550.S1/878
The American Member on the Organizing Committee for the Monetary and Economic Conference (Davis) to the Secretary of State
[Received June 3.]
Dear Mr. Secretary: You will have received directly from Mr. Atherton a copy of the minutes of the meeting of the Organizing Committee for the Monetary and Economic Conference which was held on May 12, 1933 to adopt the tariff truce. These minutes follow the general form indicated in my cables 122, May 12, 11 p.m. and 126, May 13, 1 p.m. from London. There is, however, a change in the form of the French reservation which requires some comment.
As I advised you by cable, the French gave me a memorandum indicating
three types of projects of measures which they proposed to put into
effect under their third reserve which related to projects of laws
introduced or in course of introduction, as follows, (translation):
In the final form given to their reservation the French expanded these
three types of measures and made five exceptions, as follows,
(translation):
As soon as I saw a draft of the revised French exceptions I took the matter up with the French Foreign Office and Mr. Dulles had a [Page 613] long talk with M. Coulondre27 who was in charge of the matter. Mr. Dulles pointed out that the French reserve as modified differed from the assurances they had previously given and seemed considerably to expand the measures which they proposed to put through despite the truce. M. Coulondre explained that for the most part the enlarged form of the French reservation was due to the fact that they had defined more precisely the exact measures they had in mind. He admitted, however, that in preparing their original reservation they had inadvertently omitted to mention one or two projects of laws which were so far advanced that they could not now be stopped. He added that the change was due to their desire to be quite precise in the definition of the measures envisaged both for their own protection in dealing with other branches of the Government and to avoid any misunderstanding with any other powers.
While the French explanation of their position was not particularly convincing or satisfactory, I felt it unwise to be the cause of holding up the procès-verbal particularly as it seemed unlikely that they would recede from their position. Mr. Dulles expressed my regret that they had changed their reserve in this manner after giving me a text which I had communicated to Washington. He also made it clear that in commenting on the French reserve he was only dealing with questions of form and of course reserved all rights with respect to the substance of any of the measures proposed in case they should prove in any way discriminatory against American interests. At Mr. Dulles’ suggestion the enumeration of the five types of measures proposed to be put through by France were inserted as a footnote with reference back to the third French reserve rather than in the text of the procès-verbal itself in order that the French reserve, by its length, should not create an unfortunate impression on other states to which the procès-verbal would be communicated.
In this connection the French expressed some astonishment at reports which had appeared in the press that the British Chancellor of the Exchequer had stated that the tariff truce would not prevent the British Government from imposing further duties on silk imports as the Consultative Committee on Tariffs had been considering the question before the 12th of May, the date of adoption of the truce. The French suggested that if the British proposed to give any such interpretation to the tariff truce it would certainly nullify its effect.
A copy of this letter is being sent to Mr. Atherton.
Sincerely yours,
- Robert Coulondre, Assistant Political Director.↩