871.75 Int.Tel.&Tel.Corp./27
The Chargé in Rumania (Wadsworth) to the Secretary of State
[Received January 11, 1935.]
Sir: Supplementing my despatch No. 204 of December 8, 1934, reporting regarding the dispute between the Rumanian Telephone ‘Company and the Rumanian Government following the official search on November 30, last, of the Company’s Bucharest premises and of the private residence of its American General Manager, I have the honor to submit the following report of the circumstances attending and the basis of what appears to be satisfactory final settlement of the case.
My preliminary report ended on the note that, while not seriously fearing such an eventuality, the Company’s General Manager, Mr. Ogilvie, was not prepared to dismiss as mere speculation rumors that the Rumanian military authorities had in mind eventual cancellation of the Company’s concession, as a necessary preliminary to state operation of the country’s telephone services. He was convinced that, in any event, those authorities; would not rest until they had concluded arrangements for supervising the Company’s normal technical interception service of local calls.
On the latter point Mr. Ogilvie was shown to have been correct; for on December 9, the day following the mailing of my despatch under reference, he was called to the Ministry of the Interior for a lengthy conference with the police and military authorities. On the ground that Bucharest was “under state of siege” (despatch No. 175 of September 28, 193422) it was the delegate of the “General Commandant of the Place” who directed the discussion.
The latter dismissed as largely irrelevant and of internal political interest only the then current parliamentary discussion of the matter; and he insisted that a military technical service of supervision be installed in the Company’s two Bucharest centrals. The upshot of the discussion was that Mr. Ogilvie willingly agreed to this “request,” provided the Ministry of National Defense should make it in writing of [to] the Company and that there should be published at the same time an appropriate statement in the press. These conditions were accepted by the Interior and National Defense Ministries; and, on the following day, December 10, a letter (translation enclosed)22 was addressed to the. Company and the following communiqué was published widely in the local press (translation from the Independance Roumaine, No. 17,933 of December 12, published December 11): [Page 682]
The Ministry of National Defense, at the instance of the Ministry of the Interior and in accord with the Telephone Company, has instituted as of December 8 an inspection service, exercised by military technical experts, at the telephone centrals of the Capital. The said military experts will permanently assure themselves that the Telephone Company practices no interception of conversations whatsoever, apart from that of technical observation necessary to proper service functioning.
The underlined clause of this communiqué23 was inserted at Mr. Ogilvie’s urgent insistence; and although he was not successful in obtaining inclusion of a clause specifically exonerating the Company from the original charge of “interception of telephone conversations to the detriment of the superior interests of the State,” he took the position that the dispute could be considered as ended. On the same day the envisaged military control was installed; and, as a matter of fact, its activities have since been strictly limited to the stated objective.
Concurrent with the above-reported negotiations, Mr. Ogilvie had received a number of telegrams from his New York principals indicating in no uncertain terms that they were highly disturbed over the course of events in Bucharest. News “stories” had appeared, they reported, in the European and American press under glaring headlines of which the following paraphrases are Suggestive:
Rumanian Government Takes Over American Telephone Company Concession. Twenty-six American Spies Arrested in Bucharest. Military Authorities Search American Manager’s Home. King Carol’s Private Lines Tapped.
Also, on the preceding morning (Sunday, December 9) the important local newspaper Curentul (No. 2468, dated December 10) had reported:
The affair of the raid on the Telephone Company has taken on a diplomatic character. The Minister of the United States has filed a formal protest at the Foreign Ministry on this question.
This report led to my receiving telephone calls from the Bucharest representatives of various foreign news services (United Press, Reuters and the International News and Universal Services) who had been following closely and reporting on developments in the matter. The nature of my replies will be noted below.24
The combination of these two last-mentioned developments led Mr. Ogilvie to solicit the Legation’s assistance. At his suggestion I requested that the Undersecretary for Foreign Affairs, Mr. Savel Radulescu, receive me. Appointment was made for the, following day, December 11.
[Page 683]On the occasion of my visit I set forth the circumstances outlined above, emphasizing that I was particularly pleased that the matter had apparently received a local solution satisfactory to all parties concerned. But I added that both Mr. Ogilvie and his American principals felt strongly that some assurance should be forthcoming from the Rumanian Government that neither he nor the American Management of the Company were suspected of espionage or any other action “to the detriment of the superior interests of the State.” I asked, also, whether, in view of the exaggerated foreign press reports of the matter, the Undersecretary did not believe that, if further questioned, both he and I should make appropriate calming reply to the foreign correspondents. In conclusion, and without making an issue of the point, I asked that, for the Legation’s future guidance, I be informed as to the Government’s view as to whether, under state of siege, the military authorities might properly proceed, without search warrant, to the search of an American resident’s private house.
To my first question Mr. Radulescu replied that he, personally, could assure me that Mr. Ogilvie was not suspected of actions against the security of the State and that he would be pleased to obtain from the Prime Minister and to telephone me a formal assurance in that sense. To my second, he approved my suggestion that I inform the foreign correspondents that I had not lodged formal diplomatic protest but, rather, had simply, in view of the importance of the American interests involved, made representations to obtain information in the matter (“que vous avez fait des démarches pour obtenir des éclaircis-sements”). To my third question, i. e., that touching the right of search of the military authorities, he promised to obtain and communicate to me an authorized reply.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Here the matter rested for four days, when (on December 15) Mr. Radulescu telephoned me. Our conversation is recorded in a letter (copy enclosed)25 which I thereupon addressed to Mr. Ogilvie. In this letter I report Mr. Radulescu as saying:
I telephone you to give you authorized replies to the two questions you put to me the other day (Tuesday a.m., December 11).
In reply to the first question the authorized reply is: “Mr. Ogilvie has never been suspected of espionage.”
In reply to the second: A search warrant is not necessary during state of siege; all that is required is the order of and the presence of an authorized representative of the parquet militaire (military public prosecutor’s office).
In the matter of the above-quoted reply to my second question the Department may wish to instruct me. If so, the enclosed brief legal [Page 684] opinion on the subject,26 kindly prepared by the Legation’s attorney, Dr. Mihail Stern, may be of interest.
Here I close my report proper of the circumstances in which apparent settlement has been effected of the original dispute between the Rumanian Government and the Rumanian Telephone Company.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Respectfully yours,