611.5131/1205

The Chargé in France ( Marriner ) to the Secretary of State

No. 2023

Sir: Referring to the Embassy’s despatch No. 2005 of July 9, 1935,18 and previous correspondence concerning the Franco-American commercial treaty negotiations, I have the honor to report that a few days [Page 226] ago M. Bousquet, of the Commercial Section at the Ministry for Foreign Affairs, informed a member of the Embassy staff that the Government of the United States had proposed the inclusion of 18 general Articles in the treaty. He said that the French authorities are prepared in principle to accept, subject to certain modifications, 14 of these Articles. The French counterdraft has apparently been forwarded to the Embassy at Washington for communication to the Department. However, as a matter of convenience in the event that there is some delay in the transmission of the counter proposal, I now enclose a copy of the draft19 which was lent the Embassy by M. Bousquet. As the Department has doubtless already learned, the French Government is indisposed to accept several of the provisions proposed by the United States, notably that contained in Article 10 with regard to monopolies.

The Embassy representative was likewise shown a copy of the Ministry for Foreign Affairs’ telegram to its Embassy at Washington, signifying its willingness to accord to the United States supplementary quotas on twenty items selected from the list of items for which the American Government requested special quota facilities. M. Bousquet preferred that the Embassy should not copy the list so that, although the majority of the twenty items for which supplementary quotas may be excepted are precisely recalled by the Embassy, it would be appreciated if the Department would furnish this Chancery with the complete list in order that the Embassy may be in a position more accurately to follow the trend of negotiations.

The Department will probably be struck, as was the Embassy, with the smallness of the list and with the circumstance that aside from fresh fruit and one or two other articles, the preliminary list omits the more important components of American trade. M. Bousquet is well aware of the meagerness of the list which he explained by the insistence from Washington upon having an immediate response to the request for special quota positions. He added that had the Franco-German treaty negotiations not been postponed, it would have been possible to amplify the list of supplementary quotas. As matters now stand, the results of the German negotiations will not be known until approximately August 6. Thereafter the French Government will be in a position to know exactly what quota amounts are available for according to the United States in the form of supplementary quotas. Regardless of the results of the Franco-German conversations, the French will then be able to cover the list of American quota desiderata in a much more extensive manner. The Foreign Office official consequently hopes that the present reply on quotas will be viewed in its proper light and not interpreted as final or as a move to whittle down [Page 227] concessions. The thought was expressed that if we will be patient for the moment, France will be enabled to grant much more favorable treatment than if with the present uncertainty as to available quotas it is forced at once to make a definite reply. It was asserted that a supplementary quota for automobiles cannot be granted but that while the item is not included in the present list we can certainly count upon securing a supplementary quota for automobile chassis.

M. Bousquet had gained the impression that if negotiations cannot be initiated during this month the Department may feel itself called upon to place one or two other European countries ahead of France upon the agenda and to defer negotiations with the French Government until September. Although he hoped that such would not be the case, he apparently felt that from some angles a less hurried consideration might assist in reaching a more far-reaching and useful accord. It was his personal thought that in the event of delay it might be valuable to both Governments if M. Garreau-Dombasle were to come to France during the interim for consultation.

Finally M. Bousquet confirmed the fact that the form which the contemplated radical modification to the French quota system will take has not yet been decided upon and that it is now very unlikely that any attempt will be made by the Government to initiate the new policy before about November. Obviously, therefore, the treaty negotiations will have to be completed without precise knowledge of the nature of the future French quota policy. It may nevertheless be recalled that the French authorities have already stated that so far as the United States is concerned the alteration of the quota system will be such as to work no hardship and probably such as to assist commercial relations.

Respectfully yours,

Theodore Marriner
  1. Not printed.
  2. Not printed.