861.00/5556: Telegram
The Commission to Negotiate Peace to the Secretary of State
Paris, October 31,
1919, 11 p.m.
[Received November 1, 8:35 p.m.]
[Received November 1, 8:35 p.m.]
4937. R–27 to Secretary of Treasury.
- 1st.
- Reference your unnumbered 3427, October 15th, 1 p.m., regarding repatriation of troops in Siberia. If as I understand these troops are to be moved by all water route doubt if France can supply tonnage. Polk tells me useless to endeavor to secure help from Japan or Italy. Accordingly British have been informed (a) if they agree to move one half [troops United States Treasury will provide movement of other one half] which will not require greater credit than that mentioned in paragraph two, (b) any assistance in movement by other countries to equally reduce burden undertaken by United States and British, (c) our finance will have to be provided by advances to Czecho-Slovakia only, except as small amounts [Page 310] might be available from unexpended balances of loans to Serbia and possibly Roumania.
- 2d.
- As I understand (see Mission’s 4598, October 9, midnight, to State Department) that total number of troops to be moved is approximately 72,000, the cost of moving 36,000 at figure mentioned your despatch of R–20 which seems high would be well within the $12,000,000 credit the President has authorized for Czecho-Slovakia.
- 3d.
- Expect British reply in day or so.
- 4th.
- Osusky, representative of Czecho-Slovakia, called on me this morning as requested by telegram from Czecho-Slovak Commissioner in Washington. I explained to him Treasury attitude and proposition made to British. Took occasion also to insist that Czecho-Slovaks should fulfill their existing contract to supply certain coal to Austria as the situation in Austria, owing to shortage of coal and food is likely to become desperate within thirty or sixty days unless relief measures can be devised.
- [5th.]
- Though British have not yet referred to it in connection with repatriation of troops in Siberia, I fear attitude of our Shipping Board may make it impossible to induce British to accept the proposition mentioned in paragraph 1st of this cable. See second section State Department’s confidential cable to Polk 3532, October 22, 8 p.m.23 If Shipping Board is to use what is in effect British tonnage to repatriate troops in Siberia for our one half share movement, can we insist British should also supply balance of tonnage required? While I am not familiar with financial arrangement of Shipping Board regarding use of ships, fear that its attitude may result either in our being saddled with entire cost movement of troops from Siberia or being forced to abandon project. Would appreciate advices from you on this phase of matter. Rathbone.
American Mission