of Enquiry, which appeared to have been asked not only to collect information but also to prepare a conciliation formula. The German Government was not therefore able to influence the proposal made by this Commission, of which one of the members was of Polish nationality. The Commission of Enquiry, although it heard the Secretary of the International Oder Commission at Berlin, had not considered it necessary to hear the Chairman of that Commission. Finally, he regretted that a German expert had not been present at the investigation on the spot carried out in Poland by the Commission of Enquiry. With reference to the main question at issue, he desired to put toward the legal view of the German Government. In the German delegation's opinion, the two articles of the Treat)- which were of essential importance were Articles 331 and 341, one of which established the international regime and the other the extent of the territorial competence of the International Commission. The question of the zone and that of territorial competence were dealt with in the Treaty by a single series of provisions. He would point out, as regards Article 331, that for Germany this article had no "history”. The text alone was authoritative ; it was the text which she had signed. There was only one exception to this rule: namely, the interpretation given by the Allied and Associated Powers in their reply to the observations made by the German delegation at the Peace Conference before the signing of the Treaty of Versailles. In the second paragraph of Article 331, in the clause “all navigable parts of these river system* which naturally provide more than one State with access to the sea”, the word "provide” referret to the river systems. The principal artery and the tributaries must be taken as a whole. Conse­ quently, two questions arose: (1) Did the tributary, as such, provide more than one State wit 1 access to the sea ? if so, (2) up to what point was the tributary navigable ? The territorial competence of the International Commission should extend as far as the point where the river became navigable. — 15 —

This interpretation had been given to Germany by the Allied and Associated Powers them­ selves at the Peace Conference in their reply to the German delegation, in which it stated that “the provisions regarding internal navigation routes apply only to river systems which are all international as defined by the Congress of Vienna and by later Conventions”. According to the Congress of Vienna, all international rivers were subject to an international regime as far as the point at which they became navigable. For Germany, the legal point of view was, therefore, clear, even to such an extent that, were the text of the article different, it would change nothing, for any other interpretation would be contrary to the spirit of the provisions of the Treaty regarding internationalisation. The whole system would perish. This interpretation was, moreover, general. The competence of the Danube Commission extended, in the case of the tributaries, as far as the point at which they became navigable, as was expressly stated when the Theiss was included in the system under its powers. The same principle was embodied in the Barcelona Convention. It mattered little whether this Convention was already introduced or not; it reproduced, in any case, "international” opinion so far as concerned the question with which the Committee was dealing. The question of law which had become a subject of litigation in the case of the Oder had been brought before the League. The conciliation formula at present proposed seemed to have been drawn up solely with an eye to the facts and without reference to the legal aspect of the matter. That, however, was only the case in appearance, for, in fact, the proposed solution was in conformity with the German thesis and could be summed up as follows: the rivers on Polish territory were to be internationalised and subjected to the jurisdiction of the International Oder Commission. Analysing the draft resolution before the Committee, M. Seeliger said that the Commission of Enquiry had proposed to internationalise the Netze as far as Naklo and the Warthe as far as Luban, whereas, according to the draft, the Netze sector which was subject to the International Commission ended at Usch. No counter-evidence had been submitted to disprove the written evidence brought forward by the German experts proving that the Netze was navigable a long way above Usch. Further, the limit laid down in the case of the Warthe “above Posen” was vague, and the question would again come before the Oder Commission when the point to which the competence of the Commission extended had to be fixed. In the second paragraph, the draft resolution proposed, by way of compensation, to apply the Barcelona regime to the waterway uniting Usch and the Vistula ; but complete freedom on the Vistula was not contemplated. U nder these conditions this sector was of secondary importance ; besides, an agreement already existed with regard to this sector between Germany and Poland, which offered considerable guarantees. It was stated in the draft resolution that the proposed conciliatory opinion took the various points of view into account. From the legal point of view, the German thesis was recognised. From the technical point of view, regard had in no way been paid to very detailed considerations advanced by the German delegation, the extent of the internationalisation of the two tributaries being fixed in a more or less arbitrary way. In view of the poverty of the district in routes of communication, the “general interests of navigation” which the draft had in view demanded as wide an extension as possible of international facilities. He wished to express his appreciation of the tireless efforts of the members of the Advisory Committee to discover a formula of conciliation. It would seem, however, that the point of depar­ ture itself was wrong. Notwithstanding the principle of internationalisation, the Treaty of Versailles had placed within the control of the International Commission the Oder, which was a German river navigable solely in German territory. In order to mitigate the effect of this decision, which was altogether against Germany’s interests, the Treaty of Versailles itself furnished a for­ mula of conciliation by deciding that the tributaries of the Oder, when they traversed the territory of several States, and provided they were navigable, should also be subject to the regime of the International Commission. Otherwise, it would be impossible to understand this passage in the reply, already mentioned, which the Allied and Associated Powers gave to the German delegation at the Peace Conference :

“Their powers [the powers of the River Commissions] are not limited to German territory but extend in all cases to the territory of at least one of the Allied and Associated Powers.”

If they were to adopt the text tha^t was now proposed, they would be diminishing the scope °f the formula of conciliation contained in the Treaty itself. The German delegation could only accept a formula of this kind if it made the international law applicable, on an equal and equitable footing, to all the parties interested in an international river. For these reasons, the German delegation could not vote in favour of the draft resolution.

I he Ch a ir m a n replied as follows to certain observations of the German delegate: r. The reason why no German member had been appointed on the Commission of Enquiry Was because it had been thought that that Commission ought to consist primarily of a British member, since the question had been raised by Great Britain, and a Polish member, since Poland Was the chief party concerned; the only other member was a national of a State not represented on the Oder Commission: M. Hostie, the Chairman of the Commission of Enquiry. He added that General Mance was in no way a representative of the British Government. 2. It was true that the Commission of Enquiry had not heard M. Seeliger in his capacity as Chairman of the International Oder Commission, but it had heard him in his capacity as representative of the German Government responsible for giving information to the Commission. — i6 —

3. The Polish Government would certainly have raised no objection if a German delegate had been allowed to accompany the Commission of Enquiry, on the latter’s recommendation in its investigations on the spot; but the Commission of Enquiry had not received any request to that effect from the German Government.

M. W in ia r s k i reverted to the main points of the statement he had already made before the Mixed Committee. He desired first of all to say that the fact that he was upholding a thesis contrary to that of the German delegate did not mean that his colleague and himself were there as antagonists, with interests necessarily opposed to each other. Moreover, it was not at the request of Germany or Poland that the question had been raised before the Commission, but at the request of Great Britain. The German delegate had in the main based his argument on Article 331, whilst the report of the experts appeared to be based on Article 338 of the Treaty. As regards the German inter­ pretation of the clause in Article 331: “all navigable parts of these river systems which naturally provide. . . he considered that, from the point of view of drafting, it would be inadmissible to add an entirely useless, and therefore superfluous, description to the enumeration preceding this clause, and that the clause ought therefore to be understood as meaning "all navigable parts which naturally provide more than one State with access to the sea”, etc. Applied to the affluents in question, this definition would have the effect of internationalising — that is to say, submitting to international administration — the German sectors of the Warta (Warthe) and of the Notec (Netze) as well as the "frontier” sector of the latter. No doubt the German delegate was justified in declaring that he was keeping strictly to the text of the Treaty. In all doubtful cases, it was, however, custom ary to examine motives. After prolonged discussion, the Peace Conference had eventually divided the question into two distinct parts: (1) the navigation regime; (2) the administration. This duality corresponded to the idea of the late M. Chargueraud (Secretary-General of the Commission on Ports, Waterways and Railways), which had prevailed, and which consisted in distinguishing rivers of general international interest from rivers of joint interest. The Records of the Conference showed that the original idea had been to introduce in the Treaty permanent stipulations with regard to the regime, without referring to the administration, but that subse­ quently it had been felt that guarantees must be inserted in the Peace Treaty for land-locked States — guarantees to be ensured by an international administration controlling parts of certain systems defined in the Treaty. The navigation regime was to form the subject of a future Convention — the Barcelona Convention — intended to replace Articles 332 to 337. These articles, referred to in Article 338, only concerned, however, the regime and not the administration. It would be possible to quote various texts in support of this assertion. The Barcelona Convention also adopted this dis­ tinction, thanks to the intervention of the delegates of the Latin-American States : the fact that it was essential in the interests of international navigation to open to all flags waterways serving two or more States did not make it essential in all cases to set up an international administration. It was chiefly at the instigation of the Latin-American delegates that the Barcelona Conference merely took note of what had been decided upon at the Peace Confer­ ence with regard to the international administration of certain rivers. The Polish delegate referred to Article 2 of the Barcelona Statute on International Navigable Waterways, and added that the territorial competence of the International Commissions was the same after the Barcelona Convention as it had been before. He mentioned the Barcelona Minutes and referred to the explanation furnished byr certain members of that Conference. He then cited, in support of his argument, the case of various rivers — the Morava and the Thaya — and read the passage from the records of the International Danube Commission concerning the regime of tributaries placed under international administration. The case of the Maros was the only one which showred an exception to the Polish contention, but that was due to a concession by Roumania and could not be regarded as necessitating a similar obligation on the part of the Polish Government. He referred also to the case of the Tisza, in respect of which the jurisdiction of the International Commission stopped on the Hungarian frontier: and the case of the Elbe, in respect of which the jurisdiction of the Commission could be extended, subject to the consent of Czechoslovakia and even to the unanimous consent of the Com­ mission. He quoted the terms of Article 362 of the Treaty, which required, in the case of the Moselle, the consent of Luxemburg, and in the case of the Rhine, the consent of Switzerland. In the case of the Moselle, France had refused to allow the French part of the river to be submitted to an international administration. If such inclusion were to take place ipso facto, in pursuance of the Barcelona Convention, it would not have been necessary to provide that Germany "agrees to offer no objection” to the extension of the jurisdiction of the International Commission. Speaking, then, on the important question of ratification, the Polish delegate recalled the fact that ratification was provided for in the Navigation Act of the Elbe and the Danube. Only Germany and the ex-enemy countries had had to give their consent in advance by a definite stipulation of the Peace Treaty. If all the countries did not ratify, difficulties would, of course, arise, and the same river might be subjected to different regimes, but that was nothing new : before the war the Danube had been placed under several different regimes. In the present case, if the difficulty w-ere not removed, it would perhaps be solved by bilateral agreements with all the interested States, and particularly with Germany. The German delegate had referred to the passage in the covering letter of the Allied and Associated Powers concerning the Congress of Vienna, but at the time of the Congress of Vienna it was only the question of regime which had been considered ; the system of international admi­ nistration in which non-riparian States took part only dated from 1856. — i 7 —

International administration always constituted a derogation of sovereign rights. In a doubtful case, a stipulation could not be interpreted as diminishing sovereign rights but must be regarded as upholding these rights. The German delegate had said that it was unjust to impose upon Germany alone an inter­ national administration for the Oder. Here, again, they must remember the distinction which existed in the case of international rivers between regime and adm inistration. The regime of Articles 332 to 337 had been established temporarily, and, on the coming into force of the Barcelona Convention, Germany resumed her position under the common law. As regards administration, the situation was not the same, for the object of the authors of the Treaty was to ensure access to the sea for land-locked States. Further, international administration was not limited to Germany: as was stated in the reply of the Principal Allied and Associated Powers, such admi­ nistration must extend to the territory of one at least of those Powers. Czechoslovakia had herself asked for it in the case of the Moldau. The German delegate’s observation appeared to be more exact as regards the Oder, but that case was still more favourable for Germany. The Principal Powers had, in the peace conditions, placed Upper Silesia, without plebiscite, under the sovereignty of Poland, and the latter had asked that the jurisdiction of the Commission should stop at the frontier — that is to say, at Oppeln. Czechoslovakia had wanted it extended as far as the Czechoslovak frontier. The final text of the Treaty laid down that the destiny of Upper Silesia should be decided by means of the plebiscite. In the end, Poland had lost a large part of the territory of Upper Silesia, but the river stipulations had not been modified. It would be unjust to seek to impose upon Poland the jurisdiction of the International Commission on its tributaries because that country had lost the larger part of Upper Silesia and was therefore only a riparian State on the Oder for a distance of some ten kilometres. Poland was prepared to do everything she could to remove the difficulties and to enable the International Oder Commission to carry on its work. She had already stated that she would be ready to open these tributaries to international navigation, as she had, moreover, already done by a series of conventions concluded with various States, and as she had opened her water­ ways to international transit traffic, primarily to German traffic. At the same time, it was much easier for a State to make concessions when its rights were recognised. The draft resolu­ tion wras not in conformity with the Polish thesis. As regards the Wart a (Warthe), it upheld the German thesis. As regards the Notec (Netze), it appeared to be in line with the Polish thesis, although here again there remained the question of the navigability of the middle part of this river. Poland could not allow advantage to be taken of the present dispute to open a discussion on a point quite outside the matter under consideration — namely, the question of the Bydgoszcz (Bromberg) Canal. For these reasons, he felt obliged, like the German delegate, to vote against the draft resolution.

M. V e v e r k a thanked the Advisory Committee for having allowed him to state the Czecho­ slovak point of view. The question consisted of two parts: (1) the territorial sphere of application of the international regime on the Oder system ; (2) the territorial competence of the International Oder Commission. With regard to the clause in Article 331 to the effect that “all navigable parts of these river systems which naturally provide ...” are declared international, it was clear, from a careful examination of the debates of the Committee on Ports, Waterways and Railways, that the word "provide” went with the words "all navigable parts”. At the same time, the words “all navigable parts of these river systems” m ust be understood as meaning each waterway or tributary as a whole, provided that it was naturally navigable, and not merely some part of such a tributary. It was the waterway or tributary of the principal river taken as a unit which had to give access, in that part of it which was naturally navigable, to more than one State. The international regime provided for in the treaties ought, therefore, to be applied to the tributaries of the Oder which provided more than one State with access to the sea as far as the point where they began to be naturally navigable, without reference to political frontiers. This interpretation clearly excluded from the international regime of the Oder system all purely national tributaries. In support of this view, he referred not only to the principles of the Act of Vienna but to the manner in which it was applied to the tributaries of the Danube in the Convention of July 23rd, 1921. On the basis of Article 331 of the Treaty of Versailles and the similar articles of the other Peace Treaties, the representatives of the twelve States had unanimously decided that the inter­ national regime should apply to the tributaries of the Danube, the Tisza, the Drave and the Maros, up to the point where they began to be navigable in the last country upstream. Proceeding on the same legal basis, it would seem difficult to admit a different conception in the case of the tributaries of the Oder. The Tisza had been provisionally internationalised as far as its confluence with the Samos — that is to say, as far as a point situated above the frontier section betwreen Hungary and Czecho­ slovakia ; and this was in full agreement with the thesis which he was maintaining. It only remained for the Danube Commission to decide the question whether the part situated above the confluence with the Samos was or was not navigable — a question on which, at the Danube Conference, agreement had not been reached between Hungary and Czechoslovakia. He desired to make a reservation with regard to the opinion expressed by the Polish delegate t

The question of the territorial competence of the Oder Commission was governed by Article 341 of the Treaty, it being understood that the expression "Oder” meant the whole of the international system, as defined in Article 331. On this point, he fully agreed with the conclusion of the two members of the Commission of Enquiry who were of opinion that the jurisdiction of the Oder Commission was co-extensive with the sphere of application of the international regime. He would not discuss the question of the point at which the Warthe and the Netze began to be navigable, as he did not wish to enter into technical matters. In conclusion, he said that the proposed solution was an equitable one, apart from any legal considerations. He was, therefore, prepared to accept this resolution and to recommend it to his Government. M. H o s t ie expressed his agreement with points 2 and 3 of the Chairman’s reply to the pre- iminary remarks of the German delegate. In reply to a remark by the Polish delegate, he explained that there was no contradiction between the declarations he had made at Barcelona and the report which he had signed. No doubt the Barcelona Convention dealt with the international regime, but Article 331 also referred only to an international regime. The last paragraph regarding the Rhine-Danube Canal, where it was clear that there was no question of jurisdiction, proved this. The crux of the matter was Article 341, for the interpretation of which it was necessary also to take account of Articles 331 and 338. He drew the attention of the Committee to the great advantages of the proposed solution, which was preferable, in the interests of navigation, to any legal solution. It might interest the Committee to know that General Mance had been prepared, on his sug­ gestion, to recommend to the Committee a final solution conceived in this spirit, if it had been possible to obtain a unanimous report in favour of such solution. This solution was based upon technical and economic realities which the law, in its present state, did not take fully into account. It recognised that the Netze and Bydgoszcz Canals and the river Brahe together formed, owing to the size of the locks and the volume of its traffic, a single technical and economic unit. If the Committee adopted the advisory opinion submitted to it, it would be doing useful service to the general interests of navigation and would be acting in the true spirit of the League of Nations. M. S e e l ig e r reminded the Polish delegate that Article 2 of the Statute of Barcelona contained the words: “navigable waterways for which they are international commissions”. Consequently, even from the point of view of the Barcelona Conference, these navigable waterways formed a separate domain. That was, however, for him a point of secondary importance, as he considered that the system of internationalisation and the regime by which such a system was applied were indistinguishable. Moreover, he thought that the conclusions to be drawn from the examples of the Danube, the Elbe, the Moselle, the Rhine, etc., were contrary to the conclusions which the Polish delegate had drawn. As regards the internationalisation of the tributaries of the Danube, no doubt all the parties were agreed that these tributaries should be subject to international law from the point at which they became navigable. Should it happen that this point were situated at a frontier, it would not alter the legal point of view adopted by the Commission. It was natural to ask first for the consent of Luxemburg and Switzerland, for those States were not parties to the Treaty of Versailles. Differences of regime on the same river gave rise to a difficulty which ought to be avoided in the interests of navigation. While the Treaty of Vienna did not refer to international Commissions, it mentioned the question of regime; and in his view these two matters were inseparable. As regards Upper Silesia, M. Seeliger replied to the Polish delegate that it was impossible to lose something which had never been possessed. If the argument of the Polish delegate was right, the Treaty of Versailles settled the point. The reply of the Principal Allied and Associated Powers to Germany could only retain its force if the competence of the Inter­ national Commission extended to Poland. M. W in ia r s k i did not wish to prolong the discussion. He merely wished to make it quite clear that he had been quoting passages from the official records of the Danube Commission in support of his argument. The Ch a ir m a n , before putting the question to the vote, again read the preamble of the draft resolution and the conciliatory opinion. This text defined very clearly the duties of the Advisory Committee in these disputes — duties which must not be confused with those of the Permanent Court of International Justice. Previous speakers had dealt mainly with the legal point of view, on which the Committee did not wish to lay stress. The draft resolution must be regarded as a whole. If it was accepted by the Advisory Committee, the desired results might be expected — that was to say, a measure of conciliation between the parties whose opinions were divergent. After the explanations which had been given in the M ixed Committee, perhaps the Polish delegate might be able to bring about the adoption of a less negative attitude than that implied by his vote. He called upon the delegates to state whether they accepted the draft resolution or not. The draft resolution was accepted by 13 votes-, the German and Polish delegates voted against it, and M. Reinhardt abstained from voting.

M. W in ia r s k i said that he wished to explain his reasons for voting as he had done, and made the following declaration: "The question as it arose in the Oder Commission was legal in character. Like the members of the Advisory Committee appointed temporarily by the German and Czechoslovak Governments I explained to the Mixed Committee and afterwards to the Advisory Committee what the legal problem, as I conceived it, was. Contrary to expectations, the discussion, after the first exchange of views, turned to practical questions, and an effort was made to draw up the terms of what might be regarded as a compromise between the two opposing points of view. — 19 —

"Consequently, as the legal problem has not been examined with sufficient care, and as the conclusions of the majority of the Committee do not unfortunately take sufficiently into account the argument which I have had the honour to submit to the Committee, and which I conscientiously regard as being, well founded in law, and as, further, an attempt is made in this solution to con­ nect the problem submitted to you with the question of the Bydgoszcz Canal, which is quite outside the discussion, I am compelled to declare that I am not able to vote in favour of this resolution. “That does not mean that the Polish Government will necessarily refuse to act on the lines recommended in the resolution. If that Government finds it advisable to abandon what it and I believe to be its indisputable right, it may contemplate the possibility of complying with the sug­ gestions of this Committee. In this case I, for my part, in consideration of the good will shown by my colleagues and the tenacious efforts which they have made to put an end to the difficulty which has too long hindered the regular conduct of the Oder Commission’s work, am prepared to advise my Government to accept this recommendation on grounds of expediency.”

FOURTH MEETING

Held on Thursday, November 27th, 1924, at 4 p.m .

Chairman : Mr. B a l d w in .

Present : All the persons mentioned in the Minutes of the First Meeting, with the exception of M. Hostie. Secretariat : M. H a a s, Secretary-General of the Committee, Colonel H iam and M. R o m e in .

I. (e) Sub-Committee for Transport by Kail (continuation of the discussion).

(11) Uniform Nomenclature of Goods.

M. St ie v e n a r d drew the attention of the Committee to the question — which had been dealt with by the Sub-Committee — of the standardisation of the nomenclature of goods. He suggested the advisability of co-ordinating the study of this question with that of goods transported by water.

M. Sin ig a l ia replied that the study of this question had been undertaken by the International Union of Railway Administrations. They would therefore have to await "the results of the work of this body. He thought that the question was of quite a special nature as regarded railways. There was, however, no serious obstacle to their making similar investigations with regard" to waterways; but he did not think that it would be advisable to do so at present.

M. Silvain D r e y f u s said that the Sub-Committee for Inland Navigation had already decided to ask for observations on the possibility of standardising the statistics connected with rivers and canals. This question was clearly allied to that of the standardisation fo nomenclature. Nevertheless, the problem did not affect navigable waterways in exactly the same way as it affected railways. It would therefore be better to await the results of the work on these two methods of transport respectively before trying to co-ordinate the action of the two Sub-Committees.

M. Sin ig a l ia observed that, as regards the nomenclature of railways, it would probably be necessary to seek the opinion of the various Governments, since any modification of nomenclature might entail some modification of tariffs, and tariffs had to be approved by7 Governments. In any case, the results of the work of the International Union of Railway Administration could be communicated by the Sub-Committee for Transport by^ Rail to the Sub-Committee for Inland Navigation. This proposal was adopted.

V. R e l a t io n s w it h t h e I nternational Co m m it t e e on L ong-D ista n c e T e l e p h o n y .

The Secretary-General said that, after a Conference held in Paris in March of last year, an International Advisory Committee on Long-Distance Telephony^ had been formed and had held meetings in April and May 1924. It should be remembered that when this Committee, which at present comprised representatives of the telephonic services of most of the Governments of Europe, assumed an entirely official form, its relations with the League of Nations would neces­ sarily be those provided for in Article 24 of the Covenant. Apart from this juridical possibility, the Advisory and Technical Committee had no organ to study telephonic questions. It might nevertheless" have to deal with problems involving such investigations. Co-operation with this International Committee would therefore be very desirable, and there was reason to believe th at — 20 — the Committee would be disposed to co-operate. There were already several questions of immediate interest. The International Committee on Telephony was studying plans for the [reorganisation of the telephone trunk lines of Europe; the natural course would be to ask it to communicate these plans to the Advisory Committee in order that the communications between the head­ quarters of the League of Nations and the principal capitals should be as good as those between the various other important towns. The question of broadcasting the discussions of the League of Nations by telephony and radio-telephony might also be of interest to the International Committee. And, lastly, the question of joint action in case of aggression might in future also involve the study of telephonic communications.

M. P o l it is said that certain States, like Greece, for example, w ere not represented in the Committee in question. It would be desirable to ensure the participation of the States not yet represented. It was decided that the secretariat should draw up a draft resolution on relations with the Com­ mittee on Long-Distance Telephony and should communicate to the members of the Advisory Com­ mittee any information it could obtain on the future work of this body.

V I. Q u e s t io n o f a n I nternational A g r e e m e n t f o r t h e T elephotographic T ransmission o f D escriptions e m p l o y e d b y t h e V a r io u s P o l ic e S e r v i c e s .

The S e c r e t a r y -G e n e r a l said that this question referred to the telegraphic transmission of the portraits or finger-prints of persons wanted by the various police services. M. Belin (France), who had brought out a new invention which had been favourably received by several eminent authorities and experts, had applied inter alia to the secretariat.w ith a view to obtaining the opinion of the Committee on the potentialities of such a system. It remained for the Committee to decide whether it would put this question on its agenda or refer it to the Sub- Committee on Telegraphic Questions.

The C h a ir m a n thought that it might be rather unwise to appear to advertise the work of one inventor to the exclusion of possible competitors. Discoveries of this kind were sometimes made simultaneously in different countries.

M. S in ig a l ia agreed with the Chairman. If the Committee considered that this question deserved its attention, it could quite well place it on its agenda, but it must be careful not to take any action in favour of a private person.

M. Silvain D r e y f u s pointed out th at this question had not been raised by an official body.

The C h a ir m a n replied that the Committee could nevertheless deal with the matter if it thought fit.

The S e c r e t a r y -G e n e r a l said that M. Belin was quite aware that the Committee could not deal solely with his own invention. The Committee, however, might look at the question from a general point of view and draw the attention of the competent authorities to the importance of the problem.

M. d e A g u e r o y B e t h a n c o u r t considered that they should take care to avoid all appearance of advocating a monopoly. The secretariat could nevertheless make unofficial enquiries of the persons given as references by M. Belin in support of his proposal and could collect any other information of value. The Committee could then examine the question at its next session with a full knowledge of the facts. This was agreed to.

VII. L ia is o n b e t w e e n t h e I nternational R i v e r C o m m is s io n s a n d t h e C o m m it t e e for C ommunications a n d T r a n s it .

Two resolutions adopted by the International Elbe Commission were read (see Annex VI).

The S e c r e t a r y -G e n e r a l said that the Elbe Commission’s request was perhaps partly due to a misunderstanding. The ordinary documentary and administrative liaison between the Transit Committee and the River Commissions must be distinguished from the right of the River Commissions to be represented on the Transit Committee when the Committee considered questions raised by the River Commissions themselves. In the latter alternative, as shown by the case of the International Danube Commission in connection with the question of the loan, there was no doubt that the River Commission concerned could make its views known in what­ ever way it wished, either through its Chairman or through any other person it might appoint, while, in the former alternative, it was essential that relations should be continuous and to a certain extent automatic. The practice hitherto followed of liaison th r o u g h the respective secretariats had given excellent results and had led to no difficulty with the other River Commissions, !I| fact, it had been expressly sanctioned, a f te r long discussion, in a resolution of the Internationa Danube Commission. Perhaps, however, the question raised by the Elbe Commission referre less to the meetings of the Transit Committee than to the meetings of general transit conferences. O n the latter point, full satisfaction could, no doubt, be given to the Elbe Commission. At t e Barcelona Conference, the invitations had been sent to the Chairmen of the River Commissions, but at the Second Conference, as only one Chairman of a River Commission had come to Barcelona, the invitations had been sent to the secretariats. It would be reasonable to decide in future that in the case of general conferences, in addition to the normal liaison between the secretariats, the Chairmen of the Commissions should always be invited. Moreover, these invitations were not sent out by the Transit Committee but by the President of the Conference.

Herr v o n R e n t h e -F ix k said that it was this question of General Conferences which had particularly engaged the attention of the International Elbe Commission.

The Ch a ir m a n considered that the Committee could accept the views which had been put forward and that the distinction made between the different cases would give satisfaction to the Elbe Commission. It was decided that the secretariat should draw up a draft resolution on this subject and that a letter should be sent to the Elbe Commission.

I. (d) Sub-Committee for Ports and Maritime Navigation (continuation of the discussion). Question of Double Taxation.

M. R o m e in said that a resolution adopted by the International Shipping Conference with regard to double taxation considered from the shipowners’ point of view had been communicated to the Sub-Committee. The Sub-Committee had drawn the attention of the Double Taxation Committee of the League of Nations to this problem, and the latter had asked the Sub-Committee to appoint two experts to lay before it the views of the shipowners. Mr. Cleminson and M.Palanca were accordingly appointed and had laid their viewrs before the Committee on Double Taxation, which, as a result of their explanations, had modified its proposal for shipping by making an exception to the principle of profit-sharing. It had proposed that shipping should only be taxed in the country where the enterprise had its headquarters. The Committee took note of this communication.

VIII. R e s o l u t io n s of t h e A s s e m b l y a n d t h e Co u n c il c o n c e r n in g A r b it r a t io n , S e c u r it y a n d D is a r m a m e n t (see Annex VII).

The S e c r e t a r y -G e n e r a l observed that the question was not as urgent as might appear at first sight. The resolution adopted by the Council after the last Assembly had provided for a meeting of the Council Committee on November 17th in order that the Co-ordination Committee might be able to meet soon after if necessary. Since then, the Council, at its Brussels session, had cancelled this meeting and proposed to reconsider the question at its next session at Rome. As the members of the Committee were aware, the British Government had requested the Council to postpone consideration of the question once more, and there was every reason to believe that the examination of the technical problems concerning the Committee in connection with the resolutions on arbitration, security and disarmament would be further delayed. Nevertheless, it would be well to consider forthwith what procedure the Committee should adopt. There was one point in particular which deserved its attention. It was quite possible that before the next ordinary session, which it had been proposed at the last session to hold in July, it would be necessary to give a definite opinion to the Council of the League of Nations on behalf of the Committee. In this eventuality, it would be indispensable for the members of the Committee to make every effort to meet in extraordinary session. If this were quite impossible, perhaps the Committee would agree to have this opinion given on its behalf by a meeting composed of the Chairman and Vice-Chairmen of the Committee and of the Chairmen of the Sub-Committees concerned, viz., the Sub-Committees for Transport by Rail, for Ports and Maritime Navigation, for Inland Navigation, for Electrical Questions, together with the Legal Sub-Committee ; but, of course, it would be preferable to have a meeting of the whole Committee to give a definite opinion °n so difficult a question. There was another point to consider. It was impossible at present, before the Council had given its instructions, to know exactly what kind of technical work would be required. In confor­ mity with the procedure normally followed by the Committee, it would, no doubt, be best, when the work entrusted to the Committee had been specified, to constitute a small special committee, composed of members or experts from the sub-committees particularly concerned who possessed the necessary special knowledge. This special committee could report to the plenary Committee or> if the plenary Committee found it impossible to meet, to the committee composed of the chair­ men mentioned above; it was not, however, until the Council or the Council Committee had given mstructions, th a t it would be possible to constitute this special Committee. The Advisory Committee would perhaps agree, therefore, to leave the appointment of this committee to its Chairman if the need arose. ■Lastly, they had to consider the question of the representation of th e Transit Committee 0n the Co-ordination Committee. If the role of the Co-ordination Committee were considered solely from th e point of view of th e application of the Protocol on Arbitration, Security and Dis­ armament, it would be found that the work to be undertaken by the representatives of the technical ®ganisations in this Committee, where they would act as experts advising the members of the °uncil or their substitutes, might assume various aspects. To begin with, they would act as liaison — 22 — agents, transmitting instructions and a programme of work to the technical bodies ; but when the work entrusted to the technical organisations had been completed, their part in the Co-ordination Committee would be rather that of rapporteurs. In these circumstances, the Committee would perhaps prefer not to decide in advance whom to send to the Co-ordination Committee and to leave a certain latitude in this respect to the Chairman, in order that he might be able to give due con­ sideration to the various tasks these representatives might have to perform. Furthermore, the Co-ordination Committee would also have to deal with the question of the private manufacture of arms, which clearly necessitated qualifications different from those required in questions of economic assistance or sanctions.

M. G u e r r e r o supported the last speaker’s remarks regarding the advisability of holding a meeting of the plenary Committee before a final opinion was given to the Council on the questions connected with arbitration, security and disarmament.

The Ch a ir m a n remarked that another argument in favour of the suggestions made bv the Secretary-General of the Committee in regard to the procedure of appointing the representatives of the Advisory Committee on the Co-ordination Committee was provided by the question of nationality. It would clearly be necessary to take into account the appointments which might be made by the other technical organisations of the League in order to keep the balance. This seemed to him to constitute an additional reason for giving a certain freedom of action to the Bureau. He therefore proposed that the Committee should accept the suggestions made by its Secretary- General. This was agreed to.

IX. Question of the Internal Constitution of the Committee : Representation o f the Organisation for Communications and Transit on the International A sso c ia t io n of Navigation Congresses.

On the proposal of the C h a ir m a n , it was decided to add M. R e in h a r d t to the Sub-Committee for Inland Navigation.

The Ch a ir m a n recalled the aims of the International Association of Navigation Congresses, which had its seat at Brussels and to which the Transit Organisation paid an annual subscription of 500 Belgian francs.

M. Silvain D r e y f u s observed that, at the moment of appointing its representative 011 the Asso­ ciation of Navigation Congresses, the Transit Committee must not forget that this association dealt not only with inland navigation but also with maritime navigation.

On th e proposal of M. d e A g u e r o y B e t h a n c o u r t , seconded b y M. Silvain D r e y f u s , it was decided to ask M. S u g im u r a to represent the Transit Organisation on this Association.

M. U sam i thanked the Committee on behalf of M. Sugimura. The latter being absent, he undertook to hand this proposal to him and to inform the Committee of his reply.

X. R e s o l u t io n s of t h e A sse m b l y c o n c e r n in g R a d io -T e l e p h o n y a n d t h e U se o f E speranto in I nternational T e l e g r a p h ic Communications.

(a) The following resolution adopted by the Fifth Assembly of the League of Nations was read:

“The Assembly recommends that the States Members of the League of Nations should grant to Esperanto, as a practical auxiliary language for international commu­ nications side by side with the national languages in use, the treatment and the charges in force for a language en clair in telegraphic and radio-telegraphic communications. It draws the attention of the Organisation for Communications and Transit to this effect.”

The S e c r e t a r y -G e n e r a l outlined the history of the question. The Second Assem bly had asked for an enquiry on the question of the use of Esperanto. The Third Assembly had referred the results of this enquiry to the Committee on Intellectual Co-operation, which had not felt able to give its support to th e teaching of Esperanto. Here the question w as of quite a different nature and referred to the use of Esperanto in telegraphic communications. It should be remembered that the usual Conference of the Telegraphic Union was due to meet next spring.

M. G u e r r e r o alluded to M. Hanotaux’s remarks in the Assembly in regard to this problem.

M. D o b k e v ic iu s considered that, in view of the large number of persons who used Esperanto as a medium of communication, it would perhaps be well to apply to this language the treatment proposed in the Assembly resolution.

M. d e A g u er o y B e t h a n c o u r t did not think there was any object in discussing the use of Esperanto. It was decided to refer this question to the Sub-Committee for Telegraphic Questions, which «',|7S recommended to get into touch 'with the Conference of the International Telegraphic Union. — 23 —

(b) The following resolution also adopted by the Fifth Assembly was read:

“The Assembly draws the attention of the Council to the extreme urgency of giving effect to the proposal already submitted to the Council for a revision of the London Convention of 1912, particularly in view of the enormous development in radio-telephony.”

The Committee decided that it was unnecessary to discuss this problem, as it had already been referred to the Sub-Committee for Telegraphic Questions.

X I. Q u e s t io n of t h e I n s t it u t e of P riv a te L a w .

The Se c r e t a r y -G e n e r a l said that, in pursuance of the Assembly's resolutions, the Committee would no doubt be consulted with regard to the organisation of the Institute of Private Law which the Italian Government had offered to place at the disposal of the League of Nations. The Committee had on several occasions dealt with questions of unification of private law within its sphere of action and was therefore particularly interested in the proposed Institute. The Committee authorised the Bureau to give an opinion later on this subject on its behalf.

FIFTH MEETING

Held on Friday, November 28th, 1924, at 11 a.m.

Chairman: Mr. B a l d w in .

Present : All the persons mentioned in the Minutes of the Fourth Meeting, with the exception of H err von R enthe Fink. Also present : M. F e r e n c z i, representative of the International Labour Office. Secretariat: Colonel H iam and M. R o m e in .

I. (e) (6). Regime of Passports.

The C h a irm a n asked M. Ferenczi, representing the Director of the International Labour Office, to give the Committee some details on this question.

M. F e r e n c z i said that the International Labour Organisation dealt with this problem from the following points of view : (1) emigration statistics; (2) protection of emigrants; (3) organisation of the international labour market. He recalled the recommendation voted in 1922 by the International Labour Conference. States were invited to send their emigration statistics to the International Labour Office and to endeavour to render the various statistics comparable. This recommendation referred particu­ larly to certain indications to be given in the identity certificates of the emigrants and emphasised the importance of adopting the same definitions and methods in compiling emigration statistics, furthermore, the International Labour Office itself had been invited in a special resolution to endeavour to co-ordinate the present statistics of the various States. Under the present system of passports, certain countries (Italy, Spain, Poland) already pro­ vided emigrants with special identity certificates which were regarded by certain immigration countries as equivalent to a passport. These free documents exempted emigrants from vexatious formalities both en route and after arrival at their destinations; they were very useful for procuring them admission to foreign countries and for helping them to establish their civil status and in connection with insurances, contracts, etc. An agreement in regard to the validity of documents of this kind would be particularly useful in obviating the serious difficulties which often arose at the ports of disembarkation. These were the lines on which the International Labour Office was working, and it endorsed the views put forward at the Rome Conference regarding the protection which these identity certificates would give to emigrants even after the general abolition of visas and passports. These certificates had to contain certain indications which were summarised on detachable counterfoils intended for the use of the statistical service. The first counterfoil w'as detached for the use of the country of emigration : (a) in the case of oversea emigration, when the emigrant embarked and his status of emigrant became certain : and (b) in the case of Continental emigration, "'hen he crossed the frontier. On arrival at his destination, a second counterfoil was detached, for the use of the country of immigration. It had even been proposed to increase the number of detachable counterfoils to provide for the contingency of repatriation. — 24 —

This problem was closely bound up with the general question of passports, and it was of fundamental importance for the purpose of keeping records of the movements of migration, about which little had hitherto been known. It was a first step towards the international protection of emigrants and the rational control of the international labour market in the interests both of the working classes and of employers. Certain immigration countries might not yet be disposed to recognise the final validity of such identity certificates, but they could be used, in virtue of bilateral agreements, as a basis for drawing up special identity certificates for immigrants. The International Labour Office had already examined in detail and on the spot the systems in force in a certain num ber of Continental countries (Germany, France, H ungary, Italy, Poland, Czechoslovakia), in order to ascertain in what directions they could be developed and co-ordinated. Memoranda on three countries had already been published in the International Labour Review (January, May, Ju ly 1924). The results of the investigations in which the International Labour Office was engaged would probably be considered by the small Emigration Committee which the Governing Body had recently decided to create and which would be composed of representatives of the Governments, of employers and of workmen. This Committee would study the various problems raised by the Geneva and Rome Conferences and would report to the Governing Body.

The Ch a ir m a n thanked M. Ferenczi on behalf of the Advisory Committee. The investigations of the International Labour Office into this question should be considered as parallel to the enquiry into the problem of passports in general. He asked M. Polit is to state his views on the other aspect of the passport question: viz., the examination of passports on railways.

M. P o l it is explained that the examination of passports at the frontier was sometimes done in the train itself and sometimes in a special office in the station, which obliged the passengers to get out of the train and gave rise to prolonged delays. It would therefore be most desirable to extend the practice of examining passports in the train itself to all international trains, as was sometimes done as regards the examination of hand luggage.

The Ch a ir m a n proposed that the question raised by the Greek delegate should be referred to the Sub-Committee for Transport by Rail. This question could be considered at the same time as the problem of passports in general, including the aspect dealt with by M. Ferenczi. He also proposed that a special Committee should be appointed to consider the general question of pass­ ports, with the help of the Secretariat. This Committee could collect all necessary information and might recommend the Council to convene a fresh general conference to meet in 1925 or 1926. Since 1920, when the last Conference was held, a certain number of simplifications had been intro­ duced in the passport procedure, but there was still room for a great deal of improvement. After making investigations and consulting the various Governments, the Committee could discuss the advisability of recommending the Council to convene another conference.

M. S in ig a g lia seconded the Chairman’s proposal.

M. W in ia r s k i proposed that the Chairman should appoint the members of this Committee'

The Ch a ir m a n asked M. Sin ig a l ia , M. P o l it is , M. St ie v e n a r d , M. R einhardt, M. d e A g u e r o y B e t h a n c o u r t and M. S y l v a in D r e y f u s to serve on this Committee.

On M. Sin ig a g l ia 's proposal, it was decided that the Chairman should also serve on the Committee.

M. D o b k e v ic iu s , as representative of the group of Baltic States, wished to draw the attention of the Committee to the discrimination made against certain States as regards visas and even transit. Most of the States of the former Russian Empire encountered numerous difficulties, and the situation was improving but slowly. He hoped that the Sub-Committee would consult persons competent to provide it writh information on this subject. In reply to the Belgian delegate, the Lithuanian delegate added that the said Baltic States did not enjoy reciprocity in the m atter.

The Ch a ir m a n replied that the Passport Sub-Committee would consider all the aspects of the question which might be brought to its notice and the suggestions of the Lithuanian delegate would be taken into account. Moreover, a draft resolution on the subject would come before the Advisory Committee.

M. O u a n g -H a n g supported the Lithuanian delegate's observations on the absence of reci­ procity in the treatment which was applied to the detriment of certain States.

I. (f) Special Committee of Enquiry on Road Traffic (see Minutes of the First Session of this Committee).

(1) Revision of the 1909 Convention.

M. R o m ein said that the draft convention drawn up by the Special Committee was only a preliminary draft, in regard to which certain representatives had made reservations. The text provided for the division of the certificates into two parts and for the adoption in future of two certificates: (1) International Driving Certificate; (2) International Road Certificate for motor vehicles. — 25 —

At the suggestion of the Swedish Government, among others, the Committee proceeded to a general revision of the Convention now in force. It was decided to propose the adoption of a new danger signal to give warning of unguarded level crossings, in view of the increasing number of level crossings of this description.

M. St ie v e n a r d drew' attention to Recommendation i, which he read (see Minutes of the First Session of the Special Committee of Enquiry on Road Traffic). In deciding to add this recommendation to the draft convention, the Committee had been guided by the consideration that the various national road committees ought to communicate to each other the regulations of their respective countries. The secretariat would be responsible for collecting these regulations, which would be held at the disposal of the Advisory Committee. At its next meeting the Com­ mittee could extend its investigations to all the countries interested.

M. R o m e in thought that it would be very helpful for the secretariat if all the members of the Committee would endeavour to obtain and send to it the road traffic regulations in their own countries. The secretariat already possessed a certain number of these regulations.

In reply to a question by the Ch a ir m a n , M. St ie v e n a r d said that the draft had only been passed on a first reading and that the Committee would meet again for a second reading. Not­ withstanding the reservations which had been mentioned, it was gratifying to note that the various delegates had expressed the hope that the existing difficulties would be surmounted, especially if a complete draft were laid before the Governments. The Ch a ir m a n asked if the objections were on matters of principle or of application.

M. St ie v e n a r d replied that there had only been objections on practical points: e.g., as regards the red rear light of motor vehicles, the new danger signal for unguarded level crossings, etc. The next meeting of the Committee wrould be held in February or March 1925.

M. R o m e in thought that this would hardly leave the secretariat time to receive the regulations of all the countries, including those not represented on the Committee for Communications and Transit. Only an incomplete set of documents could be collected within this time.

The Ch a ir m a n asked if the next meeting of the Committee could not be postponed in order to give the Secretariat time to receive information from the greatest possible number of States and in order to save the Conference from being faced with unexpected difficulties for want of adequate preparations.

M. R o m e in believed that there was a proposal for convening a conference next spring. The draft convention, as passed on second reading, ought therefore to be communicated to the Govern­ ments not later than March. Moreover, a distinction must be made between the draft convention proper and Recommendation 1, regarding the unification of laws and regulations. The present preliminary draft did not differ substantially from the 1909 Convention. It would be for the conference to consider how far it could go in the way of unifying law's and regulations.

M. St ie v e n a r d said that the holders of certificates were obliged to comply with the regulations of the country issuing the certificate. To make them easier to understand, these regulations should be unified as much as possible. The expediency of such unification on certain points was fairly generally recognised, and the Chairman of the Road Traffic Committee read some letters from authorities and from the Automobile Clubs of several countries supporting this view. M, R e in h a r d t m a d e the following observations on the text of the preliminary draft : 1. The third paragraph of Article 1 provided for a certain arrangement of the driving and steering apparatus ; in the interests of safety, it would be desirable to standardise as far as possible the arrangement of the essential apparatus. 2. Paragraph 6 of Article 1 stipulated that motor vehicles must carry a rear light making it possible to read the symbols on the plate. There ought also to be a stipulation prohibiting any apparatus making it possible to extinguish this light either from the driver’s seat or from the interior of th e car. These twro points might be investigated by the Special Committee. 3- In view of the increase of motor traffic, the question of vehicles passing and overtaking each other was no longer of purely local interest. The differences between the various national regulations on this point caused serious difficulties, and countries of transit for which the develop­ ment of tourist traffic was of vital importance found it greatly to their interest to make the circu­ lation of motor vehicles as easy as possible. The 1909 Conference pronounced in favour of the left- hand side (keep to the left, overtake on the right), as did the last session of the International Association of Official Automobile Clubs held at Paris in 1023, at which twenty-four States were represented. It was interesting to note that the system of keeping to the right was favoured °y the military authorities in view of the advantages it presented from the point of view of gun teams; the driver should be towards the middle of the road in order to protect the led hoi se and to e able to mount and dismount more easily. In the case of motor vehicles, the opposite applied, as the driver was generally on the light of the vehicle. This question ought to be settled on an International basis under the auspices of the League. The Austrian delegate proposed that the Special Committee should be invited to study the question.

The Ch a ir m an said that the Special Committee would consider the point in question.

M. R e in h a r d t noted in Article 6, paragraph 2, that a summary of the laws and regulations j',ey be given to the driver on entering a foreign country. He considered that the driver ought to e °bhged to procure a cop}’ of these regulations. — 26 —

M. Stievenard agreed to tnis suggestion in principle. In practice, however, the various road regulations were generally too bulky for this measure to be practicable. As it was not yet known how far it would be possible to unify the laws and regulations, could not an endeavour be m a d e to print summaries of the principal regulations in force in each country ?

M. D o b k e v ic iu s, refening to the second paragraph of Section 6, Article i, concerning appa­ ratus to light up the road in front of the car, considered that it was most important to provide regulations on the question of dazzling lights, which were one of the most frequent causes of accidents. Could it not be made compulsory to carry some arrangement allowing either the lamps to be extinguished immediately or the strength of the lights to be ieduce:!?

M. St ie v e n a r d replied that certain countries had decreed special regulations to this effect ; moreover, the proposed measure was already a matter of tacit agreement among n otorists. The chief objection to this measure was that it presented dangers for the motorist himself. It would be a good thing to have the opinion of all the automobile clubs on this point.

M. R o m e i n said that, in the United States, motorists were not allowed to extinguish the lamps for this very reason.

M. D o b k e v ic iu s emphasised the importance of the question he had raised, particularly from the point of view of the safety 01 pedestrians. He pointed out that the United States had another regulation imposing a speed limit of 35 miles an hour . A motoiist who was obliged to extinguish his lamps suddenly would only have to slow down. The question would ha\ e to be very carefully examined and every endeavour made to find a solution which would be generally applicable.

The C h a i r m a n said that the Conference would study the question. M. Silvain D r e y f u s shared M. Reinhardt’s views on the importance of the question of passing and overtaking. In France, where passing was done on the right, all cars built in recent years had the driver’s seat on the left.

M. S t ie v e n a r d asked the various members who had made observations to send them to the Special Committee in writing.

M. G u e r r e r o suggested that it would be sufficient to refer to the minutes. This was agreed.

(2) Request tor a Hearing submitted by the International Syndicate of Transport Workers.

M. R o m e i n said that a request had been received asking the Committee to hear a representative of the International Syndicate of Transport Workers. A substantially similar request had already been accepted by the Sub-Committee on Railways.

M. S t ie v e n a r d was of the opinion that the present request should be accepted if the Advisory Committee thought fit.

The Ch a ir m a n said that the Special Committee would hear the representative of the Inter­ national Syndicate.

X II. P r e s e n t Sta te o f t h e Sig n a t u r e s a n d R atifications o f I nternational Conventions in r e g a r d to Communications a n d T r a n sit (see Annex VIII).

M, R o m e in said that the last Assembly had recommended that the States which had voted for the Conventions adopted by the Second General Conference should sign them before the register was closed and should make the necessary ratifications as soon as possible. The period laid down for the signature of the Conventions had come to an end on October 31st. Only two ratifications had so far been received. This situation was quite normal, as most of the States awaited this date to have the complete list of signatures before going through the. formalities of ratification by Parliament. Perhaps it would be as well not to ask the States to hasten their ratifications so soon after the close of the register of signatures.

M. P o litis raised the question of the Conventions adopted at Barcelona, which certain States had perhaps rather forgotten.

The Ch airm an was of the opinion that it would be better to consider the question at the next session and to remind the various States simultaneously of the Conventions adopted at both Conferences.

M. Silvain D r e y f u s agreed. There might be more drawbacks than advantages in pressing States too often. The Committee decided to take note of the document submitted by the secretariat and to enter m question on the agenda of the next session. — 27 —

SIXTH MEETING

Held on Friday, November 28th, 1924, at 3.30 p.m.

Chairman ; Mr. B a l d w in .

Present: All the persons mentioned in the Minutes of the Fourth Meeting. Secretariat: Colonel H iam and M. R o m e in .

VII. L ia iso n b e t w e e n t h e I nternational R iv e r Co m m issions a n d t h e Co m m it t e e fo r Communications a n d T r a n s it .

The draft resolution referring to the liaison between the International River Commissions and the Committee for Communications and Transit was read.

M. Silvain D r e y f u s proposed the deletion of the words “or his representative” after the words "that River Commission” in the second paragraph. and the addition at the end of the paragraph of the words “either personally or through a person designated by him”.

M. D o b k e v ic iu s seconded this proposal.

M. Sin ig a l ia asked if this resolution only applied to the River Commissions ; there w ere other international bodies, such as the International Union of Railways and the International Bureau at Berne, with which the Committee had relations.

The Ch a ir m a n considered that the relations with the River Commissions were of quite a special character. The nature of these relations had, moreover, been settled once and for all by the Barcelona Conference. In the present instance, they had to settle a question of principle raised at the request of the International Elbe Commission.

M. St ie v e n a r d asked if the procedure contemplated in this resolution was accepted by the other River Commissions.

The Ch a ir m an replied in the affirmative. The resolution, with the amendment proposed by M. Silvain D r e y f u s , was adopted (see Annex IX).

V. R ela tio n s w it h t h e I nternational C o m m it t e e on L o n g -D ist a n c e T e l e p h o n y .

The draft resolution referring to this question was read (see Annex X). This resolution was adopted.

I- (e) (11) Standardisation of Nomenclature of Goods. The draft resolution regarding this question was read.

M Silvain D r e y f u s proposed the following amendments: in the third line of the French text, the word “tenues’ to be replaced by the words auxquelles c’est livrée”. After the words “progress made” in the eighth line, the proposed text to be replaced by the following: “In order to enable the latter Sub-Committee to consider the question whether a nomenclature similar to that of the railways might be adopte'd in respect of inland navigation”. The resolution as amended was adopted (see Annex XI).

h !■') (2) Unification of Private Law in respect of Inland Navigation.

A draft resolution on this question was read. This resolution was adopted (see Annex X II).

h (*) (3) Definition of Sea-Going Vessels and of Craft employed in Inland Navigation. A draft resolution regarding this question was read. I his resolution was adopted (see Annex X III).

M Composition of the Special Committee of Enquiry into the Reform of the Calendar. -I draft resolution regarding the composition of this Committee ivas read.

, the Chairman observed that this was a difficult question which would require as broad a orfflula as possible. — 28 —

M. Silvain D re yfu s asked who would have to take the final decision regarding the possible increase in the numbers of the Committee of Enquiry. Would it be the Committee itself or the plenary Committee ?

The C h a ir m a n thought that the Committee could authorise a temporary increase, which might be rendered permanent by the plenary Committee.

M. Silvain D r e y f u s proposed that the second paragraph should read as follows: “Decides to forward these requests to the Committee of Enquiry, begging it to inform the Committee for Communications and Transit of its opinion as to any possible action in answer to these requests”, This resolution, as amended, was adopted (see Annex XIV).

X. (a). Resolution of the Assembly regarding the Treatm ent to be granted to Esperanto in International Telegraphic and Radio-Telegraphic Communications.

A draft resolution on this subject was adopted, with the insertion of the words "for telegraphic and radio-telegraphic international communications” after the words “en clair” (see Annex XV),

I. (e) (6) Regime of Passports. A draft resolution on this subject was read.

The C h a ir m a n pointed out that the second paragraph appeared to affirm the absolute neces­ sity of a conference. It had to be decided first, however, whether such a conference was really necessary.

M. Stievenard proposed that the word “general” should be deleted, as this conference could only be partial. It was decided to replace the first two lines of the second paragraph by the following: “To set up a special Sub-Committee which shall be instructed to consider this question as a whole and to endeavour to establish . . W ith these modifications, the draft resolution was adopted (see Annex XVI).

On the proposal of the C h a ir m a n , it was decided that, M. W i n ia r s k i should be added to the Sub-Committee which had been appointed to study this question, and that M. P o l i t i s should preside over it.

IX. Representation of the Organisation for Communications and Transit on the International Association of Navigation Congresses.

On behalf of M. Sugimura, M. U sami thanked the Committee for appointing the former as its representative to the Association of Navigation Congresses and announced that M. Sugimura accepted with pleasure the duties which had been assigned to him.

The C h a ir m a n declared the session closed. LIST OF ANNEXES.

Page I. Agenda ...... 31

II. Letter from Mr. Baldwin to the Chairman of the Committee for Communications and T r a n s i t ...... 32

III. Report by M. Politis, Vice-Chairman of the Sub-Committee for Transport by Rail, on the European Conference on Time-tables, held at Naples on Novem­ ber 20th, 1924 (with A p p e n d ix )...... 32

IV. Letters from the British and French Governments to the Secretary-General of the League of Nations (with Appendices) ...... 36

V. Resolution regarding the Dispute concerning the Application of the Articles of the Peace T reaty relating to the O d e r ......

VI. Resolutions adopted by the International Elbe Commission, at its Eighth Session : A. — On Jan u ary 30th, 1 9 2 4 ...... 38 B. — On Ju ly 5th, 1 9 2 4 ...... 38

VII. Letter from the Secretary-General of the League of Nations to the Chairman of the Advisory and Technical Committee for Communications and Transit (with two A p p e n d ic e s )...... 38

VIII. Present State of Signatures and Ratifications of International Conventions in regard to Communications and T r a n s i t ...... 39

IX. Resolution regarding the Liaison between the International River Commissions and the Committee for Communications and T ransit ...... 44

X. Resolution regarding Long-distance T e le p h o n y ...... 45

XI. Resolution regarding the Uniform Nom enclature of G o o d s ...... 45

XII. Resolution regarding the LTnification of Private Law' in InlandNavigation . . . 45

XIII. Resolution regarding the Definition of Sea-going Vessels and of Craftused in 45 Inland N a v i g a t i o n ......

XIV. Resolution regarding the Composition of the Special Committee of Enquiry into the Reform of the C a le n d a r...... 46

XV. Resolution regarding the Treatment to be granted to Esperanto in International Telegraphic and Radio-telegraphic Communications...... 46

XVI. Resolution regarding the Regime of P a s s p o r t s ...... 46 Annex I,

AGENDA.

I. Account of the Work of the Sub-Committees and Special Committees:

(а) Special Committee of Enquiry into the Reform of the Calendar. (б) Sub-Committee for Inland Navigation: 1. Application of the Resolutions of the Genoa Conference. 2. Unification of Private Law in Inland Navigation. 3. Definition of Sea-going Vessels and of Craft employed in Inland Navigation. 4. Unification of Tonnage Measurement in InlandNavigation. 5. Unification of Inland Navigation Statistics. (c) Mixed Committee for the Examination of Health Supervision of Traffic over Navigable Waterways. (d) Sub-Committee for Ports and Maritime Navigation: 1. Question of Double Taxation. (e) Sub-Committee for Transport by Rail: 1. Adhesion by Great Britain to the Berne Convention. 2. Travelling Facilities for the Personnel of the Secretariat of the League of Nations. 3. Enquiry into existing Transport Conditions as compared with the Pre-war Period. 4. Railway Connections between Geneva and the Principal European Capitals. 5. Report by M. Politis on the European Conference on Time-tables. 6. Regime of Passports. 7. Request for a Hearing submitted by the Representatives of the Railway Workers’ Union. 8. Question raised by M. Ouang-Hang. q. Measures necessary for applying the Provisions of theRailway Convention. 10. International Organisation of Information regarding Itineraries. 11. Uniform Nomenclature of Goods. (/) Special Committee of Enquiry on Road Traffic: 1. Revision of the 1909 Convention. 2. Request for a Hearing submitted by theInternational Syndicate of Trans­ port Workers. II. Radio-telegraphic Questions.

III. Dispute concerning the Application of the Articles of the Peace Treaty relating to the Oder and the Danube. IV. Legal Opinion regarding the Question of the 3 per cent Iron Gates Loan. V. Relations with the International Committee on Long-distance Telephony. VI. Question of an International Agreement for the Telephotographic Transmission of Descriptions employed by the various Police Services. ML Liaison betw'een the International River Commissions and the Committee for Communi­ cations and Transit. VIII. Resolutions of the Assembly and the Council concerning Arbitration, Security and Disarmament. IX. Question of the Internal Constitution of the Committee; Representation of the Committee on the International Association of Navigation Congresses. X. Resolutions of the Assembly concerning Radio-telephonv, and the Use of Esperanto in International Telegraphic Communications. XI. Question of the Institute of Private Law. XII. Present State of the Signatures and Ratifications of International Conventions in regard to Communications and Transit. Annex II.

LETTER FROM MR. BALDWIN TO THE CHAIRMAN OF THE COMMITTEE FOR COMMUNICATIONS AND TRANSIT.

London, November 3rd, 1924.

His Majesty’s Government has had under consideration the appointment of an expert to take part in the meeting which it is proposed should be held to give effect to Resolution 3 C adopted during the recent session of the Ports and Maritime Navigation Sub-Committee relative to Safety at Sea and Protection of Shipping; Buoys, Lighting of Coasts and Tide Signals. Any proposal which is calculated to assist shipping, especially when it comes from an organisa­ tion connected with the League of Nations, must command the assistance of His Majesty’s Govern­ ment, but with regard to this proposal, which is not new, to promote an international and uniform system of buoys and lights, it appears to His Majesty’s Government that, before any useful work can be done by experts by different nations, it is necessary to ascertain whether there is or is not a sufficient practical prima-facie case to justify the expenditure of time and money which would be involved in the prosecution of the proposed enquiry. So far as His Majesty’s Government are aware, there is nothing to show at present that the existing national systems cause danger or even inconvenience to navigation and they are of opinion that, as a preliminary to any enquiry on the subject, the representatives of those States which desire the adoption of an international and uniform system should produce evidence of its necessity. It is needless to say that His Majesty’s Government will give the most attentive consideration to any evidence that may be produced to that effect. (Signed) J. B a l d w in .

Annex III (with Appendix).

REPORT BY M. POLITIS, VICE-CHAIRMAN OF THE SUB-COMMITTEE FOR TRANSPORT BY RAIL, ON THE EUROPEAN CONFERENCE ON TIME-TABLES, HELD AT

NAPLES ON NOVEMBER 2o t h , 1924.

(Translation.] Paris, November 20th, 1924.

I have the honour to inform you that, in conformity with the decision reached by our Sub- Committee at its meetings on October 21st and 23rd last, I proceeded to Naples and submitted to the European Conference on Time-tables, which recently met there, the statement which I have the honour to attach. At the same time I made special representations to the delegates of the administrations concerned urging that improvements should be made in the railway communications between Geneva and the principal capitals of Europe on the lines suggested to me by the Secretary-General of the Advisory and Technical Committee for Communications and Transit, as set out in my statem ent. The following results were obtained as regards the connections which had given rise to complaint :

1. Madrid-Geneva and Vice Versa. As the Spanish railways were not represented at the Conference, it was not possible, in conjunction with the delegates of the French P.L.M. and Midi lines, to study a fresh series 0 connections to Cerbère which would obviate the defects of the present connection. At present, the through-carriage Cerbère-Geneva is disconnected and left in the station at N arbonne from 0.43 until 2.43, and in the other direction it remains in the station at Lyons from 10.50 to 12.35 and at Narbonne from 21.22 to 1.40. This last delay in the middle of the night is partieulary inconvenient. The Midi line might, almost immediately after its arrival at N arb o n n e, send i- carriage on to Perpignan, but in that case a new train would have to be made up from the la ei station to Cerbère (40 km.), which, as matters now stand, would not meet any connection at Spanish frontier station. The delegates of the P.L.M. promised me that they would caieu consider whether they could not have the through-carriage, which re-starts from ■^ark°I1I|f-c]1 1.40 in the morning, taken on later by a train leaving Geneva at 10.50 instead of 7 -45» in ' ' 11 1 case the delay at Narbonne would be reduced to about one hour. As regards the heating a lighting of the carriage wrhen it is waiting at Narbonne, the representative of the Midi line proiW that he would do what he could to remedy this state of affairs. — 33 —

2 Geneva to the Orient and Vice Versa via the Simplon-Orient Express. According to the new time-table of the Simplon-Orient Express which will come into force as from June 1925, the departure from Lausanne for the Orient is fixed at 6.36 instead of 7.40, or 44 minutes earlier than at present. In these circumstances, the Swiss Federal Railways stated that it was impossible to ensure a connection at Lausanne with this train, but that if they were given sufficient warning they could place at the disposal of the delegations to the Council and the Assembly of the League automobiles leaving Geneva at 5 o’clock in the morning. As regards the opposite direction'‘(Orient-Geneva), the connection is made by the train leaving Lausanne at 23.20, which arrives at Geneva at 0.35.

3, Geneva-The Hague via Brussels. The total time from Geneva to The Hague has been reduced by 22 minutes, that is to say, the train arrives at The Hague at 16.19 instead of 16.41 as at present. In view of the connections which the train leaving Geneva at 17.40 has to make at Basle, it is absolutely impossible to delay the departure from Geneva in order to reduce the one-hour wait at Basle. It is also impossible to advance departure from Basle for the same purpose.

4 and 5. Geneva-Prague and Vice Versa. As it is impossible to improve the service via Zurich-Vienna, the new train will be run via Zurich-Lindau-Munich, as from June 1925, as follows :

Geneva . . dep. 13 40 Zurich . . . arr. 20 00 Through-carriage ordinary from Geneva dep. 21 6 to Munich. Wagon-Lits from Zurich to Munich . . arr. 00 7 Munich. Change train at Munich. dep. 7 25 Prague . . arr. 19 00

Total time . 28. 20.

And in the other direction: Prague dep. 11.20 Munich arr. 22.25 Change train at Munich. Through-car­ dep. 22.40 riage. Wagon-Lits from Munich to Zurich . . arr. 6.50 Zurich. Ordinary from Munich to Geneva dep. 7-30 via Berne. Geneva arr. 13.17

Total time 26.17

By changing trains at Zurich : Zurich . dep. 7.00 Geneva arr. 13.32

Total time . . 25.30..

Prague—Geneva via Basle. The time-table for this service has not been modified, but the delegate of the Baden Railways promised me that he would continue to make efforts to accelerate the time of arrival of the train commg from Prague-Karlsruhe in order to increase the wait at Basle and thus ensure the con­ nection at this station. The Swiss Federal Railways stated that they were quite unable to delay the departure from Basle as the train in question serves other important connections.

/■ Geneva-Paris-London via Bellegarde. The P.L.M. line is quite unable to accelerate the arrival at Paris (9.15) of train No. 668 leaving Geneva at 22.35, on account of the number of trains running between Culoz and Paris *n ^he morning. Nor can the Northern System retard the departure from Paris of its Calais tram (10.00) on account of the time of departure of the boat from Calais, but changes in the taie-table of the Sim plon-Orient Express between Lausanne and Paris make the G eneva- ausanne-Calais-London connection an extremely convenient one. The following is the time-table of this connection, which will come into force as from June 1925 : Geneva . . dep. 21 •30 Lausanne arr. 22 •43 I dep. 23 •45 ! Change train. Wagon-Lits direct between Paris P.L.M. arr. 8 .40 , Lausanne-Calais. Nord dep. 10 .00 1 London . . arr. 17 .20 — 34 —

Travellers not desiring to take this train de luxe may take the train DO, which includes first- and second-class carriages, the timing being as follows :

Geneva . . . dep. 21.30 Lausanne. . . arr. 22.43 Change train. Carriages ist and 2nd dep. 22-53 class direct between Lausann e-Paris Paris P.L.M. arr. 8.10 P. L. M. Change of train. Through dep. 9-!5 carriages ist and 2nd class, for Calais. Nord dep. 10.00 London . . . arr. 17.20

8. Rome-Geneva via Milan.

This connection is adequately maintained by the following train :

Rome . . . . dep. 23 40 Milan . . . . arr. 15 15 Wagon-Lits direct Rome-Milan. Change dep. 15 45 train. First-class carriage direct Milan- Lausanne. . . arr. 00 23 Geneva. dep. 23 20 Geneva . . . arr. 0 35

Appendix.

Statement concerning the Improvement of Communications between Geneva, Seat of the League of Nations, and the Principal Capitals of Europe.

Submitted by M. A. P o l itis to the European Conference on Time-Tables, held at Naples in November 1924.

The Sub-Committee for Transport by Rail of the League of Nations Advisory and Technical Committee on Communications and Transit has entrusted to me, as you are aware, the duty of submitting to the Conference on Time-Tables a statement on the inadequacy of the train service between Geneva and the principal capitals of Europe, and to request the administrations concerned to remedy this state of affairs as far as possible. Progress has certainly been made in improving the communications in question, but, in view of the importance of economising time, this progress still leaves something to be desired, and many delegations to the Council and the Assembly of the League of Nations have complained of the inadequacy or inconvenience of certain communications. It is certainly not easy to surmount the difficulties caused by the geographical situation ot Geneva itself. Nevertheless, a careful study of present difficulties would, no doubt, show that some improvements may yet be made at once. It is obvious that what is desirable for statesmen and other distinguished persons coming to Geneva is equally desirable for ordinary passengers, and that, consequently, the question raised is of general interest and deserves the serious consideration of the administrations concerned, if only for the latter reason. The connections which have given rise to complaint and which could be improved are the following:

1. Madrid—Geneva and Vice Versa.

The most direct and, therefore, the shortest itinerary for this connection would be by Bai- celona-Cerbère. In passing through Paris, travellers have to wait there one night, and by Irun- Bordeaux-Lyons, passengers have to change trains at Bordeaux and remain there for three hours It is true that an ordinary through-carriage runs daily between Cerbère and Geneva, but tnis carriage, it seems is disconnected on the outward journey at Tarascon or at Avignon, and on tn return journey at Narbonne, to be attached to another train after waiting three hours in eac of these stations. While waiting, the carriage is neither heated nor lighted — which is not verj agreeable or comfortable for the passengers. It would b e most desirable, by reorganising t e time-tables of these trains, to eliminate this unpleasant delay, particularly as the connection is of importance not only to Geneva, but also to Switzerland as a whole, and to Italy.

Geneva and the Orient, via Simplon-Orient Express.

Geneva dep. 21.27 L ausanne. arr. 22.48 dep. the following morning at 7-20' — 35 — j Qeneva-The Hague, via Brussels. G e n e v a ...... dep. 17.40 B a s l e ...... arr. 22.31 dep. 23.32 B r u s s e ls ...... arr. 11.08 dep. 11.43 The Hague ...... arr. 16.41

Consequently, there is one hour’s wait at Basle, and the time is considerably longer than that generally taken by the journey between Brussels and The Hague.

4. Geneva-Prague, via Zurich-Vienna. G e n e v a ...... dep. 0.30 Zurich ...... arr. 6.58 dep. 9.30 V i e n n a ...... arr. 6.50 dep. 7.00 — ------13-30 P r a g u e ...... arr. 14.07 21.17 The connection is inadequate, and the margin allowed at Vienna too fine. If the connection is missed passengers have to wait seven hours.

5. Prague-Geneva, via Zurich-Vienna.

P r a g u e ...... dep. 7.04 Vienna ...... arr. 14.30 dep. 19.05 Zurich ...... arr. 14.34 dep. 15.10 G e n e v a ...... arr. 21.10 There is a 4% hours’ wait at Vienna.

6. Prague-Geneva, via Basle. P rague...... dep. 19.10 C arlsruhe...... arr. 14.51 dep. 15.08 Basle, B. B h ...... arr.19 . 0 6 ------Basle, C .F.F...... dep. 19.25 0.18 G eneva...... arr. 0.35 6.07

The margin allowed for the connection is too small. The connection is frequently lost, parti­ cularly as a result of passport and Customs formalities.

7- Geneva—Paris—London, via Bellegarde. The arrival at Paris, particularly the time of actual arrival, is generally too late to allow connection with the train leaving for London via Boulogne at 10 o’clock, and even, in the case °f luggage, via Dieppe at 10.35. This communication is particularly im portant. The only remedy at present is to travel via Lausanne.

8. Rome—Geneva, via Milan. R o m e ...... dep. 20.45 M ilan...... arr. 8.30 dep. 9.10 L a u sa n n e ...... arr. 17.59 dep. 18.22 G e n e v a ...... arr. 20.00

I he time-table is convenient, as it stands, up to Lausanne. The train arrives at Geneva Wo hours after the arrival at Lausanne and passengers have to change trains. I do not think, gentlemen, that I need insist upon the work of peace and progress which the league of Nations has already carried out, in order to urge you to take into serious consideration e recommendations adopted by its Assembly in September last, which I have had the honour !° explain to you. You are, of course, aware of what the League has done in different spheres, . may, however, briefly point out what has been accomplished in the matter of communications. jn aPPhcation of Article 23 (e) of the Covenant. Two Conferences have already been held by the ,'eague of Nations Organisation for Communications and Transit : the first in April 1920, at Barce- na* and the second in November 1923 at Geneva. These two Conferences have drawn up and deluded international Conventions of very great importance, such as those concerning navigable r'vays, freedom of transit, maritime ports, railways, etc. These international Conventions - 36 — will soon be very generally applied, to the benefit of all concerned, and will contribute, you mav be sure, to giving a fresh stimulus to transport by rail. Much, certainly, still remains to be done and the Advisory and Technical Committee for Communications and Transit is engaged in studying a w’hole series of questions of the highest importance, some of which are intimately concerned with transport by rail. In these circumstances, I am sure that you will be good enough to assist the League of Nations by facilitating, as far as possible, the arrival and departure of those persons who interrupt their regular occupations and come to Geneva to place at the disposal of the world their knowledge and experience. Finally, I w-ould wish to thank the Managing Board of the European Conference on Time- Tables and Through Carriages for its cordial welcome and for having allowed me to carrv out here the mission with w'hich I wTas entrusted.

Annex IV.

A. LETTER FROM THE FOREIGN OFFICE TO THE SECRETARY-GENERAL OF THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS, WITH APPENDIX. London, August 23rd, 1924.

I am directed by Mr. Secretary Ramsay MacDonald to request that the following matter may be brought before the Advisory and Technical Committee for Communications and Transit under Article 376 of the Treaty of Versailles and the Assembly’s resolution of December 9th, 1920, and in conformity with the procedure settled by Article 7 of the Barcelona resolution on the rules of the organisation of the Advisory and Technical Committee: “The dispute wrhich has arisen between Great Britain, the Czechoslovak State, Denmark, France, Poland, Prussia and Swreden on the question whether the Interna­ tional Commission provided for in Article 341 of the Treaty of Versailles, in the project to be prepared under Articles 343 and 344 for the revision of the existing International Agreements and Regulations relating to the Oder, is debarred, having regard especially to the provisions of Articles 331 and 338 of the same treaty, in defining under Article 344 (c) the section of the river or its tributaries to which the international regime shall be applied, from including tributaries or parts of tributaries of the Oder which are in Polish territory and are navigable.” 2. A brief memorandum showing the differences of opinion which have arisen is enclosed herewith (see A ppendix). (Signed) Alexander Cadogan.

Appendix.

R e s o l u t io n a d o p t e d b y t h e I nternational C o m m is s io n o f t h e O d e r o n J a n u a r y 29TH, 1924.

La Commission de l’Oder, Réunie à Dresde le 29 janvier 1924 en vue de l’élaboration de l'Acte de Navigation de l'Oder, conformément à l’article 343 du Traité de Versailles du 26 juin 1919, Ayant à délimiter, conformément à l’article 344, alinéa c), les sections des affluents de l’Oder, auxquelles doit s’appliquer le régime international fixé par le Traité et auxquelles doit s’étendre la compétence de la Commission, Devant faire application, à cet effet, de l’article 331 du Traité, qui déclare international l'Oder et toute partie navigable de son réseau fluvial servant naturellement d’accès à la mer a plus d’un Etat, et de l’article 341 qui place l’Oder international sous l’administration de la Com­ mission, Constatant que, sur la base de cette disposition, il a été soutenu, D’une part, que la compétence de la Commission doit être limitée aux parties des affluents tels que la Warthe et la Netze, situées en aval de la frontière entre l’Allemagne et la Pologne, Et, d’autre part, que cette compétence doit s’étendre au contraire jusqu’au point ou ces affluents, faisant partie du réseau fluvial de l’Oder, cessent d’être naturellement navigables sur territoire polonais, Constatant que les efforts faits en vue d’accorder ces points de vue divergents n ’ont pu aboutir, jusqu’à présent, Estimant que, dans ces conditions, la Commission ne peut actuellement donner suite à 1 éla­ boration de l’Acte de Navigation et que l’article 376 du Traité de Versailles, remettant le règle­ ment de la question d’interprétation des articles 331 et 341 à la Société des Nations, offre un moyen de solution, Prie les délégués d’intervenir auprès de leurs gouvernements respectifs en vue de donner à la présente résolution les suites qu’elle comporte et d’informer de celles-ci, le plus tôt possible, la Commission. — 37

B. LETTER FROM THE MINISTER FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF THE FRENCH REPUBLIC TO THE SECRETARY-GENERAL OF THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS. rTranslation| Paris, October 21st, 1924.

I have the honour to acknowledge receipt of your letter dated October 6th last, in which you were good enough to inform me that the British Government has submitted for settlement to the Advisory and Technical Committee for Communications and Transit a dispute regarding the application of the clauses of the Treaty of Versailles governing the regime of the Oder basin. I beg to inform you that the French Government also wishes to entrust the Advisory and Technical Committee for Communications and Transit with the task of undertaking an enquiry and of finding as far as possible, by conciliation between the parties, a settlement of the dispute, the scope of which was defined in the resolution passed by the International Oder Commission on January 29th, 1924, and which concerns the question whether, in application of the relevant stipulations of the Treaty of Versailles, including Article 338, the International Oder Commission should fix the limits of the international river system on the tributaries of the Oder at the frontier between Germany and Poland or at the point above that frontier at which the said tributaries become naturally navigable. (Signed) H e r r io t .

Annex V.

RESOLUTION REGARDING THE DISPUTE CONCERNING THE APPLICATION OF THE ARTICLES OF THE PEACE TREATY RELATING TO THE ODER.

The Advisory and Technical Committee for Communications and Transit: Having regard to the letter from the British Minister for Foreign Affairs, dated August 23rd, 1924, to the Secretary-General of the League of Nations whereby the following question was submitted to the Advisory and Technical Committee "under Article 376 of the Treaty of Versailles and the Assembly’s resolution of December 9th, 1920, and in conformity with the procedure settled by Article 7 of the Barcelona resolution on the rules of the organisation of the Advisory and Technical Committee" : “The dispute which has arisen between Great Britain, the Czechoslovak State, Denmark, France, Poland, Prussia and Sweden on the question whether the International Commission provided for in Article 341 of the Treaty of Versailles, in the project to be prepared under Articles 343 and 344 for the revision of the existing International Agree­ ments and Regulations relating to the Oder, is debarred, having regard especially to the provisions of Articles 331 and 338 of the same Treaty, in defining under Article 344 (c) the section of the river or its tributaries to which the international regime shall be applied, from including tributaries or parts of tributaries of the Oder which are in Polish territory and are navigable.” Having regard to the letter from the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the French Republic to the Secretary-General of the League of Nations dated October 21st, 1924, in which the French Government expressed its desire “to entrust the Advisory and Technical Committee for Communi­ cations and Transit with the task of undertaking an enquiry and of finding, as far as possible, by conciliation between the parties, a settlement of the dispute, the scope of which was defined in the resolution passed by the International Commission of the Oder on January 29th, 1924, and which concerns the question whether, in application of the relevant stipulations of the Treaty of Ver­ sailles, including Article 338, the International Oder Commission should fix the limits of the inter­ national river system on the tributaries of the Oder at the frontier between Germany and Poland °r at the point above that frontier at which the said tributaries become naturally navigable” : Whereas, by virtue of the resolution adopted by the First Assembly on December 9th, 1920, the Committee is entrusted "with the investigation of any disputes which may be referred to the League under Articles 336, 376 and 386 of the Treaty of Versailles, and corresponding articles in the other Treaties of Peace,jand will endeavour to adjust such disputes whenever possible by conciliation between the parties” ; Whereas the duties entrusted to the Committee in connection with disputes provided for ln Conventions adopted by General Conferences on Communications and Transit are equally ^ties of conciliation and friendly settlement : Whereas the Committee is not called upon to give judgment but to endeavour to bring about friendly adjustment of the disputes submitted to it, it being open to the parties to submit such disputes for legal settlement to the Permanent Court of International Justice; Whereas, in order to arrive at a settlement by conciliation, the Committee must necessarily !ecl fully entitled to submit to the parties any solution tending to a final settlement of the disputes, - 38 -

And after having taken cognisance of the report of the Commission of Enquiry appointed to collect all legal and technical information likely to help in the settlement of the dispute and composed of M. J. Hostie, President, General H. 0 . Mance and Professor L. Babinski ; With a view to the adjustment of the dispute by conciliation, expresses the following opinion which appears to it to take into account, as far as possible, the various legal and technical views expressed both by the Commission of Enquiry and in the course of its own proceedings, as well as the general interests of navigation: 1. The jurisdiction of the International Oder Commission should extend up-streani on the WTarthe (WTarta) to and above Posen (Poznan), and up-stream on the Netze (Notec) as far as Usch (Ujscie); 2. From the point on the Netze (Notec) where the jurisdiction of the International Oder Commission would cease as far as its confluence with the Vistula through the Brom­ berg (Bydgoszcz) Canal, the waterway should be subject to the provisions of the General Convention of Barcelona on the Regime of Navigable Waterways of International Concern. It is understood that these dispositions should be regarded as finally disposing de facto, apart from any question as to the interpretation of the Treaty, of the difficulties which have arisen with regard to the regime of the Oder system and that they would not involve any consequences or in any way constitute a precedent or in any other w ay affect the application of similar articles in the Treaties relating to other waterways.

Annex VI.

[Translation.] RESOLUTIONS ADOPTED BY THE INTERNATIONAL ELBE COMMISSION AT ITS EIGHTH SESSION, ON JANUARY 30TH, 1924, AND JU L Y 5TH, 1924, RESPECTIVELY

A.— The Commission expresses the wish that invitations to participate in the meetings orga­ nised under the auspices of the Advisory and Technical Committee for Communications and Transit be addressed directly to it, leaving it to the Commission to decide by wrhom they wish to be represented. The Commission begs Mr. Baldwin, the delegate of Great Britain — and member of the Com­ mission — to m ake this wish know-n to the Committee.

B.— The Secretary-General is charged, in principal, to represent the Commission at the meetings organised by the Advisory and Technical Committee for Communications and Transit when the questions on the agenda are of interest to the Commission. The Commission leaves to the President the task of deciding on each occasion which questions necessitate the presence of the Secretary-General. It is understood that the Commission will be advised in all cases wThere the importance of the meetings organised by the Advisory and Technical Committee is such as to render it desirable that the Commission be represented by one of its members.

Annex VII (with Two Appendices.)

LETTER FROM THE SECRETARY-GENERAL OF THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS TO THE CHAIRMAN OF THE ADVISORY AND TECHNICAL COMMITTEE FOR COMMUNICATIONS AND TRANSIT. Geneva, November 4th, 1924. I have the honour to forward herewith a copy of the decision of the Council of October 3rd, 1924, regarding the preparations for the Conference on the Reduction of Armaments, and of a further decision of the Council of October 28th on the same subject. As you will see, it is provided th a t th e Council Committee entrusted with the preparations for the Conference on the Reduction of Armaments wrould be assisted in its task of co-ordinating the preparatory work of th e Conference by a Committee including the Chairman and one member, or possibly twTo members, of the Economic, Finance and Transit Organisations respectively. In view of the fact that, in virtue of the Council’s decision of October 28th, the Co-ordination Committee will not be convened until after the next session of the Council at Rome, I hope tha it will be possible for the Advisory and Technical Committee for Communications and Transit to decide at its next session how its representation on the Co-ordination Committee may be effected. — 39 —

Appendix 1. r e s o l u t i o n a d o p t e d b y t h e C o u n c il o f t h e L e a g u e o f N a t io n s o n O c t o b e r 3RD, 1924.

1. With a view to the preparation of the Conference for the Reduction of Armaments, the Council decides to form itself into a Committee. The representatives on the Council who consider that it will not be possible to attend the Committee in person will as soon as possible send to the Secretary-General the names of their substitutes on this Committee. The Committee will hold its first meeting on November 17th in order to draw up a general programme of the work connected with the application of Article 12 of the Protocol a n d with the reduction of arm am ents. The Governments of the States represented on the Council are requested to give their represen­ tatives on the Committee the necessary instructions in order th a t the general lines of the programme may be laid down during its meeting of November 17th. The Secretary-General will invite the Governments of the States Members of the League not represented on the Council to forward through him to the Committee any suggestions which they may think useful with a view to the preparation of this programme. 2. The Secretariat is requested to collect the data necessary for the economic and financial investigations relative to the application of Article 12 of the Protocol and is authorised to distri­ bute these data to the competent organs of the League (Economic and Financial Organisation, Transit Organisation) with a view to the work which will subsequently be required of them by the Committee. The Secretariat will obtain information from the official documents at the disposal of the League or from documents which might, if necessary, be furnished by the Governments. 3. In conformity with the Assembly resolution, and in order to assist the Committee in co-ordinating the preparatory work for the Conference, the Tem porary Mixed Commission shall be reorganised and shall take the name ot the Co-ordination Commission, which will be composed as follows : (a) The Committee of the Council (ten members), assisted by: (b) The President and one member, or two members, of each of the three organisations, Economic, Financial and Transit (six members) ; (c) Six members appointed by the Permanent Advisory Commission (six members) ; (d) Two members of the Employers’ Group and two members of the Workers’ Group of the Governing Body of the International Labour Office, appointed by the latter (four members) ; (e) If considered advisable, a certain number of experts, jurists and others appointed by the Council.

Appendix 2,

Resolution a d o p t e d by t h e Co u n c il of t h e L e a g u e o f N a t io n s on O ctober 28th, 1924.

The Council decided to undertake itself, at its session in Rome, the work of preparing for the Conference on the Reduction of Armaments, which it had originally asked the Council Committee to undertake at a meeting to be held on November 17th. At the end of its session in Rome, the Council would instruct the Council Committee to continue and complete this work and report to the Council at its March session. The Secretary-General was instructed to ask the Governments to furnish, in sufficient time hr the Council session at Rome, the information which had been requested for the meeting of November 17th. The Council also decided to fix at its Rome session the date of the meeting of the Committee of Jurists.

Annex VIII.

PRESENT STATE OF SIGNATURES AND RATIFICATIONS OF INTERNATIONAL CONVENTIONS IN REGARD TO COMMUNICATIONS AND TRANSIT.

BARCELONA CONFERENCE (April 1921). Geneva, November 25th, 1924.

x. Co n v e n t io n a n d St a t u t e on F r e e d o m of T r a n s it . Signatures Ratifications Adhesions Al b a n ia A l b a n ia (October 8, 1921) Au s t r ia A u s t r ia (November 15, 1923) Belgium Bolivia — 40 —

I. CONVENTIION AND STATUTE ON FREEDOM OF TRANSIT (continued). Signatures Ratifications Adhesions B r it ish E m p ir e B r it is h E m p ir e , including N e w ­ Federated Malay States (States f o u n d l a n d (August 2, 1922) of Perak, Selangor, Negri Sembilan and Pahang) (Au­ gust 22,1923) ; Non-Federated Malay States (States of Brunei, Johore Kedah, Perlis Kelantan and Trengganu) (August 22,1923); Palestine (British mandate) (January 28, 1924) B u lga r ia B u l g a r ia (July 11, 1922) Ch il e Ch in a Czechoslovakia Czechoslovakia (October 29,1923) D e n m a r k D e n m a r k (November 13, 1922) E sth o n ia F in l a n d F in l a n d (January 29, 1923) F r a n c e F r a n c e (September 1924) G e r m a n y (April 9, 1923) G r e e c e G r e e c e (February 18, 1924) G ua tem a la I n d ia I n d ia (August 2, 1922) I taly I t a l y (August 5, 1922) J a pa n J a p a n (February 20, 1924) L atvia L a t v ia (September 29, 1923) L it h u a n ia L u x e m b u r g N e t h e r l a n d s N e t h e r l a n d s (April 17, 1924) N e w Z ea l a n d N e w Z e a l a n d (A ugust 2, 1922) N o r w a y N o r w a y (September 4, 1923) P anam a P e r sia P o land P o lan d (O ctober 8, 1924) P o r tu g a l R o u m a nia R o u m a n ia (S ep tem b er 5, 1923) K in g d o m of t h e S e r b s , Cro ats a n d S l o v e n e s Siam (November 29, 1922) S pa in Sw e d e n S w it z e r l a n d Sw it z e r l a n d (July 14, 1924) U r u g u a y

2. Convention and Statute on the Regime of Navigable W aterways of I nternational C o n c e r n .

A lb a n ia A l b a n ia (October 8, 1921) A u str ia A u s t r ia (November 15, 1923) B e l g iu m B oliv ia B r it is h E m p ir e B r it is h E m p ir e , including N e w ­ Federated Malay States (States f o u n d l a n d (August 2, 1922) of Perak, Selangor, Negri, Sembilan and Pahang) (Au­ gust 22,1923). Non-Federated Malay btates (States of Brunei, Johore, Kedah, Perlis Kelantan and Trengganu) (August 2 2 , 1923) ■ Palestine (British Mandate) (January 28, 1924) B ulgaria B u l g a r ia (July 11, 1922) Ch il e C hina Colo m b ia (April 7, 1923)1 C hechoslovakia Czechoslovakia (September 1924) D en m a r k D e n m a r k (November 13, 1922) E sth on ia F in la n d F in l a n d (January 29, 1923) F rance G r e e c e 1 Subject to ratification. Conv en tio n a n d S t a t u t e on the Regime of Navigable W a t e r w a y s o f I nternational C o n c e r n (continued). Signatures Ratifications Adhesions G u a t e m a l a In d ia I n d ia (August 2, 1922) I t a l y I t a ly (August 5, 1922) L i t h u a n i a L u x e m b u r g New Zealand N ew7 Z e a l a n d (August 2, 1922) N o r w a y N o r w a y (September 4, 1923) P a n a m a P o la n d P o r t u g a l R o u m a n ia (June 19, 1923, rati­ fied May 9, 1924) Siam (November 29, 1922) Spain Sw eden Ur u g u a y

3. A d d it io n a l P ro tocol to t h e Co n v e n t io n on t h e R e g im e of N a v ig a b le W a t e r w a y s o f I nternational Co n c e r n .

Albania A l b a n ia (October 8, 1921) A u s t r ia (April 7, 1923, ratified November 15, 1923) Belgium British E m p ire B r it is h E m p ir e , including N e w ­ Nyasaland Protectorate and f o u n d l a n d (August 2, 1922) Tanganyika Territory (Au­ gust 2, 1922) ; B aham as ; Barbados; British Guiana; Jamaica (including Turks and Caicos Islands and Cayman Islands) ; Leeward Islands ; Trinidad and Tobago ; Windward Islands (Grenada, St. Lucia and St. Vincent) ; G ibraltar; Malta ; Cyprus ; Gambia Colony and Protec­ torate ; Sierra Leone Colony and Pro­ tectorate; Nigeria Colony and Protectorate ; Gold Coast, Ashanti andNorthern Territories of the Gold Coast Kenya Territory and Protec­ torate; Uganda Protectorate; Zanzibar; St. Helena; Ceylon ; M auritius; Seychelles ; Hong-Kong; Straits Settlements: Fiji; Gilbert and Ellice Islands Colony; British Solomon Islands ; Tongan Islands (August 2,1922) ; Federated Malay States (States of Perak, Selangor, Negri, Sembilan and Pahang) (Au­ gust 22, 1923) ; Non-Federated Malay States (States of Brunei, Johore, Kedah, Perlis Kelantan and Trengganu) (August 22, 1923) Palestine, British Mandate (January 28, 1924); — 42 —

A d d it io n a l P r o t o c o l to t h e Co n v e n t io n on t h e R e g im e o f N a v ig a b l e W aterw ays of International Concern. (Continued.)

Signatures Rati fications A dhesions

C h il e Czechoslovakia Czechoslovakia (Sept. 8, 1924) D e n m a r k D e n m a r k (November 13, 1922) F in l a n d F in l a n d (January 29, 1923) G r e e c e I n d ia I n d ia (August 2, 1922) N e w Z e a l a n d N e w Z e a l a n d (August 2, 1922) N o r w a y N o r w a y (September 4, 1923) P o r t u g a l — R o u m a n ia (June 19, 1923, rati­ fied May 9, 1924) — Siam (November 29, 1922)

S p a in SWEDEN

D e c l a r a t io n recognising t h e R ig h t to a F l a g o f S t a t e s h a v in g n o S e a -Coast.

A l b a n ia A lb a n ia (October 8, 1921) A u s t r ia A u s t r ia (July 10, 1924) A u s t r a l ia (October 31, 1922)

B e l g iu m B o l iv ia B r it is h E m p ir e B r it is h E m p i r e , including N e w ­ f o u n d l a n d (October 9, 1922) B u l g a r ia B u l g a r ia (July 11, 1922) Ca n a d a (October 31, 1922)

C h il e Ch in a Czechoslovakia Czechoslovakia (Sept. 8, 1924) D e n m a r k D e n m a r k (November 13, 1922) E s t h o n ia F in l a n d (September 22, 1922)

F r a n c e 1 G r e e c e G u a t e m a l a I n d ia I n d ia (October 9, 1922) I t a l y J a p a n J a p a n (February 20, 1924) L a t v ia L a t v ia (February 12, 1924) L it h u a n ia N e t h e r l a n d s 1 N e w Z e a l a n d N e w Z e a l a n d (October 9, 1922) N o r w a y N o r w a y (September 4, 1923) P a n a m a P e r s ia P o l a n d P o r t u g a l R o u m a n i a (February 22, 1923)

K in g d o m o f t h e S e r b s , Cr o a t s a n d S l o v e n e s S iam (November 29, 1922)

S p a in Sw e d e n S w it z e r l a n d 1 U n io n o f S o u t h A frica (October 31, 1922)

U r u g u a y

1 Accepts Declaration as binding without ratification. — 43 —

SECOND GENERAL CONFERENCE ON COMMUNICATIONS AND TRANSIT (Geneva, December 1923).

i. C o n v e n t io n a n d S t a t u t e on t h e I nternational R e g im e o f R a il w a y s .

Signatures Ratifications

A u s t r ia B e l g iu m

Convention and Statute on the International Regime of Railways. (Continued.)

B r a z i l B r it is h E m p ir e B r it is h E m p ir e (August 29, 1924) B u l g a r ia C h il e Czechoslovakia F r e e Cit y o f D a n z ig D e n m a r k E s t h o n ia F in l a n d F r a n c e G e r m a n y G r e e c e H u n g a r y I n d ia I t a l y J a p a n L a t v ia L it h u a n ia N e t h e r l a n d s N e w Z e a l a n d N o r w a y P o l a n d P o r t u g a l R o u m a n ia S a l v a d o r K in g d o m o f t h e S e r b s , C r o a t s a n d S l o v e n e s S ia m S p a in Sw e d e n S w it z e r l a n d U r u g u a y

2. Co n v e n t io n a n d S t a t u t e o n t h e I nternational R e g im e o f M a r it im e P o r t s .

B e l g iu m B r a z il B r it is h E m p ir e B r it is h E m p ir e (August 29, 1924) B u l g a r ia Ch il e Czechoslovakia D e n m a r k E s t h o n ia G e r m a n y G r e e c e H u n g a r y I n d ia I t a l y J a p a n L it h u a n ia N e t h e r l a n d s N ew 7 Z e a l a n d N o r w a y Sa l v a d o r K in g d o m o f t h e S e r b s , C r o a t s a n d S l o v e n e s S ia m S p a in Sw e d e n Sw it z e r l a n d U r u g u a y — 44 —

3 - Co n v e n t io n r e l a t in g to t h e T ransmission in T r a n s it o f E l e c t r ic P o w e r .

Signatures Ratifications

A u s t r ia B e l g iu m B r it is h E m p ir e B u l g a r ia C h il e

C o n v e n t io n r e l a t in g to t h e T ransmission in T r a n s it o f E l e c t r ic P o w e r . (Continued,)

C zechoslovakia F r e e Cit y o f D a n z ig D e n m a r k F r a n c e G r e e c e H u n g a r y I t a l y L it h u a n ia N e w Z e a l a n d P o l a n d K in g d o m o f t h e S e r b s , Cr o a t s a n d Sl o v e n e s S p a in U r u g u a y

4. Co n v e n t io n r e l a t in g to t h e D e v e l o p m e n t o f H y d r a u l ic P o w e r a f f e c t in g m ore than o n e S t a t e . A u s t r ia B e l g iu m B r it is h E m p ir e B u l g a r ia Ch il e F r e e Cit y o f D a n z ig D e n m a r k F r a n c e G r e e c e H u n g a r y I t a l y L it h u a n ia N e w Z e a l a n d P o l a n d K in g d o m o f t h e S e r b s , Cr o a t s a n d S l o v e n e s S ia m U r u g u a y

Annex IX.

RESOLUTION REGARDING THE LIAISON BETWEEN THE INTERNATIONAL RIVER COMMISSIONS AND THE COMMITTEE FOR COMMUNICATIONS AND TRANSIT.

The Committee for Communications and Transit, . . Having taken cognisance of the resolutions adopted by the International Elbe Commission. Notes that the practice which has hitherto been followed as regards the regular liaison in admini- tration and the exchange of documents between the Secretariats of the C o m m itte e for Commun' cations and Transit and the various River Commissions, by means of reciprocal invitations sen to the Secretaries-General of each of these bodies to attend the meetings of the other, seems to <"e given such entirely satisfactory results as to make it advisable to confirm this practice. Decides, nevertheless, that it is quite understood that, should a question which h a s ea discussed in a River Commission be placed 011 the agenda of the Committee for Commumcatio ^ and Transit at the request of that River Commission, the President of that River Commissi should be specially invited to submit the views of the River Commission to the C o m m itte e Communications and Transit, either personally or through a person designated by him. ^ In cases of General Conferences on Communications and Transit, the Committee recom ^, that the Chairmen or Organisation Committees of the said Conferences should address the tations which they may send to the River Commissions to the Chairmen of the said C o m m issi - 45 —

Annex X.

RESOLUTION REGARDING LONG-DISTANCE TELEPHONY.

The Committee for Communications and Transit, In view of the provisions of Article 24 of the Covenant which might eventually be applied in the case of the International Advisory Committee for Long-distance Telephone Communi cations (Comité international consultatif de téléphoné à longue distance) : Authorises the Chairman of the Committee to take any measures which lie may think fit and to enter into any negotiations with the said International Committee which may be"necessary, with a view to making possible and facilitating reciprocal direct co-operation between the two organisations.

Annex XI.

RESOLUTION REGARDING THE UNIFORM NOMENCLATURE OF GOODS.

The Committee for Communications and Transit, Taking note of the discussions of the Sub-Committee for Transport by Rail in its fourth session, with regard to the uniform nomenclature of goods: Decides to request the Sub-Committee, while remaining in liaison with the International Railway Union, also to keep the Sub-Committee for Inland Navigation informed of the progress made, in order to enable the latter Sub-Committee to consider the question whether a nomen­ clature similar to that of the railways might be adopted in respect of inland navigation.

Annex XII.

RESOLUTION REGARDING THE UNIFICATION OF PRIVATE LAW IN INLAND NAVIGATION.

The Committee for Communications and Transit, Having considered the recommendation made by the Sub-Committee for Inland Navigation for a modification of the resolution on this matter previously voted by the Committee: Decides to instruct the Sub-Committee for Inland Navigation to set up an organisation to study this question, as soon as this Sub-Committee is of opinion that the work of the Central Commission for Rhine Navigation towards the unification of private law in respect of Rhine navigation is sufficiently advanced to justify an examination of the question from a wider point of view.

Annex XIII.

RESOLUTION REGARDING THE DEFINITION OF SEA-GOING VESSELS AND OF CRAFT USED IN INLAND NAVIGATION.

The Committee for Communications and Transit decides to authorise the Chairman of the Committee to set up, in agreement with the Chairmen of the Sub-Committees concerned, a Com­ mittee of Enquiry consisting of two representatives of the Sub-Committee for Ports and Maritime Navigation, two representatives of the Sub-Committee for Inland Navigation and two representa­ tives of the Legal Committee. Annex XIV.

RESOLUTION REGARDING THE COMPOSITION OF THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE OF ENQUIRY INTO THE REFORM OF THE CALENDAR.

The Committee for Communications and Transit, Having taken cognisance of the various requests for increasing the members of the Special Committee of Enquiry into the Reform of the Calendar, with a view to representation of religious bodies which are not yet represented: Decides to forward these requests to the Committee of Enquiry, begging it to inform the Committee for Communications and Transit of its opinion as to any possible action in answer to these requests.

Annex XV.

RESOLUTION REGARDING THE TREATMENT TO BE GRANTED TO ESPERANTO IN INTERNATIONAL TELEGRAPHIC AND RADIO-TELEGRAPHIC COMMUNICATIONS.

The Committee for Communications and Transit, H aving considered the Assembly’s resolution of September 20th, 1924, which recommends that the States Members of the League of Nations should grant to Esperanto the treatment and charges in force for a language en clair for telegraphic and radio-telegraphic international communications and which draws the attention of the Organisation for Communications and Transit to this point : Decides to forward this question to the Committee on Telegraphic Questions for examination.

Annex XVI.

RESOLUTION REGARDING THE REGIME OF PASSPORTS.

The Committee for Communications and Transit, Having had laid before it the question of the difficulties which are, as a general rule, put in the way of international communications by passport formalities, and having considered the discussion which took place in the Sub-Committee for Transport by Rail, at its fourth session, regarding the delay of railway communications resulting from passport formalities at frontiers:

Decides : (1) To set up a special Sub-Committee which shall be instructed to consider this question as a whole and to endeavour to establish a programme for a Passport Conference to meet shortly (if possible, in 1925) and to request its Chairman in due course to ask the Council of the League of Nations to take into consideration the convocation of such a Conference. (2) To request the Sub-Committee for Transport by Rail to make a special stud) of the question of the delays to railway traffic due to passport formalities and to request th at Sub-Committee to communicate the result of its work to the Special Sub-Committee on Passports.