'File 61/11 VII (D 122) Hejaz-Nejd Miscellaneous' [‎186v] (391/454)

2
contracting party, except in the rare cases where the other contracting party
assented to the use of English alone. Further, the two texts were to be regarded
as of equal validity. In the case of treaties with Arab States, however, the
practice in the past has normally been to have both English and Arabic texts,
with the English text prevailing in case of divergence. It was therefore in
accordance with precedent that it was provided in article 10 of the Treaty of
Jedda that in case of doubt as to the interpretation of the treaty the English
text should prevail. At the same time the attempt was made to soften this
apparent discrimination against Arabic by providing that " both texts shall be
of equal validity . . . .," with the result that, although it cannot be doubted that
the English text should prevail in case of a divergence of opinion, the
phraseology of article 10 is to some extent contradictory.
5. I consider that in modern conditions it is no longer practicable in all
cases to insist upon the rule formerly observed with Arab States. In recent
years relatively large and important independent Arab States have arisen, such
as Iraq and Saudi Arabia, which must be treated in the matter of the language
of treaties on an equal footing with other independent sovereign States. A
precedent has already been established in this sense in the case of the Anglo-
Iraqi Treaty of Alliance of 1930, which does not provide for either language
prevailing iii case of doubt, but lays it down that any dispute as to interpretation
is to be dealt with by negotiation or through the League of Nations.
6. I accordingly authorise you to inform the Saudi Government that His
Majesty's Government are prepared to accede to their desire to secure equality
for the Arabic version of the Treaty of Jedda. and to provide, in any eventual
exchange of notes formally prolonging the treaty, for the necessary amendment
of the existing article 10. You should add, however, that His Majesty's
Government consider that this amendment can most conveniently and accurately
be made not by adopting the formula proposed in the draft note communicated
by Euad Bey on the 30th March, but by providing for the deletion of the words
after the semicolon in the second sentence of article 10, so as to leave the
operative portion of the article to run as follows without any risk of
ambiguity ;—
" The present treaty has been drawn up in English and Arabic. Both
texts shall be of equal validity."
I consider that this modification could best be effected by means of an
explanatory paragraph in the eventual exchange of notes prolonging the Treaty
of Jedda, which would put on record the agreed amendment and set out the
revised wording of the article.
7. In view of the fact that (as you yourself reported in your despatch
No. 113 of the 11th April) there has hitherto been no dispute over the interpre
tation of the actual wording of the treaty, I consider that it would be both
unnecessary and undesirable to embark on a possibly difficult attempt to find a
formula providing for any such dispute to be settled by arbitration or any other
means. You should therefore avoid raising on your account the question of the
inclusion of any provision of this nature.
I am, &c.
ANTHONY EDEN.