893.6359 Antimony/13: Telegram
The Chargé in China ( Gauss ) to the Secretary of State
[Received February 1—3:20 p.m.]
56. Legation’s 31, January 22, 3 p.m. Foreign Office reply of January 25 to the Legation’s note of December 12 is definitely unsatisfactory. The Chinese contention is that the Hunan antimony syndicate constitutes a merchants’ organization comparable to syndicates of productive enterprises found in other countries having as object the standardization of prices and the maintenance of the level of production and therefore it has nothing to do with the provisions of article 15 of the Sino-American Treaty of 1844 and article 14 of the Sino-French Treaty of 1858 because the purpose of the articles mentioned was to abolish the system of Hong merchants formed by a third party. Foreign Office holds that since the syndicate has not concluded any monopoly contract with a British firm the Nine Power Treaty has not been violated.
With reference to the Department’s telegram 24, January 25, 7 p.m., it seems improbable that the American Government will receive much support from any creditors other than the British because of the possible interest of the Japanese in obtaining monopoly privileges for themselves in China and the comparatively smaller commercial interests of France and Italy in the China trade. The views of the interested Legations are being ascertained and will be reported to the Department.
The Legation contemplates drafting another note to the Foreign Office concerning the antimony monopoly along the lines of its note of October 6, 1933,55 protesting against the establishment of a tungsten monopoly.
- Not printed; for pertinent portion of the note, see Department’s telegram No. 336, October 6, 1933, 3 p.m., Foreign Relations, 1933, vol. iii, p. 597.↩