611.5131/1066: Telegram
The Ambassador in France (Straus) to the Secretary of State
[Received 2:45 p.m.]
328. Mr. Williamson and Mr. Reagan8 of the Embassy called yesterday morning at the Ministry for Foreign Affairs to express my keen apprehension concerning certain recent developments coming as they do at the time of preliminary commercial conversations in [Page 216] Washington. The interested Ministers have before them plan for increasing duties to practically prohibitive levels on a number of items including canned asparagus, dried prunes and grapefruit and they contemplate extending the principle begun this quarter, of reducing quotas to the basis of amounts effectively utilized.
It was pointed out that if the above developments are symptomatic it might be seriously questioned whether the French Government is really in the proper frame of mind to negotiate to this end with the United States. The Foreign Office official took note of the threatened tariff increases complained of and said that he would do his best to block them. I am glad to report that this morning he telephoned to state that Monsieur Laval9 would refuse to sign the increases, with the exception of certain citrus fruits where augmentation is aimed against Spain and is of lesser concern to the United States.
The conversation then turned to how far the French Government is willing to proceed in widening the scope of treaty negotiations. While in principle the French express a disposition to negotiate along general lines the Embassy representatives were somewhat disappointed when actual details were mentioned by the apparent narrow limits of projected French concessions which as they pointed out are not at all within the spirit with which France negotiated with Germany and other countries. The Foreign Office official stated that despite the best good will of his Ministry it is difficult to obtain from other self-interested sources and Ministries consent to much more liberal treatment. Confidentially he asserted that if added concessions instead of emanating from him were to come in the form of demands from Washington it would strengthen his hand. The Department may therefore wish to consider whether it would be advisable to send for French Ambassador and to inquire (1) why it is that the list of exceptions to minimum tariff treatment should so largely comprise chemicals and allied items with the apparent intention of favoring German trade at the expense of American trade and to inform him (2) that the American Government would desire upon at least a few items preferential tariff rates below the existing minimum rates (on, for example, such items as asparagus where even the minimum tariff is exorbitant and where the United States is principal furnisher and French production is unimportant); (3) that the United States should be protected against future arbitrary increases in the tariff which vitiate any treaty entered into, this protection to be accomplished through a list of consolidated tariff rates on items of special interest to the United States; (4) that the list of exceptions to minimum tariff treatment should be slightly scaled down; and (5) that adequate quota protection must be accorded, perhaps including assurances [Page 217] relative to the present policy of quota reductions, an increase of certain quantitative positions and the granting of credit for indirect shipments. Such representations might serve to give shape to the broadening of negotiations.
The Foreign Office representative at this point confidentially stated that within the next few weeks there might be a radical change in the whole quota policy although this matter must first be considered at the next inter-ministerial meeting. The proposed change would probably mean a scrapping of the most-favored-nation principle as regards quotas and would be aimed largely against those countries applying exchange restrictions against French commerce. The result would be that even though some quotas might still be reduced France would then be in a position to withdraw from discriminating countries substantial portions of their quota allotments and to divide the amounts thereof among countries according special concessions to France. It was intimated that during the commercial negotiations with the United States, France might thus be in a position to accord us quota benefits impossible under the present system. However, it should be borne in mind that the new policy would necessarily abrogate our quota agreement10 and that some new form of quota accord would therefore have to be evolved within the framework of the commercial treaty.
- Harold L. Williamson, Second Secretary of Embassy, and Daniel Reagan, Assistant Commercial Attaché.↩
- Pierre Laval, French Minister for Foreign Affairs.↩
- See telegram No. 342, May 31, 1932, 7 p.m., Foreign Relations, 1932, vol. ii, p. 232.↩