800.51W89 France/1045
The Ambassador in France (Straus) to the Secretary of State
[Received May 26.]
Sir: I have the honor to report as follows.
M. Léon Blum, leader of the French Socialist Party, was the guest of honor and speaker at the luncheon of the American Club on Friday, May 15th. On that occasion he delivered a speech which attracted wide attention in the French press and which eventually found echoes in Rome, Berlin and London. During the course of his remarks, which he prefaced by stating that they were delivered in an entirely personal capacity and without engaging the responsibility of any Government official, he brought up the question of France’s War debt to the United States in a manner which could only be interpreted as an intention on his part to reopen the issue when he will assume power as Prime Minister on June 3rd. M. Blum’s references to the debt question have, it is believed, been erroneously reported by at least one of the American agencies in Paris as a definite intention on the part of the French Government to consider some form of token payment on June 15th (the date of the next debt instalment) or to offer a solution for a settlement on a reduced scale. It would be wrong to infer anything of the kind. M. Blum did, however, make it clear that it was his intention to reopen the question and he frankly acknowledged that France’s unilateral denunciation of a solemn contract had offended America’s sense of moral and commercial honesty. The exact stenographic text of M. Blum’s remarks, together with a careful translation thereof, are enclosed. There are also enclosed numerous clippings,32 without translation, which appeared in the more important Paris newspapers of varying shades of political opinion.
It may be of interest in this connection to furnish a little background in connection with these developments. On May 5th Mr. Tuck, First Secretary of the Embassy, accompanied by Mr. Edgar Mowrer, Paris correspondent of the Chicago Daily News, lunched with M. and Mme. Blum. During the course of conversation, M. Blum asked Mr. Mowrer what was thought of France in the United States. The latter, with characteristic frankness, replied that the United States had not, as seemed to be generally believed in France, forgotten the question of debts and consequently a very definite feeling of animosity existed. [Page 584] He added that in his (Mowrer’s) opinion, the Johnson Act and the recent Neutrality Legislation33 had their origin, at least in part, in the failure of certain European countries to make any gesture towards debt settlement. The American public, Mr. Mowrer considered, had become convinced that France quite wrongly seemed to believe that the affair was no longer an issue in the United States. M. Blum appeared interested and, turning to Mr. Tuck, asked him whether he shared Mr. Mowrer’s views. Mr. Tuck replied that it was embarrassing in his official capacity for him to express an opinion but, since the question had been asked in complete frankness, he could not but concur with Mr. Mowrer’s point of view.
Subsequently, the Embassy learned from an entirely confidential and reliable source that M. Herriot, who is greatly disturbed at France’s truly precarious position in foreign politics, had urgently besought M. Blum to take some action towards debt settlement and that the Socialist leader had consequently delegated a member of the Executive Committee of his party to undertake a full report on the question. M. de Laboulaye’s return to France is also believed to be connected with the matter and it is possible that he might be called into consultation. M. Blum, according to reports, had no scruples about bringing up the matter of debt settlement since he has never voted against the payment of war debts and consequently felt that his record was such that he could, in all propriety, reopen the question. It is therefore possible that when M. Blum delivers his Ministerial Declaration on June 3rd that he will include therein a direct reference to the debts. Contrary to the report contained in the Embassy’s telegram No. 410 of May 14th/8 p.m. the Ere Nouvelle, M. Herriot’s personal organ, carries the story today that he has definitely decided not to accept the portfolio of Minister for Foreign Affairs in the Front Populaire Government, which has been offered him at least three times. However, he and M. Blum will meet this week and it may still be possible that the Mayor of Lyons may be induced to change his decision.
During the course of the luncheon at the American Club I sat next to M. Blum. He asked me why there was such animosity between our respective countries. I replied that, in my opinion, and talking purely personally, there were two fundamental reasons which influenced my country. The first was that the debt question was not forgotten in America and, secondly, strong anti-French attitude on the part of the Hearst press. He also questioned me with regard to the Neutrality Legislation and I explained to him that it was my belief that the fundamental policy of such legislation was to keep the [Page 585] United States out of European embroilments and that it was in no way aimed directly against Italy.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Respectfully yours,