811.114 Liquor/776: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Ambassador in France (Straus)
383. Your 692, September 20, 5 p.m. We have gone over your telegram thoroughly with F. A. C. A.66 We cannot prevent the use of certain generic French wine-names, originally geographical, such as Champagne, Burgundy, Chablis, Sauterne, which have in this country become the accepted descriptive names of types of wines. In regard to these few, all we can do is to require that labels conspicuously disclose the true place of origin and/or describe the product only as “Burgundy type”, etc. We can, however, prevent the use of proprietary names such as “Chateau Yquem”, and of geographic names which have not by long use here come to mean wine of a particular type. The French should submit a list of the names for which they seek protection. We can then indicate those on which we can or cannot give full protection.
The foregoing represents much more than we had at first thought possible in meeting French wishes. It is a step which we do not have to take and is something for which, if we do it, we shall expect expeditious correction of the turnover tax discrimination and modus vivendi treatment on rice.
We are not interested in the conclusion of a modus vivendi with respect to the turnover tax and wine labels. A simple exchange of notes would be sufficient.
The French are obviously putting forth their maximum demand and are seeking a very substantial quid pro quo for the removal of a flagrant discrimination against our trade—a discrimination built up for the purpose of bargaining. Furthermore, they seem to overlook the moral obligations they are under, at least in connection with copper, arising from our action in the dress sample case.
- Federal Alcohol Control Administration.↩