462.00 R 296/59b: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Ambassador in France (Herrick)
409. Jusserand’s conversation yesterday afternoon stated following limitations on inquiry proposed by Poincaré:
- First. That inquiry should be limited to present capacity to pay or capacity “within a brief period.” I asked what was meant by “brief period”. Jusserand did not know. Subsequently Jusserand suggested, in emphasizing important range permitted for inquiry, that experts could take up the entire schedule of payments. I asked whether that was qualified by a limitation of inquiry to capacity to pay within a brief period. To this Jusserand could make no satisfactory reply. I finally told him on this point that I was unable to define what M. Poincaré meant by his limitation; that it was understood of course that treaty rights could not be changed without the consent of the parties and that the inquiry should be wholly advisory and within the scheme of the Treaty, and that if M. Poincaré intended to suggest a limitation upon such an inquiry it should be clearly defined.
- Second. Jusserand said that the total amount of Germany’s obligations was fixed and could not be changed without the consent of France and that there could be no consent to the experts recommending a reduction of the total. I answered, repeating that treaty rights could not be changed without the consent of France and that I saw no harm in permitting recommendations but that this question was not as serious as the limitation of the inquiry by reference to the capacity to pay within a brief period.
- Third. Jusserand said that the inquiry could not deal with the occupation of the Ruhr. I said that it was not that the experts should deal with the question of the legality of the occupation or [Page 91] with the mere political questions involved but that if it was intended to restrict an inquiry with respect to production in the Ruhr, such restriction would be very serious. The question of the capacity to pay was in substance a question of Germany’s productivity and it was quite impossible to consider the capacity of Germany to produce without taking into account production in the Ruhr.
Jusserand is to ask Poincaré for an explication of his attitude. I explained that the United States Government was merely desirous of cooperating in a practicable manner; that it was not the intention to deprive France of payments which she would otherwise be able to get; that apparently there were no reparation payments in sight and there would be none if Germany disintegrated; that even security would not be assured in that event as there might be German unity in the future and France would lose both reparations and security. I pressed Jusserand to know whether M. Poincaré had any economic program and he was unable to state. He continuously stressed the injuries which France had sustained and I dwelt upon the present situation and the importance of some constructive effort. I emphasized the importance in the interest of France herself that this inquiry which seemed the only avenue of hope should not be thwarted.
Repeat to London 330 and Brussels 77.