500.A15A4 General Committee (Arms)/122: Telegram
The American Delegate (Wilson) to the Secretary of State
[Received March 8—9 a.m.]
1003. Your 480, March 7, noon. Informal conversation with members of the British delegation indicates Simon’s objections to inspection are more fundamental and far reaching than he indicated in his conversation with Atherton. The British appear to be in a precarious condition as to their war reserves which, due to the shortage of money in the past 10 years, has been very seriously depleted. The publication of “orders” followed by inspection on the spot of production would, they claim, clearly indicate their unfortunate position to interested continental nations. This is plausible as inspection on the spot of production would inevitably reveal numbers and the British have consistently opposed “numbers” appearing any place in the convention favoring “values” by categories, headings and subheadings.
Apart from the technical consideration is the political one that the British delegates have repeatedly told me that they recognize the great importance that the French attach to inspection on the spot and they feel that if they give the French “all they want” in this treaty there will be no incentive to the French to go further and to make a more general treaty on limitation of armaments. They consider “inspection on the spot” one of their trump cards and decline to give it away without what they consider adequate recompense.
In addition the British feel that detailed publicity as to orders would furnish a basis for unfair competition which would prejudice [Page 33] their armaments trade. The maintenance of their production capacity they consider vital to the reestablishment of a sound national defense situation. Members of the British delegation individually appreciate the effect of our amendments of paragraph 4 of article 30 but the Cabinet decision has been taken to the contrary.
Cipher text mailed London.