462.00 R 296/728: Telegram
The Ambassador in France (Herrick) to the Secretary of State
535. L–266 [from Logan]. Reference Department’s 152.91
- 1.
- At experts’ meeting this morning I made the simple oral statement that the Government of the United States had two general claims against Germany, namely, claims for damages to persons and property, and pre-war debts; that it anticipated the concurrence of the interested Governments in securing satisfaction to these claims through the Dawes Plan annuities. I emphasized the belief that our right to this participation in the Dawes annuities was so obviously sound from the points of view of both law and equity that I did not anticipate any denial of such recognition from the interested Governments. I added that a detailed statement of the ground on which we based our claims would seem unnecessary at this time.
- 2.
- The French and Belgian representatives then stated that regardless of the legal bases of our claim on which they reserved their Governments’ [position, they?] were prepared to fully support our position on the grounds of equity.
- 3.
- The Italian representative stated that he personally supported our position on equitable grounds, but that he had no instructions from his Government. [Paraphrase.] He told me privately yesterday that he had been informed from Rome that the Italian Government could not support our position on legal grounds and that he was without instructions in regard to support from point of view of equity. He acknowledged his personal support after I had summarized our position, and he said he would communicate to his Government the broad grounds of our position with recommendation that they be considered favorably.
- 4.
- Japanese delegate remarked that though personally he supported our position he also was without instructions from Japanese Government. After the meeting I told him privately I should be glad to give him orally expose of broad grounds of American position. I shall do this this afternoon. He had promised to ask his Government for immediate instructions. [End paraphrase.]
- 5.
- British representative remarked that he had no information to support our position either from an equitable or a legal basis but he felt before the British Government would give its approval the committee of experts should be fully informed of the figure and details of our claims. I replied that before giving any figures or details [Page 93] whatever it seemed to me that the question of principle should be settled, that until such [was] established it would be futile to discuss details. I proposed therefore that the committee adjourn until the British representative could be instructed by his Government, since no useful purpose [could be?] served by the committee until the British attitude in this respect [were] known. The British representative replied that he regretted this proposal since it would involve a delay. I replied that any delay would be due to the failure of the British Government to reach a decision. He agreed to my proposal and the committee adjourned.
[Paraphrase]
- 6.
- I have telephoned full account of meeting to Ambassador Kellogg, who approves the stand I took and will press for early determination of position of British Government on question of general principles. I am not wholly satisfied with Italian stand and am hoping Department will be able to find some means of strengthening it.
- 7.
- On the whole I am pleased with today’s developments. Because of firm and unequivocal support of both the French and the Belgians I feel almost certain the British will ultimately come into line. The press in both France and Belgium is beginning to show interest in the proceedings of the committee and to comment favorably on our position. Undoubtedly there will be some leakage of the proceedings of this morning’s committee meeting which I feel may be helpful in getting our position recognized by British.
- 8.
- Repeated to Embassies at London and Rome. Logan.
Herrick