890E.1281/1
The Consul at Beirut (Steger) to the
Secretary of State
No. 628
Beirut, January 13, 1934.
[Received
February 6.]
Sir: I have the honor to enclose translations
of legislative Decrees Nos. 65 and 6633 of
the Lebanese Government, relative to conditions to be required, after
January 1, 1939, of persons desiring to be admitted to the practice of
medicine or pharmacy in the Lebanese Republic,
[Page 487]
and to express the opinion that these two decrees,
taken in conjunction with Decree No. 163334 of March 1, 1933, a translation of which is also
enclosed, constitute a discrimination against American citizens
incompatible with the provisions of Article 11 of the Mandate.35
The effect of these decrees is to prohibit the practice of medicine or
pharmacy in the Lebanon, after November 1, 1939, and November 1, 1938,
respectively, to any person who does not hold the Lebanese, Syrian, or
French baccalaureate diploma or the degree of Bachelor of Arts of the
American University of Beirut. Corresponding degrees from other
countries, even though equivalent or superior to those specifically
mentioned, appear to be excluded from recognition.
Since it is extremely improbable that any American physician or
pharmacist, receiving his training in American institutions, would hold
any of the degrees mentioned, such persons would be excluded from the
right to practice their profession in the Lebanese Republic.
Inasmuch as it is hardly likely that an American would care to set up an
individual practice of medicine or pharmacy in this country, this
discrimination is of slight importance so far as the general independent
practice of the professions is concerned. However, should the provisions
of these decrees be literally applied, the practical effect would be to
prevent American religious missions or educational and philanthropic
institutions from engaging American physicians to carry on their work.
The American University of Beirut, the ranking members of whose medical
faculty are always predominantly American or European, would be
especially affected.
In a note dated December 15, 1933, a copy of which is enclosed, I brought
to the attention of the French High Commissioner the situation which
might result from a strict application of these decrees, with the
request that the steps be taken to ensure that American educational and
philanthropic institutions shall not be limited in the choice of
physicians whose services are required. I have now received from the
High Commission a reply, of which a translation is enclosed, expressing
the opinion that no de jure discrimination
results from the decrees in question, despite the incontestable fact
that the situation thus created does actually leave American physicians
in a less favored position than those of Lebanese, Syrian, or French
nationality.
The High Commission takes the standpoint that the list of degrees
specifically acknowledged as equivalent to the Lebanese baccalaureate is
not exclusive of all other diplomas, since the President of the Republic
may at any time add to this list. Even if this interpretation
[Page 488]
be correct, which seems to me
doubtful, this statement still appears to evade the issue and to place
in the category of a courtesy, to be granted in the discretion of the
Lebanese Government, what should be considered as a right guaranteed
under the terms of the Mandate to citizens of the United States and of
members of the League of Nations.
In connection with this matter, I have acted in concert with the British
Consul General, who is desirous of safeguarding similar British
interests. The reply received by the British Consul General to his note,
which approached the question from a slightly different angle, was
identical with that addressed to me.
As the evasive tenor of the note of the High Commission appears to
indicate an unwillingness to take steps to rectify the situation, I have
the honor to inquire whether the Department desires me to make further
representations, or whether it is preferred that the matter be taken up
through the American Embassy in Paris.
Respectfully yours,
[Enclosure 1]
The American Consul at Beirut (Steger) to the French High Commissioner (De Martel)
The American Consul presents his compliments to His Excellency, the
French High Commissioner, and desires to call attention to the fact
that Legislative Decrees Nos. 65 and 66 of the Lebanese Government,
dated January 5, 1933, contain provisions which, if literally
interpreted, might seriously interfere with the work of certain
American philanthropic institutions in the Lebanese Republic.
The effect of these decrees is to prohibit the practice of medicine
in the Lebanon, after November 1, 1939, to any person who does not
hold the Lebanese, Syrian, or French baccalaureate diploma or the
degree of Bachelor of Arts of the American University of Beirut.
Corresponding degrees from other countries, even though equivalent
to those especially mentioned, appear to be specifically excluded
from recognition.
Under these provisions, any American physician or pharmacist would be
excluded from the right to practice his profession in the Lebanese
Republic, since it is very improbable that a person receiving his
medical training in the United States would hold any of the degrees
mentioned.
More specifically, the practical effect would be to prevent American
religious or educational missions from availing themselves of the
services of physicians of any nationality other than Lebanese,
Syrian, or
[Page 489]
French. For
instance, the American University of Beirut, the higher ranking
members of whose medical faculty have always been predominantly
American and European, would find it impracticable to exercise a
free choice in engaging foreign specialists; and several religious
missions which conduct hospitals or clinics would similarly be
prevented from entrusting the direction of these institutions to
American physicians.
It is of course realized that the purpose of the decrees in question
is the very proper one of raising the educational standards of the
medical profession in the Lebanon, and that a discrimination against
foreign physicians, or a limitation of the freedom of action of
American philanthropic institutions, is not intended. Nevertheless,
Mr. Steger would appreciate it if M. de Martel would carefully
consider the unfavorable situation which, as outlined above, would
result from a strict application of the provisions of these decrees,
as well as the possibility of taking measures which will ensure the
exemption from these provisions of medical men appointed to the
staffs of American philanthropic and educational institutions.
[Beirut,] December 15,
1933.
[Enclosure 2—Translation]
The Secretary General of the French High
Commission (Lagarde) to the American
Consul at Beirut (Steger)
No. 164
Beirut, January 8, 1934.
Mr. Consul: In a note dated December 15th,
last, you pointed out the objections in principle called forth on
your part by the provisions of legislative decrees 65, 66, and
67/L36 of the President of the Republic, regulating the
liberal professions.
These regulations, instituted with the double purpose of raising the
intellectual level and of reducing the number of candidates for the
liberal professions, require of the latter the possession of the
diploma of the Lebanese baccalaureate or of an equivalent
diploma.
The degrees admitted as being equivalent by decree No. 1633 are:
- 1.
- The Syrian baccalaureate
- 2.
- The French baccalaureate
- 3.
- The degree of Bachelor of Arts of the American University
of Beirut.
The equivalence of the Syrian baccalaureate requires no
discussion.
The Lebanese Government has admitted the French baccalaureate in view
of the fact that French is an official language in the Lebanon.
[Page 490]
It has also admitted the diploma of Bachelor of Arts of the American
University on account of the excellent education acquired in this
establishment by numerous Lebanese in the past seventy years.
While reserving an opinion with regard to the application of Article
11 of the Mandate on such matters, I believe these new regulations
cannot be criticized on the basis of this article: They do not
establish among candidates for the liberal professions any
discrimination on the basis of their nationality or of the
nationality of the institutions where the latter carried out their
studies. This is all which is required by the principle of economic
equality. It requires only an equality consisting, as in this case,
of the establishment of uniform rules applicable to all. But it is
not incompatible with de facto inequalities
resulting from the differences produced by the application of
uniform regulations to different situations.
It is quite incontestable that the principle of equivalence of
diplomas is in strict conformity with equality. In its application
de facto inequalities must perforce
occur, by virtue of the Act of the Mandate itself. Article 16, by
the terms of which “French and Arabic shall be the official
languages in Syria and the Lebanon”, authorizes the mandated States
to consider that diplomas granted by institutions not giving
instruction in one of these languages are not really equivalent to
the local diplomas, it being fundamentally impossible for their
holders to have a command of local technical terminology—a thing
which might present serious difficulties.
Aside from the above, it is well to observe that the list of degrees
admitted to be equivalent is not exclusive. In a matter where the
terms of the Mandate appear to me to grant to the local governments
a certain liberty of interpretation, I have no doubt that, should
the case arise, the Lebanese Government will show itself disposed to
examine in a favorable light the matter of admitting as equivalent
certain American diplomas, on condition, of course, that Lebanese
diplomas have the benefit of reciprocity.
Please accept [etc.]
