711.4216Ni/339
The Minister in Canada (Armour) to the Secretary of State
[Received March 2.]
Sir: With reference to the Department’s instruction No. 262 of February 25, 1936, (file No. 711.4216 Ni/337) regarding the question of the St. Lawrence waterway project and the possibility of having the St. Lawrence Treaty and Niagara Falls Convention withdrawn from the Senate and a new treaty embodying the principles set forth in these two conventions negotiated with the Canadian Government, I have the honor to inform the Department that I called this afternoon on the Prime Minister and took up with him the matter dealt with in the instruction under reference. A copy of the memorandum of this conversation is enclosed herewith.48 I left with Mr. King an informal memorandum based upon the above instruction.
As the Assistant Chief of the Division of Western European Affairs49 had telephoned me with regard to this matter and had given me the substance of the instruction and informed me of the urgency [Page 839] of the matter, I felt it best to seek an early interview with the Prime Minister without even awaiting the arrival of the instruction itself.
Although Mr. King was in the midst of the debate on the Trade Agreement50 and had himself in fact finished a three-hour speech in support of the resolution which he completed only last night, he was good enough to see me in his small office off the Chamber early this afternoon.
While Mr. King did not enter into a discussion of the merits of either treaty, he made it very clear that the announcement of the negotiation of a new treaty dealing with these questions at this time would, he felt, be embarrassing to him. He also indicated that he was not at all convinced that the waterways portion of the treaty would be of benefit to Canada at the present, fearing particularly its effect on the Canadian National Railways at any rate, which are already in a difficult position. (In this connection see the Legation’s strictly confidential despatch No. 400 of February 14th last,51 reporting a conversation with the Minister of Railways, Canals and Marine, Mr. C. D. Howe.) Mr. King admitted that of course the power phase of the St. Lawrence Treaty was something to be considered, but did not go so far as to admit that he felt this would be sufficient to change his opinion.
As regards the Niagara Falls Convention, it will be noted that he expressed understanding of our Government’s position as to the inadvisability of conferring unusual and unwarranted advantages upon a private American power company, but whether deliberately or not he did not go so far as to indicate that he would be willing to see the scenic aspect of the Convention separated from the power aspect and a separate treaty with regard to the former concluded.
Mr. King expects to be able to give me a more definite expression of his views within the next two or three days after he has had an opportunity to consult with his colleagues.
Respectfully yours,