500.A15A5/100: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Ambassador in Great Britain ( Bingham )
Washington
, June
20, 1934—7 p.m.
255. [For Davis.] Your 336, June 19, 6 p.m.
- 1.
- Your telegram is most welcome in that it gives an opportunity to dispel at once any possible basis of misunderstanding. What you call the “written technical program” of June 4 was never intended as a program to be advanced by us in toto. Parts of it, such as the two points to which you specifically referred, namely the abolition of cruiser sub-categories and the unit tonnage of capital ships, were intended to represent the ultimate limit of concession and not a statement of our first position.
- 2.
- With regard to sub-categories, you are right in assuming that if the British do not too insistently demand additional cruiser tonnage, the problem need never arise. The Navy tells us that with the present tonnage in the two cruiser sub-categories built or laid down, there is no need as a practical matter to abolish sub-categories in a new treaty of 10 to 15 years duration unless additional tonnage is agreed to and even then only in respect to that additional tonnage.
- 3.
- With regard to the unit tonnage of capital ships, we feel that the initiative for any change should come from the British, and the details of the “technical plan” merely indicate the extent to which we could meet them in an effort to reach a common viewpoint.
- 4.
- We entirely concur in your analysis of the President’s instructions as outlined in your paragraph 3 and agree with you that we should not take the initiative in offering suggestions of a technical character at least until the general picture is clearer.
- 5.
- We have discussed your telegram with Admiral Standley who concurs in the substance of this reply.
Hull