HL Deb 27 February 1924 vol 56 cc385-97

LORD ASKWITH had the following Notice on the Paper—

To ask His Majesty's Government whether, in view of the fact that the United States of America, France, and Belgium have recently given recognition, and in view of the importance of facilitating the trade of this country in every possible manner, His Majesty's Government are taking steps to recognise the present Government of the United States of Mexico, and to settle any outstanding differences with that Government.

The noble Lord said: My Lords, it is a far cry from the wandering poor of this country to the country whose recognition I ask about in this Question. But that recognition itself might, perhaps, have the effect of giving work to the wandering poor of whom the right rev. Prelate gave us such an eloquent account. This is no new question, as it has been raised from time to time in another place during the last three years, but I am not aware that for some considerable period any debate upon it has taken place, or any question been raised, in your Lordships' House. During those three years the difficulties of the Foreign Office in recognising Mexico, so far as can be judged from the answers that have been given, seem to have been of a diminishing quantity.

At first there was the difficulty that the United States of America had not recognised Mexico. But that country has for some time now recognised Mexico. Then there was the difficulty of the claims of bondholders and other security holders. Many of those difficulties were settled when a committee of bankers from all countries met and, on June 17, 1922, made an arrangement which has been accepted, I understand, by the Government of Mexico. Then there were the difficulties connected with private claims, among which that of Mrs. Rosalia Emilia Caden Evans bulks rather largely. I do not say anything about that case, because I understand that it has either been settled or else it is under appeal, but from the latest information that I have had upon the subject I gather that in the difficulties she has had—difficulties in the locality and not with the supreme Government-she has not lost one inch of the land which she claimed.

I put down a Question at the end of the last Parliament, but as Parliament was rising I deferred the Question and, almost immediately afterwards, the recent turmoils in Mexico broke out. Those, I understand, though the noble Lord who will reply will know better than I do, have largely come to a close. I would ask whether the statements that have reached His Majesty's Government would enable them to take a more favourable view of the speedy recognition of Mexico than has hitherto been the case.

During this period of three years other countries have recognised Mexico without making the difficulties that this country has made. Mexico has been recognised by the United States. France, Belgium, and, I believe, Spain, and in spite of the efforts of Señor Mascarenas, the late Consul-General for Mexico, who is now Consul-General in New York, it was impracticable to get a representation over there by which either a Court of Claims could be established or by which a really accredited representation could be sent. There was a gentleman in Mexico City, but he was not in the state or condition of a trained diplomatist with an accredited post. He was more a person who would hand over letters or statements and even the draft Treaties that were under discussion at the end of 1922, and he was not particularly favourably received by the President of Mexico, or by the various Ministers, although he was, perhaps, an excellent man.

In fact, the condition of affairs as regards ourselves might be described in the words of a gentleman with very large interests there who has written to me and who has only recently come back—a letter which I shall be pleased to put at the disposal of noble Lords. He sums up the position in words which I adopt entirely: British companies operating in Mexico are brought into constant touch with the Government and have to fight their own battles. Many of them have large claims in the settlement of which the assistance of the British Government would be necessary. At present the British Government cannot intervene, or, if its representative does 60, he probably does more harm than good. Many companies, as the result of the long continuance of this situation, are tempted to come to any kind of settlement with the Mexican Government which may be suggested, even though such a settlement may Jo much less justice than under other conditions would be possible. I need not dilate on the value of trade that would be brought about by recognition of a great and rich country like Mexico.

She produces goods of every possible kind which are wanted here, and which can be brought here at an earlier date than they can be produced in many other countries; and she has various zones—maritime, temperate, tropical and mountainous zones. She has timber, oil, minerals, corn, barley, tobacco, sugar, fruit, cotton and other products, all of which we want. What she requires is agricultural implements, machinery and other products of a country like this. Meanwhile, she is being supplied almost up to 70 per cent. by the United States of America. She has done what she can, she has a great hydro-electrical plant there; there are wonderful bridges and buildings, and altogether it is marvellous what she has achieved with her limited resources.

In a country like that the real riches out of which payments can be made for any claim cannot well come from taxation of peons or of poor people who have very limited pay per diem, or from the salaries of the Government officials, but they must come by the development of the country which might be very largely helped by this country more than it does at present. We have very large financial interests there. I have none whatever myself, but I have understood from those who have been in the country that the interests of the British there are extremely large, that there are still certain claims outstanding which might well be dealt with, that the Government of Mexico is anxious to deal with claims and has shown its desire to deal with them, and that the acceptance of this bond settlement alone is a proof that it does so desire.

Is this Government stable? I might quote what President Wilson said in June, 1915, when he addressed to Mexico a strong Note informing the leaders of the country that if they could not accommodate their differences within a very short time the United States Government would be constrained to decide what means should be employed by it in order to help Mexico to save herself and to serve her people. That illustrates the state of Mexico in 1915, and in contrast I might mention that the other day, in sending a consignment of arms and other supplies to assist the Mexican Government, the Secretary of State, Mr. Hughes, said that he did so in view of the importance of the maintenance—not of the establishment but of the maintenance—of stability and orderly constitutional procedure in the neighbouring Republic.

It may be that in a country in which there are about 32 provinces, some of them as large as England but containing, perhaps, only 250,000 inhabitants, the central Government has not control over the difficulties that may exist in certain districts. Trains have been held up; so have they been in this country. Mails have been held up; so, I believe, have they been here quite recently. There have been many bad disturbances, but they have been very largely exaggerated, and at the present moment it would appear that the central Government has obtained possession again of one of the most considerable portions of Mexico—namely, Vera Cruz—and holds it in its possession. In fact, the Government of Mexico at the present time under President Obregon is, and has been for three years, the de facto Government of Mexico. Yet it is almost the only Government in the world with which we are out of touch. Indeed, all the countries in the world except our own seem to have recognised the Government of Mexico. Can, then, recognition be given now or in the immediate future, either with or without a settlement of claims? That is rather a difficult question and one which depends very much, I think, upon the mentality of Mexico.

Mexico, so far as I can ascertain on all hands, contains a very proud people. Her people are proud of then sovereignty and are very anxious that there shall be no indication of any hurt to their sovereignty. The Treaties of 1922 may have been largely abortive because Mexico wished to put into them statements about her sovereignty. The present rebellion or turmoil of Pablo Huerta is also said to be largely due to the idea that the existing Government are "putting away" that sovereignty in dealing with the United States of America. If that is so, the recognition of Mexico, without insisting upon the previous settlement of claims, would be of assistance to the existing Government in preventing Huerta from continuing his, objections to it. The barter of sovereignty in the past has been one of the great difficulties of Mexico. It is a matter which has bitten into the heart of her people and, therefore, no Government dare say or do anything which shows any signs of such bartering without forfeiting the confidence of the people.

President Obregon's own view has been clearly stated. He puts it in this way— Our commitments must be fairly met. We cannot make the discharge of our duty the subject of barter. To pay our debts is our problem, and we must solve it. To recognise our Government is the duty of other States, and it is for them to discharge it if they are so minded. Then there exists another point. The noble Lord who, I believe, is going to answer this Question, is very much interested, and His Majesty's Government are very much interested, in the progress of the League of Nations. How is Mexico to come into the League of Nations if this country fails to recognise her? I would only suggest to the noble Lord that, on Mexico coining into the League of Nations, the principle of bartering sovereignty should not be any condition of her recognition. But unless she is recognised by the leading nations in the League of Nations it will be very difficult indeed for her to come in. The President has shown by the remarks he has made from time to time about his objection to war and his view of the necessity of nations knowing each other, that he has a mind which might well have within it the idea of joining the League of Nations. But he has this difficulty—that a country which is a near neighbour has not yet come in, and various kinds of problems might arise if Mexico came into the League and the United States of America, did not.

It may be true that many members of the population of Mexico are steeped in ignorance, that Mexico's educational improvement has not yet been brought up to the standard that exists in European countries, that her people are not able to self-educate themselves in the way in which our people in this country are by reading newspapers, magazines, and books. It may be that there are too many bureaucrats and too many officials in a country of that kind. But those who know the country speak of the people as very imaginative, of great resource, very generous, hating humbug and hypocrisy, as very proud, and as liking the people of this nation and ready to do business with them. One gentleman wrote to me from Lancashire when he saw that I had placed this Question on the Paper. He is the gentleman who planted the first cotton plantations in Mexico, and he said this— To one who knows the Mexican people, they are quite honourable, very proud, and very anxious to do business with our country.

The gentleman who wrote to me before also said— There is no doubt that the long delay and the feeling of irritation caused by the continuance of the present situation make the task of British companies in Mexico more difficult. It is important in the interests of trade that normal relations with that Government should be established as soon as possible. Mexico is doing quite a large trade now, and if British subjects are to compete successfully for a reasonable proportion they must not be handicapped as against the other competitors … the fact that the United States particularly has recognised Mexico gives American citizens a distinct advantage.'' I would suggest to the noble Lord that he should hold out the right hand of fellowship at as early a date as possible to this particular nation; and that we should recognise an old friend with whom we have had good relations for over a hundred years, and an old friend that has a great destiny before it.

LORD PARMOOR

My Lords, I find myself in agreement with a great mass of the statements so ably made by the noble Lord who has asked this Question, and on the last point I may say at once that so soon as the conditions arise which are considered to be necessary (and on which I will say just a word or two by and by), it is the policy and desire of His Majesty's Government to recognise the Government in Mexico. I would also say in connection with what has been stated by the noble Lord, that it is true, I think, that we are the only great Power at the present time which has not recognised the present Government of Mexico. As he has said, this is no new question, but there is one point upon which I am not sure what the noble Lord's view is. Does he desire that there "should be recognition with, or without, a settlement of the claim, or does he think some conditions at any rate should be settled before the recognition is given?

LORD ASKWITH

I would like the basis of settlement of claims to be if possible determined, but not necessarily that the settlement of claims should be a condition of recognition.

LORD PARMOOR

I took it the noble Lord would say that. It enables me to put quite shortly one of the points which has been under consideration of the Government in connection with the recognition of Mexico. The noble Lord referred to certain negotiations up to the date of June 17, 1922, but when the negotiations were broken off towards the end of 1922 the noble Marquess opposite, the Leader of the Opposition, would know that they were broken off because the Mexican Government demanded recognition before any Commission was set up to decide upon the claims of the British and Mexican nationals, and insisted on the exclusion of certain categories of British claims from the purview of the Commission. The noble Lord will see that the basis on which these matters might be settled was certainly not conceded at the end of 1922. There is no doubt, as the noble Lord said, that the interests involved are very large, nor is there any doubt that it is very desirable to encourage in every possible way trade between Mexico and this country, particularly as Mexican products would be of great value here, while on the other hand, our machinery and manufactured products would be of value to Mexico.

There is one other point of importance to which the noble Lord referred briefly—-namely, the difficulties in Mexico at the present moment. Perhaps I may read a sentence from the information that we possess which shows that the situation is rather different from the picture painted by the noble Lord. The information I have is that the instability in Mexico at the present moment makes it impossible to regard the Obregon Government as the de facto Government. They have not, in truth, sufficient command of the government of the country to be placed in that situation. There is the further obstacle to recognition at the present time that Mexico is in a state of complete chaos, and, although Obregon has recently made some progress against the insurgents, there seems to be evidence, as was always anticipated, that the Huerta movement would, if unsuccessful, be followed by widespread guerilla warfare. The view of the Government at the present time is that the Obregon Government is not, from the de facto standpoint, a Government which could be recognised until more stable conditions have been brought about.

I would like to say, in addition, that we shall soon have further information from our representative in charge of the Legation there, Mr. Cummins, who is sending over general observations on the whole question. His Despatch containing these observations is expected by the end of the month. The view of the Government is that when the conditions non-existing—which have been described as conditions of complete chaos—have been removed, and the country has become more settled, there is no obstacle, so far as I know, to the de jure recognition of Mexico, subject to the settlement of the basis of the claims to which the noble Lord has referred.

There is only one other matter to which I need refer. The noble Lord tried to tempt me by a reference to the League of Nations. I think it is very desirable that Mexico should become a member of the League of Nations. It is the only considerable Latin State in America which is not a member at the present time, and it is extremely desirable that it should become a member. This is not only desirable in a general sense, but the other Latin-American communities are desirous that it should become a member in order that all countries of similar interests in that part of the world may be members of the League. I do not think that I can give the noble Lord any further information. We are in complete sympathy with him. We hope sufficient stability may soon be obtained, and when sufficient stability is obtained I think he will find there will be no difficulty in the de jure recognition, subject to the basis of settlement to which he has referred.

THE MARQUESS CURZON OF KEDLESTON

My Lords, I suppose I ought to say a few words on this subject, because it is one with which I have necessarily been very familiar in recent years. During the five years that I was at the Foreign Office I think this matter came before me no less than eight or ten times. Constant pressure was being put upon the Foreign Office by those who have large financial interests in Mexico to grant de jure recognition which they thought would benefit their own position, and that was practically admitted by the noble Lord, Lord Askwith, to-night. On each occasion that this pressure was applied I went very minutely into the question myself, and on each occasion I received the unanimous opinion of the Departmental officials in the Foreign Office concerned with the subject that recognition was out of the question. The noble Lord seemed to think that our objections had been a diminishing quantity during recent years or months. I can assure him that is not in the least the case. The case against recognition when I left Office was just as strong as, and in some respects stronger than, it had been when I took Office four or five years ago.

The noble Lord was wrong, if he will allow me to say so, in another respect. He seemed to think our action had been, at earlier stages, influenced by a desire to act in co-operation with, or to please, America. That is not in the least the case. The decision at which we arrived on these many occasions had no reference whatsoever to the action of America. It was a decision arrived at upon the merits of the case, and upon the merits of the case alone. Here let me, in passing, say one word about a gentleman to whom, I think, my noble friend rendered insufficient justice. I speak of the official, Mr. Cummins, whose name has just been quoted by the noble Lord, Lord Parmoor. Mr. Cummins has for some years been acting in a position of immense difficulty in Mexico, and although we have not recognised that Government and therefore they have not officially recognised him, he has been in close and constant contact with members of the Government, and has discharged his duties with very great ability. I look forward, when the Report to which the noble and learned Lord referred comes to this country, to finding an absolutely impartial and valuable account of the situation.

The noble and learned Lord began by saying that he found himself in general sympathy with the argument of my noble friend, and then, in a most genial and courteous way, he proceeded absolutely to demolish that argument. Let me point out to the House how he did it. My noble friend rested his case upon two arguments. The first was the condition of the country in Mexico. My noble friend, whose studies cannot, I think, have, involved any personal acquaintance with Mexico represented that interesting country as a country devoid of humbug or hypocrisy. I am bound to admit that I have seen neither humbug nor hypocrisy in the conditions there. He pictured it as a country the general social and industrial condition of which rather resembled our own country. There were sporadic disorders, occasional strikes and demonstrations, but the people were a simple, peaceable, industrious and unhypocritical people really living almost in Arcadia. Then comes the noble and learned Lord, fresh from the Foreign Office, with the latest information, and he says this country is in a condition of complete and chronic instability. It is. It is perfectly true. It is one of the most-disorderly countries in the world; and this excellent President Obregon, whom the noble Lord wants us to recognise, is revealed by the noble and learned Lord as not being even the de facto ruler. What he says is quite true. At the present moment I do not suppose there is a more disorderly country in the world than Mexico.

I hope my noble friend will inquire about the course of justice. I wonder if any of the clients whose interests he is advocating would go to the Mexican Courts for justice. I should like their answer upon that point. The noble Lord speaks as if President Obregon, by a wave of the hand, will be able to dispose of the rival claimant and settle down in the peaceful enjoyment of the de jure recognition of His Majesty's Government. The fight is not over. He has not beaten his opponent by any means, and if, with the aid of the United States, he does beat him, we all know, from our experience of Mexican history, that there follows a period of what is called guerilla warfare, a general sniping by everybody at everybody else without any humbug or hypocrisy. That is the sort of situation with which we shall be confronted. That was the first point, on which the noble and learned Lord calmly but dexterously and firmly knocked down the substructure of my noble friend's observations.

Now I come to the second point, which the noble and learned Lord dealt with rather more gingerly but which is much more important, and that is the case of the unsatisfied claims of the British Government and British nationals. I noticed that he rather slurred this over. Let me tell the House what are the facts. In the first place there are—I have not the figures with me, because I have not been able to refresh my recollection—large loans which have been made at different times by the Government, and from other sources, to the Mexican Government which have been either wholly repudiated, or the interest upon which no attempt has been made to pay, I should like to remind my noble friend of a little incident that occurred only a few years ago. At that time there was a President whose name was Huerta, and in the spirit of gushing good humour which is recommended by the noble Lord, a loan was made to that gentleman. He presently disappeared from the scene, as invariably happens in the rotation of political life in Mexico. He was succeeded by Carranza. What happened? Carranza repudiated Huerta; and if Obregon got a loan, which is clearly the object of de jure recognition, and a new Huerta should appear on the scene, he would no doubt repudiate Obregon, and we should have this vicious circle again.

Another point which the noble Lord entirely ignored is the evidence, which is overwhelming, of wholesale seizure and confiscation of property belonging to British subjects, British nationals and British companies in Mexico. And lastly, there is the case of personal injury to individuals. The noble and learned Lord referred to the case of Mrs. Evans, and that was a desperate and deplorable case of gross ill-usage, but when I left office it was wholly unrecognised, uncompensated, and still remaining to be solved. These are the sort of cases that are occurring and have occurred during recent years. The third point, on which the noble and learned Lord gently kicked away the supports of my noble friend's case, was in regard to the attitude of the Mexican Government. My noble friend said that these worthy people were incapable of humbug or hypocrisy and were only too anxious to settle our claims, that Obregon was a most reasonable man with a high regard for law and order. They had their chance. They had their chance in 1022 when we proposed a Convention, or some form of agreement, referring to neutral arbitration a settlement of these claims. What did they do? In the first place, they attached to the discussion the plea for recognition which the noble and learned Lord referred to, and they proceeded to say that they could not agree to the Convention unless the major part of the claims were cut out, bringing the whole thing to the ground. That was the action of this excellent Government that is so anxious to do justice to British subjects.

The only other point made by my noble friend was this. He asks: Why do you stand out ? Why do you not do what America has done, what France has done, and what Belgium has done ? Everybody knows that recognition by the United States of America was given for political reasons and in the interests of particular trades connected with that country. But I would like him to go to the United States, or Belgium, or to Spain, or to any of the countries that have given recognition, and find out whether in return for recognition they have got any acknowledgment or settlement of the claims of their subjects. I happen to know that in some cases they bitterly regret the recognition they have given. Therefore do not let the House be precipitate in this matter. Let us bear in mind the double condition laid down by the noble and learned Lord, with which I entirely concur. His first point was that you must have a country presenting some semblance to civilisation before you can recognise its Government. That condition docs not at present exist. His second point was that we cannot, with any regard to the interests of our people, slur over the settlement of these claims in the manner proposed by the noble Lord.

When challenged by the noble and learned Lord as to whether he thought a settlement of the claims ought to be a prior condition to recognition or not, the noble Lord evaded the point by saying he thought it should be considered, but he would not necessarily insist upon it. It is absolutely essential. Are you going to allow these great claims to be whittled away and forgotten in the abstract desire to see Mexico in the League of Nations? That is out of the question, and I hope His Majesty's Government, in pursuance of the line indicated to-day, will take a firm attitude on both aspects of this case; that they will not proceed to de jure recognition until they are assured that there will be a fair, equitable and complete settlement of the claims of British subjects for whom they are responsible.