,I

/"

FlORIDA tAltANnc UNIVERSITY'8RARV

GENEVA RESEARCH CENTRE

LEAGUE OF NATIONS. INTERNATIONAL

LABOUR ORGANISATIONAND THE

UNITED STATESSOCIALIST - LABOR

COLLECTION:--..........-_ -~,..,.~_ ..

STITUT'EOF

nfNi'if£J'fNA TIO ' 'Al __ TUD I ES

'G,ENEVA STUDIES. VOLUME X. No.1 MARCH .1939/

GENEVA RESEARCH CENTRE

14, Avenue de France, Geneva, Switzerland

The Geneva Research Centre is an independent privateorganisation devoted to the advancement of the study of inter­national relations. Its location facilitates contact with theLeague of Nations Secretariat and Library, and with theInternational Labour Office. Its Board of Directors is inter­national without being in any way officially representative ofthe various nations. The Centre publishes the series knownas Geneva Studies ; the list for 1939 is shown on the last pageof this cover. In addition to the publication of the GenevaStudies and a monthly In/ormation Bulletin which reportsevents at Geneva, the Geneva Research Centre :

1. Serves as an information bureau and clearing house fornational research organisations.

2. Grants fellowships and assists research in the field ofinternational relations.

3. Examines by conference and in other ways proposals forresearch in the social sciences calling for internationalcollaboration.

4. Undertakes research projects.

During the past year the Centre has, for example, assisteda number of .the national coordinating committees of theInternational Studies Conference, appointed fellows interestedin international legal, political, and economic problems,examined proposals for an international study of neutralityand entered upon a study of Commercial Policy and of theRegulation of International Trade which is now going forwardin twenty countries.

)

GENEVA STUDIESVOLUME x No. 1

MARCH 1939

~I~ E A G U E O,F N-ATIONS,INTERNATIONAL

LA.DOUR ORGANISATION­AND THE

UN'ITED STATE,S

AN ANNUAL ACCOUNT

BY A GR OUP OF AMERICANS IN GENEVA

ABBREVIATIONS

L.o.N. - League of Nations

O.J. Official Journal

Copyright by Geneva Research CentrePrinted in Switzerland

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION . ". .

LEAGUE OF NATIONS

Political

ChinaSpain .Abyssinia ..CzechoslovakiaLatin-AmericaMandatesDisarmament

Technical. . . .

Economics, Finance, Transit

Social . . . . . .

Dangerous DrugsHealth ... ..Social . . . . .Refugees . ..Intellectual CooperationNew York World's Fair

PERMANENT COURT OF INTERNATIONAL JUSTICE

INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANISATION

Election of an American Director .Ratification of Conventions.Annual Conference. . . . . . . .Special Conferences and CommitteesGoverning Body Meetings. .Governing Body CommitteesAmericans on Office Staff .American Liaison Office

Conclusion. . . . . . .

".

Page

7

15

15

15171718182121

22

26

33

333537394143

4749

505153576162646

G5

INTRODUCTION

Twenty years after President Wilson went to the ParisPeace Conference to assure the creation of the League ofNations, the League of Nations is setting up in the UnitedStates its first international exhibit.

The two decades between have been kaleidoscopic; I-Iistoryhas moved at a dazzling pace. Certain factors of world-wideprominence at the War's end have disappeared into oblivion;certain new factors and ideologies then undreamed of havecome into being; the spectre of war has again begun to hauntthe minds of men.

During that period, the League of Nations reflected theatmosphere of the world about it. For the first ten yearsit built steadily upwards, adding new Members and new work,till it came to its two greatest efforts, the World Disarmamentand the World Economic Conferences. During the second tenyears, it met ever increasing difficulties, beginning with theworld economic crisis and the failure of the two Conferences,and passing on through political reverses in Manchuria ,Abyssinia, Spain, Eastern Europe, and China.

During the whole of this time, despite these unevennesses,the cooperation of the United States in the League's variousactivities steadily, if slowly, gained ground. At first, afterthe shocks of the Treaty fight in the Senate, there had been nocommunication at all. · Shortly, however, began a cautiousand limited participation in certain humanitarian and technicalactivities. By the end of the period, the United States wastaking direct or indirect part in practically all League activitiesof interest to it. The year 1938 is particularly interesting ingiving a clear-cut cross-section of the stage which this

-8 -

cooperation has reached twenty years after President Wilson'svisit to Paris and at the moment of the League's Exhibitionat the New York World's Fair. It offers the opportunity toadd up the accounts and assess what has been done and whathas not been done in connection with what undoubtedlyhas been the most far-reaching effort for the permanentorganisation of peace and international cooperation whichthe nations have ever attempted.

The year was the more interesting, too, in that it culminatedin a world-wide unrest and upheaval and bade fair to mark thepassage of history from one chapter to another. Italy wasendeavouring to digest its Abyssinian conquest in Africa andthreatening even wider moves elsewhere; Spain was beingparalysed for another decade by Civil War and foreignintervention; Germany had seized .Aust ria , dislocatedCzechoslovakia and alarmed all Europe ; Japanese armieswere marching over China in a desperate, though undeclaredwar. The crisis was universal and not localised to any givenarea; intercontinental and interimperial blocks were formedor forming. A universal holocaust was but barely avoided,and, as the period ended, the dread grew that out of one orall of these points of danger, a tragedy might be precipitatedeven worse than the great war of only two decades before.

Both the United States as a Great Power with interests inevery continent and the League of Nations as an internationalagency for peace and cooperation were vitally affected by thisominous trend. The League received blow after blow from thegrim struggle going on about it and in part within it, and sawits prestige steadily decline from its high point of the firstdecade. The United States, whilst still untouched except forits colossal armaments bill, saw its principles and interestsadversely affected in many parts of the world and its easyisolation far from the danger of foreign encroachmentsseriously questioned. Both the League and the United Statesanxiously watched the situation: the League doing whatlittle it could but being unable to exercise any really controllinginfluence, and . the United States limited largely to formalprotests and the piling up of armaments. Each acted on itsown lines but without cooperation or contact and withpractically equal lack of success or effectiveness.

- 9

The twenty-year period so ominously ending shows thatthe United States has a far greater multiplicity ' of relationswith the League of Nations than is generally realised . As aresult of two decades of cautious and almost unconscioustesting on the part of the United States, active collaborationbas been established in most of the League's technical andnon-political work and in much of its more general work.The degree of formality in this cooperation varies greatly,.however . Sometimes it is exceedingly active and forthright ;.sometimes it is limited or only II parallel ". In brief, the UnitedStates has become a full Member of the International LabourOrganisation; the Senate has ratified the first Conventions, andan American, Governor John G. Winant, has been elected Direc­tor of the Office. The United States is also widely associated inthe '" League's economic, financial and disarmament .work,considers itself a II full lVlember " of the Social Committee, isa dominating .participant in the anti-drug work, an eagerparticipant in the health, nutrition and similar activities, andis variously interested in many other less permanent phasesof League work. Its most conspicuous absence is from thePermanent Court of International Justice, although member­ship has been advocated by every President and Secretary ofState. since 1922 and was ·once ratified with reservations bya large majority in the Senate.

During the years also, the Government's relations with theLeague have become most courteous and cooperative. TheGovernment has proved very helpful in supplying informationon the ' widest variety of questions, some of it .by Treatyobligation, but most of it in reply to Circular Letters. Moreover,by special arrangement, it also registers and publishes allits Treaties through the League. Its Minister in Berne isin frequent contact with the League; its Consulate in Genevais, one of the best equipped offices of information associatedwith the League; and its Labor Office in Geneva serves as achannel between the Labour Organisation there and theDepartment of Labor in Washington.

Despite this, the United States has had only the slightestpart in the League's two central agencies, the Assembly andthe Council. American Government representatives have 0

occasion , to be sure, cooperated with both: with the former

- 10 -

in connection notably with drugs and armaments, and withthe latter in connection with Manchuria. These cases apart,however, there has been no organised or regular contact.American cooperation has, in fact, been limited largely tothe Special Conference or the Committee stage; no methodhas been evolved for following a given subject through allthe various stages necessary in a complicated agency like theLeague. This has been a loss both ways: to the League inplanning the general lines which its activities should follow ,and to the United States in pressing its own particular policiesin connection with those activities.

From this it follows that the United States has had no partin and taken no responsibility for the maintenance of theLeague as a whole. Such official references as have been madeto it have been courteous and friendly, with an apparentintent neither to embarrass the League nor to express ajudgment upon it. The League seems increasingly to have hadthe goodwill of the American Government but it has not hadany general suppor-t from it.

In many cases where American cooperation has beenpositively given, however, this reticence has not prevailed.This was most clearly shown, perhaps, by Secretary of LaborPerkins at the 1938 annual Labour Conference when she saidthat" in such fields as the improvement of working and livingconditions, in public health and social problems, in studiesof nutrition, finance and economics, in the whole area ofscientific humanitarianism, the United States finds itselfable and glad to co-operate to the fullest practical extent" 1 .

Similarly, Mr. Stuart Fuller of the State Department spokeof the Opium Advisory Committee as " the one forum in ;t heworld where the problem of the illicit traffic in narcotic drugscan be and is publicly discussed " 2, and the State Departmentlater said that" as the largest legitimate consumer of opium andthe coca leaf and as the largest market for narcotic drugs in the

1 International Labour Conference, Twenty-Fourth Session,Geneva, 1938, R ecord of Proceedings, p. 195.

~ Department of State, Press Releases, Vol. XVIII, No. 436,.p . 211.

- 11 -

illicit traffic, the United States is vitally interested in and direc­tly affected by the work of this [Central Opium] Board " 1.

American policy has undoubtedly been considerably affectedby the existence of the League. The League has set in motionmany activities of interest to it and has decided on manypolicies involving it. In some cases, the United States hasdirectly participated in League action; in others it has madeknown its views or even taken an initiative; while in stillothers it has maintained a completely undeclared positionuntil the League should have acted. It could hardly beotherwise than that both the actions and the inactions of anassociation of some half hundred Governments and those ofone of the most powerful nations in the world should have theirmutual effect upon one another.

Two interesting illustrations of this were given during theyear through the creation by the American Government oftwo new Divisions to deal with activities particularly stimulatedby the League. In the field of communications and transit,where the League has had an active technical organisationsince 1920, the Government announced the creation in theState Department of the Division of Communications tocoordinate its various activities in this wide domain. In t he'field of Intellectual Cooperation, where since 1920 also t heLeague has initiated an entirely new type of cooperation, theGovernment announced the creation of a Division of CulturalRelations, which, while at first concentrating largely on Latin-­America, must inevitably follow very closely the lines tracedby the League. If imitation is the highest form of flattery, the'United States undoubtedly paid high compliment to the Leaguein these two actions.

What the experience of these two decades has shown aboveeveryt hing else, however, is that, whatever the difference ofmethod, there is the closest identity of interest and objectiveas between the League of Nations and the United States.Leaving aside the ' contractual obligations in the Covenant ,which many Americans felt went too far for the United States,there wa s practically no positive action in the first twenty'

1 D epar tment of State, Press R eleases, Vol. XIX, N o. 466 ,.p. 157 .

- 12 -

years of the League's history to which the United State.took except io n , while on the other hand there was a vastamount which the United States cordially supported. Thoughobviously the League had not lived up to the high hopeswith which it had been founded, nevertheless, as· far as itwent , it was throughout in the closest sympathy with America'sspirit and viewpoint. In the same way, many of the policies,indeed practically all the policies, enunciated from Washington,particularly towards the end of the period, were in complete.a ccord with the League's underlying philosophy. What wassurprising, h owever, was that, with this complete sympathyof viewpoint and a very considerable degree of actualcooperation, there was only the m ost cautious suggestion-of even a limited reconsideration of a better relationshipbetween the two. Those sustaining an orderly process ofchange in the world were clearly not as united as thosechallenging it.

Yet changes were undoubtedly taking place on bothsides. Considerable groups within the United States werebeginning to feel that the country had become an uncomfortablepart of the world scene; insecure, .if not positively endangeredby outside events. No longer, particularly after the flashlight-of the Munich Conference, did they feel fully protected inEurope by the Anglo-French democracies, or comfortably safein Latin-America through the Monroe doctrine, or generouslypaternal in the Far-East through the Open-Door Policy. Newideologies were threatening the easy-going ideas of democracyin Latin-America and even closer home; unorthodox tradepractices were threatening the ever more necessary foreigntrade markets; huge armies were destroying the world as ithad been and forcing it towards an unprecedented armaments·ex p en dit ure ; while, to bring the picture dramatically home,airplanes began crossing the ocean in fewer hours thanit. took days in Washington's t ime. The Governmentbecame increasingly anxious and the question was put ev ermore insistently as to what place America should occupy inworld-life. None of this , however, found strong reflection in the-Gov er nm ent 's attitude towards the League of Nations, nor inany proposa l of a freer or more effective method ofcooperation with an international agency, however imperfect,

- 13

dedicated to the advancement of international peace andcooperation. 1

During this twenty-year period, however, a more positiveevolution had been going on within the League. Certain of itsbasic principles had been under bitter attack; several importantStates had left it to pursue a purely nationalistic policy ;others were reducing their international commitments withinit; and enquiries had been set under way as to how best toorganise the world 's profound longing for peace which had beenmost vividly illuminated at the time of the Munich crisis.The compulsory or sanctionist elements of the League, whichhad been the greatest bar to American membership in 1919,had tended constantly to lose ground, particularly after theAbyssinian crisis , and the League had tended more and moreto become that consultative international agency which manyAmericans desired. Whether or not in conscious recognitionof this fact, the League took two steps in 1938, which, ifsomewhat limited in comparison with the urgency of thehour, constituted, nevertheless, the first' even indirect efforttowards a better fundamental relationship. First, recognisingthe importance of the various technical and non-politicalactivities which it had set under way in many fields, it formallyconfirmed to the United States, as to other non-MemberStates, its desire to increase their cooperation in this work,and in effect asked them for suggestions to this end. Secondly,it voted a considerable credit for the League's first participationin an international exhibition in New York, where it hopedto give an objective and impartial picture of its manifoldactivities which are practically unknown to the general public.There was just the vaguest hope in Liberal circles in Europethat, as the blackness was growing more intense in the oldworld, some flash of hope, perhaps in a way wholly unsuspected ,might come out of the new as it had when President Wilson,apparently with nation-wide support, had launched the Leagueof Nations idea at the end of the World War. The Leagueauthorities responsible for the conception of the exhibit inNew York could find no better keynote, indeed, than the

1 Evidence of the continued interest of the United States is­sh own in a communication from the United States Governmentof February 2nd, 1939; quoted on pages 25 -26.

- 14

'Const ant alternative: " Peace or War " , I I Organisation orChaos", " Prosperity or Depression ", and they placed .asthe last words to be seen over the exit door those quotedfrom President Roosevelt in last year's Study: "In aworld of mutual suspicions, peace must be affirmativelyreached for. It cannot just he wished for. It cannot just bewaited for." 1

1 The United States, League of Nations and International Orga­nisation during 1937, Geneva Studies, Vol. IX, No 1, p . 14.

LEAGUE OF NATIONS

POLITICAL.

American cooperation in the League's political activities hasvaried from year to year and from case to case. Sometimesthere has been direct participation, as in the Manchurian andLeticia disputes; at other times parallel action, as in theAbyssinian; and at still others very little contact. Thedecision seems to have been based rather more on expediencyand the details of the particular conflict than on principle.

During the critical year of 1938, the opportunity did notoffer for the United States to take as large a part in the League'sgeneral work as previously. On the one hand, world-widepolitical disruption made impossible any gatherings such asthe World Disarmament or Economic Conferences in whichthe United States had played a leading role. On the other,while the Manchurian, Rhineland, and Abyssinian affairs hadbeen handled through the League, there developed more andmore a tendency to handle such affairs outside the League:Spain, for instance, in part, and Czechoslovakia entirely.Nevertheless, there still remained many points of directcontact and indirect effect.

China: The Chinese situation, which the year previouslythe League had referred to the Nine-Power Conference inBrussels in the hope of fuller American cooperation, returnedto the League during 1938 as the only international agencydealing .with it. The Chinese utilised the League once againas . an international forum to have the other Powers attestJapanese aggression and to spur those Powers to a fullerrealisation of a situation which they seemed disposed to forget.The League, while not formally recommending it, authorisedapplication of Article 16 by any State so desiring, and urged

- 16 -

that nothing be done to impede, but rather whateverpossible to assist, Chinese self-defence 1. This policy ~

while not formally commented upon by the United States,was, nevertheless, within the spirit of views previouslyexpressed by it either in connection with League recommend­ations or at the Brussels Conference. In the same way, the$ 25,000,000 American credit to China, while quite independentof this Resolution, was again very much within its spirit.

One precise action of a humanitarian nature which theLeague took during the year had direct and effective Americancooperation. The previous year, in view of the danger ofepidemics in China resulting from the Sino-Japanese conflict,the Assembly had voted a credit of 2,000,000 Swiss francs ,the largest sum it had ever voted for relief work, to financea scheme of medical assistance and anti-epidemic work. Asa result, three medical groups had been sent out under French,Swiss and British doctors to cooperate with the Chineseauthorities and to include a foreign epidemic commissioner,a foreign bacteriologist, a foreign sanitary engineer, a mobileprophylactic unit with a foreign doctor, two cars, an ambulance,some ten light .lorries, a qualified mechanic, chauffeurs, andsubordinate staff, with the necessary stores and equipment. 2

During July, in view of an epidemic spreading very rapidlyin the Central, Western and South-Western provinces of China,the Chinese Sanitary Administration had appealed to theLeague "for an extra six million doses of vaccine. 3 This appeal,which was communicated by the League to 1\11'. HowardBucknell, American Consul in Geneva, was immediatelyforwarded to Washingtori, as to other Governments, and onJuly 13th the State Department issued a communique to theeffect that c e officials of the United States Public Health Servicereported that information in their possession confirmed theLeague's estimate of the seriousness of the present need insouthwest China... Within 2 hours the Red Cross had placedorders with American manufacturers for one million cubiccentimeters of cholera vaccine, estimated to be the equivalent

1 L~o.N., O.J., 1938, pp. 878 et seq .. 2L.o.N., Monthly Summary, Vol. XVIII, No.1, p. 19.

B L.o.N., Information Section, communique No 8571.

- 17 -

of three million doses". 1 This donation, together with thoseof other Governments brought a total supply of over eightmillion doses. Subsequently, the Council Committee forTechnical Collaboration with China, on which the UnitedStates was represented as usual by Mr. Bucknell as observer,recommended the continuance of the 2,000,000 franc credit forthe general work of technical assistance to China for 1939. 2

Spain: While the Spanish sit uat ion was handled in largepart by the non-Intervention Committee in London, theMadrid Government, still holding its seat in ·the LeagueCouncil, repeatedly put its case before League bodies and broughtabout two actions of direct American interest. The first wasthe despatch of a military commission to Government territoryto attest the withdrawal of all foreign volunteers. An American,Mr. Noel Field of the League Secretariat served as its assistantsecretary, and several hundred American volunteers wereamongst those whose withdrawal was attested. 3 The secondwas the dispatch to Government . Spain of .a mission inconnection with food for the civilian population, resulting ina report of appalling conditions, which was transmitted to theUnited States and was used by the Red Cross and the Friends'Service Committee in their valiant attempts to meet the crisis. <1

Abyssinia: The Abyssinian dispute, where American andLeague policies had previously greatly reacted one on theother, with a definite identity of principle, though a differenceof method, re-echoed both in Geneva and Washington during1938. The United States, original author in the Manchuriandispute of the policy of non-recognition of territorial changeseffected by force, had, like the Members of the League, appliedthis policy to .Aby ssinia . During 1938, however, many LeagueStates abandoned this policy and on May 12th, Members ofthe Council stated that they no longer felt bound by theirprevious decision . 5 Secretary of State Hull was questioned the

1 Department of State, Press Releases, Vol. XIX, N o. 459, p. 37.2 L.o.N., O.J., 1938, pp. 862-63, 1112-13.3 Ibid., 1938, pp. 882 et seq. ; 1939, p. 59.4 Ibid., 1938, pp. 875, 1147 et seq.; 1939, p. 102.5 Ibid., 1938 pp. 333 et seq.

- 18 -

same day at his Press Conference as to the effect of this actionon American policy and announced that that policy remained"absolutely unchanged". He added that " on July . 16th,last year, I gave an outline of the basic and fundamentalprinciples and policies deemed necessary for the maintenanceof any satisfactory structure of international order and normaland peaceful relations between nations", and that theGovernment had "not deviated" and did not .intend "todeviate from any of these principles and policies". 1

Czechoslovakia: The Czechoslovak crisis, the gravest sincethe World War, though occurring in the midst of the Assembly,was handled by emergency measures entirely outside the Leagueand on a very different basis. Nevertheless, as the issue ofwar or peace was hanging in the balance, the Assembly passeda special Resolution stressing the grave anxiety of the 49 Statespresent, urging a settlement by peaceful means, and expressingthe earnest hope that no Government would attempt to imposea settlement by force. At the same time, profoundly impressedas all the Delegates were with the stern appeals issued byPresident Roosevelt, they took the unusual action of concludingthe Resolution with the statement that the Assembly« welcomes with great satisfaction the action taken by thePresident of the United States of America and fully associatesitself with the spirit which inspired it. " 2

Latin-America: The triangular relationship between theLeague of Nations, the Latin-American States and the UnitedStates entered a somewhat new phase during 1938. Recentevents and tendencies had, indeed, created a preoccupationunparallelled since the promulgation of the Monroe Doctrineover a century before.

In previous years the League and the United States hadsometimes been represented as having different policies andviews and even of ' being in active opposition to one anotherin Latin-America. More recently, however, it had becomeclear that their mutual interests were Ifar more identical than

1 Department of State, Press Releases, Vol. XVIII, No. 450,p. 576.

2 L.o.N., O.J. Special Supplement, No. 183, pp. 94, 95.

- 19

antagonistic, that they stood for very much the same objectives,and were opposed by very much the same forces. Moreover, aconsiderable shift of influence as between the two had takenplace. American influence, which sometimes had been feared,began to grow as a result of the Good Neighbour Policy andthe danger from Europe, while League influence, whichsometimes had been represented as a counterpoise, declinedfor the same reasons. The Latin-American States, instead ofbalancing between the United States and Europe andmaintaining an active position at Geneva, tended to withdrawsomewhat from Europe and to give greater confidence totheir Northern neighbour. At the same time the Leagueappeared less as a barrier to the United States Latin-Americanrelations than it had previously seemed to be. A small technicalLeague mission which travelled throughout the Latin­American States during the summer made a point of stoppingin Washington, where it was received with every courtesy bythe American authorities.

The Conference of American States at Lima, to which theUnited States sent a strong delegation headed by Secretaryof State Hull, brought this situation very much into theforeground. The principal question on the agenda wasundoubtedly that of the organisation of peace in the Americas,par t icularly against outside aggression. Specific proposals hadbeen m ade for an American League of Nations, for an Inter­American Court of Justice, for consultation in case ofemergency , and for many of the other objectives so well knownin Geneva, care being taken to represent them not asantagonistic but as complementary or perhaps parallel witht he more universal efforts at Geneva. Considerable oppositiondeveloped, however, particularly from the Argentine, to anynew form of organisation, partly because of the League angle.This more ambitious part of the programme was, consequently,dropped, and the more limited resolutions on the preservationof peace, consultation and the like, closely followed, insofar asthey went, similar resolutions under discussion in Geneva foryears.

A forward step was taken, however, in laying the groundworkfor closer relations between the Pan-American Union andinternational bodies in other parts of the world. This question

20 -

h ad first arisen at previous Conferences in con nection withobservers sent by the League of Nations. On one occasion theUnited States Delegation had opposed the presence of suchobservers and on anot her , on which such observers had been

. invited by the convening Government, difficulties had againarisen. T he general question of the Union's relationship toother int ernational agencies had consequently been put understudy by a special Committee which reported in detail to t heLima Conference. The situation was thus described in apamphlet on t he Lima Conference by Mr Walter W. van Kirk,Director of the National Peace Conference 1.

" There was a time when the activities of non-Am ericaninternational organizat ions were regarded by many people inthis country as falling altogether outside the sco pe and evenbeyond the concern of the Pan-American Movement .Happily this day is past. The United States has itself becomea member of the International Labor Office. Moreov er t h iscountry welcomed and even cooperated with the League'shandling of the Leticia dispute between Peru and Colombia.Somewhat later, the United States warmly applauded theefforts of the League to bring to an end the Chaco war . Asa matter of regular procedure the Pan-American Union eachmonth furnishes the I.L.O . with data relative to laborconditions in the Republics of America. Efforts are nowbeing made to integrate the work of t he League's Instit uteof Intellectual Cooperation with the cultural and int ellect ualexchange program within this Hemisphere. The P an­American Sanitary Bureau is a member of the InternationalHealth Section of the League of Nations. '

The Buenos Aires Conference in 1936 asked the P an­American Union to study ways and m ea ns of coordinatingthe program and policies of the International Conferenceof Am erican States "with organizations of similar purposein this and ot her continents... " The Lima Conference,accordingly, recommended that the Pan-American Unionand its related bodies" cooperate with international bodi esin other parts of the world, within the limits imposed bytheir organic statutes and without affecting the integrityof the international organization of t he twenty-one AmericanRepublics" . It was also recom m ended "to coordinate theinvestigations they may carryon in the fields of economic,

1 W alter W. van Kirk, The Lima Conference, New Y or k , 19;i9,pp. 31, 32.

- 21 -

social , cultural and juridical activity." The GoverningBoard of t h e Pan-American Union was asked to adoptmeasures deem ed necessary for the greatest possible develop­ment of t hese cooperative relations."

111andaies : The situation of the mandated territories inAsia Minor, Af rica and · Oceania entrusted by the PeaceConference t o the general oversight of the League, became ofincreasing imp or t ance t o t he United States as the worldsituation began t o change. The American Government,

.t hough not participating in the mandates work, had ,never t heless , always claimed juridical rights regardingmandated territ or ies because of its participation in the warwhich created them . It had taken a strong position towards theLeague of Nations in 1920 and had made diplomatic demarcheswith indi vi d ual Governments sin ce. By 1938, however, thesituation had changed greatly. Palestine and Syria weresub ject s of wi de discussion , the former on account .of theJ ewish National H orne and t h e latter in view of a possiblesuppression of the mandate. The African territories hadbecome of gre at interest in view of Germany's demands fortheir re t urn and their propinquity to Latin-America. TheP acific Is lands mandated to J apan became even moreprominent with reports of their fortification and theconsideration of the fortification of the Guam . While theGovernment followed these v arious cases closely ; 'it announceda formal demarch e with Great Britain in connection withP alest ine. On October 14th, the State Department recalleda previous assura nce by Great Britain that it would keep theU nited States " fully informed of any proposals which maybe made to the Council of the League of Nations for t hemodification of the Palestine Mandate", and concluded thatthe Government would take « all necessary measures for theprotection of America n rights and interests in Palestine. " 1

Disarmament : The League's disarmament work, in whichthe United Stat es had t aken a very large part, particularlyat t he tim e of the World Conference in 1932, came during

1 Department of State, Press Releases, Vol. X IX, No . 472 , p. 261.

- 22 -

1938 to the most inactive period it had had since the end of theWorld War. With the world's armaments expenditure passingthe colossal figure of $ 18,000,000,000 and the American figuresalone passing $ 1,000,000,000, and with war raging in Chinaand Spain and threatened in Eastern Europe, the machinerybuilt up at such pains barely turned in 1938. The ThirdCommittee of the Assembly held a meeting during the Munichcrisis which could only be perfunctory, 1 while the Bureau ofthe Disarmament Conference, of which the United States is amember, remained adjourned inter alia as a result of thatcrisis. 2 The most that could be done was the publication ofcertain regular or special documerrts. The Armaments YearBook came out as usual, giving full data on the military, navaland air establishments of most countries in the world, includinga large section furnished by the United States Government. 3

Other communications or statements from the United Stateswere also published on subjects such as the national controlof the manufacture of and trade in arms, 4 the publicity ofNational Defence Expenditure;> and the London NavalTreaties. 6 Secretary Hull, while repeatedly stressing thewillingness of the United States to join in any hopeful effortfor disarmament, felt that C C where there is no basis foragreement, the convening of a [Naval Disarmament] Conferencewhich would become a platform for airing national grievanceswould merely exacerbate public opinion in the variouscountries and harm, rather than help, the cause of peace. "7

TECHNICAL

While the League's wider political work was considerablyless active during 1938 than in previous years, its technicalwork and its general task of organising international cooperation

] L.a.N., O.J. Special Stipplemenl, No. 186.2 Ibid., 1938, p. 876.3 L.o.N. Document C.206.M.112.1938.IX.4 Ibid., Conf.D.183, pp. 2-4 ; 184, pp. 191 ei seq... 1bid., Conf. D.194, p. 5.6 Ibid., Conf. D. 190.7 Department of State, Press Releases, Vol. XVIII, No. 445,

p.448.

- 23-

was much less affected by the world crisis around it. In thetwo decades since the launching of the League, there had beenbuilt up a series of technical and non-political activities, thescope of which, as the Assembly later described it, « is insome cases world-wide". 1 Indeed, one of the contributionswhich the League has undoubtedly made to internationallife has been to create a single centre around which could begrouped not only a few weak and isolated official internationalmovements existing before the war, but even more a host ofnew activities which have since come upon the internationalscene but which probably would not have been strong enoughto stand by themselves.

The League's economic and financial work had developed,entirely apart from three major world conferences, into whatwas in effect an international clearing house for economic andfinancial questions, with permanent specialised committeeson many technical subjects, a most useful statistical serviceperforming a wholly new function of collecting and analysinginternational data, and a series of publications in wide use bygovernn1ents, business houses, and libraries. The activitiesin communications and transit had similarly created anorganisation which made it possible to group together manytechnical questions of international interest which had hadlittle means of expression or study heretofore and to developa new extension of law in 'this wide domain. The League'shealth work had opened up avenues of cooperation in thisvital human interest which had never been available before,whether in creating new international standards for varioustypes of sera, investigating special diseases such as malaria,syphilis, and ·others, aiding in emergencies such as in Chinaand Spain, advancing education through the exchange ofmedical officers, or going into new social problems such asnutrition, rural hygiene, and housing. Other scattered pre-waractivities such as the antidrug work had been given a solidbasis of law and personnel, while still others wholly ' new topermanent official international action, such as child welfare,intellectual cooperation, and abolition of prostitution hadbeen launched.

1 L.o.N., O.J, Special Supplement, No. IS:>, p. 142.

- 24-

During the League's first twenty years these variousactivities, which had been embryonic or non-existent in 1920,tended more and more to assume their own autonomous anddistinct personality. They built up on the one hand their ownspecial laws and conventions and on the other their particularpersonnel and mechanism of administration. In the case ofopium, for instance, where there had existed in 1919 but oneimprecise convention with few signatories and no machineryof enforcement, there had by 1938 been added three moreconventions with almost world-wide participation and a seriesof enforcement agencies including the central bodies of theLeague: Assembly, Council and Secretariat, the OpiumAdvisory Committee, the Central Opium Board, and theSupervisory Body.

Non-Member States, particularly the United States, hadcooperated largely in these various activities and had helpedto give them their world-wide status. The League, withoutelaborating any general policy in the matter, had in practiceinvited such States freely and spontaneously to cooperate inthese activities as they arose one after another, and non­Member States had freely accepted, without raising anyquestion as to the League itself, until the German, Italianand Japanese governments assumed their more intransigeantattitude. The results of such collaboration had been beneficialall around : to the League in 'the execution of its work and itseffort for universality, even if only on limited subjects, and tothe various States in their efforts for social advancement.

During 1938, however, a step was taken to formalise and,if possible, to extend this cooperation. Two elementscontributed to this action: on the one hand, ViscountCranborne's report on the collaboration between the Leagueand non-member States 1, which gave an excellent picture ofthe situation, and, on the other, the frequently expressedinterest in this work in circles outside the League, particularlyin the United States. Accordingly, the British delegation tothe Assembly proposed that, while it "had unfortunatelybecome increasingly clear that the realisation of universalmembership was still far from being attained and that theLeague must for the present rest content with developing its

1 L.a.N. Document C.368.M.250.1937.VII.

25 -

means of co-operation with non-members", "the views ofnon-members themselves should be sought" as a preliminarystep to this end. 1 A resolution, unanirnously adopted by theAssembly, reaffirmed with approval the policy . heretoforeadopted of inviting the collaboration of non-member St ates intechnical work, not ed with satisfaction the favourable responseto such invitations, expressed the view that it was in theuniversal interest that such collaboration be developed, andconcluded "that any comment or suggestion for the widerdevelopment of such technical and non-political collaborationwhich non-member States may care to make would be welcomedby the Members of the League. . . " 2 This res olution,constituting the first, even if limited, approach by the Leagueto non-Member St at es , was formally transmitted to theUnited States Government, as to other non-Member States, inOctober, and was under study in the State Department andother interested branches of the Government as the yearclosed.

The answer of the United States Government ' to thiscommunication, d ated February 2, 1939, is of such importancethat it deserves t o be quoted :

""The United States Government notes with interest

the Assembly's reaffirmation of the policy of the League toinvite the coll aboration of non-Member States in its technicaland non-political ac t ivities. It shares the Assembly'ssatisfaction that such collaboration has steadily increasedand the Assembly's belief that it is in the universal interestthat such collaboration be contin ued and further developed.

« The growing complexity of the modern world has formany years made inc reasingly clear the need for intelligentco-ordination of va rious activities, and the pooling ofinformation and experience in many fields . The InternationalPostal Union, the International Institute of Agriculture, theInternational Office of P ublic Health, and other internationalorganisations, we re creat ed to meet this need in specificfields before the creation of the League and continue tocarry out their tasks. The League, however, has beenresponsible for the development of mutual exchange and

1 L.o.N. Document A.76.1938.VII, in L.o .N., 0 ..1. Spec ialSupplement, No. 189, p . 106.

2 Ibid., Special Supplement, No. 183, pp. 99, 142 .

- 26-

. discussion of ideas and methods to a greater extent and inmore fields of humanitarian and scientific endeavour thanany other organisation in history. The United StatesGovernment is keenly aware of the value of this type ofgeneral interchange and desires to see it extended.

"Encouraging as has been the progress already made,much remains to be done for the promotion of human welfarein health, social, economic and financial fields. This.Governm ent regards each sound step forward in thesefields as a step toward the establishment of that national.and international order which it believes is essential to realpeace.

c· The United States Government looks forward to thedevelopment and expansion of the League's machinery fordealing with the problems in those fields and to theparticipation by all nations in active efforts to solve them.It would not be appropriate for it to make specific suggestionsfor the development of the League's activities, but it willfollow with interest the League's efforts to meet moreadequately problems relating to the health, humanitarian,and economic phases of human activities. It will continueto collaborate in those activities and will consider in asympathetic spirit means of making its collaboration moreeffective." 1

Economics, finance, transit: American cooperationin the League's work in economics, finance and transit, whichbegan at the very outset with the Brussels Financial Conferencein 1920, continued through the two World EconomicConferences in 1927 and 1933 and penetrated into most of thepermanent technical committees, had by the close of thetwenty year period reached perhaps its IUOSt complete andsympathetic point. With most capable experts present innearly all League Committees in these fields and with aneffective interchange of information back and forth, it hadbecome wholly clear by the end of 1938 that the United Statesand the League were seeking the same objectives, though bydifferent approaches. The former had concentrated largelyon its bi-lateral method of direct trade treaties, capping itsefforts during the year with the Anglo-American Agreement, 2

while the League, unable in the present supernationalism to

1 L.o.N. Document C.77.l\JI.37.1939.VII.2 Department of State, Press Releases, Vol. XIX, No. 457,

Supplement A.

27 -

resume multilateral efforts such as the V\'orld Economic­Conference, concentrated, with much American assistance,.on technical studies and analyses. Though the United States.was not formally represented in the more authoritative Leaguebodies, its influence was largely felt elsewhere throughoutthis branch of League work, which indeed was very muchalong the lines which American policy was following.

The question as to how best secure the full cooperation ofall interested elements was under discussion in both Leagueand American circles. A" Conference on World EconomicCooperation", which brought together in Washington inMarch under the auspices of the National Peace Conference­several hundred of the Iorernost economists of the UnitedStates, urged a considerable expansion of this branch of Leaguework. Its report stated: 1

"We express our admiration for the extremely abletechnical work that has been done on world economicproblems in the past, and is still being done, by the economicservices of the League of Nations. This work is invaluableto the world. We endorse the active participation of theUnited States in the economic work of the League and urgethat it be continued.

"We suggest that the present economic work of theLeague and the expanded functions just proposed be placedunder the control of an autonomous organisation responsibleto a governing body representing not only Governments butcommercial and industrial groups, somewhat on the modelof the International Labor Organisation with its labor andemployer members . .. It should be an independentorganisation, open to the membership of nations unwillingto assume the political obligations of the League. The UnitedStates should participate fully, as its great national interestin world economic cooperation would require."

A League Committee previously set up to consider suchquestions of organisation did not feel it expedient at the momentto go this far. But it took a number of steps calculated toincrease the effectiveness of the Economic and FinancialOrganisation and to improve the collaboration with non­Member nations. 2

1 Conference on World Economic Coop eration published by­National Peace Conference, New York, 1938, pp. 27, 30.

2 L.o.N. Document A.16.1938.II.

- 28-

Meanwhile, in practice, the steady progress t owards fuller'Contacts between the United States and the League continued .T he League gave increasing attention to American matters,both in the formation of its Committees and in the preparationof its publications. The various reports and analyses issuedin 1938 contained many sections describing developments andpolicies across the Atlantic, as must inevitably h ave been thecase with respect to the world's largest single economic unit.Whether it were a debate in the Assembly, a general statementby the Economic Committee, or a more specialised publication'on Raw Materials, Exchange Control, or the World EconomicSurvey, much material of an objective and impartial natureis to be found dealing with the American aspects of the worldproblem.

One sweeping endorsement of American policy stood outall t h e m ore interestingly because of its unusual character.As a rule, League bodies scrupulously refrain from expressingopinions on the policies of individual nations; nevertheless,th e Second Committ ee of the Assem bly , acting on the reportof Mr . Bruce of Australia , gave a most unqualified approvalto Secretary Hull's trade p olicies. In speaking of his efforts

·" t o revive international trade through reciprocal trade agree­m ent s" , the Committee went so far as t o say :

('Mr . Hull has applied such untiring good-will and realismto this task that already his work appears as one of the m ostp owerful forces on t he side of economic sanity in the worldto-day ." 1

T he various League technical committees made what contri­b ution towards this same world economic sanity they could int he p resent world d isorganisation. In this they were stronglyaided by an effective group of Americans who, while servingindividually, were either Government officials, or known tohav e t h e Government's confidence. This day-to-day .coope­ration, indeed, was perhaps the most effective yet attained,though the United States was not represented in the Assembly·0 1' Cou n cil discussions and Americans were not · present on

1 L .o.N., Document A.64.1938.II.B. , in L .o.N. , 0 ..1. Specia l.S upp lem en i , No. 185, p . 63 .

- 29 -

certain other Committces of interest , such as those on Vete­rinary matters, on Raising the Standard of Living, or on theBehaviour of Tax Systems during the resent crisis.

Mr . Henry F. Grady, Vice-Chairman of the Tariff Commission ,.cont inue d as a member of the Economic Committee, whichserves as a kind of general sta ff for the League's economicwork. He attended its 48t h session in July, taking an active'part in the deliberations. 1 He had also taken part in thet hree sessions of the Raw Materials 'Colll m it t ee held in 1937,_set up to report on a question which had long been a subj ectof world controversy. The Economic Committee subsequentlyformulated certains principles based on its Report 2, whichwere transmitted to all Governments, including the American..The latter replied in June that it had studied these principles."with a great deal of interest", and "will be prepared to givet he m ost sympathetic consideration to whatever action m aybe pr op osed ." It added, however, that the suggestions concern-·ing international regulation schemes for raw materials, seem edto fall short '.'of supplying the assurances that should beextended to the consumers of raw materials regulated b ysuch schemes", and hence to require considerably morestudy. 3

Mr. Dana Durand, member of the Tariff Commission, andone of the creators of the League's Statistical Committee,attended its seventh session in July, which made further progress.towards world uniformity in statistics regarding the gainfully­occupied population, housing, building, international trade,industrial production, balance of payments, and the like. 4 ·

The Government also replied to a League questionnaire on t hefirst-named subject. The prevention or mitigation of economic'depressions was another question which called forth Americancooperat ion . Early in 1938, the Council created a special.D elegation on the subject, naming Mr . W.W. Riefler as amember. 5 'T he Delegation drew up a questionnaire to Govern-

1 L.o.N., O.J., 1938, p p. 1088 el seq.2 I bid., pp. 175 et seq.3 Ibid ., p . 1103.4 Ib id., pp. 891 et seq.5 I bid. , pp. 108-09.

- 30 -

.m ents requesting a brief statement of the measures adoptedin recent years for reviving economic activity and of anymeasures of a more permanent character adopted to preventor mitigate depressions in the future. 1 The American Govern­ment transmitted a fifty-page reply, which, with other Govern­rnent replies, was under study by the Delegation at the end'of the year.

Echoes were also heard of other work initiated by theLeague but given a somewhat independent character. InApril, the International Sugar Council, one of the positive-results of the World Economic Conference, met in London witha delegation representing both the United States and thePhilippines. 2 In May the International Agreement for theRegulation of Whaling supplementary to the Geneva Conven­tion of 1931, came into force, 3 and the first case under it in.a n American Court came in December with the prosecutionof the whaler "Frango" for slaughtering 900 whales offAustralia. 4

In the more strictly financial field, American expert coope­ration was more complete than of recent years, when theAmerican member sometimes could not attend. Mr. T. JeffersonCoolidge, former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury, took.his place on the Financial Committee, to which he had been.a p p oirrt ed some time before. He was present at the 66thsession in July, when a report was approved entitled "Some"Observations on the General Situation" 5 and when also theloans to Bulgaria and Hungaria were under examination. 6

Mr. W.'V. Riefler replaced him at the December session, whenthe Committee dealt with the Bulgarian situation and withagricultural credits and insurance, monetary and credit policyin agricultural countries, and medium-term industrial credits 7.

1 Ct. L.o.N. Document C.L.18.1938.II.A.2 Department of State, Press Releases, Vol. XVIII, No. 446,

:p. 480.3 Ibid., No. 451, pp. 587-88... New York Times, December 7th, 1938.5 L.o.N. Document C.227.M.129.1938.II.A.6 L.o.N., O.J., 1938, pp. 887 et seq.<tua., 1939, pp. 58,117.

-31-

Mr. Riefler was also appointed by the Council to a Sub­Commit t ee of Statistical Experts, which met towards the endof the year to study the standardisation of banking and capitalformation statistics.

Mr . Mitchel B. Carroll, formerly of the Commerce Depart­m ent and the Treasury and for years one of the most activeexperts in the League's work on fiscal matters and doubletaxation, was elected Chairman of the Fiscal Committee, whichdevoted its October session t o a detailed study of fiscal evasion,principles of taxation, and ' d ouble taxation. 1 The League'had previously transmitted to the American Government, asto other Governments, a detailed questionnaire on FiscalEvasion, which brought from Washington a helpful 24-pagereply describing the methods used in the United States toprevent such evasion.

The League's Hungarian Reconstruction Plan, which hadhad an appreciable American interest from its start in 1924,came to a successful conclusion in 1938. Part of the loan onwhich it had been based had been placed in the United States;an American, Mr. Jeremiah Smith, had served as the League'sCommissioner for many years; and another American, Mr.Royall Tyler, had succeeded him as representative of theFinancial Commitee, when in 1931 it had proved possible tosimplify the control. During 1938, the situation had developedso favourably that it proved p ossible to terminate the controlcompletely. Mr. Tyler attended the Council session which tookthis action, being one of a small number of Americans whohave sat with the Council. 2 The Rapporteur stated that "thespecial experience and vigilant and careful judgment that Mr.Tyler has brought to the execution of the task . . . haverendered his unremitting and unselfish labours of signal valueto all concerned", and the Council formally paid tribute tohis exceptional merits, Mr. Tyler on his side expressed theview that "the results which had been attained could nothave been achieved without the guidance that had been givento Hungary by the Financial Organisation of the League." II

1 L.O.N., O.J., 1939, pp. 59, 121.2 Ibid., 1938, pp. 77-79.

- 32 -

Subsequently, he was engaged as an expert attached to theLeague's financial and economic organisation.

Another form of American collaboration was continuedduring 1938 when the Rockefeller Foundation renewed for aperiod of four years the grant if had previously made towardsthe analytical research work of the Financial Section andEconomic Intelligence Service. The League had proved ablethrough its various services to bring together world economicand financial data which had never been adequately assembledbefore and had done so in a wholly impartial and scientificmanner. As this work was somewhat outside .of and corollaryto the regular formal work, the donation of 350,000 Swissfrancs (roughly $75,000), was accepted with appreciation bythe Council at its January session 1.

The League's work in Communications and Transit, whichhad led to considerable American cooperation in previous years,particularly as regards the buoyage and lighting of coasts, thepollution of sea waters, and the methods of tonnage measure­ment, provided no occasion for direct cooperation during 1938beyond a bare interchange of information on road accidentswith the Central Statistical Board. Of considerable possiblefuture interest, however, was the quite accidental simultaneousapproval in both Geneva and Washington of new or extendedagencies for cooperation in this field. In Geneva, the Leaguedefinitively adopted the new Statute for the Organisationfor Communications and Transit, which contains provisionspermitting the . full membership of States non-Members 2 "

while in Washington the State Department created the Divisionof International Communications ·3 . This double action openedthe possibility of much more effective cooperation betweenthe United States and the League in this new field than hadbeen possible heretofore.

1 L.o.N., O.J., 1938 , p. 75.2 Ibid. , pp. 112, 218 et seq.3 Dep artment of State, Press Releases, Vol. XIX, No. 464,.

pp. 127-28.

- 33 -

SOCIAL

Danqerous drugs: The 1110st complete cooperat ion effect edin any branch of international interest between the UnitedStates and the League of Nat ions lay in the efforts to combatthe traffic in dangerous drugs, which h ad been an activeAmerican interest for the past quarter century. Not only didAmerican official representatives and individual exper t s takepart in ' all the L eague's specialised work in t his field, b uttwo general statements were made giving the fullest possibleexposition of the Government's viewpoint. In t he first Mr.Stuart J. Fuller, Assistant Chief of the Division of Far EasternAffairs of the State Department, said in a speech on F ebruary2nd , in Washington:

" As one who attends the Opium Advisory Committ eeunder instruction from his Government to collaborate inevery possible way with the efforts of that Committee tocombat the menace of narcotic drug addiction, I ventureto urge you to give to this agency of the _cooperative inter­national effort the same measure of support which yourGovernment gives, and which I am sure that you will all ,upon reflection, agree that it fully deserves, whatever maybe your views in regard to the League of Nations." 1

Previously Mr. Fuller had described -this Committee as" t he only official international body established to supplementt he individual efforts of Governments to suppress the illicittraffic in narcotic drugs of all kinds and to check up the wayin which governments fulfill their obligations under the Con­vent ions . . . The Opium Advisory Committee affords theone forum in the world where the problem of t he illicit trafficin narcotic drugs can be and is publicly discussed and whereany government whose territory has been used as a base forthe illicit traffic may without fear or favor be publicly askedt o account for its stewardship." 2

Mr . Fuller bore this out fully at the annual meeting of theCom mit t ee in June, when he played a leading part, as usual ,as representative of the United States. He was v ery outspoken

1 D epartment of State, Press Releases, Vol. 'X V I I I , N o. 436,p.213.

2 Ibid ., p. 211.

- 34

regarding the situation in the Far East, stating that theGovernment general of Chosen was openly aiding and abettingthe traffic, that the regime in Manchuria and J ehol was exploi­ting it for profit, and that in parts of China under Japanesecontrol, the situation is worse than ever, while clandestinemanufacture has extended "beyond the wildest drearns ofits promoters." 1 This declaration brought a detailed replyfrom the Japanese Government and some time later, whenJapan ceased all 'cont act with the League, she also terminatedher representation on the Committee. In the same way,M·r. Fuller attacked abuses in other parts of the world, directingan embarrassing spotlight of publicity to them which in manycases proved effective. Mr. Fuller's cooperation was very far,however, from being merely critical, as he served as Chairmanof two sub-committees, namely on drug seizures and on Indianhemp, made a valuable contribution on behalf of the UnitedStates Public I-Iealth Service to the study of the nature andtreatment of drug addiction and was active in plans for limitingthe culture of the opium poppy and the production of rawopium.

The second official American statement came in connectionwith the invitation by the League Council to submit names ofcandidates for membership in the Permanent Central OpiumBoard and to name a representative "who will in conjunctionwith the Council of the League make the selection of the eightmembers who .are to succeed the outgoing Board". 2 OnSeptember 2, the State Department issued a statement which,after explaining the relationship of the Board both to theLeague and to the United States, stated:

t t As the largest legitimate consumer of opium and thecoca leaf and as the largest market for narcotic drugs in theillicit traffic, the United States is vitally interested in anddirectly affected by .the work of this Board.. "The American Government, with almost all the othergovernments of the world, has obligated itself to cooperateand has cooperated wholeheartedly with the 'Permanent

1 L.o.N. Document C.249.M.147.1938.XI, p. 56 (Minutes of theTwenty-Third Session of the Advisory Committee on Trafficin Opium and other Dangerous Drugs).

2 Department of State, Press Releases, Vol. XIX,.No. 466, p. 153.

- 35

Central Opium Board since its establishment in 1928,recognizing its independence and the fact that it is the onlyofficial international body which collects the statisticalinformation essential to control of the traffic in narcoticdrugs, a control which can be maintained only by inter­national cooperation." 1

The State Department then announced that it had acceptedb ot h invitations, transmitting to the League a list of candidatesfor the Board and naming its Minister at Berne, Hon. LelandH arrison , to sit with the Council when it acted as an electoral.b od y for the selection of the Board. 2 On August 19 the Lega­tion in Berne duly transmitted the list of seven candidatesproposed by the United States Government, with an expressionof " appreciat ion of the public spirit which has been shown byt he retiring members". 3 On September 30, Mr. Harrisonsat with the Council, which reappointed the original Americanm emb er of the Board, Mr. Herbert L. May, who had beenproposed by the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada,Aust ralia , New Zealand and Peru. 4 Mr. May took part in allfour meetings of the Board during 1938. 6

The United States also participated in the considerableday-t o-day anti-drug work of the League. In order to extendt he area for treaty control of dangerous drugs, the Governmentreplied affirmatively to a League questionnaire concerningthe extension of the 1931 Convention to include certain drugsl ik e paracodeine not now included. As in previous years, it sub­mit ted annual reports to the League on all aspects of the drugquest ion in the United States, as well as the Philippines, givinga very full account of seizures and of the methods used by drugsm ugglers . It also transmitted copies of all laws and treatieson the su bject.

H ealth: American cooperation in the League's health work ,which has been very extensive during years, continued activeduring 1938. While less governmental than that in the anti-

1 Department of Stat e, Press Releases, Vol. X IX, No . 4()6, p. 157.2 Doc. cit ..3 L .o.N . Document C.272.1938.XI.4 L.o.N. O.J. 1938, pp. 871, 873.s L .o.N. Document C.4 82.M.325.1938.X I.

-- 36 --

drug field, it called forth the support of practically all elementsinterested in these vitally important questions, including notonly the public health authorities but also various scientificagencies, the great Foundations, and many leading individualauthorities. Indeed, these various interests played freelyback and forth, illustrating a wholly new procedure in worldpublic health matters which has been introduced , since thecreation of the League.

. Former Surgeon-General Cumming continued as an activememberof the Health Committee at Geneva, attending the twomeetings in June and October and being named Vice-Presidentat the latter session. 1 He participated in practically all the dis­cussions but especially in those concerning the League's anti­epidemic work in China, the projected Conference on rural life inMexico, and the relations with the Pan-American SanitaryBureau.

Formal Governmental cooperation took place in connectionwith the League work on Nutrition 2. On May 11 the LeagueCouncil had approved a Report which said :

"The first meeting of representatives of national nutritioncommittees, held at Geneva in February 1937, derived greatbenefit from the participation of a representative of thecommittee recently set up in the United States of America.I have no doubt that the Council would appreciate therenewed participation of the United States Committee, ifthis is found possible, in the proposed meeting." 3

On September 26, the State Department announced that ithad accepted this invitation and that President Roosevelt hadapproved the designation of Miss Sybil Smith of the Inter­departmental Committee to Coordinate Health and Welfareactivities, to represent the United States. 4 Miss Smith tookan active part in the work, giving a detailed .descript ion of themethods used in the United States concerning the nutritionregime of rural families, particularly with a view to reorganisingfarms and farm life. 5

1 L.o.N., 0 ..1., 1938, pp. 841, 984 ; 1939, pp. 55, 106.2 For a general account see F.L. McDougall, Food and Wei/are,

Geneva Studies, Vol. IX, No.5., Geneva, 1938.3 L.o.N., 0 ..1., 1938, p. 317.4. Department of State, Press Releases, Vol. XIX, No. 470, p. 233.5 L.o.N., 0 ..1. 1939, p. 57.

- 37 -

A further less official cooperation took place wit h the Tech­nical Com m ission on N ut rit ion studying the extent to whichor dinary nutrition falls shor t of the standards that havebeen established . Dr. Lela Bocher, Chief of Foods and NutritionDivision, Bureau of Home Economics, of the Departmentof Agriculture, p articip ated in the August session. 1

TJ:1e United St ates also accepted the invitation t o t heConference on R ural L ife which had b een fixe d for MexicoCity in the aut umn, but it was deemed wise because of othermeetings to adj ou rn t his till later. The Public H ealth Servicein 'tVashington also remained in close contact and associationwith the League health authorities in Geneva, while thePhilippine Government remained a m ember of the Epid em ic­logical Bureau at Singapore.

Apar t from Government cooperation , Ameri can authoritiestook part in nearl y all the Leag ue 's expert unofficial meet ings .The International Hormones conference, which succeeded instandardising four new hormones in addition to the sex hormonespreviously standardised, was attended by Dr. Oscar Riddle ofthe Carnegie St at ion for Experimental E volution, Dr. P hilip E.Smith of Columbia, and Dr. R . W. Bat es of the Carnegie Instit ut eof Washington. 2 The Com mission on P hysical Educat ion , whichdrew up a series of recornmenclations and subjects for furtherresearch was at t en ded by Professor H. B. Dill, Director of theHarvard ·F at igue Lab orat ory . 3 A group of experts consultedon Health Indices for Rural Districts, to show the economic,social and health factors, included Dr. R. Atwater , E xecu tiveSecretary of the American Public I-Iealth Associat ion. 4 A groupof H ousing Experts to prepare a report for the coming Eur opeanConference on R ural Life, included Dr . H .A. Whittaker, of theUniversity of Min nesot a, 5 while preliminary suggestions for anInternational Institute of H ou sing were received from Americanex perts.

Soc ial : The U nited St ates continued during 1938 as " afull m ember" of the Commit tee on Social Questions, as, it

1 L .o.N., Motilhlij Summary , Vol. XV III, No.8, pp. 199, 200.~ 1 bid., p p . 198-99.3 '1bid., N o.7, p. 189.4 L .o. N ., O.J., 19 38 , p. 985 .;; L .o .N ., Montly S um m ary, Vol. XVIII, No. 12 , p . 31~~ .

- 38 -

asked in 1935 to be designated, after having .b een listed as1I 0 b ser ver " for 13 years. On April 4, the State Depart­ment announced the appointment of Miss Castendyck of theChildren's Bureau of the Department of Labor to represent theGovernment in substitution for Miss Katharine F. Lenroot,Chief of the Bureau, who was unable to attend. 1 Miss Casten­dyck took an active part in the deliberations, particularlyon questions such as the improvement of films, the placingof children with foster parents, and their protection againstdisasters such as fire, flood, and war. 2

The Government also continued its representation in theCommittee on Assistance to Indigent Foreigners. On January19, the State Department announced that President Roosevelthad appointed Mr. George L. Warren, Director of the Inter­national Migration Service, and Mr. Henry B. Hazard, Assistantto the Commissioner of Immigration and Naturalisation, asrepresentatives of the Government in an expert and advisorycapacity." The Committee found itself faced with such diver­gent views in the present world crisis that it concluded thatthe m ultilateral convention · originally contemplated wasunlikely to prove effective and a third draft was, therefore,prepared for the consideration of Governments to serve as abasis for either mult.ilateral or bilateral Conventions. -1

The usual correspondence and interchange on social problemsbetween Washington and Geneva continued during the year.On April 27, the State Department informed the League thatin its judgment the draft Convention previously circulated toGovernments for the suppression of the exploitation of othersafforded a satisfactory basis for the convocation of an inter­national Conference on this subject. Suggestions were alsocirculated from Geneva to the various nations including theUnited States, in connection with penal reform and assistanceto indigent foreigners, the legal aspect of illegitimacy and thelike.

1 Department of State, Press Releases, Vol. XVIII, 1 TO . 445,p. 455.

2 L .o.N., O.J., 1938, pp. 583, 586, 587.3 Department of State, Press Releases, Vol. XVIII, No. 4:34,

pp. 122, 123.4 L.o.N., o.r., 1938, pp. 316, 530-32.

- 39 -

A new question to reach the Committee stage in Leaguework was that of the Legal Status of Women, which hadfreq uent ly been discussed in the Assembly, particularly inview of pressure from both North and South American circles.On January 28, the Council appointed a Committee of sevenexperts, amongst whom it included Miss Dorothy Kenyon ,member of the New York Bar and legal adviser to a numberof national organisations, 1 who had been highly recommendedby 'b ot h national and international agencies. The Committeeheld its first meeting in April, drawing up a scheme of workfor the most extensive study of comparative law on the status ofwomen ever attempted. It took account of suggestions of madeby the representatives of international organisations of women ,including Miss Alice Paul, of the Women's Party, and requestedthe cooperation of the International Institute for t he Unifi­cation of Private Law, the International Institute of PublicLaw, and the International Bureau for the Unification of P enalLaw. 2

Refugees: It was in the most urgent social pr ob lem fort he world at large, namely that of refugees, that Am ericana nd League efforts seemed during 1938 to be least coordinated.The League had been occupied with various aspects of thisquestion ever since its origin. At the very outset, in 1920,Dr. Nansen had repatriated some 400,000 prisoners of warand shortly after, during the Greco-Turkish crisis, the Leaguehad organised the greatest interchange of populations inhistory, when 1,250,000 Greeks had been transferred fromAsia lVIinor to Greece and several hundred thousand T urksfrom Greece to Turkey. The League had created the NansenOffice for Refugees and the High Commissioner's Office forGerman Refugees, to which latter post it had appointedan American, Mr. James G. McDonald. For several years, theLeague had been considering how most effectively to organisethis work.

On March 24, in the midst of these discussions, the UnitedStates Government announced that it had' 'become so impressed

1 L.o.N., O.J., 1938, pp. 91, 92.2 L.o.N., Monthly Summary, Vol. XVIII, No. 4; pp. 87-89.

-- 40 -

with the urgency of the problem of political refugees that ithas inquired of a number of governments in Europe and inthis hemisphere whether they would be willing t o cooperatein setting up a special committee for the purpose of facilitatingthe emigration from Austria and presumably from Germanyof political refugees." 1 President Roosevelt proposed a Confe­rence to meet in Evian ; 2 Congress voted a special appro­priation; and an Advisory Committee on Political Refugeeswas created . 3

The League Committee was very uncertain how this wouldaffect the League's refugee work, but decided t o go on tenta ­tively with its plans. The Council' was inform ed in May thatthe Committee had taken care that its proposals "shouldnot prejudge, or hamper, any decisions which the Conferenceconvened by the Government of the United States of Americamight be led to take", and recommended that its Reportshould be transmitted cc for information" to the United States.The Council, itself also uncertain of the situation, acceptedthis viewpoint. 4 -

When the Conference met in July, Mr. Myron C. Taylor,chief American Delegate, expressed "the firm belief" of hisGovernment that the Conference and the League agencies, 'should be complementary and should work together t owardsa solution of the problem.. ." " As evidence" of his Government'sintentions in this respect, he proposed that the League repre­sentatives be invited to participate in the Conference. 5 Thatbody's final Report stated that, "recognising the value of thework of the existing refugee services of the League of Nationsand of the studies of migration made by the InternationalLabor Office", the new organisation which grew out of theConference should "co-operate fully" with those services. 6

The proceedings were formally communicated to the League,and the new Committee at its meeting in London invited the

1 Department of State, Press Releases, Vol. XVIII, No. 443,p . 411.

2 Ibid., No. 45 0, p. 575 .3 Ibid ., No. 451, p . 585.01 L.o.N., 0.,]., 1938, p. :~67.

i1 Department of State, Press Releases, Vol. XIX, No. 458, p . 20.6 L.o.N., 0 .,]., 1938, p . 677.

-41-

League High Commissioner to participate in any discussionson admission and settlement of refugees and on the work ofprivate organisations. 1 NIl'. George Rublee, an Americanserving as Director of the new organisation, entered into closecooperation with Sir Herbert Emerson', the League HighCommissioner. As the year closed and it became clear thatthe hopes of a favourable settlement with Germany were doomedto failure, it seemed that the reason for calling the EvianConference outside the League had ceased to exist and thatthere might henceforth be a tendency to return to a singleorganisation.

Apart from this new and rather dramatic move, the UnitedStates maintained a certain amount of cooperation in theLeague's specific refugee activities, as it had in previous years.Thus Mr. Howard Bucknell, Consul in Geneva, was appointedto attend as an observer the Intergovernmental Conferenceon Assistance to Refugees from Germany held in Geneva inFebruary. 2

Intellectual cooperation: The League's work)n the culturaldomain, launched at the first Assembly in 1920 and takingon ever wider form since, had an added American interestduring 1938, when the State Department, in recognition ofthe growing importance of such questions, announced on July27 the creation of a Division of Cultural Relations 3. This newofficial agency was exactly in line with the general movementon which the League had been working for years. Whileconcentrating at first on Latin-American problems, it was<hoped that the new Bureau would gradually expand to includeall other parts of the world in what has become a question ofuniversal interest.

T he Government was also represented in a Conferencecalled by the League to consider the effect which the closingby Italy of the International Cinematographic Institute atRome might have on the Convention for facilitating the inter-

1 L. o.N. Document A.54.1938.XII in O. J. Special Supplement,N o. 189 p. 85.

2 T he Convention drawn up at this Conference is to be found inL. o.N., O.J., 1938, pp. 269 et seq.

a Depart m en t of State, Press Releases, Vol. XIX, No. 461, p. 66.

- 42 -

national circulation of educational films, which had been signedon behalf of the United States on April 9, 1934.

On July 30, 1938, the American Legation in Berne informedthe League that the United States agreed to the Council'sproposal of a Conference to bring about the resumption ofthe operation of this Convention and stated that it would berepresented thereat. Mr. Curtis T. Everett, Consul at Geneva ,was appointed for the purpose and took part in the Conferencewhich met in September. An Agreement was signed entrustingto the International Committee on Intellectual Cooperation of theLeague the duties previously entrusted to the Rome Institute. 1

Another Conference on Intellectual Cooperation in whichthe United States was represented less directly was that inParis for the elaboration of the new Statute for the Instituteof Intellectual Cooperation. That agency had been createdin association with the League by an offer of the FrenchGovernment which largely financed it. During the years ithad been given more and more work and it became Clear thatit would be desirable to give it as solid and autonomous astatus as possible. Accordingly a Conference was called bythe French Government to which the United States accreditedMr. Maynard P. Barnes, First Secretary of the AmericanEmbassy in Paris, as observer. A new basis of organisationwas agreed upon which among other things will permit aconsiderable cooperation by States non-Members of theLeague. 2

Meanwhile unofficial American cooperation, which hadalways been large, continued active during 1938. At the Januarysession of the Council, a recommendation was made thatProfessor James T. Shotwell of Columbia, who had been a memberof the International Committee on Intellectual Cooperationfor the last five years, and who had made "a very valuablecontribution to its work, more particularly in the sphere of thesocial sciences and the study of international relations" shouldbe reappointed for another three years. The Council, in appro­ving this reappointment and that of Professor Gilbert Murray,

1 L.o.N., O.J. Special Supplement , No. 183, pp. 111 et seq.2 Societe des Nations, Cooperation Intellectuelle, Nos 93-94~

pp. 461 et seq ..

- 43 -

placed on record ((its grateful appreciation of the achievements.of two of the most devoted servants of the cause of intellectualco-operation". 1

At the annual meeting of this Committee in July, Mr. Waldo,Leland, Executive Secretary of the American Council of LearnedSocieties, replaced Dr. Shotwell, who was unable to be present. 2,

A considerable group of Americans attended the XIth sessionof the International Studies Conference at Prague in May,including Mr. Malcolm W. Davis of the Carnegie Endowment;Mr. Brooks Emeny of the Cleveland Foreign Affairs Council ,Mr. Halford L. Hoskins of the Fletcher School, lVIr. JohnB. Whitton of the Geneva Research Centre, and Mr. Tracy'B. Kittredge of the Rockefeller Foundation. 3 Four Americans,also took part in a Conference on Modern Theories of Physics.at Warsaw, including Prof. G. Gamow of George WashingtonUniversity and Professors S. Goudsmit, J. von Neumann ,and E.P. Wigner of Princeton. 4 Four other Americans took

. part in a Committee of Experts in June on the use of broad-­casting in the cause of peace, namely, Mr. Max Jordan of theNational Broadcasting Company, Mr. Edward Murrow ofthe Columbia Broadcasting Company, Mr. Tracy B. Kittredgeof the Rockefeller Foundation, and Mr. John B. Whitton ofthe Geneva Research Centre. 5 Finally, Mr. lVIalcolm Davis.attended a meeting of the Permanent Committee on Arts andLetters as substitute for Dr. Frederick Keppel, 6 and Miss.Rose Terlin an International Students' Conversation as repre-·sentative of the Universal Federation of Christian Students.Associations. 7

New York World's Fair: Final authorisation for and detailedorganisation of the League's Exhibit at the New York World's;Fair took place during 1938. The previous Assembly, not.

1 L .o.N., o.i.. 1938, p . 76.2 Ibid., p. 919.3 Societe des Nations, Cooperation l nielleciuelle, Nos 89-90,.

pp. 199 et seq., 234, 235.4 Ibid., pp. 235 et seq., 243.ij L.o.N., o.i., 1938, p. 973.{; Societe des Nations, Cooperation 1utellectuelle, Nos 93-94, p. 477 _

. 7 Ibid., Nos. 89-90, pp. 244 et seq.

-- 44 -

wishing t o lose the opportunity to accept the invitation con­veyed to it through the American Legation in Berne; hadtentatively opened a credit of 300,000 Swiss francs to be drawnagainst if the Supervisory Commission found the projectfeasible from the financial point of view and the Council foundit desirable from the general point of view. A League officialof American nationality, Mr. Noel Field, who happened t o bein the United States, had taken an option on a site, but fullerenquiries had shown that over three times the credit originallyvoted would be required . The Supervisory Committee had,after detailed consideration, decided that 1,000,000 francswould be necessary for an adequate Exhibit, subject, of course,to the Council's agreement on the general , principle. OnJanuary 28, the Council unanimously gave its approval tothe Exhibit 1 and , the detailed organisation of the first suchaction in League history began forthwith.

Another League official of American nationality, lVIr. ArthurSweetser, thereupon proceeded to New York, where he wasjoined by the Technical Adviser appointed for the conception 'and design of the building, the Reverend Father de Reviersde Mauny, who had designed and directed theVatican Pavillionat the Paris Exhibition in 1937. A contract was signed for thesiteand arrangements made with regard t o architects, contrac­tors and the like. Again, however, the budget estimates provedtoo low, and the Supervisory Committee decided to recommendan increase to 1,200,000 Swiss francs, or about $275,000, fourtimes the amount voted by the previous Assembly. Thoughthis was the darkest moment in the .European crisis, whichwas forcefully brought home by a "black-out" in Genevaitself on the day of the decision, the Assembly unanimouslyvoted the credit without 'discussion . 2

The first formal action on American soil came with thelaying of the cornerstone on the day before Armistice Day, adate specially chosen as the 20th anniversary of the termination,of the hostilities which had brought the League into being.On that occasion a League flag, specially designed for the Fair,was flown for the first time, and appeared regularly thereafter

I L.o.N., 0 ..1., 1938, p. 106.2 Ibid. Special Supplement , Nos 183, pp. 97, 139.

- 45 -

amongst the emblems of the official participants. Opportunitywas also afforded to a considerable audience to see the pivotalsite assigned to the League building on the axis of ContinentalAvenue, one of the principal thoroughfares in the officialarea. In welcoming the guests, Mr. Sweetser stressed "thatthe League is not some strange phenomenon created in thefirst .after-war flush but rather a natural and logical step inthe upward progress of mankind;" that it was "probablythe most ambitious ·political experiment ever attempted";that, despite obvious failures, it had also had great successes;and that unless the nations changed their present drift, "theworld will experience a holocaust worse than that which ended20 years ago". 1

Deputy Commissioner Charles :LVI. Spofford speaking for theUnited States World's Fair Commission, mentioned the"extensive and heretofore unparallelled work of the Leaguein the fields of public health, education and youth movement,control of narcotics, and of assistance to refugees, prisoners.of war, and other victims of international upheaval", andadded that "few of us realise to what extent our Government,though not a Member-State, has benefited from cooperativeventures sponsored by the League, as party to conventions.initiated under its auspices covering a wide variety of mattersof social and economic importance, ranging from disarmamentto the facilitation of international circulation of educationalmotion pictures". 1 Mr. Grover Whalen, President of the Fair,.said that "this pavillion will deal with the League's serviceto the five Continents as regards disarmament, public health,economics, and campaigns against white slavery and narco-­tics", 1 and added that the League was setting up an illustratedchapter pointing to a better World of Tomorrow emergingfrom the interdependence of men and the cooperation ofnations towards peace.

By the end of the year, the foundation and the steel structurehad been put in place in New York and the exterior of thebuilding practically completed. Meanwhile, the detailedconception of the individual exhibits was being worked out in

1 The League's First International Exhibition, published for theLeague of Nations Association Inc., New York, 1938.

- 46 -

Geneva, while their actual expression in artistic form wasentrusted to a group of artists in Paris who had had experience"in the Paris Exhibition. It was hoped to make the first ship­ments in early March and complete the installation by theend of April, when the Secretary-General, M. Avenol, plannedto go to New York for the official opening of the Fair and the-ex hibit and for official visits to Ottawa and Washington.

PERlVIANENT COURT OF INTERNATIONAL JUSTICE

J

The Permanent Court of International Justice, more widelyknown as the World Court, which had twice been the centreof national campaigns in the United States, was accordedpractically no mention in the United States during 1938.This was the more noticeable in that it is this agency of allinternational institutions which has been most distinctivelyAmerican. It was an American Secretary of State, Mr. ElihuRoot, who first proposed it at The Hague Conference in 1899 ;it was with cordial American support that provision for itscreation had been inserted in the League Covenant at Parisin 1919; it was Mr. Root who again at The Hague in 1920 foundwithin the new League mechanism a solution of the hithertoinsoluble question of how to choose a dozen judges from sixtyStates; and among America's foremost jurists Mr JohnBassett Moore, Mr. Charles Evans Hughes, Mr. Frank B.Kellogg, and Mr. Manley O. Hudson, have in successionaccepted membership on the Bench. Every President, Repu­blican or Democrat, since the creation of the Court, includingPresidents Coolidge, Harding, Hoover and Roosevelt, andevery Secretary of State, including Secretaries Hughes, Kellogg,Stimson and Hull, have publicly pressed for American mem­bership. .Once the Senate in 1926 by an overwhelming majorityof 75-17 ratified the Statute, but with reservations whichrequired elaboration abroad. Again it was Mr. Root who foundthe basis for two new Conventions, one specifically concernedwith American membership, which have now been ratifiedby many States. When in 1935 it looked as though the Senatewere going to take the same action, a sensational radio campaignand last-minute opposition developed which left the projectsix votes short of the two-thirds majority necessary forratification. Since then no official echo has been heard in theUnited States.

- 48 -

While the Government thus remained without formal contactwith the Court, American jurisprudence st ill had a certainpart in it. Judge Manley O. Hudson continued to sit on t heBench, serving in the Spring term but being kept away byillness in the fall. Moreover, the American members of thePermanent Court of Arbitration participated. in the electoralprocess for filling a vacancy on the Bench. The invitation wasconveyed to them, in accordance with the Statute, by i t heSecretary-General through the State Department, and onMarch 25 the American Legation in Berne transmitted thereply nominating Professor Victor Bruns for the vacancy 1 ~

This was the tenth election since the establishment of t heCourt, the American National Group having participated inall but the first. When the election was held in Septemberby the Council and the Assembly, the choice fell on Mr. Erichof Finland. '

Meanwhile, the Court, though not having the support ofits principal founder, continued its work in the Peace Palaceat The Haghe, a building donated by an American, Mr. AndrewCarnegie, the 25th anniversary of the opening of which wascelebrated on August 28. Its programme of cases, in previousyears rather long, tended to shorten as respect for law and legalsettlement throughout the world diminished. During the year,a case between Italy and France as to phosphates in Moroccowas presented to the Court, which, as it involved the in t er­pretation of the Act of Algeciras, to which the United Statesis a Party, was duly notified to the American Government,but the Court subsequently decided that it lacked jurisdictionin the matter. It also heard the preliminary arguments in t hecases between Belgium and Bulgaria, and Estonia and Lithuania,and at the end of the year had t hree cases on its docket,"

1 Cf. L.o.N. Document A.28.1938.V.2 L.o.N., Monthly S umm ar y . Vol XVII I , pp. 163-64 , 194, 325~

INTER! ATIONAL LABOUR ORGANISATION

In a year in which one political crisis has succeeded anotherwithout respite and a backward movement seems to haveturned the policy of nations away from international co­operation, the vital role played by the United States in theInternational Labour Organisation has increased both theactivities and the prestige of that body. Three outstandingactions furnished concrete proof of the continuing belief ofthe people of the United States in the need to improve condi­tions of livelihood throughout the world and of their desire touse to the utmost the facilities provided by the InternationalLabour Organisation. An American citizen, John GilbertWinant, undertook the heavy responsibility of serving as thenext Director of the International Labour Office; the Secretaryof Labor, Miss Frances Perkins, attended the annual Confer­ence as first delegate of the United States; the President,following action by the United States Senate, ratified fiveinternational labour conventions, thus binding the UnitedStates to apply certain standards laid down at the 1936 Mari­time Conference, to all seamen in American merchant ships.

In addition the United States was represented at all theregular meetings of the Organisation, namely the sessions ofthe Governing Body, and the annual Conference, and atnumerous technical committees at which such problems asconditions of work in agriculture, investment of social insurancefunds, safety in coal mines, and the situation of the textileindustry were discussed, as well as special conferences on thecoal mining industry and the prevention of silicosis. In allaspects of the work of the Organisation, the interest andinfluence of the United States could be felt as one of thedominant factors. A rnovement, which had begun even beforethe United States actually entered the LL.O., to change theemphasis of the Organisation from a concentration on Europeanproblems to encompass the wider field of extra-Europeanrelations has been aided and furthered by the participation of

- 50 -

the United States as one of the American nations. At thepresent 'time the future of the Organisation as a whole appearsto depend to a large extent on the active support of the Ameri­can continent. That this support will be continued is amplyvouched for by the invitation, issued by the Governmentof Cuba, at the Annual Conference, and accepted by theGoverning Body, to hold a second regional conference inHavana, Cuba, in the autumn of 1939, similar to that held inSantiago de Chile in 1936. This conference will mark anotherstep toward giving full recognition to the special nature ofthe problems of the Americas in an Organisation whosemembership is world-wide.

Election 01 an American Director.

After nineteen years of service, first as Deputy Directorand then as Director of the International Labour Office,Harold Butler, at the April session of the Governing Body,submitted his resignation. He leaves the Office to organisethe new School of Social Science at Nuffield College, Oxford,where he will have the opportunity to apply in an academicbackground the experience gained in the field of social welfarefirst in the British Ministry of Labour and later in the Inter­national Labour Office .

At a special meeting of the Governing Body, in June 1938,Mr. Winant, former Governor of New Hampshire and formerChairman of the Social Security Board, then Assistant Directorof the International Labour Office, was elected Director.At the same meeting the post of Deputy Director, which hadbeen held in abeyance from the time of Mr. Butler's electionas Director, was recreated, and Mr. E. J . Phelan asked to fillthe post. Mr. Winant, in accepting his new office, stated tothe Governing Body :

"There has been a tradition established in relation tothe office of the Directorship that is above reproach. AlbertThomas and Harold Butler each in his own way madecontributions to this · Organisation and to the world atlarge that makes it difficult to carryon. . Thomas withhis singleness of purpose, and Butler with his completeselflessness, have established a standard that would make

- 51-

any man humble-minded in following in their foot-steps.I want to say to you that there is nothing that you couldhave done that would have been more helpful to me thanthe creation of the office of Deputy Director and Mr. Phelan'swillingness to accept that post . . .

You have followed a great ideal; you believed thatsocial justice was essential to peace and that peace isnecessary for the well-being of mankind, and you haveproved your faith by works. In my judgment there is nohigher statesmanship. You have been pioneers on thefrontiers of civilisation." 1

In January 1939, Mr. Winant takes up his new office. Beforehim lie new frontiers and a pioneering task of perhaps stillgreater difficulty than that which came before,-for he mustbegin with the old frontiers once more threatened, and tryto rebuild firmer bulwarks at the old outposts. The gains mustbe rewon with a sharply reduced budget and with many nationslosing faith in the possibility of international co-operation ofany kind. Nevertheless, the foundations remain . The verybreakdown of international collaboration at so many pointshas made all the more necessary the continuance of the Inter­national Labour Organisation as one of the few remaininginstitutions on which the future may depend. That this workwill be continued and even enlarged was made clear in thereport of the Committee on Budgetary Economies, which,while stating the amount by which the funds of the Inter­national Labour Organisation would be reduced in 1940 ,called attention to the increase in its activity and the use madeof it by its member States. It is too early to say by whatmethods Mr. Winant will carry out his heavy task-but thespirit in which he will attack it may best be judged by theclosing words of his speech of acceptance of office: II I believe,as you believe, that the world rightly belongs to those whoreally care". 1

Ratification oj Conventions.

On the 29th of October 1938 the United States Governmentregistered with the Secretary-General of the League.of Nationsits first ratifications of International Labour Conventions.

1 Communicated to the press on June 4th, 1938.

- 52-

Five Conventions, concerning officers: competency certificates,shipowners' liability for sick and injured seamen, annualholidays with pay for seamen, hours of work and manning,and minimum age of employment at sea had been submittedto the Senate by the President, in August 1937, for ratification,and on June 13, 1938 the Senate approved their ratification. 1

At the same 'time the Senate decided to insert in its recordthe Seamen's Welfare in Port Recommendation which hadbeen submitted to it, along with the Conventions, with thesuggestion that it should be sent to the Committee on Commercefor future reference.

These ratifications constitute the first binding internationalobligation that the United States has entered into as a conse­quence of its membership in the International Labour Organi­sation. The leading role taken by the United States delegationin the negotiation of these maritime treaties has now beencarried through at home by the Act of the President andSenate of the United States. Putting most of the provisions'of the treaties into effect will not require any change inAmerican law or practice for, to a large degree, the treatiesmerely register conditions already in effect in the UnitedStates. Indeed, the adoption of these treaties will help tobring other nations who accept the same conditions up towardthe. standard laid down by the United States. However, certainof the provisions, and especially those granting vacationswith pay to seamen carry a greater significance, for they markthe acceptance by the U.S. of a new and higher standardthan that now practised. American seamen will receive thebenefit of annual paid vacations as a direct result of Americanmembership in the International Labour Organisation.

On June 9th, 1938, the President submitted to the Senatethe Convention on Reduction of Hours of Work in the Textile

1 Congressional Record, Seventy-Fifth Congress , Third Session,Vol. 83, Part 8, pp. 9024 et seq.

Ratification of a sixth Convention concerning health insurancefor seamen was not approved by the Senate.

C]. The United States, League of Nations and .InternationalLabour Organisation during 1937, Geneva Studies, V ol. IX, No. ·1,p. 67, for submission of conventions for ratification, and TheUnited States and World Organisation during 1936, GenevaSpecial Studies, Vol. VII, No.9, p. 33, for description of theConference wh ich adopted the Conventions.

53

Indust ry, accompanied by a special message concerningrat ificat ion. The other Conventions and Recommendationsadopted by the 1937 session of the Conference were submittedt o the United States Congress by a further Presidential messageof the same date.

A nn ual Conference.

The 1938 Annual Conference, presided over by t he BrazilianGovernment delegate, was, in spite of the unsettled conditionof world affairs, one of the largest in the history of the Organi­sati on. 1 Four hundred and sixteen representatives fromfift y countries produced an attendance practically equalto t he record made the previous year. The Soviet Union wast he only large Member-St at e that did not send a delegation;Germany, since she is no longer a member of the Organisation ,was not represented at t he Conference , nor was Italy whichhas given not ice of withdrawal. Lat er in the year Japanalso announced her wit hdrawal from the Organisation.

Miss Perkins was one of nine Ministers of Labour who t ookpart in the work of the Conference and contributed largelyt o its successful meeting. The American delegat ion consistedof Secretary Perkin s, Miss Frieda S. Miller an d Carter Goodrichas Government delegates, Henry 1. Harriman as Employers'delegate and Rob ert J . Watt as Workers' delegate. Eachdelegate was accompanied by t echnical advisers . 2 Both

1 Ct. John S. Ga mbs, "Results of International Labour Confe­rence", June 1938, Monthly Labour Review, 1938, pp. 278 et seq.

2 The delegation was composed as follows : Governmen.t Delegates ,Miss Frances Perkins, Secretary of Labor (fr om J une 11-18) ;Miss Frieda S. Miller, New York State Department of Labor;Carter Goodrich, U .S. Labor Com missioner, Geneva: A dvisers,Mrs . Clara M. Beyer, Assistant Direct or , Division of LaborStandards, Department of Labor; A. F . H in richs, Chief Economist,Bureau of Labor St atistics, Department of Labor; H. H. Kelly,Chief, Safety Section, Bureau of Motor Carriers, InterstateCommerce Commiss ion ; W . E . Chalmers, Department of Labor;John S. Gambs, Ass istant U.S. Labor Commissioner, Geneva ;Llewellyn E . Thompson , Jr., American Consul, Geneva. Employers'Delegate, Henry I. Harr im an, Chairman of the Bo ard, New E nglandPower Associa tion, Boston . Advisers, William T . Fo ster, Directorof the Pollak Fo undation for Economic R esearch, Boston ;Ivan Bowen, General Counsel, National Association of MotorBus Operators, Minneapolis, Minn. vVorkers' Delegate, RobertJ . Watt, (Director [of Social SecurrtyPcllcy, A.F. of L . Advisers,

- 54-

delegates and technical advisers participat ed actively in t heplenary sessions and in the committees of t he Conference. 1

The work of the Conference was largely of a preparatorycharacter. Only one item was up for final discussion, .thatof statistics of hours and wages. On this subject a Conventionwas adopted, without a single opposing v ot e, t hough withsome abstentions, which aims to make such statistics m oreeasily comparable internationally. It will be recalled that t hepreparatory work on this Convention had been completedthe previous September by the Technical Conference of OfficialLabour Statisticians, on which Mr. Lubin, U.S. Commi ssionerof .Labor Statistics, served as Vice-Chairman.

As has been the case for a number of years, t he largestpreoccupation of the Conference concerned the general problemof reducing hours of work. Although the Organisation has hada long history of dealing with this problem, the Conferenceat its June meeting was faced with a new world situation, forthe relation between reducing hours and rearming could notbe ignored. The Employers' delegates drew t he . conclusionthat it was impossible to consider shortening hours at a t imewhen the nations were t t straining every nerve t o keep theirplace in the world". Nevertheless the keynote , ac cepted bythe Conference as a whole, was struck by the Director's state­ment that the situation made "it more rather than less necessaryto think out the problem of shorter hours" in preparationfor the time "when the furious pace in armaments will begin

Marion Hedges, Director of Research, International Brotherhoodof Electrical Workers; George Googe, Southern Representative,A.F. of L.; A.D. Lewis, International Represen tative , UnitedMine Workers of America; Phil E. Ziegler, Secretary- Tr eas urer ,Brotherhood of Railway and Steamship Clerks, Cincinnati, Oh io ;Hyman Blumberg, Vi ce-President, Amalgamated ClothingWorkers of America, New York City; Joseph Cohen, Chairma n,Legislative Committee, Typographical Union of Philadelphia .Secretary to the delegation, Miss Harriet Hopkinson, U .S.Department of Labor. Ct. International Labour Conference,Twenty-Fourth Session, Geneva, 1938, Record ot Proceedin gs,p. XIII.

1 Miss Miller acted as reporter for the Road Transport Committee,Mr. Goodrich as Chairman and reporter of the Standing OrdersCommittee, Mr. Harriman as Vice-Chairman of the Committee onStatistics, and Mr. Blumberg as Vice-Chairman of the Committeeon Resolutions. Mr. Harriman and Mr. Watt served as membersof the executive committees of the Employers' and Workers"groups, respectively, of the Conference. Ct. ibid. , pp. 27 et seq.

~ 55 -

to slacken . ". If in the meanwhile the groundwork hasbeen solidly prepared, if a thorough plan has been workedout for a methodical reduction of hours on practical lines,taking full account of the difficulties to be overcome, thenthere will be some chance of solving the problem and theOrganisation will have rendered a signal service." 1

The international reduction of hours of work is of particularinterest to the United States, where, during the last few years,the policy of granting shorter hours to workers, either by lawor collective agreement, has won increasing support. Theannouncement by the Government delegate of the United Statesin the course of the debate on hours of work that the Wagesand Hours Act had finally been passed by the United StatesCongress gave an added impetus to the work of the Conference.In preparing the way for a final treatment next year of thequestion of reduction of hours of work, the most importantissue debated was whether the shorter work week should bedealt with as a single problem or ' whether "it should be splitup to permit the adoption in 1939 of a series of separateConventions. On the one hand, the Workers' group, dis-­appointed over the slow progress made so far, was anxiousto ensure a commitment to a single Convention covering allIorms of economic activity. On the other hand, the BritishGovernment delegate was eager to retain the industry byindustry approach, while various delegates pointed out that itwould be almost impossible to draw up or to obtain consentfor or enforce a single Convention covering all the occupationsenvisaged. A compromise, suggested by the U. S. and eight otherStates, and adopted by the Conference, was to draft a "limitednumber" of Conventions. Thus, the question of hours in coal­mining, which, had already been considered by a special confer­ence, was to be separated from the general subject and placedon the 1939 Conference agenda as a separate item. Transportwas to be given special attention, and the Governing Bodyasked to call one or more preparatory technical conferencesin this field. The remainder of the subject was to come beforethe 1939 session of the Conference as a single item, but with

J Int ernational Labour Conference, Twenty-fourth Session,Gen ev a , 19:38, R eport of the Director, p. 56.

- 56 -

the possibility of drafting two Conventions, one to covercommerce ' and offices and the other industry.

Other items on the 1938 Conference agenda were the regula­tion of hours of work and rest periods of professional driversand their assistants engaged in road transport, technicaland vocational education and apprenticeship, the regulationof contracts of employment of indigenous workers, and therecruiting, placing and working conditions (equality of treat­ment) of migrant workers.

The Committee on Hours of Work in Road Transport, likethe Reduction of Hours Committee, prepared the groundfor final drafting of a Convention in 1939. Two different pointsof view were made evident in the debate. Some delegates,while interested in achieving a shorter work week, were chieflyconcerned in reduction to a point that would ensure a reasonabledegree of safety-a point of view similar to that governingthe United States Interstate Commerce Commission regulationsconcerning hours of service of motor vehicles-other delegates,however, desiring to see hours reduced beyond this point as ameasure of social value.

Four members of the American delegation took an activepart in the work of another committee, that on technicaland vocational education and apprenticeship. In the discussionon apprenticeship the American members all emphasized thatthe Government's function must remain supervisory and thatthe intiative in planning programmes must come from theworkers and employers themselves.

Besides dealing with the regular items on its agenda theConference amended its own rules of procedure so that inthe future there will be a choice of methods to be followedin preparing a Convention and bringing it to a vote in theConference. Partly as a result of American influence, theOrganisation has tended during the last few years to makean increasing use of technical tripartite meetings on specialsubjects to prepare for the full discussion in the June Confe­.rencc, but these meetings have been outside the normal proce­dure. Therefore, the Standing Orders Committee of the Confe­rence, under the chairmanship of Mr. Goodrich, recommended

.that such meetings in the future be made a part of the ordinaryrules and regulations of the Organisation.

- 57-

Special Conferences and Committees.

The special conferences and committee meetings convenedduring 1938 dealt with many different phases of the workers'conditions of livelihood-and at almost all of these meetingsAmerican citizens took part, American experience was madeavailable to the other nations meeting together, and Americanexperts found practical assistance in the contributions madeby their colleagues throughout the world. In examining thework of these committees, where the result of research andinvestigation is given practical application, the diversityof the information to be obtained becomes apparent-as doesthe nature of the service that the I.L. O. can render to itsmembers.

A meeting was held from February 7-15 of the PermanentAgricultural Committee.v which Lowry Nelson, Professor ofRural Sociology of the University of Minnesota; attended astechnical expert. This meeting was the first session of aninternational parliament of the agricultural world, which isdesigned t o aid the J.L.O. in solving social problems in agricul­ture. The discussion in the committee of such problems ashours of work, wage-fixing, mechanisation of agriculture, etc.,brought to light the great diversity of the aspects of agriculturalproblems as faced by different countries. For example, thereis the difference between western European agriculturallabourers who constitute a permanent class in the populationand join labour unions in relatively large numbers, and thesituation in Canada or the United States where relativelyfew wage labourers consider their present occupation as morethan a stepping stone to farm ownership and few belong tolabour unions. Perhaps the most im portant action taken bythe Committee was to identify the problem of wage labourersin agriculture with that of the small operator, whether tenantor owner, and to bring t o the attention of the Governing Bodythe importance of considering ways and means by which theentire rural population can be provided with a higher standardof living.

1 C], Industrial and Labour Information, Vol. LXV, No. 1.01938), pp. 242-44, for summary of proceedings of the Committee.

- 58-

A new stage was reached in the field of public works planningat the first meeting of the new International Public WorksCommittee, held from June 27 t o 29. 1 The representativesof the United States on this Committee were Robert H . Randall,consultant to the National Resources Committee, and CarterGoodrich, United States Labor Commissioner. The Committeewas set up to carry out a Recommendation of the 1937 Confer­ence calling for c cinternational co-operation in respect ofpublic works." The business of it s first meeting was to drawup a " uniform plan", under which the Governments are tomake annual reports on the public works programmes whichthey are undertaking. The discussions developed a fruitful

. interchange on the diverse methods employed in the twenty­five countries represented at the meeting. Mr. Randall'saccounts of American methods of advance planning over aconsiderable number of years were particularly stimulatingto the members of the Committee, as were the reports of thesuccessful timing of works projects given by representativesof Sweden and Finland. Comparisons even more valuableto the U.S. should be possible wh en the Commit t ee resumes itsdiscussions in 1939 on the basis of documented reports fr omthe Governments. The ultimate purpose is t o make it possiblefor the great indust rial nations t o co-ordinate the t iming oftheir works programmes in a concer t ed attack on the problemof world depression. /

In the absence of the permanent Chairman, 1\'11'. Goodrichwas chosen as Acting-Chairman of the Committee. Because ofthe close relationship between public works planning and otherm ethods of reducing economic fluctuations, he was calledupon later in the year to take part in two meetings of thesmall group of economists wh o make up the League's Dele­ga tion on Economic Depressions.

The Coal Mining Industry was the subject of two usefulmeetings during 1938. In Maya Technical Tripartite Meetingon the Reduction of Hours of Work in Coal Mines> was held in

1 C]. Industrial and Labour Information, Vol. LXVII, No.3,(1938), pp. 60, 61, for summary of work of meeting.

2 ct. Ibid . Vol. LXVI, No. 9, (1938), p. 228 for conclusionof t he m eeting.

- 59 -

Geneva, attended by Halph J. Watkins, then Director of theBureau of Business Research, University of Pittsburgh andnow Assistant Administrator of the Wages and Hours Division,Department of Labor, as Government delegate; A.D. Lewis,of the United Mine Workers, as Workers' delegate; and DuncanC. Kennedy of the Kanawha Coal Operators Association, asEmployers'delegate. In addition, Robert J. Watt participatedin the meetings as representative of the Workers' group ofthe Governing Body. This Conference was similar in natureto the Tripartite Technical Conference on the Textile Industry,held in Washington the previous April. Like the TextileConference, it had before it an Office report 1 on the socialand economic conditions of the Coal Mining Industry. Thereport also contained, in addition to the general analysis, achapter presenting the methods of regulating hours of workin coal mines throughout the world, and suggesting a list ofpoints on which Governments might be consulted if hours ofwork in coal mines should be deemed a suitable subject of adraft Convention.

The second conference, that of Experts on Safety in CoalMines," met during the week of November 21, 1938, and wasattended by experts from Belgium, France, Great Britain, theNetherlands, Poland, and the United States-the latter countrybeing represented by Francis Feehan of the Bureau of Mines.The Conference on coal mine safety began the work of drawingof a draft model safety code to decrease the risk of accidents.This draft code will be submitted to the Labour Conferencein 1940 in the form of a Hecommendation. If adopted, andlater accepted by our Government, this code will serve asapoint of departure for future state and national legislation orregulation on coal-mine safety.

The Committee's debate made clear that accident andmortality statistics are not comparable internationally andthat perhaps the high comparative record of coal-mine accidentsin the United States is more apparent than real. It was, to besure, brought out that the safety of American mines is , 'by

1 International and Labour Office, Studies and Reports, Series B,No. 31, The World Coal-Mining Industry, Geneva, 1938.

~ Cj, Industrial and Labour Information, Vol. LXVIII, No. 10(1 938) pp. 312, 31 3, for conclusions of the meeting.

- 60-

contrast with the European, more often threatened byinfrequent inspection and the use of .elect ri cit y for under­ground transportation. On the other hand, American miners usedsafer lamps and more accurate methods of determining theproportion of inflammable and explosive gases in the atmosphere.

In order to protect the health of miners, as well as of workersin stone, quarry and pottery workers, and in general all workersexposed to the inhalation of dusts containing silica, a Confe­rence of Experts met from August 29 to September 9, as acontinuation of work started in Johannesburg in 1930, to studymeasures to be taken against silicosis, 1 Dr. Leroy U.Gardner,Director of the Saranac Laboratory for the Study of Tuber­culosis, and Dr. R. R. Sayers, Chief of the Division of IndustrialHygiene, of the Public Health Service, represented the UnitedStates Government; and Dr. L. Greenburg, Executive Directorof the Division of Industrial Hygiene, New York StateDepartment of Labor, participated as observer and expert;during part of the meetings, Dr. Siegfried Nilson, Chief of theMedical Service of the Mutual and Casualty Insurance Companyof New York, also attended. The subject matter of theConference, though sometimes highly technical, was full ofabsorbing interest. Dr. Gardner reported experiment afterexperiment-some of them lasting over a period of years-inwhich guinea pigs had been exposed to the dusts of severalminerals. He was able, as the result of his painstaking research,to pile evidence upon evidence for the theory that silicosis isa true illness which results only from the toxic effects of silicondioxide. Several of the experts had been doubtful as to thecauses of the disease, but there was no room for scepticismafter the record of American experimentation had beenunfolded. Dr. Sayers served as Vice-Chairman, as well assubmitting three papers concerning the pathology and diagnosisof silicosis, and Dr. Greenburg made a distinct contributionthrough his presentation of the new preventive regulationsin New York State.

Other special meetings in which American experts tookactive part were concerned with such problems as workers'

1 Cj. Industrial and Labour Information, Vol. LXVII, No. 13(1938) pp. 354, 355, for conclusion of the meeting.

61 -

recreation, social aspects of scientific management, and theinvestment of social insurance funds. The Committee onRecreation, formerly known as the Advisory Committee ofCorrespondents on Workers' Spare Time, met in London onOctober 20-21, and was attended-as American expert by Miss­Hilda Smith, of the Works Progress Administration. ThisCommittee considered especially the facilities for workers"holidays during their periods of vacations with pay. It appearedthat the American tendency to include brief adult educationcourses in short holidays has not been considered practicalin Europe, where any form of education is thought of as classwork and thus not a suitable holiday activity. The AdvisoryCommittee on Management met in May in Geneva and wasattended by Wallace Clark, member of the Executive of theInternational Committee on Scientific Management, as Amer­ican expert; the Con1mitteestudied practical measures­that might lessen the possibility -of harmful consequencesthat sometimes follow immediately after applying scientific'management in enterprises. Mrs. E. L. Dulles of the HesearchDivision of the Social Security Board participated in themeeting of the Committee on the Investment of Social lnsu-­ranee Funds, meeting December 5-9. 1 The purpose of thisCommittee meeting was to draft general principles underlying­the investment of social insurance funds. In the course of thediscussion it developed that there were considerable differences.between American practice and that of other countries, parti­cularly in regard to the business-investment viewpoint , theimportance of real property and building as a prime investm ent ,.and the expectation on the part of European .authorit tes oF­high interest rates.

Governing Body Meetin qs.

The United States continued to take a leading part in thefour· regular sessions of the Governing Body at which thegeneral policy of the Organisation is determined, as well

1 Ct. Industrial and Labour Information, Vol. LXVIII, No. 12:­(1938) pp. 388, 389, for conclusion of the Committee.

- 62 -

a s in the special session called in June for the election of.a new Director. Carter Goodrich was the Government membera t all except the April meeting, when, during his absence,

-Richardson Saunders, Administrative Assistant of the Depart­ment of Labor, t ook his place; Robert J. Watt took part inthe work of all four meetings as a member of the Workers'group; Henry I. Harriman participated, as Employers''represent at ive , in the first three meetings, and Henry S.Dennison replaced him at the fourth meeting. The Government'represent at ive at each meeting was assisted by John S. Gambs,Assistant United States Labor Commissioner, and by L . E.Thompson, United States Consul; W . E. Chalmers also attendedthe February meeting. 1

The October session was of an unusual character, since,instead of being held in Geneva, it met in London on the.invitation of the British Government. The meeting was madethe occasion of an exceptional display of hospitality andsuppor t for the Org anisation throughout England. Coming3 S it did immediately after the Czechoslovakian crisis, it.gav e a furt her proof of the enduring quality of the work of theOrganisation as a whole . At this meeting the Chairman ofthe Governing Body, 1\11'. Leggett, of the British Ministry ofL abour, was succeeded by Mr. Berg, Justice of the SupremeCour t of Norway.

Governing Body Com m ittees.

T he Governing Body, in order to carry out its executiveor administ rat ive funct ions, frequently sets up committeesfrom among its own m embers, or appoints one or more of itsm em bers to-represent the Organisation at meetings held underthe auspices of other bodies. During 1938 the United Stateshas been active in both these capacities and has thus greatlyi nfluenced the direction of t he whole work of the Organisation.

J F or brief -sum m ary of the proceedings of the four regularsessions of t h e Governing Body, see Industrial and Labour Injorma­l ion , Vol. LXV, No. 8, (1938) pp. 190 et seq. Vol. LXVI, No.8,(1938) pp. 200 et seq. ; Vol. LXVII, No.1 , (1938) p. 5 et seq.V ol. LXVIII, No.7, (1938) pp. 204 et seq.

63 -

A Preparatory Committee on the Textile Industry was setup by the Governing Body to explore the ways in which to give'effect to the Resolutions passed by the 1937 WashingtonTextile Conference. This Committee held two meetings, one·in May and one in October, 1938 , and will meet again inJanuary 1939. In view of the great interest ·of the UnitedStates in examining all possible ways of assisting the textileindustry, three Americans, one from each group of the Gover-­ning Body; were named as members of the PreparatoryCommittee. It was agreed that a Permanent InternationalCommittee should be set up, but its exact composition wasleft until January. The new Committee may well become oneof the most valuable instruments of the I.L.O. as it will providean international meeting place where those directly concernedin all branches of the greatest international industry will be­able to present their special problems, exchange experienceand make possible an improvement in the conditions of ' theindustry as a whole.

Most important of the special committees of the Governing­Body is the Finance Committee, which determines the budgetof the Organisation as a whole. This Committee, which metfrequently during 1938, was also attended by the three UnitedStates members of the Governing Body, each of whom tookan active part in the deliberations. Two representatives ofthe United States also set on the Standing Orders (bye-laws)Committee.

Mr. Goodrich, the United States Government 'member ofthe Governing Body, was chosen to represent the Organisationat one Committee of quite exceptional importance, namelythe Committee on Budgetary Economies.

The Committee on Budgetary Economies was appointed bythe Council of the League to examine the ways of meetingthe serious financial problem occasioned by the withdrawalof certain states from the Geneva organisations, the difficulteconomic and political situation of the world in general, andthe desire expressed by many States not to be faced withmeeting an increase in their contributions in the next fewyears. As these terms include the International LabourOffice, the Governing Body was asked to name a representative.to serve on the Committee. The Governing Body chose Mr.

- 64-

Goodrich as its member and asked that, in view of thetripartitecharacter of the I.L.O., representatives of the Workers' groupand the Employers' group be added to the Committee in anadvisory capacity. The naming of an American to representthe Governing Body upon the Committee was of particularsignificance; it emphasised the separate nature of the twoorganisations, the I.L.O. having members such as the UnitedStates which are not members of the 'League, and it assuredthe independent expression of the I.L.O. point of view.

The work of this Committee is only mentioned here in soIar as it affects the future of the I.L.O. The recommendationsfor cutting the 1940 budget of the I.L. O. by more than 250,000dollars still remain for consideration by the Governing Body ofthe I.L.O. Throughout the discussions and in the report of theCommittee it was made clear that in spite of the politicalsituation of the world, the work of the International LabourOrganisation had not been adversely affected and that, asfar as the financial conditions could be made to permit, allbranches of its work should be fully maintained.

Americans on Office Staff.

In the course of 1938 a number of American citizens wereadded to the regular staff of the International Labour Office.Mention has already been made of the election of Mr. Winantas Director of the Office. Professor Rexford B. Hersey, of theUniversity of Pennsylvania, was appointed as Chief of theEditorial Section of the Office and will be in charge of all thepublication work of the Office. In addition, an Americanhas become Assistant Librarian, and various other Americanshave joined the Staff.

American Liaison Office.

Heference has been made in previous issues of this public­ation to the 'office maintained in Geneva by the Departmentof Lahor to serve as liaison between the Department and the

- 65 -

I.L.O. The first head of the office, bearing the title of UnitedStates Labor Commissioner, was Professor William G. Rice,Jr., of the University of Wisconsin who was succeeded in thefall of 1936 by Prof. Carter Goodrich, of Columbia University.Mr. Goodrich returned to the United States on leave in thefall of 1937; he continued to serve as member of the GoverningBody, returning to Geneva for the February meeting, and inMay he again took up his duties in Geneva as Labor Commis­sioner. Mr. W . Ellisson Chalmers, who had acted as AssistantLabor Commissioner under both Mr. Rice and Mr. Goodrich,served as Acting Commissioner during NIr. Goodrich's absence,and early in the spring of 1938 returned to Washington, wherehe is now responsible for the questions concerning the I.L.O .in the Department of Labor. The position of Assistant LaborCommissioner has been filled by John S. Gambs, formerlyof Teachers' College, Columbia University. Mr. Gambs tookup his duties in February 1938, and has participated in allthe meetings of conferences, committees and the GoverningBody throughout the year.

Conclusion.

The work of the I.L.O. and the participation in this workof the United States may perhaps be best summarised byquoting from the speech made by Miss Perkins at the JuneConference, as follows :

"It is a very great satisfaction to Ine to be here and totake part personally in the work of this Organisation.Its activity represents a type of co-operation between nationsand between peoples in which the Government of the UnitedStates is most happy to participate. The United States hasmuch to learn from the experience of other countries in them aint enance of good labour-employer relations. Its fewyears of membership in the International Labour Organi­sat ion , and its prior participation in the work of the Inter­national Association for Labour Legislation, have alreadygiven us a great deal of useful information and importanthelp in the development of modern patterns of labourlegislation. For this we are grateful. The United States hasalso, we believe, a practical contribution to make from thefreshness of our experience, from mistakes as well as fromsuccesses that we have had in this department of life.

- 66 -

. . .' 'Whereas our remoteness frequently makes us un­familiar with the political problems involved in some formsof international co-operation, in such fields as the improve­ment of working and living conditions, in public health

.and social problems, in studies of nutrition, finance andeconomics, in the whole area of scientific humanitarianism ,the United States finds itself able and glad to co-operateto the fullest practical extent. Because the InternationalLabour Organisation co-operation for . improved living andworking standards is specific and practical, Americans findit within their field of possible judgment and therefore ofeffective participation. We take part in its work with whole-hearted conviction. .

"We believe that the International Labour Organisation ,avoiding involvement in political matters, can make a realcontribution to world economic recovery by aiding in theremoval of social and economic maladjustments. Whatwas once the need of the workers for better conditions hasnow become the need of the world for economic life itself.It is in this sense that our membership in the InternationalLabour Organisation has real significance in the UnitedStates.." 1

1 International Labour Conference, Twenty-Fourth Session ,Geneva, 1938, Record .of Proceedings, pp. 195, 196.

SOME NOTABLE STUDIES PUBLISHEDBY THE GENEVA RESEARCH CENTRE

(1930-1938)

The League and Manchuria,Nos. 10, 11 and 12 (1931), Nos. Nos. 5 and 10 (1932), No.3(1934). No.3 (1938). A series of studies now recognisedas one of the leading works on the subject.

Unemployment as an International Problem,by T.G. Spates, No.3 (1931).

Problems of the World Economic Conference,by Leo Pasvolsky, No.2 (1933).

The Munitions Industry,No.9 (1934). An analysis of the U.S. Senate investigation,Sept. 4-21, 1934.

The Suez Canal and League Sanctions,by Raymond L. Buell, No. 3 (1935). A pioneering andmost timely study issued in the midst of the dispute overEthiopia, cited by over 200 newspapers.

The United States, League of Nations and InternationalLabour Organisation during 1937,by a group of Americans in Geneva.

Post-War efforts for Freer Trade,by William E. Rappard (1938).

The First Sanctions Experiment. A study of League procedure,by Albert E. Highley (1938).

Food and Welfare,by F. L. McDougall (1938).

A complete list of past studies will be furnished on request.

STUDIES TO BE PUBLISHED IN 1939(PROVISIONAL)

Revision of the Covenant,by Professor H. Kelsen.

A critical analysis of the Covenant of the League of Nationsfrom the juridical point of view.

Psychological Aspects of War and Peace,by Robert Waelder, Ph. D.

An approach to the problem of peace and war from thepoint of view of mass psychology. The author offers sugges­tions for further research.

.The Political use of the Radio,by Thomas Grandin.

The author brings to the attention significant informationin a subject about which little is known.

There are further studies in preparation, among them :

International Cartels and Combines in relation to CommercialPolicy.

, . Certain aspects of Wage Policy during the Business Cycle.

SUBSCRIPTION RATES

Annual subscription for 6 studies $2.00 or 8.50 Swiss francsSingle copies. 40 cents or 1.75 Swiss francs

Post free.

Agent in the United States :

Columbia University Press, International Documents Service,2960 Broadway, New York City.