500.A15a3/1251
Memorandum by the Secretary of State
The French Ambassador called today and first asked whether I had read his note of two days ago. I told him that I had received a verbal report of it through Mr. Marriner but had not read it myself. I sent for Mr. Marriner who came in with the report and the Ambassador then said he did not have anything further to discuss about it.
It then developed what his real mission was. He asked me about his suggestion the other day of having France build battleships under her rights in the Washington Treaty and asked whether I had reported that to Mr. Gibson. The information which I had just received from Mr. Constantine Brown about a half an hour before, as to the difference between the French Admiralty and the French Government, at once recurred to my mind. I asked the French Ambassador whether I correctly understood his proposition to be that if France built these 3 battleships, as she had a right to do under the Treaty, this would serve to establish the superiority over Italy which she desired and would permit France to be generous to Italy in the other categories, namely, the auxiliary ships? He at once said that that was his idea. I said, of course if his proposition merely was that France would build the battleships and then also insist upon her contention of superiority over Italy in the auxiliary vessels, it would be of no assistance. He said, “Oh, no. My proposition was the first one that you mentioned.” I then said in response to his question that I did not report this to Mr. Gibson because I had thought that this suggestion came from the French Government and that in that case of course Mr. Gibson would already have it from Mr. Tardieu. The French Ambassador at once said, “No, that was my suggestion. Not my Government’s. It is to be taken as originating in the air and was suggested as a means of helping.” I thanked him warmly for his kindness in coming to correct the error which I had made and said that I would report it to Gibson at once.
The foregoing would seem to be a clear confirmation of Constantine Brown’s statement about Sablé’s attitude, namely, that the French [Page 174] Admiralty has a plan which they would agree to and they have been trying to get it to us in this indirect way. In view of this, his statement to the effect that Tardieu is opposed to this proposition on account of its expense and prefers to try to maintain French superiority in auxiliary construction in order to achieve his aim of superiority over Italy and still keep his budget lowered, may also be correct.