462.00 R 296/66: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Ambassador in France (Herrick)
415. Your 459, November 10, noon,36 and 460, November 10, 7 p.m.
I stated in Departments 414, November 9, 6 p.m., the exact results of negotiations. Nothing has been done since. Negotiations have ended only in the sense that I told Jusserand that in the opinion of this Government the limitations insisted upon by Poincaré would frustrate the purpose of the inquiry suggested in my communication of October 15th.
It should be borne in mind that question arose over scope of invitation proposed to be extended for American participation in inquiry of experts. While the terms of this invitation were under consideration by Allies, Jusserand was instructed to advise me of limitations imposed by Poincaré. When these were defined I stated our position as above.
It is not desired that you should go into any diffuse discussion orally or in writing which would obscure situation now well understood by public. In this view I think it best to make a brief answer to Poincaré’s letter and avoid any invitation to controversial correspondence.
Accordingly you may answer Poincaré’s letter, as follows:
“I have not failed to inform my Government of your letter of blank date and I am directed to reply that the position of my Government, as stated in the Aide-Mémoire handed to the British Embassy at Washington on October 15th in reply to their communication, and since published and made available to your Government, remains unchanged. This position has been re-stated in the conversations which have taken place between the Secretary of State and Ambassador Jusserand.
It was made clear that the proposed inquiry-was to be wholly advisory and that no government was to be asked to make commitments in advance but would be free to accept or reject the recommendations [Page 98] which might follow the inquiry. With this understanding, my Government has hoped that the experts would be left free to develop for the consideration of the respective governments a comprehensive financial plan with respect to reparations which might aid in averting economic disaster and in re-establishing the essential conditions of European peace and economic restoration. The experts themselves would be in a position to judge of the practicable extent of such a plan and any recommendation they might make could be considered on its merits.
My Government has regretfully been compelled to reach the conclusion that the limitations which you have proposed with respect to the inquiry would frustrate this purpose, and this was the opinion expressed to Ambassador Jusserand. I can assure you that your friendly sentiments are most cordially reciprocated.
Accept, Sir, etc. etc.”
- Not printed.↩