MANDATES AND OIL.

Manawatu Times, Volume XLII, Issue 1782, 7 April 1921, Page 5

MANDATES AND OIL.

AMERICA SENDS A NOTE OF PROTEST. [By Electric Cable-Copyright.] [Aust. and N.Z. Cable Association] WASHINGTON, April 5. The United Press learns that- the State Department has sent to Britain, France. Japan and possibly Italy a new note protesting against their attitude regarding the mandated territories. It is understood that the Note strongly presents the United States’ opinion concerning Yap, and protests against the San Remo agreement between Britain and France regarding the division of the Mesopotamian oil supplies. The Note declares that the United States, through Dr Wilson, has never definitely or tacitly assented to the inclusion of Yap in the Japanese mandate; also that Britain’s and France’s action regarding Mesopotamia has violated tho spirit of the mandate principle. LONDON, April 5.

A White Paper has been issued containing correspondence between Britain and the United States regarding the economic rights of the mandated districts, particularly Palestine and Mesopotamia, the United States alleging that its oil interests were suffering. , ,

Lord Curzon replied that no pipe lines had been laid in Mesopotamia, and the only work done had been for purely military purposes. It was untrue that Britain had utilised the war in order to prepare for the exclusive control of the oil reserves. Lord Curzon points out that the United States herself controls ejghty per cent, of the world’s oil. The question of the mandate can only be properly discussed by tho signatories to the Covenant. Mr Bainbridge Colby replied that he received most of Lord Curzon’s statements with satisfaction, but declared that the United States was a participant in the war, and could rightly discuss after problems without being a signatory.