Foreign Relations of the United States Diplomatic Papers, 1933, The American Republics, Volume IV

625.3531/13

The Ambassador in Argentina (Bliss) to the Secretary of State

No. 1877

Buenos Aires, November 25, 1932.
[Received December 5.]

Sir: Referring to my despatch No. 1865 of November 18, reporting on the modus vivendi recently agreed to between the Governments of Argentina and Chile, for a mutual reduction of certain items in their respective custom tariffs, I have the honor to report that I called yesterday afternoon on the Minister for Foreign Affairs and requested that there be extended a like treatment to importations from the United States into Argentina. The Minister requested that I write him a note on the subject to which he said careful consideration would be given. I was not able to obtain from him any expression of opinion as to what decision would be made.

I beg leave to transmit herewith a copy of my note of yesterday’s date which was delivered today at the Foreign Office in compliance with the Minister’s desire for a written communication on the subject.

The Department will see that I have adduced the provisions of Article 4 of the Treaty of 1853 as grounds for claiming similar treatment for American products brought into Argentina. Without going into a lengthy discussion of the subject, I desire, however, to express the view that whereas Article 3 of the said treaty may be called a conditional most-favored-nation clause, it refers to matters of commerce and navigation only, whereas Article 4 specifically refers to duties, providing that “no higher or other duties shall be imposed on the importation into the territories of either of the two contracting parties of any article of the growth, produce or manufacture of the territory of the other contracting party, than are, or shall be, payable on the like article of any other foreign country.” From this it would appear to me that it was the intent of the two Governments at the time the treaty was negotiated and signed, that Article 4 was considered as an unconditional most-favored-nation clause applying to customs tariffs.

As already reported in my said despatch No. 1865, the provisions of the modus vivendi have been extended to the importations into Argentina of goods proceeding from Great Britain, Northern Ireland, France and Italy. Several of the foreign diplomatic representatives accredited to this Government (notably the German Minister and the Belgian Chargé d’Affaires) have made representations to the Minister for Foreign Affairs to obtain the same treatment for their nations’ products as that granted in the modus vivendi between Argentina and Chile, but to none of these, so far as I have been able to learn, has a definite reply been made by the Foreign Office.

Inasmuch as the question seemed of urgent importance, I have acted in the above manner without first consulting the Department of State, and hope that my action will receive its approval. I shall, of course, however, inform the Department by telegraph as soon as I have obtained any definite answer from the Minister for Foreign Affairs.

In the conversation with Doctor Saavedra Lamas yesterday afternoon, he was very emphatic in telling me, confidentially, that the unlimited most-favored-nation clause, existing in his Government’s treaties with Great Britain, France and Italy, was a source of considerable annoyance and that it was his intention to denounce these treaties at the earliest possible moment. He also said that practically all other nations of America had eliminated the unconditional most-favored nation clause from their international treaties and that Argentina was consequently seriously handicapped in maintaining treaties which embodied it.

Respectfully yours,

Robert Woods Bliss

[Enclosure]

The American Ambassador (Bliss) to the Argentine Minister for Foreign Affairs (Saavedra Lamas)

No. 845

Buenos Aires, November 24, 1932.

Excellency: Complying with the request Your Excellency made in the conversation we had at the Foreign Office this afternoon, I have the honor to request that the reduction in certain items of the Argentine tariff as contained in the modus vivendi recently enacted between the Governments of Argentina and Chile be accorded in like manner to importations into Argentina from the United States.

In our conversation, I observed that the reductions provided in the said modus vivendi had already been accorded to the products of several countries other than Chile. You explained that this had automatically followed because of the unconditional most-favored-nation clauses in the treaties between Argentina and those countries. As pointed out to Your Excellency, it appears to me proper and just, as a matter of equity and in view of the provisions of Article 4 of the Treaty of 1853 between our two countries, that a similar treatment should be vouchsafed to the products of the United States involved.

I also beg to recall my having told Your Excellency that a shipment of dried prunes (ciruelas secas) arrived in this port from the United States on the 23rd instant and that unless it can be cleared from the Customhouse under the benefit of the reduced tariff on dried fruit, it will not be possible for that shipment to be sold in competition with like commodities from those countries to which the provisions of the modus vivendi have been applied. No previous notice having been given of the contemplated reduction in the Argentine tariff, the importers of the said shipment had no inkling of the prejudice which the application of the modus vivendi would impose on the shipment. The same is true of other shipments already en route to Argentina from the United States.

I therefore have the honor to request Your Excellency kindly to cause the necessary orders to be given to accord to products from the United States imported into Argentina the reductions in duties provided in the modus vivendi mentioned above.

I avail myself [etc.]

Robert Woods Bliss