Mr. BLOOM. In reference to your amendment, a bill, I believe, has been placed before the committee now providing for the same thing you are trying to do, it is either the amendment or the bill.

Mr. YOUNGDAHL. It is all right, sir.

Mr. BLOOM. Either the amendment or the bill may seek the same end. Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. Chairman, in order that we may understand, will you give the date that your claim was incurred?

Mr. YOUNGDAHL. I will ask Mr. Lockwood, the secretary-treasurer of the company.

Mr. JOHNSON. Just the year.

Mr. YOUNGDAHL. Mr. Lockwood will give the facts.

Mr. JOHNSON. I don't care about the fact. I just want the date.
Mr. YOUNGDAHL. Mr. Lockwood will give that.

STATEMENT OF GEORGE H. LOCKWOOD, SECRETARY-TREASURER
OF THE TABASCO PLANTATION CO., CLAIMANT CORPORATION,
RELATIVE TO THE STATUS OF THE COMPANY'S CLAIM AGAINST
MEXICO

Mr. BLOOM. Will you give your name and address?

Mr. LOCKWOOD. George H. Lockwood.

Mr. BLOOM. Whom do you represent?

Mr. LOCKWOOD. I represent the Tabasco Plantation Co.-secretarytreasurer.

Mr. BLOOM. Where are they?

Mr. LOCKWOOD. Two thousand six hundred stockholders.

Mr. BLOOM. Where are they located?

Mr. LOCKWOOD. About a thousand are located in the northwestern part of Minnesota and the rest are distributed quite generally throughout the United States.

The losses as represented in these claims of the Tabasco Plantation Co. all took place during the years 1912 to 1920, the years of revolutionary activity. Senator Sheppard has stated our case in a general way so I shall not take the time of this committee to go into general details. We were all sufferers together in the fight with Mexico at that time. We were all invited to go down there and were urged in every way possible to come into the country and promised every sort of a guaranty. In our particular case our machinery was admitted free of duty. We were told we were doing a splendid thing for the country. Naturally we were made promises of every kind. Our claim represents a total of $2,836,000 out of a total investment of over $4,000,000 in a cane-sugar industry.

We were hampered, and burned, and pillaged, and one of our officials was murdered, who happened to be a cousin of President Woodrow Wilson. The body was stripped and the pay roll taken. I could go on but I shall not take your time with the details. Surrounded finally by rebellious elements we were forced to close down our enterprise entirely in 1917. We were, figuratively speaking, choked to death. We could not get our sugar out. Our claim was filed in 1923. We filed our claim under both the General and Special Commissions because at the time there were certain terms and conditions and features that made it difficult to determine exactly under which commission our claim should be filed. And so, as many of us did, we filed under both Commissions.

Mr. BLOOM. You filed under the Special and General Commissions? Mr. LOCKWOOD. Special and General. In fact, it was one commission at that time. It was not until the Protocol of 1934, as you know, that there were two distinct Commissions.

Mr. JOHNSON. As I understand, your claim could not be involved in this bill because it was after the date. The Special Claims covered the claims during the revolutionary period and that is when you say your claim occurred, and there was a Commission created for the payment of those claims and claims have been allowed and the Mexican Government is paying. Why didn't you get an award under the Special Claims? That is the Commission under which you would expect, and have a right to expect, compensation.

Mr. LOCKWOOD. I will reply to that by saying, as this Segregation Commission took our claim up for consideration in Mexico City, it was allowed to be classified as a general claim. Of course, that meant a saving to the Mexico Government of some eighty-odd-thousand dollars. The Mexican Government agreed by the 1934 Protocol to offset with the United States Treasury 2.6 percent of the gross claims considered as special. And it was naturally in the interest of the Mexican commissioner of the Segregation Commission to have a large claim like ours assigned to the General Commission. Now, our claim was considered by the agents of both the Special Commissionthe American Special Commission-and the Mexican special agent, both of them decided that our claim was special. Nevertheless our claim rested with the General Commission at the time it went out of existence, and it had never acted on it. It never sent our claim to the Special Commission. It simply expired by limitation without acting. Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. Chairman, I do not know, of course, but it strikes me with the limited time we have on this bill, it is apparent that the claim referred to is not pertinent or germane to the bill in question because it occurred at another period of time when there was a commission set up for the payment of those claims. Those claims are being paid and have been allowed. And if we go on taking up claims of people we will never get anywhere and we will take up the whole history of 100 years.

I think the other legislation passed created a special commission and the claims are being paid by the Mexican Government at the rate of $500,000 a year. Those claimants are getting their payment where they were approved. And this bill now before us has to do with an old commission which was created a long time and nothing was done about it. They occupy an entirely different position. And while I am sure the gentleman feels very deeply that he has not been treated fairly, yet I think that it is not germane to this bill at this time in view of the fact we have people here from all over the country to be presented, whose claims are covered within this bill and about which there is no question this is the identical bill to take care of them. It strikes me we ought not to follow into too many collateral issues.

Mr. KEE. Mr. Chairman, haven't we a bill before us covering the case presented by the gentleman? That is, H. R. 1821, presented by Mr. Dempsey? The gentleman suggested they have an amendment to this bill which they want to offer. I suggest we receive that amendment and determine then whether or not it is germane. We do not know whether it is germane or not until we see the amendment.

Mr. BLOOM. I will say this. The committee sympathizes with what you are trying to do but I am somewhat afraid if we accept your amendment, and your claim, and put it into this bill, it would throw it entirely open to an entirely different procedure to what has been done heretofore. It would not do you any good and at the same time might destroy the purpose of this legislation. If you will kindly wait until we get through with Mr. Dempsey and see if that satisfies you and maybe take your claim on there.

Mr. KEE. My suggestion is that these gentlemen be permitted to file whatever they have.

Mr. BLOOM. Yes. Without objection it is so ordered. They will be permitted to file any brief statement for the record.

Mr. VORYS. Is your claim excluded because it was presented too late or because it arose too early?

Mr. BLOOM. Or because it is within a different category, a general claim or a special claim? Is that right, Mr. Vorys?

Mr. VORYS. Well, it is not clear in my mind what the difference is between a general and a special one. I wonder if you could answer the question?

Mr. LOCKWOOD. Well, a special claim, as I understand it, represents claims arising out of purely revolutionary activities.

Mr. JOHNSON. During a certain period of time. There are certain dates which set the boundary limits, in which one goes in either the one or the other. They are entirely separate and they are treated separately.

Mr. LOCKWOOD. 1910 to 1920.

Mr. VORYS. And there is a Special Claims Commission?

Mr. JOHNSON. Yes; a Special Claims Commission, and money is being paid on the claims adjudicated.

Mr. VORYS. This is the one on which $500,000 a year is being paid by Mexico?

Mr. BLOOM. A million dollars a year, if you don't mind.

Mr. JOHNSON. No.

Mr. VORYS. NO. A million dollars is for something else. Now, what do you say, yours is in that group?

Mr. LOCKWOOD. Ours was decided as a general claim.

Mr. JOHNSON. Well, if it occurred during a certain time it is general or special. The date determines it, not your judgment.

Mr. LOCKWOOD. The date of the hearing?

Mr. JOHNSON. The date the claim accrued or happened.

Mr. VORYS. He says his accrued in 1917.

Mr. LockwOOD. 1910 to 1920.

Mr. JOHNSON. That is when they set the special claims date. Judge FITZHUGH. It is the period of time plus whether or not the claim originated in a revolutionary act. Now, there are general claims that come out of that same period of time but it is because the claim did not originate in a revolutionary act. A special claim is a claim which originated between December 1910 and May 1920 out of a revolutionary activity.

Mr. JOHNSON. Both must concur?

Judge FITZHUGH. Yes; it takes those two things.

Mr. JOHNSON. Other claims, aside from that are general claims? Judge FITZHUGH. All other claims aside from them are general claims.

Mr. BLooM. Does that answer your question, Mr. Vorys ?
Mr. VORYS. Are those the claims that are before us?

Judge FITZHUGH. No; those are of a kind not before us. Ours is a general claim and only those that have been reduced to an award. The others are special claims. I see what the difficulty with the gentleman is. His claim has never been determined and it has been pitched back and forth from one commission to another and they have never gotten any adjudication on their claim.

Mr. IzAC. This bill would not cover that at all, Mr. Chairman. Mr. LOCKWOOD. Our claim has been decided as a general claim. Mr. Izac. It has never been adjudicated, Mr. Chairman. Therefore it does not come under this.

Mr. YOUNGDAHL. May we have the privilege of filing a statement and may I have the right to revise my remarks?

Mr. BLOOM. Yes. Without objection, it is so ordered.

STATEMENT OF GEORGE H. LOCKWOOD, SECRETARY-TREASURER OF THE TABASCO PLANTATION Co., CLAIMANT CORPORATION, RELATIVE TO THE STATUS OF THE COMPANY'S CLAIM AGAINST MEXICO

The Tabasco Plantation Co. was duly incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware on June 13, 1901. The authorized capital stock of the corporation was $5,000,000, divided into 16,666% shares of $300 each. The nature of the company's business and the objects and purposes for which the corporation was formed were to purchase and acquire landed property in the Republic of Mexico in order to develop the resources thereof, and to transact and carry on all the necessary business, construction, and development work incident thereto.

All of the funds acquired by the Tabasco Plantation Co., hereinafter referred to as the claimant corporation, were obtained through the sale of its capital stock to approximately 2,600 citizens of the United States, except 150 of whom reside in Canada. The shares of stock in the claimant corporation were, in the main, sold to small subscribers on the installment plan, providing for payment over a period of years; this plan being necessary because practically all of the stock subscribers were from the working class of American citizens who did not have cash available to pay for the shares in full at the date of purchase.

In carrying out its object and purpose, the claimant corporation legally acquired by cash purchase two plantations in Mexico; one plantation, known as the "La Oaxaquena," being situated in the municipality of Suschilapan, in the district of Minatillan, in the State of Veracruz, and the other, known as the "San Miguel" being situated in the municipality of Tacatalpa, in the State of Tabasco. The two plantations consisted of 24,800 acres and 7,500 acres of land, respectively.

Upon the acquisition of its interest in the two plantations in Mexico, the claimant corporation proceeded with the development of its properties. Large sums of money were expended in clearing the jungle and forest lands and in preparing the same for sugarcane planting, for the cultivation and production of cocoa and bananas, and for use as a cattle ranch. Modern sugar and alcohol mills and distilleries, fully equipped with modern and expensive machinery, were erected on the plantations. In addition, the claimant corporation erected office buildings, warehouses, commissaries, hospitals, residences for its employees, a necessary sugarcane railroad, and other necessary buildings required for the proper conduct and operation of its sugar mills and distilleries.

By June 30, 1909, the claimant corporation had invested in its plantations for materials, labor, and permanent improvements, the sum of $3,256,356.97. In addition to the expenditures for permanent improvements, the claimant corporation placed on the plantations, livestock, stores, and materials making the total capital invested in the enterprise amount to $3,338,998.16. Subsequent to June 30, 1900, the claimant corporation continued to develop and improve its properties in Mexico. From June 30, 1909, to June 30, 1912, the claimant corporation increased its capital investment in its Mexican properties from $3,338,998.16 to $4,014,314.42, a net further capital investment of $675,316.26 in 3 years. Of this total amount $3,580,706.11 represented the amount invested in the "La

Oaxaquena" plantation, and $433,608.31 represented the amount invested in the "San Miguel" plantation.

Up to the beginning of 1912 the claimant corporation's possession and management of the plantations was quite and highly successful. The enterprise being well planned and firmly established was a "going" one, founded on a sound financial basis and destined to net a good profit to its owners. For the year ending June 30, 1911, the net profit from the "La Oaxaquena" plantation was $69,876.84. For the year ending June 30, 1912, the net profit was $113,090.09, indicating that the enterprise was just then beginning to show some returns from the years of development work.

However, as a result of the disturbed conditions, revolutionary and rebel activities in the year 1912 in Mexico and in the general vicinity of the claimant corporation's plantation, and by reason of the failure of the existing government in Mexico to offer protection and security, the successful management and operation of the enterprise was seriously interfered with and interrupted and the production on the plantation diminished. Armed revolutionary forces operating on and in the vicinity of the claimant properties interfered with and collected tribute from the claimant corporation. The Federal forces of the Government of Mexico never seriously combated the revolutionary forces, and allowed them to prey upon the countryside. The claimant corporation's property was requisitioned by both the Federal troops of Mexico and the revolutionary forces. Between July 3, 1915, and December 8, 1916, the revolutionary forces of Alvaro T. Alor, raided the claimant's plantation 19 times, destroying, plundering, and appropriating property on each occasion. Incursions and raids by lawless elements were a daily occurrence. Demands for money and merchandise as tribute for the noninterference with the operations of the plantation were made and complied with.

Due to the utter failure of the Mexican Government to afford adequate protection, the district wherein the claimant corporation's properties were situated was controlled and dominated by various revolutionary forces. Occasionally Federal troops patrolled the district and when they did they were quartered on the claimant's corporation's plantation at its expense, as a result of which the revolutionary forces singled out the claimant corporation's properties for further depredations and raids, upon the withdrawal of the Federal troops.

By reason of the activities of the revolutionary forces, and Federal troops in and about the claimant corporation's properties and throughout the districts, the business and successful operation and management of the plantation became impossible. Lawlessness had become widespread and no efforts were made to suppress it. The absence of law, order, and protection on the part of the Federal, State, or local authorities, rendered impossible and prevented the continued operation of the plantations. Bands of rebels and armed forces, without restraint, hindrance, or fear of punishment, roamed over and lived upon the country and the claimant corporation's plantations. The shutting off of transportation facilities of men, supplies, and products of the plantation, the depredations committed, the demands made, the utter failure to afford any protection and the danger to life so dislocated the operation and management of the plantations that on or about May 1, 1917, the claimant corporation was compelled to discontinue and abandon the operation and management of its properties and plantations in their entirety, with a loss to it of its entire capital investment.

As a result of the loss suffered by the claimant corporation, and pursuant to the terms of agreements of September 8, 1923, and September 10, 1923, between the United States and Mexico, identical claims against the Government of Mexico on behalf of the claimant corporation were filed with the General Claims Commission and with the Special Claims Commission, in the sum of $2.250,000 each.

The claims were filed for "the confiscation of plantations, loss and destruction of cane fields, buildings, and other property, forced loans, interruption of business, taking of marine equipment, damage to sugar factory, distillery, and other buildings, and losses due to depreciation and repudiation of Mexican currency and various and sundry losses due to numerous acts of armed Mexican forces." The claims on behalf of the claimant corporation against Mexico were filed on August 21, 1925, and September 15, 1925, respectively.

Under the conventions of September 8. 1923, and September 10, 1923, the Government of the United States and the Government of Mexico agreed to