611.6131/466: Telegram
The Ambassador in the Soviet Union (Davies) to the Secretary of State
Moscow, July 25,
1937—8 p.m.
[Received July 26—7:15 a.m.]
[Received July 26—7:15 a.m.]
190. Your 108, July 23, 1 p.m.
- 1.
- The representatives of the Commissariat for Foreign Trade were unable to be present at the conference held this afternoon.
- 2.
- The representatives of the Foreign Office who received us were informed that it was impossible for the American Government to consider proposals calling for the modification of the clause relating to the exports of arms and were given the reasons therefor.
- 3.
- They were also told that although the American Government might be willing to consider some reservation with respect to the amount of purchases in case of an adverse court decision it nevertheless felt that since such a reservation would tend to weaken the effect which the agreement would have upon the American public and to draw undue attention to the situation with respect to coal, it would prefer that no such reservation be included.
- 4.
- The Foreign Office officials stated that they had another suggestion, namely, that the Soviet Government would agree to set the limit of coal to be exported to the United States at a figure lower than 400,000 tons and that in return for this concession the American Government would agree to omit from its note regarding the ruling of the Treasury the phrase “subject, however, to possible adverse action by the courts” (see Department’s telegram No. 90, July 12, 7 p.m.).
- 5.
- They were advised that it would be useless to transmit such a suggestion to the American Government since it was clear that the Executive Branch of the Government could make no promise with respect to duties on coal without simultaneously making reservations with respect to such action as the Judicial Branch might take. The Embassy could therefore state at once that there was no use discussing (his suggestion.
- 6.
- The Foreign Office officials thereupon stated that in the absence of a representative of the Commissariat for Foreign Trade and in view of our refusal to consider their suggestion regarding the omission of the phrase quoted above they could go no further without additional instructions.
- 7.
- Since it was apparent that a flat acceptance of their proposal to reduce their purchase commitments in case of an adverse court decision would not at this juncture expedite the conclusion of an agreement we decided that it would be inadvisable to show at this meeting our willingness fully to accept that proposal.
- 8.
- We stated our regret that, as a result of new proposals made by the Soviet Government at this stage of the negotiations, the reaching of an agreement had again been delayed. They stated that they hoped after discussions with their superiors to talk with us again tomorrow.
- 9.
- It may be stated that Foreign Office appears to be in a state of considerable confusion. Neymann, principal Soviet negotiator, has “unexpectedly gone away on leave” and his colleagues seem uncertain and afraid to take responsibility.79
Davies