[Enclosure]
Memorandum by the American Chargé (Boal) of a Conversation
With the Canadian Prime Minister (Bennett), April 19, 1934
In the course of a conversation today with the Prime Minister he
brought up the subject of the Trail Smelter and asked how we
were progressing in the matter. He said that he had been
surprised to know the intensity of the fumes coming from various
cities along the border. I said that I was not informed as to
conditions in these areas, but supposed them to be in each case
quite different from those at Trail, and speaking personally
wondered whether there had been much damage since I had not
heard of complaints. He said that he thought there probably had
not been much damage. I said that we had had no response from
the Department as yet on the subject of his note, but that my
belief was that we would find the Department firmly disposed to
treat the Trail Smelter case as the Trail Smelter case and not
as a case covering the whole Canadian-United States border. If
we were to try to connect up every pending question with all
possible future questions, we would have a great deal of
difficulty in getting anywhere on any case. The Prime Minister
seemed to concur in this.
I said that I could not say much about the outlook of the Trail
Smelter matter. I rather felt that the Department might not be
able to approve some of the terms of the convention drafted in
Washington by Mr. Read and Mr. Metzger when here [there?]; on the other hand we had the
Canadian Government disposed to bring the whole border into the
question before settling this one point. I said I did not know
where this state of affairs might lead us unless it led us to
some kind of arbitral proceeding. The Prime Minister said that
this was a
[Page 935]
question
which he had hoped to settle long ago and when it first arose,
before his time in office, he did not realize how complicated it
would be but certainly it was one which should not be allowed to
drag on but should be settled as soon as possible because it
could do nothing but cause injury if delayed. He said that as
for arbitration, if it should be necessary, the machinery to be
availed of was good, but it was a very expensive procedure, and
on the whole the idea of our country and his going abroad to
arbitrate our cases seemed a very undesirable one from the point
of view of both of us.
He then said that he had had a good deal of difficulty with the
Trail Smelter people. The greatest difficulty he had had, he
said, had been in persuading them that they should accept the
$350,000 sum for payment. He said he knew, of course, that our
people had equal difficulty on their side on this and other
points. This remark of his makes me wonder if he has had any
intimation from Herridge in Washington that we were considering
abandoning the $350,000 sum, or whether if the State of
Washington claimants asked that it be abandoned or had been told
that it would be abandoned this had gotten back to the Trail
Smelter people and through them had reached him. He added that
when the Trail Smelter suggested that assent to this figure be
withdrawn by the Canadian Government he had categorically
refused to do so, since having once assented to this he did not
feel that the Canadian Government could afford to withdraw its
assent. There seems to be no reason why he should raise this
particular point of the draft agreement for comment unless he
has had some intimation from somewhere and wished to make things
awkward for us by implying that his Government would not deem it
proper to withdraw on this point under the existing
circumstances. It is my impression that he broached the Trail
Smelter matter in order to make this point.
I did not pursue this subject any further with him feeling that
in view of the Department’s instruction we were on delicate
ground and I did not wish to be in a position of discussing this
matter further with him until I had had further instructions
from the Department.
