500.A15a3/1571: Telegram

The Secretary of State to the Ambassador in Great Britain (Dawes)

[Paraphrase]

140. Reference to telegram No. 57 of May 16, 6 p.m., from Berne, which is being repeated to you, and my No. 112 of May 1, 5 p.m. If you find it to be true as it is reported here that the British Government is already studying a new French proposal, please inform Department of its terms as soon as you have learned what they are. Present the following suggestions only upon subsequent instruction:

Certain progress is being made at Geneva, it would seem, toward the solution of the remaining Franco-Italian naval difficulties. You may, in your discretion, and in view of Mr. Henderson’s previous request for suggestions which was transmitted in the Embassy’s telegram No. 48 of February 20, 1 p.m.,26 inform the Prime Minister (since Henderson is absent) of certain suggestions which we believe may contribute toward a solution of the present naval problems still outstanding. These ideas are to be considered as nothing more than tentative suggestions advanced in a spirit of helpfulness. No doubt certain of them are already under discussion.

1.
An alteration of the March 1 Bases of Agreement so that, except for the 66,000 tons over which there is a difference, dates could be spaced for the laying down of ships.
2.
Such spacing would cover tne period up to the end of the year 1935 instead of the period to July 1, 1935, which the French proposal contemplates. This would tend to relieve British apprehension as to French construction being crowded into too brief a period. It would also give the conference scheduled for 1935 a longer time in which to work.
3.
France would necessarily be free to lay down 66,000 tons of replacement after December 31, 1935, if the conference of that year failed to produce any satisfactory agreement. To meet this contingency Great Britain might now expressly reserve the right to use the escape clause of the London Treaty, if she deems that course necessary after the conclusion of the 1935 conference. Great Britain would nave a [Page 419] considerable period before the end of the year 1935 to do such laying down as might be deemed necessary if the conference of 1935 were to assemble, for instance, as early as January of that year.

As Mr. Henderson knows, I share with him both his desire for the success of the General Disarmament Conference and his belief that Franco-Italian accord is a necessary antecedent to that success. I make the above suggestions only in view of the inquiry which Mr. Henderson has made, for I have no desire to intrude into the negotiations which have been so ably conducted by him and by Mr. Alexander. It seems to me that out of these suggestions there might be shaped a compromise plan which would limit Franco-Italian construction until at least 1935 and which would at the same time eliminate the danger to Great Britain suggested in Mr. Alexander’s memorandum (your No. 131 of May 2, 9 p.m.).

Stimson
  1. Not printed.