711.522/73: Telegram
The Ambassador in Spain (Moore) to the Secretary of State
[Paraphrase]
Madrid, July 12, 1923—noon.
[Received 7:38 p.m.]
[Received 7:38 p.m.]
68. Your no. 42, July 10, 5 p.m.
- 1.
- Paragraph 2, your telegram. Spain will under no circumstances agree to use the term “most-favored-nation treatment”, which conflicts with the national laws. We propose to accomplish the same object by submitting a list of the articles which it is desired to export to Spain together with the rates of duty specified for each article; these rates are to be the same as the lowest rates stipulated in treaties between Spain and other countries with general principle like that contained in article 5 of the British treaty; Spain to submit to us a list of articles exportable to the United States on which the rate of duty would be fixed as provided in our tariff act. This is our plan of procedure although the Spanish Government has expressed no agreement to it and no definite suggestion will be made that Government until I shall have received instructions.
- 2.
- Your paragraph 3. (a) Spanish law does not require the admission of specific articles, wines, for example, but a provision for the admission of wine for all lawful purposes namely, medicinal and sacramental, was made a condition to the negotiation, (b)Spanish law does not require a reduction of the tariff on any particular articles, but it does require reciprocal concessions or “advantages” to be made in the treaty for reductions far below the second column.18 (The Department’s attention is invited to the first disposition [sic] of the law quoted in Mr. Hackworth’s memorandum of June 1319 and to schedules A and B attached to the treaty with Great Britain.)
- 3.
- Your paragraph 4. Paragraph 4 of my telegram was evidently garbled. The Spanish Government understands clearly that the United States can not permit the admission of any liquor for beverage purposes. They were referring to wines for medicinal and sacramental purposes. They desire wine to be mentioned in the treaty in order to satisfy influential Spanish wine interests.
- 4.
- Your paragraph 5. Yes. Both matters were fully explained to the Spanish Commission.
- 5.
- Your paragraphs 1 and 6. Department will please see my no. 67, July 11, 5 p.m.
- 6.
- Our purpose was not to make any concessions unless absolutely necessary to do so, but to ascertain how far we are to be permitted to go if necessary.
Moore
- The “second column” was the tariff rate usually imposed, being applicable to countries which did not discriminate against Spain’s commerce; although in theory this tariff was the minimum, the Law of Authorization of 1922 permitted conditional concessions, thus creating what was actually a “third column”.↩
- Not printed.↩