763.72113 Au 7/22
The Austrian Minister (Prochnik) to the Secretary of State
Excellency: This Legation has obtained information that one of the reasons, if not the chief one, for the delay experienced in the framing of a bill dealing with the return of Austrian property was the lack of sufficient particulars as to the nature and extent of potential claims, which Austrian citizens may have against the United States Government from seized patents, copyrights a. s. f.
If the legislation pertaining to the return of Austrian property is to be framed along the lines as envisaged by my Government, suggested to Your Excellency, and discussed by me with Judge Parker96 and Mr. Mills,97 I do not see, how the question of potential Austrian claims could in any way interfere with the passage of a legislative measure authorizing the Alien Property Custodian to release Austrian property under certain stipulated conditions—unless the members of the Ways and Means Committee had the German analogue in mind, overlooking or not being aware of quite a different construction contemplated in our case.
[Page 460]In the German case a sort of clearing between American claims against Germany and German claims against America had to be resorted to to enable provisions for payment of the awards of the Mixed Claims Commission, the chief prerequisite for the return of property. In the German case the creation of a special fund for the payment of such awards was under consideration and this question could only be solved by retaining part of seized private property, by alloting the unallocated interest and by crediting to Germany a certain amount in compensation for seized ships, radios, patents etc. For this reason it was necessary to estimate and settle on an approximate amount of counter claims in connection with the Bill.
In the Austrian case, however, the American claims against Austria are entirely divorced from the potential Austrian claims against the United States. The awards of the Tripartite Claims Commission will be fully paid by the Austrian Government with Government funds and no request for the return of property is made prior to a moment when the United States Treasury in agreement with Judge Parker is in a position to declare that the Government property already in said Department’s Custody and an additional cash amount to be deposited by the Austrian Government are sufficient to cover all American claims.
Austria has always maintained the standpoint that awarded American claims constitute a liability against the Austrian Government to be settled with Government funds and that this settlement in no way should interfere with the liquidation of private claims between the two countries. No matter, whether and when Austrian citizens will obtain redress or compensation for seized patents etc., or when the unallocated interest will be returned to the rightful Austrian owners, the Austrian Government is ready to provide for the payment of American claims awarded by the Tripartite Claims Commission.
Of course, the Austrian Legation could not, for the mere reason of simplifying matters, waive for private citizens of Austria whatever rights they may have or obtain to claim under similar conditions as provided for in the German Bill certain indemnities for seized and used patents. In fact such a waiver would be embarrassing and unacceptable to your Government and Congress as it would create a case of discriminative legislation.
This Legation must, therefore, reiterate its request to have an appropriate clause inserted in the Austrian Bill which would reserve to Austrian owners of patents, copyrights etc. under like or similar conditions the same rights which Congress is willing to grant to German citizens. May I recall in this connection that the Mills Bill when under advice during the last session of Congress [Page 461] actually contained such a provision in favor of Austria although it otherwise exclusively dealt with German property.
As there is no intention on our part to have whatever claim Austrian citizens may possess credited against the liability incurred by the awards of the Tripartite Claims Commission the question of determining these claims should not interfere with the passage of a Bill for the return of property. Like in the German case a special arbitration procedure shall determine, what if any Austrian claims of aforementioned nature exist, and whether and to what extent they shall be recognized. But as awards against the Austrian Government will be settled by the same regardless whatever the outcome of these arbitration proceedings may be, I see no reason why the potential claims of Austrian citizens should cause a delay in the passage of an act returning Austrian property.
The same applies to the unallocated interest which accrued from Austrian property. We expect and hope that these interest[s] will be returned to the rightful Austrian owners with the seized property, but we do not request that this amount should be computed in or deducted from the total awards to be charged by the Tripartite Claims Commission against the Austrian Government.
Austria, with other words, offers an exchange of securities—Government property for private property—it is anxious to make with Government funds such “other suitable provisions” which Congress stipulated as a prerequisite for the return of seized private property.
Your Excellency would greatly oblige me by bringing the aforesaid to the attention of Congress.98
Accept [etc.]