A.—sd.

The first of these was the Question of Alexandretta or, rather, consideration of the circumstances which had moved the Turkish Government to enter a vigorous protest against the methods adopted in preparing the regulations, and against some of the regulations themselves, governing the elections in the Sanjak, which elections are to form part of the settlement reached by the Council in May, 1937. For details I refer you to document C. 580, 1937, comprising a number of communications, together with the regulations as drafted by the Commission appointed to organize and supervise the elections in the Sanjak. The Settlement as a whole is outlined in my report dated 20th June, 1937, on the last May session of the Council. So important a part do the elections, which are to be taken in two stages, play in the settlement, that for the first stage it was provided that they should be organized and supervised by a Commission appointed by the Council of the League and composed of nationals of States members of the League other than France and Turkey. The Commission was duly appointed and it set to work. Unfortunately, it has been charged with adopting a procedure contrary to the spirit of the Council's resolutions and with an undue regard for the opinions of the Mandatory authorities, and this, it is alleged, has not promoted impartial decisions. At the commencement of the proceedings in Council the President invited the representative of Turkey, M. Sudak, and the President of the Elections Commission, Mr. Reid, to come to the Council table. The representative of Turkey spoke first. He maintained that the resolutions of the Council governing that part of the settlement dealing with the elections had been wrongly interpreted. The duties of the Elections Commission were twofold—firstly, to make a preparatory study and to make proposals to the President of the Council for the appointment of agents and staff to organize and supervise the electoral operations (in this work it w%s.to take into account the opinions of the parties to the dispute) ; and 1 the second of the Commission's tasks was to assist in the organization and supervision of the electoral operations themselves, and for this purpose its numbers were to be enlarged by" the addition of representatives of the communities. The second phase was to be carried out without French and Turkish participation. In the opinion of the Turkish Government the separate duties had been confused and there had arisen errors not only in procedure but in substance, since it was not the duty of the Elections Commission to draw up what amounted to an electoral law containing provisions for penalties and also other measures affecting the free and direct expression of the will of the people. M. Delbos, speaking for France, was conciliatory in reply. His Government had no hesitation in leaving the matter in the hands of the Council, and he welcomed a full discussion which he hoped would lead to an appeasement that would be acceptable to both parties. Mr. Reid, speaking on behalf of the Elections Commission, promised to furnish the Council with any particulars required, and asked for an opportunity of replying to the charges formulated by Turkey. M. Unden, who represented Sweden at this session of the Council and succeeded M. Sandler as Rapporteur, was of opinion that if it was a question of introducing an adjustment within the framework of the regulations formulated by the Council he might indicate a method during the present session of the Council, if the French and Turkish Governments were agreed on such a course. But if it was a question of giving an authoritative interpretation to the Council's decisions of May, 1937, then he would have to propose judicial procedure. M. Sudak, having agreed that adjustments should be made in agreement with the representative of France, and the President of the Elections Commission having offered no objection to this course, M. Unden promised to proceed to an urgent study of the questions at issue and to submit a report before the close of the session. The Rapporteur's report was submitted at the meeting of the Council held on the 31st. January and the document is C. 65, 1938. It was drawn up as a result of meetings between the Rapporteur and the representative of the countries concerned, and it proposed the creation of a Council committee, consisting of the representatives of Belgium, the United Kingdom, France, Sweden, and Turkey, whose task it would be to make such modifications as would be found necessary in the electoral regulations which had already been drawn up. For this purpose the President of the Elections Commission would be consulted. The report also provided that the decisions of the Committee must be unanimous. The Rapporteur asked the Council for authority to submit the findings of the Committee to the President of the Council, who would in turn pass them to the Mandatory Power for promulgation in the Sanjak. After short speeches by the representatives of Turkey, France, and Great Britain the report was adopted. Again we have an excellent example of the success of the methods of conciliation which the machinery of the League provides (see also Document C. 60, 1938). Financial Committee : Report on the Work of its Sixty-fifth Session. The Financial Committee's report is Document C. 569, M. 405, 1937, lla, whilst the comments of the Rapporteur to the Council, the representative of Sweden, are contained in Document C. 11, 1938, lla. The Financial Committee's report covers a wide field such as the Falsification of Securities (dealt with separately by the Rapporteur), Quotas and Exchange Control, Raw Materials, Economic Depressions, Agricultural Credits'and Monetary Problems, and the Financial Situation of Bulgaria and Hungary.

16