File No. 600.119/491
The Ambassador in Great Britain ( Page) to the Secretary of State
[Received January 25, 2.23 a.m.]
8387. War Trade Board [from Sheldon]:
No. 69. Referring your No, 10.4 Have had extended conferences with Simpkin, War Trade Intelligence, and Harwood, War Trade Statistical Department. They are both against the principle of division of rations as their previous experience in trying to make such division even as regards continents rather than countries has proved impracticable. Their belief is that the neutral buyer ought within certain limits [to] be allowed to go to the market [Page 952] that suits him best, subject to restrictions on inadvisable use of tonnage, and, as such conditions change, it is practically impossible in advance to predetermine the sources of neutral supplies. The control, however, from the point of view of tonnage should be specified in the agreements and remain in the hands of the Inter-Allied Committee. The apportionment of the commodities to be supplied from the Allied countries, owing to probable lack of competition, they believe would not lead to much friction among sellers. If you have any particular commodities in mind of Allied origin coming within the ration on which specific agreements ought to be studied, please cable us a list. It is pointed out that the ration of manufactured articles is obviously extremely difficult to apportion in advance. After discussing this matter with Frothingham, I am inclined to agree with the point of view expressed by these men who have had experience on this point.