List of Papers

(Unless otherwise specified, the correspondence is from or to officials in the Department of State.)

GENERAL

THE CONFERENCE FOR THE REDUCTION AND LIMITATION OF ARMAMENTS, GENEVA: 1936 PHASE

[Page XII]
Date and number Subject Page
1936 Aug. 17 (1815 Pol.) From the Consul at Geneva
Observations on preparatory work in connection with the possible resumption of the Disarmament Conference, as set forth in memoranda (texts printed) by officers of the League of Nations Secretariat.
1
Sept. 9 (1830 Pol.) From the Consul at Geneva
Transmittal of draft statement, prepared by the Disarmament Section of the League Secretariat for delivery in case the disarmament matter is raised in the forthcoming Assembly meeting, and of a memorandum dealing with the attitudes of the various governments.
11
Sept. 25 (1067) From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
French desire that the Council consider calling the Bureau of the Disarmament Conference, and hope that the 1935 committees considering traffic in and manufacture of arms, and budgetary publicity, will resume work.
13
Sept. 26 (1069) From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
Speculation as to French position in forthcoming Conference Bureau meeting, and request for instructions if Department wishes energetic support for reopening of disarmament discussions.
13
Sept. 28 (511) To the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
Department’s position relative to reopening subject of disarmament and desire for further information on present prospects of a positive result; instructions for Minister to attend Bureau session if called.
14
Sept. 29 (1070) From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
Advice of move of Scandinavian and Netherland delegations to have disarmament question taken up by the Assembly Third Committee, and inquiry as to whether the British and French should be approached formally to ascertain their positions on the subject.
15
Sept. 29 (512) To the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
Reason for view that formal approach to the British and French would be inadvisable.
16
Oct. 1 (1071) From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
Information that the Third Committee was set up by the Assembly; and that France would support reexamination of budgetary publicity, control of manufacture and traffic in arms, and limitation of air forces.
16
Oct. 2 (1073) From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
Election of Lange of Norway as President of the Third Committee, and his attitude that its work would be a useful preface for the meeting of the Bureau.
18
Oct. 4 (1074) From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
British attitude toward budgetary publicity, and toward general disarmament discussions at this time.
18
Oct. 5 (1075) From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
Decision of Third Committee to support French move for convocation of the Bureau; reiteration of their positions by the French and British.
19
Oct. 7 (1078) From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
Approval by Third Committee of a report to the Assembly favoring an early meeting of the Bureau.
20
Oct. 10 (1079) From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
Council’s authorization to its President to set date of meeting of Bureau, and its decision to communicate information of actions taken, relative to disarmament, to members of the Bureau, and to states represented at the Conference.
20
Dec. 24 (4735 L. N. No. 3484) From the Minister in Switzerland
Communication from Council’s President (text printed) stating that he has decided to refer the question of the date of meeting of the Bureau to the Council itself in January.
21

LONDON NAVAL CONFERENCE, 1935: SECOND PHASE, JANUARY 6–MARCH 25, 1936

[Page XIII] [Page XIV] [Page XV] [Page XVI] [Page XVII] [Page XVIII] [Page XIX]
Date and number Subject Page
1936 Jan. 7 To President Roosevelt
Transmittal of draft telegram for the President’s consideration (text infra).
(Footnote: President’s approval of communication.)
22
Jan. 7 (8) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Advisability of securing clear-cut statement as to whether Japan would be willing to reach agreement on other phases of the naval question in the absence of agreement to a “common upper level”; Department’s view on continuance of discussions.
22
Jan. 8 (38) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Account of conversations with British Foreign Office officials, who disagreed as to securing an early termination of conversations with the Japanese.
24
Jan. 9 (39) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Agreement of Foreign Secretary Eden with U. S. desire for early determination of Japanese position on the matter of a common upper limit; his doubts as to even a consultative pact with the Japanese.
26
Jan. 9 (10) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Comments relative to conversations reported in No. 38, of January 8.
27
Jan. 10 (41) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Information from Eden regarding Japanese concern when he told them the British were ready to discuss and come to a decision relative to the common upper limit; practical agreement of French and Italians to join in rejecting common upper limit.
28
Jan. 10 (43) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Request for Department’s views as to Japan’s continuation in naval negotiations in capacity of observer if she withdraws from active participation in consequence of rejection of common upper limit.
29
Jan. 10 (12) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Department’s inability to see any basis for objection to presence of Japanese observer or observers.
30
Jan. 11 (45) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Request that delegation be kept fully informed of conflicting views between Foreign Office and the Navy in Tokyo.
30
Jan. 11 (14) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Advice that U. S. Ambassador in Japan has been informed of request in No. 45 of January 11.
30
Jan. 12 (9) From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Advice of reports indicating disagreement on Naval Conference between the Navy and the Foreign Office which desires to avoid blame for complete rupture; belief that disagreement is on methods and tactics and not on objectives.
31
Jan. 13 (11) From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Foreign Minister’s confirmation that he had won out in contest with Navy over immediate withdrawal of delegation from London.
32
Jan. 14 (46) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Further developments in relation to Japanese participation in the Conference; comment of Nagai, one of the Japanese delegates, that what Japan wants is to leave in most friendly spirit.
32
Jan. 14 (47) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Discussion with British of entire situation, including their unwillingness to accede to Japan’s desire that other matters be taken up before the subject of parity; observations relative to British views on qualitative agreement.
(Footnote: Citation to text of Japanese withdrawal announcement of January 15.)
33
Jan. 16 (55) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Observations disagreeing with reported statement of Senator Key Pittman to the effect that future efforts to limit naval armament are futile, and that Japan withdrew to institute a naval race.
35
Jan. 16 Memorandum by the Chief of the Division of Far Eastern Affairs
Analysis of the effects of Japanese withdrawal, in which issue is taken with observations made in No. 55 of January 16.
36
Jan. 18 (20) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Explanation that Japanese withdrawal has considerably lessened U. S. interest in the Conference, and that initiative in the Conference should be left to European powers.
(Footnote: Citation to text of statement of Chairman Davis of January 15.)
38
Jan. 20 (23) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
President Roosevelt’s opinion that Department should still seek an agreement, within the tonnage limits in existing treaties, with an escape clause in event Japan exceeds limitations.
38
Jan. 21 (62) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Importance of agreement among European naval powers to U. S.-British agreement; difficulties connected with quantitative and qualitative disarmament.
39
Jan. 23 (64) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Résumé of conversations indicating the general French attitude toward continuation of the Conference, and French opposition to inviting Germany to participate at this time.
40
Jan. 23 (66) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Development of U. S.-British disagreement as to status of previous informal understanding on gun caliber and tonnage of capital ships; contention of U. S. delegation that understanding was contingent on agreements which were not consummated; desire to avoid evidence of difference of opinion.
42
Jan. 24 (67) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Detailed résumé of conversations with the British relating to gun caliber and tonnage of vessels, and request for Department’s views on British compromise proposals.
44
Jan. 26 (72) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Further explanation of British proposals, with indication of escape clauses.
48
Jan. 29 (28) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Inquiry as to whether there was any discussion on question of scrapping.
48
Jan. 29 (29) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Department’s position relative to British proposals discussed in telegrams from Chairman Davis.
(Footnote: Marginal notation that Department’s telegram was read and approved by Admiral Taussig, and one specified part by President Roosevelt.)
49
Jan. 30 (76) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Doubt as to meaning of portion of Department’s No. 29 of January 29; further explanation of status of conversations, and opinion as to what should be accepted.
50
Jan. 30 (77) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Hope that the President, the Department, and the Navy will approve delegation’s recommendations on cruisers; acknowledgment that qualitative limitation would have definite advantages and would be better than no agreement.
51
Jan. 31 (31) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Memorandum of the Navy General Board suggesting changes in proposals as set forth by the delegation, and requesting further information.
52
Feb. 1 (81) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Information requested by the General Board.
53
Feb. 3 (82) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
British intentions in regard to scrapping.
54
Feb. 3 (83) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Reasons why the British are unable to give any definite assurance as to ultimate tonnage of the light surface category, and observations as to probable future British construction capacity.
55
Feb. 4 (92) From the Consul General at Beirut, Temporarily at Paris
Conversation with an official of the Foreign Office relative to German participation in international disarmament discussions.
57
Feb. 6 (33) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Instructions as to basis of discussions; and information relative to President Roosevelt’s approval, with the request that implications of agreement on that basis be noted.
57
Feb. 12 (94) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Account of conversations with the French, who are considering probable political consequences of German participation, and wish, before acquiescing therein, to come to an agreement with the British concerning possible future violation of the Rhineland.
58
Feb. 14 (96) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Information from Eden of his conversation with a French delegate who was told that a naval agreement, essential to the British, necessitated German participation. Eden’s willingness to assure French that the British would stand by Locarno.
59
Feb. 17 (123) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Discussion of present situation in naval negotiations with the Minister of Marine, who explained French acquiescence in German participation in a naval treaty upon agreement to later conversations on air and land forces.
60
Feb. 18 (97) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Conversation with French delegate, who conveyed French willingness to initial treaty to go into effect when certain “general political questions” were solved, and was informed by Chairman Davis that the United States could not sign an agreement contingent on a European political settlement.
61
Feb. 19 (99) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Conversation with another French delegate to whom Chairman Davis intimated his displeasure at attempt of French Government to secure U. S. position on capital ships through the French Ambassador in Washington, and reiterated his position as stated in No. 97 of February 18.
63
Feb. 20 (58) From the Ambassador in Italy (tel.)
Information indirectly from the Japanese Ambassador that in a Council of State at Tokyo the ranking Admiral advocated Japanese withdrawal from the Conference, but gave assurances that Japan had no intention of building in competition with British or U. S. navies.
64
Feb. 20 To President Roosevelt
Information of French Ambassador’s representations regarding capital ships. Request for approval of indicated method of steering negotiations back to London.
65
Feb. 20 (40) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Account of French Ambassador’s representations regarding capital ships, and U. S. reply indicating hope that the French would take up matter at the Conference.
65
Feb. 20 (41) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Observations as to Department’s position on tonnage of capital ships and caliber of guns.
66
Feb. 21 (102) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
British position on the importance of a naval agreement to which Germany would be a party, agreement with U. S. position against acceptance of treaty contingent upon a political agreement, and plan for representations to the French.
68
Feb. 21 (43) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Approval of position Davis has taken relative to avoiding an agreement dependent upon political developments or settlements.
69
Feb. 21 (103) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Observations as to uncertainty of the Italian position regarding a naval agreement and relative to possible influence of the Abyssinian question on that position.
69
Feb. 25 (44) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Department’s objection to the anomalous position of having to wait for signing of treaty pending settlement of European political questions; request for advice on suggestion to speed final agreement.
70
Feb. 25 (105) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Account of conversation with officials of the Foreign Office, in which Davis proposed that the naval treaty, as contemplated, be drawn up and initialed by Britain and the United States, and left open for adherence by other powers.
71
Feb. 25 (46) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Counter suggestion of a memorandum indicating type of treaty the United States would be willing to sign before end of year.
72
Feb. 25 (106) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Information from the British as to French proposal for the conclusion of a four-power treaty with a later bilateral British supplementary treaty with Germany, and as to the German and Italian positions.
73
Feb. 25 (107) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Advice of attempt to speed reaching of conclusions, and of Eden’s opposition to further dillydallying.
74
Feb. 26 (47) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Nonobjection to French proposal, but instructions to indicate that the United States will take no part in the bilateral agreements with Germany.
74
Feb. 26 (108) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Information that negotiations are still going on, but that delegates have had idea suggested in No. 46, February 25 in mind, in case something more satisfactory cannot be reached.
74
Feb. 26 (109) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Information from Italian Delegate Grandi that Italy would not sign agreement at present, but might adhere in the future.
75
Feb. 27 (110) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Presentation of three alternatives of action contingent on specific developments.
76
Feb. 27 (48) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Comment on alternatives, including statement of willingness to enter an agreement with England and France with appropriate safeguard clauses.
(Footnote: Indication of President’s approval of telegram.)
77
Feb. 28 (112) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Explanation by Italian delegates that they wished to remain in the Conference although for political reasons they would not sign a treaty at the present time; that they would, however, indicate it was for technical reasons; and that Italy hoped to adhere later.
77
Feb. 28 (50) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Information from Italian Ambassador that Italy is unable at this time to enter into a naval treaty, with reasons therefor.
78
Feb. 28 (51) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Suggestion for consideration of a gentleman’s agreement between Great Britain, France, Italy, and the United States, and, through England with Germany, for notification of every decision to lay down vessels of over 100 tons.
(Footnote: Information that this instruction embodied substance of a memorandum from the President.)
78
Feb. 28 (113) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
For the President and the Secretary: Detailed analysis of situations which are making agreement difficult, and suggestion of two possible lines of procedure which might prevent the termination of the Conference without concrete results.
79
Feb. 29 (114) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
For the President and the Secretary: Suggestion as to action in case none of the other powers, except Britain and the United States, are prepared to sign.
81
Feb. 29 (54) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Comments on analysis and suggestions of the delegation.
82
Mar. 3 (119) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Understanding of condition under which the United States can agree to reduce the gun caliber of capital ships to 14 inches; recommendation that delegation not insist upon condition.
83
Mar. 4 (120) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Advice of French formula pertaining to capital ships, and modification suggested by the delegation for Department’s approval.
84
Mar. 5 (58) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Approval of modifications of French formula. Position that further discussions relative to reduction in tonnage or gun caliber of capital ships might better take place in 1941, with arrangement to take effect as from January 1, 1942.
(Footnote: Approval of telegram by Navy officials.)
86
Mar. 9 (64) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Request for opinion as to possibility of expediting discussion of any pending technical questions, and as to early return of the delegation, in view of entirely new turn of events brought about by German action in the Rhineland.
86
Mar. 9 (129) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Information that treaty completion will take ten days longer, and question as to Senate ratification in time for treaty to come into force January 1, 1937; importance of having it effective on that day.
87
Mar. 10 (132) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Hope of concluding treaty with France and England in ten days; probable effects of German Rhineland matter on negotiations.
88
Mar. 11 (68) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Discussion of ratification of treaty, and conclusion it would be best for Davis to initial draft of treaty at this time and appoint some later time for signature in order not to jeopardize Senate acceptance of treaty.
89
Mar. 13 (137) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
For the President and the Secretary: Request for definite information as to whether it is proposed to obtain ratification before the end of the year and reasons for request, with a general résumé of the situation as seen from London.
89
Mar. 14 (138) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
For the President and the Secretary: Further information relative to ratification, and suggestion of signing and withholding treaty from Senate pending clarification of international situation.
91
Mar. 14 (72) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Further views on ratification, and advice of President’s views on submission of the treaty to the Senate instructions as to further steps in connection with initialing or signing.
92
Mar. 16 (141) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Conversation with an official of the Foreign Office, who indicated the British decision to go ahead with the naval treaties, while Davis explained the U. S. position on ratification.
94
Mar. 19 (146) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Suggestion that, since the new treaty does not provide for quantitative agreement, a statement including idea of parity be agreed to; British sympathy with idea.
95
Mar. 19 (147) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Explanation of safeguarding clauses found in articles 24 and 25 of the draft treaty.
96
Mar. 21 Memorandum by President Roosevelt to the Under Secretary of State
Desire for clarification in treaty relative to building vessels during interim period before treaty becomes effective.
96
Mar. 23 (80) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Confirmation of telephone conversation conveying President’s thought that the affirmation of the parity principle be incorporated in an exchange of private notes with Eden which need not be made public.
97
Mar. 23 (83) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Expression of thanks for work of delegation leading to the conclusion of the treaty.
98
Mar. 23 (84) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Suggestion of oral exchange relative to the parity principle, with an exchange of memorandums of the conversation instead of letters.
98
Mar. 28 To the Secretary of the Navy
Information of the notes exchanged (text printed) between Davis and Foreign Secretary Eden regarding the maintenance of parity between the navies of the United States and the British Commonwealth.
98
Mar. 30 To President Roosevelt
Advice that interests of the United States relative to building in the interim period before the treaty becomes effective are fully protected.
100
(Note: Citation to text of Treaty for the Limitation of Naval Armament, signed March 25, and of Protocol of June 30, 1938. List of signatories and dates of deposit at London of instruments of ratification of the Treaty.) 100

EFFORTS TO RELATE OTHER POWERS TO THE LONDON NAVAL TREATY OF MARCH 25, 1936, BY ACCESSION OR BY SEPARATE BILATERAL TREATIES

[Page XX] [Page XXI]
Date and number Subject Page
1936 May 28 (287) From the Chargé in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Advice of British bilateral conversations relative to adherence to 1936 Naval treaty with the Poles, who seek explanation of the situation, and with the Soviets, who desire to make reservations before signing. Scandinavian inclination toward general treaty.
102
July 2 (333) From the Chargé in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Deposit of instruments of ratification of Treaty of March 25; readiness of Russians to accept treaty with reservations; continuance of British conversations with Germans and French.
102
July 9 (A 5678/4/45) From the British Assistant Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to the First Secretary of the American Embassy in the United Kingdom
Advice of Japanese communication, in reply to British advances, indicating that Japan has no intention of adhering to the London Treaty under present conditions.
104
July 25 (280) To the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Instructions to ascertain British view as to present status of 14-inch gun provision of treaty, which was made contingent on its acceptance not later than April 1, 1937, by Washington Treaty powers.
104
July 31 (385) From the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
British view that Japanese cannot be presumed to have refused to accept 14-inch limit unless they make declaration to that effect before April 1, 1937; British intention to seek views of their Ambassador in Japan.
105
Aug. 1 (101) To the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Explanation of situation with respect to 14-inch guns.
106
Aug. 27 (172) From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Agreement with British colleague that inquiry as to Japan’s position on the 14-inch question should be put point-blank eventually, and comments as to Japan’s probable stand on question.
106
Sept. 29 (392) From the Ambassador in Italy (tel.)
Reasons for Italy’s refusal to sign the London Treaty, and her readiness to work with the Locarno powers.
107
Oct. 2 (128) From the Minister in Switzerland
Memorandum (text printed) of a conversation with British Admiral Bellairs, who recounted British conversations aimed to secure adherence of continental powers to the London Treaty.
108
Oct. 9 (408) From the Ambassador in Italy (tel.)
Belief of British Ambassador that Italy’s real objection to signing was unwillingness to cooperate in naval matters until a more definite program of European cooperation was agreed to.
110
Nov. 16 (1141) To the Chargé in Japan
Instructions to consider the advisability of making formal inquiry as to Japan’s position on the 14-inch gun matter, with a detailed presentation of background material on the matter.
111
Dec. 2 (151) To the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Further instructions as to urgency of action upon receipt of instruction No. 1141 of November 16.
113
Dec. 3 (249) From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Suggestion of possibility of handling gun matter through the Naval Attaché in Tokyo, in line with a suggestion made to the British by Ambassador Yoshida at London.
113
Dec. 3 To the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (circ. tel.)
Information that President ratified London Naval Treaty, drafted to come into effect on January 1, 1937, on May 28; request for information as to intentions of Government to which Ambassador is accredited.
(Footnote: Sent also to Embassies in France and Italy.)
114
Dec. 3 (434) To the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Review of background of attempt to secure Japanese view on question of 14-inch guns, and instructions to ascertain present status of question as between the British and Japanese.
114
Dec. 7 (599) From the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Reluctance of the Foreign Office to proceed on matter of 14-inch guns until negotiations with Soviets and Germans relative to signature of Treaty have been concluded.
116
Dec. 10 (157) To the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Advice that conversations are now going on between the British Foreign Office and the Japanese Ambassador at London relative to gun calibers, and that Department will not broach matter before end of December.
117
Dec. 12 (447) To the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Information as to probable early ratification of the London Treaty by France and Italy, and instructions for representations indicating Department would deem it unfortunate if a lapse in naval limitation were to occur.
117
Dec. 14 (609) From the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Position of France, Great Britain, and Italy on ratification.
118
Dec. 18 (262) From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Detailed report on Japan’s position on naval disarmament, and on the precarious situation of the Government.
118
Dec. 22 (340) From the Minister in Norway
Information from Bureau Chief of the Foreign Office of a recent meeting leading to an agreement in principle between Norwegian, Swedish, Danish, and Finnish officials to accept British invitation to participate in London Naval Treaty.
120
Dec. 30 (1304) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Desire of French to put off ratification of Naval Treaty until conclusion of present discussions with Germany; plan to ratify some time in January.
121

REJECTION BY THE UNITED STATES OF BRITISH PROPOSAL FOR RENEWAL OF ARTICLE 19 OF THE WASHINGTON NAVAL TREATY, FEBRUARY 6, 1922

Date and number Subject Page
1936 Sept. 11 Memorandum by the Acting Chief of the Division of Western European Affairs
British Chargé’s proposal to renew article 19 of the Washington Naval Treaty, providing for nonfortification of certain insular possessions in the Pacific, with change permitting modernization and extension of existing fortifications.
122
Sept. 16 Memorandum of Conversation, by Mr. Robert T. Pell of the Division of Western European Affairs
Analysis by representatives of the State, Navy, and War Departments of the British proposal to renew article 19 of the Washington Treaty, and decision not to discuss renewal with the British.
124
Sept. 25 (347) To the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Oral reply made to the British Chargé (text printed) indicating U. S. reasons for not joining Great Britain and Japan in the renewal of article 19.
130
Oct. 14 Memorandum by the Chief of the Division of Far Eastern Affairs
Explanation of what appeared to be an inconsistency in British position relative to Hong Kong fortifications by indication of radical change in British attitude toward rearmament.
131

RETENTION OF NAVAL TONNAGE BY THE UNITED STATES, THE UNITED KINGDOM, AND JAPAN UNDER ARTICLES 17 AND 21 OF THE LONDON NAVAL TREATY OF 1930

[Page XXII] [Page XXIII]
Date and number Subject Page
1936 Apr. 30 (1223) To the Ambassador in the United Kingdom
Request for information on British and Japanese plans on scrapping tonnage in excess of amounts indicated in article 16 of the London Treaty of 1930, or on possible invocation of article 21, the escalator clause.
132
May 15 To the Secretary of the Navy
Reply to inquiries relating to British and Japanese position in the matter of excess tonnage.
133
June 4 (191) To the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Notification of forwarding of copy of memorandum acknowledging receipt of British memoranda relative to destroyer excess tonnage.
134
July 15 (348) From the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
British invocation of article 21 of the London Naval Treaty of 1930 with view to retaining 40,000 tons of overage destroyer tonnage in excess of allowance in article 16.
135
Aug. 14 (105) To the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Memorandum for presentation to Japan (text printed) indicating British action, and containing an announcement of U. S. intention to exercise right under article 21 in view of British action.
(Footnote: Transmittal to Embassy in the United Kingdom of a memorandum similar in substance for communication to British Government.)
135
Sept. 3 Memorandum by the Secretary of State
Receipt of memorandum from Japanese Ambassador indicating Japan’s intentions in view of the British action on destroyers.
136
Sept. 7 (421) From the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Advice from Foreign Office of receipt of Japanese note of August 31 indicating decision to retain excess tonnage in destroyers and submarines; British alarm at retention of submarine tonnage.
136
Sept. 10 (114) To the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
U. S. position that there is no legal warrant for Japanese retention of submarine tonnage, in lieu of adequate destroyer tonnage, without recourse to article 21.
137
Sept. 25 (445) From the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Conversation with Craigie, Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, who gave an outline (text printed) of the British position on Japanese retention of excess submarine tonnage and indicated British desire to retain five “C” class destroyers.
138
Sept. 29 (1442) To the Ambassador in the United Kingdom
Tentative decisions, in meeting of officials of the State and Navy Departments with the Counselor of the Embassy in the United Kingdom, pertaining to problems connected with certain categories of vessels, and with the Anglo-Soviet Bilateral Naval Agreement.
140
Oct. 27 Memorandum by the Counselor of Embassy in the United Kingdom to the Ambassador
Résumé of long conversation with Craigie on various naval problems, including those on which tentative conclusions had been reached in the Washington meeting.
145
Oct. 28 (385) To the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
U. S. attitude toward British retention of cruisers beyond tonnage allowed by Treaty of 1930; instructions to inform Craigie that the United States is obliged to insist on strict application of article 21.
149
Nov. 5 (139) To the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Instructions to present to the Japanese Government a memorandum stating that U. S. Government has decided to retain 19,000 tons of destroyers under article 17.
151
Nov. 21 (413) To the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Instructions to hand to Craigie a memorandum (text printed) relative to U. S. position on the application of article 21 to the British retention of excess cruiser tonnage.
151
Dec. 15 (448) To the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Request for information as to status of British and Japanese projected action under article 21, in view of scrapping complications.
153
Dec. 16 (618) From the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Advice that Japan is giving favorable attention to British proposals relative to “C” class cruisers, and to application of escalator clause to retain submarines.
153
Dec. 17 Memorandum by Messrs. William T. Turner and Eugene H. Dooman, of the Division of Far Eastern Affairs
Conversation with an official of the Japanese Embassy who desired approval of two points in connection with formal notification of invocation of article 21 in connection with submarines; informal statement (text printed) on the two points.
154
Dec. 17 (450) To the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Information relative to Japanese invocation of article 21, in order to retain submarine tonnage.
155
Dec. 24 (624) From the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
British notification of invocation of article 21 relative to retention of cruiser tonnage.
156
Dec. 28 (284) From the Japanese Ambassador
Notification of retention of 15,598 tons of submarines in excess of tonnage permitted under article 18, and of invocation of article 21.
156
Dec. 29 (458) To the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Instructions to present note (text printed) acknowledging receipt of British notification of invocation of article 21 and indicating U. S. intention to increase by proportionate amount its cruiser tonnage.
157
Dec. 29 (291) From the Japanese Ambassador
Notification that, in response to British invocation of article 21, Japan has decided to retain the subcategory cruiser Tsushima.
157
Dec. 30 (166) To the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Information of Japanese note and Department’s reply (infra) indicating U. S. intention to retain proportionate amount of submarine tonnage.
(Footnote: The same to the Ambassador in the United Kingdom.)
158
Dec. 30 To the Japanese Ambassador
Acknowledgment of Japanese note and statement of U. S. intention to retain proportionate amount of submarine tonnage.
158
Dec. 30 Memorandum by the Chief of the Division of Western European Affairs
Reiteration to Counselor of the British Embassy of U. S. position in favor of a reduction of armaments, and regret that it has been found necessary to increase naval armament by invocation of article 21.
158

SIGNATURE OF PROCÈS-VERBAL, NOVEMBER 6, 1936, RELATING TO PART IV (RULES OF SUBMARINE WARFARE), LONDON NAVAL TREATY, SIGNED APRIL 22, 1930

[Page XXIV]
Date and number Subject Page
1936 Mar. 10 (130) From the Chairman of the American Delegation to the London Naval Conference (tel.)
British plan for reconfirming commitment to part IV of the London Treaty of 1930 pertaining to submarines.
160
Mar. 20 To President Roosevelt
Explanation of attempt of London Naval Conference to obtain wider adherence to rules of submarine warfare as set forth in 1930, by authorizing the British to invite other countries to sign a procès-verbal. Request for authority for American delegation at Conference to sign.
(Footnote: Authority given as requested.)
160
Mar. 20 (76) To the Chairman of the American Delegation to the London Naval Conference (tel.)
Advice of President’s authorization of signature of procès-verbal.
(Footnote: Department’s receipt of information that Japanese would not have instructions in time to sign the procès-verbal before the following week.)
162
Mar. 28 (104) To the Chargé in the United Kingdom (tel.)
For the Ambassador or Atherton: Authority to sign procès-verbal in view of departure of American delegates to the Conference.
162
Aug. 15 (399) From the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
British efforts to secure favorable replies from France and Italy in respect to procès-verbal.
162
Oct. 6 (462) From the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Advice from Foreign Office of Italian readiness to sign, and of arrangements for early signature of instrument; request as to full power for signature.
163
Oct. 8 (367) To the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Authorization to sign procès-verbal and advice of dispatch of full power signed by President.
163
Nov. 6 (515) From the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Advice of signature of procès-verbal.
164
(Note: Citation to text of procès-verbal, and Department’s statement.) 164

VIEWS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE WITH RESPECT TO NEUTRALITY LEGISLATION

[Page XXV]
Date and number Subject Page
1935 Dec. 28 (507) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
List of suggestions, made by various persons, with respect to permanent neutrality legislation; request for comment thereon. Instructions to repeat to London, Berlin, and Bern.
165
Dec. 31 (257) From the Ambassador in Germany (tel.)
Question as to desirability of any permanent neutrality legislation in sense of “mandatory” legislation; belief that the Executive should have as complete discretion as possible.
165
1936 Jan. 2 (1) From the Ambassador in Italy (tel.)
Inclination in support of allowing belligerent to buy any materials in “normal volume,” as being in substantial compliance with treaty obligations and consonant with neutrality.
166
Jan. 2 (2) From the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Reference to his previously expressed views; indication that President should be given latitude to specify what commodities should be embargoed and to whom as an aggressor the embargo should apply.
168
Jan. 2 (3) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Belief that neutrality legislation should be in general terms and that, by implication, sales might be permitted to nations on a cash and carry basis; indication of varying views of Embassy staff.
169
Jan. 3 (362) From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
Comments on the various alternatives in No. 507 of December 28, and indication of strong feeling that any legislation beyond that affecting arms and implements of war should be left to the discretion of the President.
172
Jan. 9 Memorandum by the Chief of the Office of Arms and Munitions Control
Explanation of the passport provisions of the neutrality bills, at the request of the Counselor of the Italian Embassy.
173
Jan. 22 From the Secretary of War
Suggestion that, due to its special status, the Panama Canal Zone be specifically excluded from the neutrality bills before Congress.
174
Feb. 1 (32) To the Chairman of the American Delegation to the London Naval Conference (tel.)
Request for Chairman’s comments on possibility of international consideration of the use of neutral ports by armed merchant vessels instead of inclusion of subject in U. S. neutrality bill.
175
Feb. 4 (84) From the Chairman of the American Delegation to the London Naval Conference (tel.)
Tentative comments including belief that only possible method of approach between the naval powers would be as corollary to part IV of the London Treaty.
176
Feb. 28 To the Secretary of War
Discussion of neutrality measures before Congress and promise to keep matter of Panama Canal Zone in mind in connection with any future legislation on neutrality.
178
Dec. 15 Memorandum by the Chief of the Office of Arms and Munitions Control
Explanation, in reply to questions of the Turkish Ambassador, of U. S. position on export of certain bombers for which Turkey has contracted.
178

ANALYSES AND REPORTS BY AMERICAN DIPLOMATIC MISSIONS REGARDING EUROPEAN POLITICAL DEVELOPMENTS AFFECTING THE PRESERVATION OF PEACE

[Page XXVI] [Page XXVII] [Page XXVIII] [Page XXIX] [Page XXX] [Page XXXI] [Page XXXII] [Page XXXIII] [Page XXXIV] [Page XXXV] [Page XXXVI] [Page XXXVII]
Date and number Subject Page
1936 Jan. 3 (1) From the Ambassador in Germany (tel.)
Account of French Ambassador’s conversation with Hitler in which the Italian-Ethiopian situation and the Franco-Soviet agreement were discussed; concern of French Embassy over possible effect of agreement on demilitarized zone.
180
Jan. 19 (373) From the Minister in Czechoslovakia
Conversation with Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs in which the recent visit of the Austrian Chancellor was discussed, including its economic and political significance.
181
Jan. 27 From the Minister in Switzerland
Detailed résumé of activity of the ninetieth session of the Council of the League of Nations, with special attention to its position on the Ethiopian question and on sanctions in connection therewith.
183
Feb. 6 (40) From the Ambassador in Germany (tel.)
Résumé of Embassy Counselor’s conversation with a Foreign Ministry official, who stated that Germany was building up to announced 36 divisions, but would reduce armaments if others did so.
188
Feb. 8 (2651) From the Ambassador in Germany
Analysis of German situation; conclusion that time is ripe for discussion with Germany on armament limitation and related questions; opinion regarding efficacy of threat of encirclement.
189
Feb. 12 (46) From the Ambassador in Germany (tel.)
Further remarks on encirclement idea; information from British Ambassador that his Government is absolutely committed to great armament.
195
Feb. 13 (58) From the Chargé in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Explanation of trend of British policy toward temporization.
196
Feb. 15 (48) From the Ambassador in Germany (tel.)
German position that Franco-Soviet pact is a breach of Locarno, and concern over “spirit” which may develop in the two countries; hint of possible army influence toward improvement of Soviet-German relations.
199
Feb. 17 (49) From the Ambassador in the Soviet Union (tel.)
Survey of international relations, including information from Soviet Commissar of Foreign Affairs Litvinov and from Polish Foreign Minister Beck.
200
Feb. 21 (2563) From the Ambassador in France
Conversation with new Prime Minister Sarrant on the broader aspect of world problems, including Sarrant’s suggestion of an international conference to consider the question of securing for each nation raw materials, markets, and outlets for surplus population.
202
Feb. 22 (62) From the Ambassador in Italy (tel.)
Evaluation of Italian foreign policy following a long talk with Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs Suvich, who gave assurance that there are no negotiations in process for military or political cooperation with Germany.
204
Mar. 7 (168) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Unconfirmed press report that small detachment of German Army has entered Cologne; French view of violation of Locarno treaty.
206
Mar. 7 (67) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Instructions to keep Department closely informed of developments arising out of German action.
(Footnote: Sent also to Embassies in the United Kingdom and Germany.)
207
Mar. 7 (60) From the Ambassador in Germany (tel.)
Memorandum sent by Germany to the Locarno powers (excerpt printed); Foreign Office comments on memorandum and assurance that entry of troops into demilitarized zone was devoid of military significance.
207
Mar. 7 (76) From the Ambassador in Italy (tel.)
Detailed résumé of Suvich’s explanation of the Italian view of the German action and its probable effects.
210
Mar. 7 (79) From the Ambassador in the Soviet Union (tel.)
Attitude of various members of the diplomatic corps and of Litvinov toward the German action.
212
Mar. 8 (89) From the Chargé in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Advice of British general view of German action, and of Foreign Secretary Eden’s conferences with representatives of the Locarno powers, and with the Prime Minister.
213
[Mar. 8] (61) From the Ambassador in Germany (tel.)
Discussion of content and reception of Hitler’s Reichstag speech, and information of Military Attachés estimate that about 45,000 soldiers are being moved into the Rhineland.
214
Mar. 8 (175) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Foreign Minister’s observations relative to the situation created by the German action; and his request, in view of British vacillation, that President Roosevelt or the Secretary condemn on moral grounds any unilateral repudiation of a treaty.
216
Mar. 9 To President Roosevelt
Transmittal of a memorandum relative to German action, with indication that the action appears to be a violation of the Versailles Treaty and the Locarno pacts, but not of the U. S.-German treaty of August 25, 1921.
218
Mar. 9 (66) From the Ambassador in Germany (tel.)
Advice of favorable attitude of the Foreign Office toward a League invitation to attend a Council meeting to discuss the German action.
218
Mar. 9 From the Ambassador in Mexico (tel.)
Hope that opportunity may offer itself for a tender of good offices by the President to avert war in Europe.
219
Mar. 9 Memorandum by the Minister in Austria
Discussion of background and meaning to Europe of German violation of Locarno Pact, and probable consequence to Europe if England and France permit Germany to get away with this fait accompli.
219
Undated (Rec’d Apr. 1) Memorandum by the American Minister in Rumania of a Conversation With the Rumanian Minister for Foreign Affairs, March 9, 1936
Conversation with Foreign Minister Titulescu, who was critical of the mild course of France, and indicated readiness of Rumania to join in sanctions against Germany if the League voted them.
227
Mar. 10 (70) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Advice that Department does not feel that it could appropriately make the statement requested in No. 175 of March 8, in view of procedure provided for application to present situation.
228
Mar. 10 (184) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
French demands in connection with the German situation as set forth in a meeting of the Locarno signatories.
228
Mar. 10 (100) From the Chargé in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Cabinet decision that Hitler’s proposal (made in his Reichstag speech) should be considered; critical views of pro-French element in official quarters.
229
Mar. 11 (89) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Summary of trends relative to the German situation, including remarks on the improbability of the adoption of sanctions, uncertainty of Balkan representatives as to views of their Governments, and fear of involvement by some countries.
230
Mar. 11 (102) From the Chargé in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Trends prior to meeting of Locarno powers in London, including a stiffening of the French position, British unwillingness to perpetuate promise of temporary support to France and Belgium, and Soviet opposition to negotiations with Germany.
232
Mar. 11 (69) From the Ambassador in Germany (tel.)
Advice of German plan for demilitarization of Franco-German frontier, and of German belief that French are not in any mood for discussions.
233
Mar. 11 (197) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Foreign Minister Flandin’s disappointment that the United States could not give support requested for French thesis, and his satisfaction over Belgian support of sanctions with its probable effect in Great Britain.
(Footnote: Reference to despatch setting forth Belgian position relative to demands for sanctions against Germany.)
234
Mar. 11 (71) From the Ambassador in Germany (tel.)
Information that Mussolini is sending two army divisions to the Brenner Pass zone, and that U. S. attitudes are closely watched by all powers.
235
Mar. 12 (108) From the Chargé in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Report on deadlocked negotiations, including: British attempt to seek basis for French-German agreement, pressure on France by Soviet Union and the Little Entente, British view of Belgian position, and Italy’s cynical onlooker’s attitude.
235
Mar. 12 (51) To the Ambassador in Mexico (tel.)
Advice of President’s appreciation of message relating to good offices, and of his hope that necessity for drastic action will be obviated.
237
Mar. 12 (74) From the Ambassador in Germany (tel.)
Comments on a German official statement, which includes a discussion of proposals of March 7, and on the German military situation.
237
Mar. 12 (113) From the Chargé in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Information of British-French conversation, and of German position at the London Locarno meetings.
238
Mar. 12 (1053) From the Ambassador in Poland
Advice of French Ambassador’s views of Hitler’s proposals, and of French intention of satisfying French-Soviet agreement. Foreign Minister Beck’s promise that Poland would remain faithful to Franco-Polish agreement; observations thereon.
239
Mar. 13 (115) From the Chargé in the United Kingdom (tel.)
French Ambassador’s assessment of situation to date; British attitude and changes therein, due to a better understanding of the French and Belgian positions.
241
Mar. 13 (116) From the Chargé in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Report on Belgian plan offered at meeting of the Locarno powers, and on rumors relative to British approach to Hitler.
243
Mar. 13 (117) From the Chargé in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Question as to attendance as visitor at the League Council meeting.
244
Mar. 13 (80) To the Chargé in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Department’s view that he should not attend meeting.
244
Mar. 14 Memorandum by the Under Secretary of State
Explanation of U. S. position in the present European situation in reply to a request from the Turkish Ambassador.
244
Mar. 14 (75) From the Ambassador in Germany (tel.)
German decision not to give way to pressure for some gesture to France in withdrawing part of Rhineland forces, and not to send a representative to the Council meeting at this time; summary of rumors and conjectures.
245
Mar. 14 (2) From the Minister in Czechoslovakia (tel.)
Czech views on German action of March 7, and attitude toward sanctions.
246
Mar. 14 (754) From the Ambassador in Belgium
Outline of seven points of Belgian position, and information as to probable Belgian aim in efforts to reconcile views of British and French.
247
Mar. 16 (78) From the Ambassador in Germany (tel.)
Analysis of German situation including relation thereto of the Ethiopian question and U. S. isolationism, and request that this communication be shown to the President.
249
Mar. 16 (79) From the Ambassador in Germany (tel.)
Foreign Office comments on reply to invitation to participate in the League Council meeting, with indication that the Government was prepared to accept provided the German proposals would be considered; observations on general situation.
251
Mar. 17 (11) From the Minister in Yugoslavia (tel.)
Information from Foreign Minister that in case of failure of peaceful solution of the German problem, Yugoslavia would give France full and unqualified support.
252
Mar. 17 (80) From the Ambassador in Germany (tel.)
British assurance that German and other proposals would be discussed at Council meeting in due course; German decision to send delegation to London headed by Ribbentrop, Ambassador-at-Large.
252
Mar. 17 (139) From the Minister in Norway
Possible effects of Danish Foreign Minister’s refusal to support sanctions in his capacity as representative of the Scandinavian countries at the Council meeting.
253
Mar. 18 (20) From the Minister in Norway (tel.)
Information from various sources that the British will propose at intervals a comprehensive peace plan providing inter alia for equality for Germany and security for France and Belgium.
254
Mar. 18 (85) From the Ambassador in Germany (tel.)
Considerations relative to London discussions in general, and the French position in particular.
254
Mar. 18 Memorandum by the Minister in Switzerland
Foreign Minister’s inclination toward British point of view, and against the French, which he thinks too legalistic; his position on sanctions, and on the proper scope of work of the League.
255
Mar. 20 (14,593) Report by the Military Attaché in Germany
Detailed explanation of the Rhineland occupation as a defensive measure from the German point of view; discussion of points on which Germany will not yield, and of the probable outcome of the crisis.
258
Mar. 20 (381) From the Minister in the Netherlands
Foreign Minister’s view of the European situation, with special attention to the complications deriving from the German struggle for equality, and his belief that Hitler’s peace plan might have good results, but that his country would refrain from joining entangling alliances.
260
Mar. 20 (21) From the Minister in Norway (tel.)
Italy’s allegation of inability to participate in any Rhineland patrol scheme which might be adopted by League Council; expected trend of Council meetings.
262
Mar. 21 (6) To the Minister in Norway (tel.)
Expression of appreciation of Minister’s No. 20, March 18, and indication of continuing interest in telegrams of type similar to No. 21, March 20.
263
Mar. 21 (88) From the Ambassador in Germany (tel.)
Foreign Office opposition to accord adopted in London March 19, but desire to continue negotiations; Hitler’s election campaign appeal.
263
Mar. 23 Memorandum by the Chargé in Belgium
Background of accord adopted in London by the Locarno powers, and Van Zeeland’s rôle therein; German astonishment at firm stand taken.
264
Mar. 23 (89) To the Chargé in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Expression of appreciation of Chargé’s reports on meetings of the Council and the Locarno powers.
265
Mar. 24 Memorandum by the Chargé in Lithuania
Explanation by a Foreign Ministry official of Lithuanian attitude toward a non-aggression pact with Lithuania mentioned in the German memorandum of March 7.
266
Mar. 25 (251) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Restatement of French position by an official of the Foreign Ministry, including information concerning opposition in Germany to Hitler’s Rhineland action.
(Sent also to London, Rome, Brussels, Berlin, and The Hague.)
267
Mar. 26 (153) From the Chargé in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Information from Dieckhoff of the German delegation in London that German official opinion concerning Rhineland action was united, except as to number of troops to be sent.
268
Mar. 28 (266) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Foreign Minister’s regret that British Government did not take a firm attitude from the beginning of the German Rhineland conflict, since it would have removed, at least for some time, the danger of war.
269
Mar. 28 (4319) From the Minister in Switzerland
Observations on a London meeting of representatives of the Scandinavian countries and Holland, Spain, and Switzerland, who decided that powers nonsignatories of the Versailles Treaty or Locarno Pact, but members of the League, had no responsibility in the present situation.
270
Apr. 1 (776) From the Ambassador in Belgium
Memorandum (text printed) of a conversation with Van Zeeland, Prime Minister and Foreign Minister, who commented on parliamentary government, the German situation, English sympathy with Germany, Anglo-Belgian military conversations, and the forthcoming Belgian elections.
271
Apr. 2 (1078) From the Ambassador in Poland
Foreign Minister Beck’s remarks relative to Poland’s position at London, and his gratification at statement of Neville Chamberlain, leader of the Conservative Party, that Great Britain would abide by obligations as a League member to guard Poland against aggressive attack.
273
Apr. 2 (604 Diplo.) From the Chargé in Estonia
Account of conversations with Estonian and Latvian officials relative to the effect on the Baltic countries of the German Rhineland occupation, and the Hitler peace proposals.
275
Apr. 2 (103) From the Ambassador in Germany (tel.)
Analysis of local non-German reaction to German proposals and Hitler’s tendency to talk directly to the people; opinion that Hitler’s bluff for peace should be called since the powers do not seem willing and capable of calling his bluff for war.
278
Apr. 4 (2747) From the Ambassador in Germany
Advice of probability that no action will be taken on Hitler’s proposals until after French elections, and review of German relations with the Danubian countries, Italy, France, Great Britain, the Soviet Union, and Poland.
279
Apr. 6 (25) From the Minister in Norway (tel.)
Information concerning a French plan in respect to the Rhineland, British desire to end Italian-Ethiopian hostilities, pro-German attitude of English people, including high army circles, and forthcoming conclusion of German-Japanese military arrangements.
282
Apr. 7 (1649) From the Consul at Geneva
Comprehensive survey of the general European situation from Geneva viewpoint, including the view that how Great Britain reconciles her European and African interests is, next to Germany’s policy and intentions, the great problem in the situation.
282
Apr. 9 (105) From the Ambassador in Germany (tel.)
German receipt of French plan and preliminary official comment thereon; press repudiation of plan in detail and in tone.
286
Apr. 14 (789) From the Ambassador in Belgium
Memorandum (text printed) of a conversation with Van Zeeland’s Chef de Cabinet, pertaining to the meeting of the Locarno powers, other than Germany, at Geneva, April 10.
287
[Apr. 16] Memorandum by the Minister in Yugoslavia
Assistant Foreign Minister’s views on the Austrian establishment of conscript service, possibility of similar Hungarian action, eventual success of Italy in Ethiopia, and views on the French position.
289
Apr. 17 (431) From the Minister in Czechoslovakia
Detailed consideration of Czechoslovak concern relative to possible repercussions of recent developments in Germany, especially in their effect upon the relation of France to the Little Entente and upon Hungary. Prophecy that Germany will attain aims.
290
Apr. 22 (116) From the Chargé in Germany (tel.)
Résumé of situation as seen from Berlin, including comments on views of Foreign Office as to satisfactory relations with the British, and on French Embassy’s distrust of German intentions in Austria. Belief that situation is focusing on French-German rivalry for European hegemony, and the new element of Italy.
295
Apr. 27 (228) From the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Analysis of British trends, including the passing of the high point of pro-German opinion, the awakening to the possible dangers from Nazi policies, and the awareness of necessity of rearming; opinion of the importance of the time element in four factors of international import.
296
May 1 (807) From the Ambassador in Belgium
Evaluation of increasing Belgian tendency of an orientation toward Great Britain rather than toward France, and of economic and other reasons for the change.
298
May 18 Memorandum by the Ambassador in the Soviet Union
Lengthy conversation with German Foreign Minister Von Neurath, who talked, without apparent reserve, about German intentions and relations to other European powers, and gave the impression that Germany will attempt to avoid commitments until her fortifications in the West are completed.
300
May 19 (269) From the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Résumé of the British situation, with attention to the apprehension in official circles that Hitler does not wish to effect appeasement through negotiation, in view of his attitude toward a British questionnaire and other matters.
304
May 20 (270) From the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Foreign Office position that it is in the British interest to reconstruct a front of the Western powers, a step which necessitates the termination of the Anglo-Italian situation and adjustment of Italy’s position in the League.
305
May 20 Memorandum by the Ambassador in the Soviet Union
Conversation with Van Zeeland, who was concerned about the effect of the immense decrease of French prestige and the military weakness of England, and who expressed his views as to desirable changes in the League Covenant.
306
May 21 Memorandum by the Ambassador in the Soviet Union
Information from a French Foreign Office official of French Government’s willingness to use force to prevent construction of German fortifications on the French and Belgian frontiers, but his acknowledgment of possible difficulties with public opinion.
308
May 22 (275) From the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Information of Hitler’s opening of indirect discussions with Mussolini.
310
May 26 (2852) From the Chargé in Germany
Explanation by Foreign Office official that Germany, by a note of April 1 to the British, feels herself bound not to increase the garrison in the Rhineland for four months, but is not bound as to fortifications; information that fortifications are under way.
310
May 28 (161) From the Chargé in Germany (tel.)
Account of conversations with British and French Ambassadors and with Dieckhoff on various subjects, including Italo-German relations, Hitler’s economic stabilization plan, resurgence of German military power, and work on German reply to British questionnaire.
311
May 30 (136) From the Minister in Albania
Presentation of two U. S. military attachés to King Zog, who gave his views as to when general war, started by Germany, might break out, and suggested its possible prevention by collaboration between the British and Americans.
312
June 16 (691) From the Minister in Egypt
Examples of prevailing opinion on the inevitability of a new world war.
314
July 3 (206) From the Chargé in Germany (tel.)
Belief that a reply to the British questionnaire will soon be made, and that the French are anxious to have Germany participate in the Brussels Locarno discussions. Advice from the French of German fear of a monarchical restoration in Austria at Mussolini’s initiative.
315
July 11 (825) From the Minister in Austria
Transmittal of a “sketch” (text printed) of conversations between Chancellor Schuschnigg and the German Minister, which is expected to lead to completion of an agreement in which Germany would recognize Austrian independence and agree to noninterference in Austrian internal affairs.
316
July 13 (345) From the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Information from Foreign Office official on British views relative to the Austro-German agreement, French notification of termination of Mediterranean mutual assistance accord, and on proposed Brussels meeting.
(Footnote: Eden’s announcements of mutual assistance agreement lapses.)
321
July 15 (219) From the Chargé in Germany (tel.)
Analysis of and observations on the possible significance of the Austro-German agreement, including its effect on German relations with Italy and Great Britain; speculations as to Hitler’s next move.
322
July 16 (607) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Foreign Office view of Austro-German accord, including observation that the countries that have the most to worry about are Czechoslovakia and Poland.
325
July 23 (508) From the Chargé in Czechoslovakia
Foreign Minister Krofta’s fear of growing German power, but belief that Hitler knows he would not be allowed to absorb Czechoslovakia; Krofta’s concern, however, over a possible German offer of a “political and commercial pact.”
326
July 24 (645) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Views of Vienot, Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, on results of a London Conference of representatives from Belgium, France, and the United Kingdom, July 23, and his belief that Hitler would not answer the British questionnaire until at least after the Olympic games.
(Footnote: Information that Germany did not reply to questionnaire.)
327
July 25 (511) From the Chargé in Czechoslovakia
Summary of optimistic observations of President Beneš on the general European situation, including his assertion that Czechoslovakia has implicit faith in her allies.
328
July 28 (234) From the Chargé in Germany (tel.)
German willingness to participate in a five-power Locarno conference in the fall after careful preparation, and views as to possible agenda.
(Footnote: Information that conference was not held.)
330
July 29 (236) From the Chargé in Germany (tel.)
Information from the British Chargé of concern over French position on Eastern European problems, and German failure to reply to questionnaire; from the French Counsellor of concern over German position on Soviet Russia.
331
Aug. 5 (650) To the Chargé in Germany
Detailed instructions for special study and reports relative to policies and plans of the German Government and leaders in respect to the countries of Eastern Europe.
332
Aug. 6 (722) From the Chargé in France (tel.)
Soviet Chargé’s belief that Germany and Italy accepted invitation to projected Locarno conference to conciliate British opinion in respect to Italian aid to Spanish insurgents; and view that Germany would utilize conference to protest against Soviet Russia and Communism.
334
Aug. 18 (256) From the Ambassador in Germany (tel.)
View of Schacht, Minister of Economic Affairs, that German cooperation for world peace depended on international guarantee of colonial possessions and room for her increasing population, and his desire that President Roosevelt call a conference to make proper concessions.
335
Sept. 3 (3019) From the Ambassador in Germany
Analysis of background of present turmoil in Europe and probable future trends, with special attention to Germany’s resurgence, her relation to Italy, and the influence of the Soviet Union and Communism on that relationship.
335
Sept. 5 (546) From the Minister in Czechoslovakia
Detailed summary of Krofta’s comments on the European situation, with emphasis on the relationship of Czechoslovakia to the other countries of Europe.
339
[Sept. 10] Memorandum by the Minister in Austria
Comprehensive analysis of unlimited German objectives and the external and domestic influences determining the rate of their realization.
342
Sept. 12 (210) From the Chargé in the Soviet Union (tel.)
Litvinov’s reasons for denunciation of the Blum government in France; belief of German observers in Moscow that the Kremlin is dissatisfied with the United Front experiment in France.
345
Sept. 16 (976) From the Chargé in Belgium
Information from a Foreign Office official of the tendency of Italy and Germany to put off the Locarno Conference with the expectation of securing better strategic positions meanwhile.
347
Sept. 18 (3047) From the Ambassador in Germany
Comprehensive survey of the attitudes of the German people, and conclusion that Hitler for the present at least can count on an overwhelming majority in support of any venture he might undertake.
347
Sept. 21 (3052) From the Ambassador in Germany
Discussion of the international aspects of the Nuremberg Congress, forming the first of three despatches devoted to that event, and indicating the clarification of foreign policy, especially relative to the Soviet Union and Italy.
350
Sept. 22 (906) From the Chargé in France (tel.)
Observations of a Foreign Office official on German foreign policy with special reference to the ulterior motives behind the anti-Soviet campaign, and to the drive for colonies.
353
Sept. 28 (294) From the Ambassador in Germany (tel.)
Advice of projected increase in German military strength, and of signs of mutual cooperation between Germany and Italy.
355
Oct. 2 (7) From the Ambassador in France
Conversation with Léger of the Foreign Office, who explained the military promises made during General Rydz-Smigly’s visit, and analyzed German policy in respect to a possible attack on France.
356
Oct. 8 (978) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Foreign Minister’s remarks on removal of trade barriers, desirability of an economic conference, and reason why the agreed on military conversations with the Soviet Union have not taken place.
358
Oct. 12 (301) From the Ambassador in Germany (tel.)
Information of German action to increase military strength, effective October 11.
359
Oct. 14 (1005) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Views of Beck, Foreign Minister of Poland, on a Locarno agreement, and his opinion that nothing could be done except to meet each situation which arose, in a spirit of moderation and reasonableness.
359
Oct. 19 (561) From the Minister in the Netherlands
Netherland approval of declaration of King Leopold of Belgium on October 14, which stated that his country’s efforts must be directed not to preparing for war in a coalition, but toward keeping war away from Belgian territory.
360
Oct. 21 (422) From the Ambassador in Italy (tel.)
Advice of Italian reply to British proposals relative to a Locarno meeting, indicating a desire to return to original Locarno undertaking.
363
Oct. 24 Memorandum by the Third Secretary of Embassy in Belgium
Information from Le Ghait, Chef de Cabinet to the Foreign Minister, that the Belgian reply to the British invitation to a five-power conference was in line with the recent statement by King Leopold on foreign policy.
363
Oct. 28 (2037) From the Chargé in the Soviet Union
Soviet concern over King Leopold’s statement as a sign of the beginning of the fall of the structure of so-called collective security, and denial that there is a connection between the Belgian shift in policy and the Franco-Soviet pact.
364
Nov. 2 Memorandum by the Secretary of State
Discussion with the Hungarian Minister as to the consequences of continuing increase in European armaments.
365
Nov. 9 (67) Report by the Naval Attaché in Belgium
Discussion of meaning and effects of King Leopold’s statement of October 14 recommending an “exclusively and integrally Belgian policy” in order to keep Belgium out of its neighbors’ conflicts.
366
Nov. 13 Memorandum by the Chief of the Division of Near Eastern Affairs
Detailed information from the Rumanian Minister relative to the last meeting of the Little Entente Council and the rifts therein, including difference of views on Soviet policy and on the restoration of the Hapsburgs.
368
Nov. 14 (332) From the Ambassador in Germany (tel.)
Assessment of the possible influence of present Italo-German rapprochement upon Central Europe in general and Czechoslovakia in particular.
370
Nov. 16 (335) From the Ambassador in Germany (tel.)
Advice of Germany’s unilateral denunciation of part XII of the Versailles Treaty relating to German waterways; uncertainty as to reason for the action and timing of denunciation.
(Footnote: Information of few mild protests lodged with Foreign Office.)
372
Dec. 2 To the Director of Naval Intelligence, Navy Department
Comments on a report pertaining to Belgium’s new neutrality policy, forwarded by the Director.
374
Dec. 3 (1080) From the Ambassador in Belgium
Memorandum (text printed) of a conversation with Le Ghait, who indicated that a favorable reply would be sent to the British suggestion of Belgian participation in a new Western pact.
374
Dec. 7 (609) From the Minister in Czechoslovakia
Résumé of a discussion with Veverka, presently Czechoslovak Minister in Austria, in which the waning power of Italy in Central Europe was mentioned, but major stress placed on differences with Germany in the Sudeten area.
375
Dec. 9 (3179) From the Ambassador in Germany
Advice that the German Government has given no formal notification to the United States of the denunciation of part XII of the Versailles Treaty, the rights and advantages of which were given to the United States under the U. S.-German treaty of 1921.
379
Dec. 16 (1262) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Information of French and German advances requesting U. S. assistance in reaching a reconciliation; suggestion of possible statement by President Roosevelt after preparation of ground.
380
Dec. 17 (264) From the Chargé in Latvia
Finnish Minister’s observations concerning the relations of his country with the Soviet Union and Germany, and Finland’s hope to remain neutral in case of war in Eastern Europe.
381
Dec. 17 (1266) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
French intention of going ahead with conversations with the German Ambassador concerning a Franco-German understanding, despite British opposition to previous conversations in which the matter of colonies was mentioned.
382
Dec. 18 (1273) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
French pressure on Little Entente to alter mutual obligations for defense against Hungary and Bulgaria into obligations for defense against Germany.
383
Dec. 19 (1094) From the Ambassador in Belgium
Digests (texts printed) of (1) British note of September 17, proposing a Western pact, (2) replies thereto of Belgium, France, Germany, and Italy, and (3) British supplementary note of November 19.
384
1937 Jan. 7 (1438) From the Ambassador in Poland
Foreign Minister Beck’s optimistic views on European situation, and his satisfaction in Polish relations thereto.
387
Jan. 16 (68) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Information of no progress in connection with French offer to enter into pacts of mutual assistance with Yugoslavia, Rumania, and Czechoslovakia against attack from any source.
389

THE GERMAN-JAPANESE ACCORD OF NOVEMBER 25, 1936, AGAINST THE COMMUNIST INTERNATIONAL

[Page XXXVIII] [Page XXXIX]
Date and number Subject Page
1936 Oct. 27 (2101) From the Chargé in Japan
Memorandum (text printed) of a conversation with the Belgian Ambassador, who said he believed that an informal German-Japanese military accord has existed for some time, but that a more concrete agreement was being reached.
390
Nov. 11 (231) From the Chargé in Japan (tel.)
Local reports of an important diplomatic project having to do with Germany.
391
Nov. 13 (232) From the Chargé in Japan (tel.)
Japanese ban on foreign press despatches relative to rumored negotiations with Germany; belief in informed sources that any agreement reached will be a declaration opposed to Communism, aligning Japan with Fascist nations.
391
Nov. 17 (279) From the Chargé in the Soviet Union (tel.)
Information from Litvinov, Commissar of Foreign Affairs, relative to signature of German-Japanese declaration calling for an international campaign against Communism, and his comments thereon.
392
Nov. 17 (468) From the Ambassador in Italy (tel.)
Press comments relative to agreement.
393
Nov. 18 (281) From the Chargé in the Soviet Union (tel.)
Press report relative to agreement.
394
Nov. 18 (1126) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Information of the German Foreign Minister’s view as of last May on an agreement with Japan. Soviet Ambassador’s information that agreement had secret clauses making it virtually an alliance against the Soviet Union.
394
Nov. 18 (470) From the Ambassador in Italy (tel.)
Information from the Japanese Ambassador that he understood an agreement had been initialed in Berlin, that there was no hidden military understanding, and that Berlin had taken the initiative.
395
Nov. 20 (343) From the Ambassador in Germany (tel.)
Assurance from Foreign Office informant that nothing in the nature of a real agreement exists with Japan; intimation, however, that there may be a Japanese declaration against Communism in the near future.
396
Nov. 23 (238) From the Chargé in Japan (tel.)
Foreign Office official’s summary of proposed anti-Comintern agreement with Germany, explanation of its character, and assurance that it was not directed against any particular power.
397
Nov. 25 (294) From the Chargé in the Soviet Union (tel.)
Information from the Chinese and French Ambassadors and the Japanese Chargé concerning developments in the Far East with special reference to relations between Japan and Germany.
398
Nov. 25 (349) From the Ambassador in Germany (tel.)
Receipt from Foreign Minister of copy of agreement with Japan, signed November 25 (text printed), and his assurance that it covered the entire agreement, that there were no secret clauses.
(Footnote: Citation to text of secret additional agreement signed the same day.)
400
Nov. 27 Memorandum by the Acting Secretary of State of a Conversation With the Polish Ambassador
Ambassador’s assertion that Poland is not a party to the German-Japanese Agreement and does not propose to be; his mention of close arrangement with Rumania for self-protection.
401
Nov. 27 (137) From the Chargé in Poland (tel.)
Information that Poland has not the slightest intention of joining German-Japanese anti-Communist front.
402
Nov. 28 (351) From the Ambassador in Germany (tel.)
Attempt to assess the German situation in the light of the agreement with Japan; feeling that Hitler is proceeding on a clever line which can lead in any one of several directions.
402
Dec. 4 (251) From the Ambassador in Japan (tel.)
Apparent surprise of Foreign Office over adverse reaction to agreement both in Japan and abroad; belief of Diplomatic Corps that secret military understanding accompanied agreement; views of British and Soviet Ambassadors.
404
Dec. 22 (288) From the Ambassador in China
Transmittal of memoranda of conversations with the Foreign Minister and the French and German Ambassadors, indicating various attitudes toward the agreement.
405

NEGOTIATIONS FOR THE SUPPRESSION OF LIQUOR SMUGGLING INTO THE UNITED STATES

Belgium

[Page XL]
Date and number Subject Page
1936 Jan. 25 Memorandum by the Secretary of State
Expression of hope that Belgium would take steps, by the requirement of bonds for the production of landing certificates, to eliminate the smuggling of alcohol into the United States from Belgian ports.
407
Feb. 7 Memorandum by the Consul General at Antwerp, Temporarily in the United States
Belgian Ambassador’s presentation of his Government’s position that it is the duty of the U. S. Government to protect its own coast from smuggling; Consul General’s reiteration of arguments for a regime of landing certificates.
408
Mar. 10 (332) To the Ambassador in Belgium
Belief that Belgian Ambassador will send report recommending action on lines desired by the United States, and instructions to facilitate Belgian action. Information of recent Mexican cooperation in smuggling matter.
410
Mar. 10 (10) To the Ambassador in Belgium (tel.)
Advice of Belgian Ambassador’s plan to gain desired action; request that instructions of March 10 be disregarded.
410
May 20 (D. 6738 No. 2129) From the Belgian Embassy
Desire of Belgium to collaborate despite the fact that the Belgian laws do not permit imposition of a system of landing certificates; indication of past and possible future means of collaboration.
411
May 20 (28) From the Ambassador in Belgium (tel.)
Embassy representations to the Foreign Office in attempt to prevent the departure of the Hillfern with a cargo of alcohol; Belgian insistence on inability to prevent departure legally.
412
May 21 From the Consul General at Antwerp (tel.)
Seizure of Hillfern by Commissioner of the Port, and release by Minister of Marine; finding of purchaser for alcohol at Rotterdam.
413
May 22 (29) From the Ambassador in Belgium (tel.)
Account of further fruitless representations, and request as to how far the Department wishes to go in the matter.
414
May 22 Memorandum by the Under Secretary of State
Conversation with the Belgian Chargé to whom a statement (text printed) was read as an oral representation on the Hillfern situation, and indication made of the disastrous effect the matter would have if aired in the press.
415
May 26 Memorandum by the Under Secretary of State
Conversation with the Belgian Ambassador, who expressed great concern regarding smuggling operations in Antwerp; Department’s reiteration of its serious view of the situation.
417
May 27 Memorandum by the Assistant Chief of the Division of Western European Affairs to the Under Secretary of State
Information relative to cooperation in the prevention of smuggling by France, Mexico, and the Netherlands, submitted as of possible interest in connection with the Belgian negotiations.
418
May 28 Memorandum by the Under Secretary of State
Belgian Ambassador’s delivery of note verbale (infra) relative to the steps taken in regard to the Hillfern, and his request for copies of the U. S. anti-smuggling laws, and for information as to those of the Netherlands.
(Footnote: Information from Consul at Rotterdam, telegraphed May 23 and 28, that Hillfern unloaded alcohol at Rotterdam.)
418
May 28 From the Belgian Embassy
Explanation of Belgian action in the Hillfern case as being the limit to which the Government could go under present legislation, and information that study of a draft law is being considered.
419
June 1 (18) To the Ambassador in Belgium (tel.)
Advice of Belgian note of May 28 and instructions to express gratification to the Foreign Office at steps it is proposed to take, and information as to status of Netherland legislation.
420
June 22 (43) From the Chargé in Belgium (tel.)
Foreign Office assurance of cooperation to stop alcohol smuggling, its hope that legislation might be passed to require landing certificates, and that the U. S. Consul General might assist by attending meeting of experts.
(Footnote: Department’s instructions in connection with attendance at meeting.)
421
July 2 (22) To the Chargé in Belgium (tel.)
Instructions to communicate to the Belgian authorities an excerpt (text printed) from a letter of the Secretary of the Treasury explaining operation of U. S. anti-smuggling laws.
422
July 7 (47) From the Chargé in Belgium (tel.)
Advice of new regulations providing for the shipment of alcohol from Belgium in barrels too heavy to transship at sea without a crane.
423

Canada

[Page XLI]
Date and number Subject Page
1935 Nov. 22 (138) To the Minister in Canada (tel.)
Information of loading of vessels with alcohol at Antwerp for delivery to smuggling vessels on the high seas near Canada; instructions to discuss possible willingness of Canada to join in representations to Belgium to require landing certificates.
424
Apr. 3 (564) From the Minister in Canada
Advice of willingness of Canada to participate in representations to Belgium, and request for information as to U. S. representations.
424
Aug. 5 (481) To the Minister in Canada
Reasons why no action was taken in connection with Canadian participation in representations; and advice of Belgian decree, effective August 1, designed to prevent illicit shipments.
425

Cuba

Date and number Subject Page
1936 June 13 (950) To the Ambassador in Cuba
Hope that Embassy will be successful in its efforts to obtain a continuation of the present system to prevent smuggling of Cuban alcohol into the United States; amendment desired by the Secretary of the Treasury (text printed) if the bill to change the system is considered on the floor of the Senate.
(Footnote: Information that bill was voted down in the Senate, after passage by the House, despite pressure by Cuban distillers.)
427

France

[Page XLII]
Date and number Subject Page
1936 Feb. 20 To the French Embassy
Advice of violation of anti-smuggling decree of April 9, 1935, at St. Pierre-Miquelon; and belief that France will wish to take measures against further violations.
428
Apr. 16 (123) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Instructions for representations against a new decree proposed to replace that of April 9, 1935.
429
June 26 (1384) To the Ambassador in France
Instructions to express appreciation of French action to prevent further smuggling, and hope that the Administrator at St. Pierre-Miquelon will be given assistance in his task of enforcement.
(Footnote: Ambassador’s advice that customs forces have been augmented, and a night patrol service inaugurated.)
430
Oct. 9 From the Vice Consul at St. Pierre-Miquelon (tel.)
Advice of proposed decree (text printed) abrogating that of April 9, 1935, except insofar as it concerns foreign alcohols now in warehouses, and of accompanying resolution prohibiting the importation of all foreign alcohols.
432
Nov. 10 (453) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Instructions to endeavor to secure assurances that no distillery will be permitted at St. Pierre; and that no French alcohol, known as “trois-six” will be exported from St. Pierre-Miquelon.
433
Nov. 13 (1105) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Foreign Office assurance that measures will be taken to prevent operation of distillery, and explanation that “trois-six” is a “foreign alcohol” and hence will be prohibited.
433
Nov. 23 (475) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Suggestions of Treasury Department on which favorable French consideration is desired.
434
Dec. 4 (1194) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Foreign Office readiness to make certain suggestions to the Ministry of Colonies in connection with the new decree.
434
Dec. 16 (530) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Comments on Foreign Office suggestions, with indication of changes desired.
435
Dec. 18 (1275) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Consideration by the Foreign Office of changes desired, and indication that no definite action will be taken before consultation between the Foreign Office and the Ministry of Colonies.
436

Mexico

Date and number Subject Page
1936 Jan. 24 (3238) From the Ambassador in Mexico
Information from the Minister of Hacienda that decree will be promulgated shortly, providing that shipments of alcohol out of Mexico must carry a bond for the production of a landing certificate.
436
Feb. 29 (40) From the Ambassador in Mexico (tel.)
President’s signature of decree on February 29.
(Footnote: Promulgation on March 22.)
437

Netherlands

Date and number Subject Page
1936 Apr. 18 (403) From the Chargé in the Netherlands
Note from the Foreign Minister (text printed) relative to legislation to be submitted shortly to control fraudulent importation into the United States of alcohol originating from the Netherlands.
437
May 21 (9) To the Minister in the Netherlands (tel.)
Request for information as to status of anti-smuggling legislation, and question as to informing Belgium of contemplated Netherland legislation.
438
May 22 (20) From the Minister in the Netherlands (tel.)
Information as requested, and indication that the Foreign Office has no objection to U. S. notification to Belgium of contemplated legislation.
438
Aug. 3 (26) From the Minister in the Netherlands (tel.)
Advice that legislation awaits approval of the Minister of Finance before submission to the States General where prompt approval is expected.
(Footnote: Information that apparently the legislation was still under consideration when the Government moved to London in 1940.)
439
[Page XLIII]

Norway

[Page XLIV]
Date and number Subject Page
1936 Jan. 24 (93) From the Minister in Norway
Advice of investigation by Norwegian authorities of the case of the Reidun, which had unloaded alcohol on the high seas, and also of Oslo attorney’s question relative to what action might be taken against the vessel should it enter a U. S. port.
439
Mar. 18 From the Norwegian Minister
Representations against the detention of the Reidun in New York, with reservation of rights to claim damages.
440
Mar. 26 (8) To the Minister in Norway (tel.)
Advice of seizure of Reidun and legal basis for the action.
443
Apr. 8 (26) From the Minister in Norway (tel.)
Foreign Minister’s view as to the illegal nature of the Reidun seizure, and possible infringement of Norwegian treaty rights.
443
Apr. 15 (14) To the Minister in Norway (tel.)
Information that liquor treaty of May 24, 1924, has no application to Reidun since the vessel came voluntarily into U. S. jurisdiction.
443
Apr. 23 To the Norwegian Minister
Résumé of events connected with the Reidun case, now pending in the courts, and indication that there is no action which the executive authorities can take in the matter.
444
Apr. 27 To the Norwegian Minister
Informal observations relative to the note of April 23, expressing belief that the Norwegian Government was not fully advised of the actual situation in connection with the Reidun.
448
May 7 (48) To the Minister in Norway
Information that a District Court order for release of the Reidun was suspended to permit the U. S. Government to file an amended libel or to consider advisability of appeal to a higher court.
449
May 27 (187) From the Minister in Norway
Observations on the seizure of the Reidun, and on Foreign Office viewpoint; belief that the action of the U. S. authorities was useful in halting use of Norwegian ships in smuggling activities.
449
June 12 (20) To the Chargé in Norway (tel.)
Dismissal of suit and countersuit in Reidun case.
451
June 13 From the Norwegian Minister
Confirmation of conversation with the Assistant Secretary, in which the Minister expressed expectation that Norwegian vessels suspected of having engaged in smuggling should have free access to American ports, and gave assurance of Norway’s continuing efforts against smuggling.
451
June 17 From the Norwegian Minister
Advice that Norway has waived any and all claims against the United States in respect to the Reidun case, and reiterated assurance of June 13.
451
June 23 To the Norwegian Chargé
Statement by appropriate U. S. authorities that, in view of Norwegian assurances of cooperation to prevent use of Norwegian vessels in smuggling enterprises, the U. S. customs officers will be instructed to permit entry of two specified Norwegian vessels.
452

INTEREST OF THE UNITED STATES IN THE EFFORTS OF THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS TO PROMOTE INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC COOPERATION

[Page XLV] [Page XLVI] [Page XLVII]
Date and number Subject Page
1936 May 26 (195) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Advice from Stoppani, Director of the Economic Relations Section of the League, of the forthcoming meeting of the Economic Committee, with the question of the most-favored-nation clause on the agenda; Stoppani’s suggestion of a possible alternate to J. H. Rogers, American member of the Committee.
453
July 14 (1776 Pol.) From the Consul at Geneva
Report on possible trend of discussions on economic questions at forthcoming sessions of League bodies, including consideration of a provisional international accord as envisaged by Stoppani.
454
Aug. 26 (98) To the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
For Stoppani from Rogers: Designation of Leo Pasvolsky, an American economist, as his alternate; intention of both to attend meeting of Economic Committee.
456
Sept. 14 (331) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Report of Rogers and Pasvolsky on Economic Committee meeting, including outline of Committee’s general report.
(Footnote: Release of Committee’s full report on September 23.)
456
Sept. 15 (106) To the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Comment on Committee report as highly satisfactory support of general program of U. S. Government, and instructions to inform the Secretariat orally of this judgment.
457
Sept. 15 (338) To the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Instructions to secure copy of Committee report, and to ascertain from proper officials what instructions will be given as to the disposition of the report by the League Council and Assembly; permission to make known favorable U. S. reaction to the report.
(Footnote: Sent also to Paris.)
458
Sept. 18 (885) From the Minister in Switzerland, Temporarily at Paris (tel.)
Advice of representations made as directed, and transmittal of aide-mémoire (text printed) received from the Foreign Office, indicating that the French on the whole will support the principles of the Committee report.
(Sent also to Geneva and London.)
459
Sept. 25 (444) From the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
British aide-mémoire (text printed) indicating general support of report, but inability, at the moment, to state what the final instructions to British representatives will be.
460
Sept. 26 (362) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Information that Secretariat officials are not yet aware of any definite plan for discussions in Second Committee following the announcement of French devaluation.
460
Sept. 29 (371) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Speech of Australian representative to the League referring to tripartite stabilization agreement of the United States, France, and Great Britain of September 25, and urging the Assembly to follow this lead.
461
Sept. 30 (373) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
British survey of reaction to a possible resolution for a study of the question of access to raw materials. Stoppani’s statement on the situation (text printed), suggesting multilateral collaboration in economic field similar to that begun in the monetary field.
461
Sept. 30 (374) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Conversation with Saavedra Lamas, Argentine Foreign Minister and President of the League of Nations Assembly, who planned to carry out the Secretary’s wish that he take action to increase internationally the effect of American economic policy, and requested practical suggestions as to accomplishment.
462
Oct. 1 (382) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Conversation with Avenol, Secretary-General of the League, who disclaimed knowledge of a French project; but spoke of his impression of U. S. interest in an international conference, and of interest of the Locarno powers in economic issues.
465
Oct. 1 (113) To the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Suggestion for Saavedra Lamas that common interests might best be served by emphasizing and dramatizing the Economic Committee’s report insofar as it relates to most-favored-nation policy and exchange stability, and comments relative to Montevideo Conference.
466
Oct. 1 (373) From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
Desire of French Foreign Office official to secure cooperation of Great Britain and United States in a statement on economic matters before the Second Committee; suggestion of possible later U. S. supporting statement.
468
Oct. 2 (115) To the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Statement of U. S. position indicating endorsement and support of conclusions of Economic Committee, and the application of the principles embodied therein; reservation of judgment as to proposal for multilateral conversations, pending further study.
468
Oct. 2 (386) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Agreement of Saavedra Lamas to points set forth in Department’s No. 113 of October 1.
469
Oct. 2 (389) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Advice of contemplated French decree relaxing some trade restrictions, and of French intention to inquire as to U. S. willingness to join conversations of French, British, and possibly other countries, on economic subjects.
469
Oct. 3 (118) To the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Further statement of U. S. position on economic matters; and indication of interest in a conference of European countries, but unwillingness to make any commitments in that connection.
470
Oct. [3] (394) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Further French inquiries relative to U. S. position on participation in an economic conference.
471
Oct. 3 (395) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Information of favorable British attitude toward the French proposal, and British reasons for not wishing to proceed through the League.
473
Oct. 4 (396) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
British denial of a French press item that the French and British have worked out a project to submit to the League.
475
Oct. 4 (120) To the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Instructions to inform French of U. S. preference for direct diplomatic channels instead of a general conference, and hope that governments at Geneva will support report of Economic Committee.
475
Oct. 5 (397) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
French intention of approaching the United States through regular diplomatic channels, and of presenting to the Second Committee a resolution of general endorsement of the conclusions of the Economic Committee’s report.
476
Oct. 10 (431) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
French delegate’s plea for removal of trade obstacles made when introducing report and resolutions of Second Committee; their approval by the Assembly.
476
Nov. 23 (146) To the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Instructions to ascertain latest date for possible suggestion of American for appointment to the Economic Committee.
477
Nov. 24 (478) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Advice that person might be named to Stoppani as late as January 7.
477
Nov. 24 (480) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Stoppani’s summary of factors connected with question of setting up a committee on raw materials; and request to be informally advised respecting U. S. attitude on participation.
477
Dec. 2 (487) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Inquiry by German Consul General as to U. S. attitude toward a committee on raw materials, and his indication of German willingness to participate, especially if meetings took place away from Geneva; German belief that first move should come from Great Britain.
478
Dec. 5 (495) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Tentative list of states proposed as participants in the meetings of the raw materials committee; plan that committee would technically not be composed of government representatives.
479
Dec. 5 (72) From the Acting Secretary of State to the Secretary of State (tel.)
For the Secretary of State and Feis: Advice that the League Assembly requested the Council to appoint a committee on raw materials, summary of related developments, and inquiry as to Secretary’s view of U. S. participation and composition of the committee.
480
Dec. 10 (604) From the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
British views on composition, function, and scope of proposed committee; also, information that British have no intention of approaching any governments except through League channels.
481
Dec. 14 (58) From the Secretary of State to the Acting Secretary of State (tel.)
Instructions to inform Consul at Geneva of inclination to participate if committee is to be one of technical inquiry with no direct discussion of European political problems; suggestion that President Bowman of Johns Hopkins University be named U. S. representative.
481
Dec. 15 (160) To the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
U. S. willingness to participate under certain conditions; request that Consul confer with Stoppani and report whether U. S. understanding of plans is correct.
482
Dec. 17 (520) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Stoppani’s summary of purpose, membership, and probable scope of discussions of the projected raw materials committee.
483
Dec. 30 (162) To the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Department’s consideration of appointment of same person to both Economic and Raw Materials Committees; request for information as to coordination, frequency, dates, and duration of meetings.
484
Dec. 31 (527) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Stoppani’s general reply to Department’s inquiry.
484
Dec. 31 (163) To the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Suggestion of Henry F. Grady, Dean of the College of Commerce, University of California, as appointee to the Economic Committee, and also possibly to the Raw Materials Committee.
485

PRINCIPLES UNDERLYING THE POLICY OF THE UNITED STATES FOR RESTORATION OF INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE AND FINANCE

[Page XLVIII]
Date and number Subject Page
1936 Mar. 11 (1231) To the Ambassador in France
Transmittal of memorandum paraphrasing conversations with the British Ambassador relative to the merits of multilateral trade on a basis of equality, and comments thereon; instructions to lose no opportunity to explain policy to responsible officers.
486
(Note: List of missions to which the same or similar instructions were sent.) 487
June 17 To the Minister in Austria (circ. tel.)
Instructions to report on visit of Schacht, President of the Reichsbank and German Minister of Economic Affairs, and to explain to members and officials of the Government the U. S. broad economic program of trade agreements, pointing out ultimate dangers of narrow bilateral agreements.
(Instructions to repeat to Budapest, Belgrade, Athens, and Sofia.)
488
June 20 (25) From the Minister in Hungary (tel.)
Account of Schacht’s visit to Budapest, including information from a high bank official that conversations consisted merely of an exchange of ideas.
488
June 20 (1226) From the Minister in Greece
Account of Schacht’s visit to Athens, including Legation’s understanding that it represents a further step in Germany’s economic penetration of the Near East.
489
June 23 (245) From the Minister in Bulgaria
Account of Schacht’s visit to Sofia, including comment on Schacht’s remarks of a political nature; information on Bulgarian attitude toward American policy of trade agreements.
491
June 24 (813) From the Minister in Austria
Account of Schacht’s visit to Vienna, with a detailed analysis of the economy of Southeastern Europe, and German present and possible future relation thereto, accompanied by due consideration of political currents, and assessment of relation to U. S. economic policy.
493
June 25 (538) From the Minister in Yugoslavia
Analysis of Yugoslav economy in the light of Schacht’s recent visit to Belgrade, with observations on U. S.-Yugoslav trade relations.
499

INTEREST OF THE UNITED STATES IN LIBERALIZING THE POLICY OF THE INTERNATIONAL RUBBER COMMITTEE WITH RESPECT TO THE WORLD SUPPLY OF RUBBER

[Page XLIX]
Date and number Subject Page
1936 May 1 (423) From the Minister in the Netherlands
Information relative to increase in rubber consumption and reduction in stocks; comment on the operation of the rubber producers’ restriction agreement of 1934, in respect to raising of production quota and to use of export duties to restrict native production.
503
Sept. 16 (26) To the Minister in the Netherlands (tel.)
Instructions to make representations relative to U. S. concern over the rubber situation, in order to prepare way for forthcoming meeting of the International Rubber Regulation Committee meeting in London; advice of departure of American representatives to the meeting.
(Footnote: Substantially same telegram to Ambassador in United Kingdom.)
504
Sept. 22 (36) From the Chargé in the Netherlands (tel.)
Advice that American delegates may not come to The Hague before the opening of London meeting; Netherland position on the rubber situation, and question of deferment of protest in view of that position.
506
Sept. 23 (548) From the Chargé in the Netherlands
Indication that Netherland officials are strongly opposed to British idea of higher rubber prices, and their experts do not feel there is any danger of a world rubber shortage; suggestion of adjustment of U. S. and Committee’s figures on tonnage.
507
Sept. 24 (27) To the Minister in the Netherlands (tel.)
Advice relative to figures on tonnage, and instructions to inform authorities of U. S. hope that Netherland representatives at the meeting will support additional increases of 5 to 10 percent.
508
Sept. 24 (442) From the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Conversation with Sir John Campbell, Economic and Financial Adviser to the Colonial Office; impression that Campbell will not favor further quota release at September 29 meeting.
509
Sept. 26 (348) To the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Authorization, if no objection is seen, to present to Campbell or other appropriate official certain itemized facts relative to rubber control, supporting suggestions of the American rubber interests.
510
Sept. 28 (448) From the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Advice that facts enumerated were covered previously, and that no useful purpose could be served in their repetition.
511
Sept. 28 (42) From the Chargé in the Netherlands (tel.)
Information from Netherland rubber expert indicating agreement with U. S. point of view.
511
Sept. 29 (553) From the Chargé in the Netherlands
Possibility that altered exchange rate will automatically force the Committee into further releases of rubber.
511
Oct. 1 (451) From the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Opinion of Townsend, one of the American representatives, that Embassy representations had been beneficial, and indication that he expected the October 27 meeting would authorize a further release of rubber.
512
Dec. 5 (438) To the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Advice of forthcoming arrival of Townsend to attend Committee meeting of December 7 to represent the American rubber industry; and detailed instructions as to representations to Government officials in behalf of consumers of rubber.
(Footnote: Similar telegram sent to the Netherlands.)
513
Dec. 12 (68) From the Chargé in the Netherlands (tel.)
Arrival of Townsend, who did not consider oral or written representations to the Government necessary.
516
Dec. 15 (612) From the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
For Butterworth, Embassy official temporarily in Washington: Satisfaction of American representatives with amount of rubber agreed upon for release; resentment of Campbell over interference of U. S. Government, and its effect on American representatives.
516
Dec. 17 (449) To the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Justification of U. S. official intervention; authorization to discuss with Foreign Office.
517
Dec. 24 (43) To the Minister in the Netherlands (tel.)
Instructions to indicate to the Netherlands Government the interest of the U. S. Government in the rubber question, its belief that action of Committee on releases is inadequate, and hope that a maximum release will be made from the Netherlands Indies.
518
Dec. 28 (614) From the Chargé in the Netherlands
Compliance with Department’s instructions; Foreign Minister’s general assurances.
519
[Page L]

PRELIMINARY DISCUSSIONS WITH RESPECT TO AN INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON PRODUCTION AND MARKETING OF SUGAR

Date and number Subject Page
1936 Jan. 3 (4) From the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Substance of British informal note proposing reconvening of International Sugar Conference, if there is a prospect of its success, outlining a possible basis for it, and inquiring as to U. S. participation and observations on points made.
521
Jan. 10 (8) To the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Instructions to inform Foreign Office of U. S. interest and sympathy, and of reasons for postponement of reply.
523
Feb. 6 (47) To the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Request for information concerning rumor that invitations to Sugar Conference are delayed on ground of probable inability of the United States to support Conference commitments.
523
Feb. 8 (53) From the Chargé in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Advice that rumor was also current in Great Britain and is believed to have originated in United States; statement of British official that United States has not yet been officially consulted.
523
Apr. 2 Memorandum by the Agricultural Attaché in the United Kingdom to the Chargé
Account of a conversation with the Parliamentary Under Secretary during which he was given a résumé of the status of U. S. sugar legislation and assured that no bar existed to U. S. participation from the standpoint of agriculture.
524
Apr. 20 To the Chief of the Bureau of Insular Affairs, War Department
Draft of radiogram (text printed) containing information relative to participation in the Sugar Conference, and addressed to the High Commissioner in the Philippines for his use in bringing the matter to the attention of the Philippine Government.
(Footnote: Information that telegram was sent to the High Commissioner on April 22.)
525
May 9 (307) From the High Commissioner in the Philippine Islands to the Chief of the Bureau of Insular Affairs, War Department
For the Department of State: Communication (text printed) from Philippine President Quezon to the High Commissioner indicating willingness of his Government to participate and to cooperate with the U. S. delegation, but reserving the right to vote in accordance with its own interests in case of disagreement.
527
May 11 (1236) To the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Memorandum approved by the President for transmittal to the Foreign Office (text printed) indicating probability of U. S. participation in projected Sugar Conference and describing in detail the far-reaching steps already taken to stabilize the sugar industry.
528
May 19 (168) To the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Request to inform Foreign Office orally of Philippine intention to participate in the proposed conference.
532
Aug. 10 (2439) From the Ambassador in the United Kingdom
Letter from the Foreign Office (text printed) summarizing replies of various countries to requests for their views, and indicating referral of replies to the International Sugar Committee and Dr. Colijn of the Netherlands.
533
[Page LI]

TRIPARTITE FINANCIAL STABILIZATION AGREEMENT BY THE UNITED STATES, FRANCE, AND THE UNITED KINGDOM, SET FORTH IN SIMULTANEOUS STATEMENTS, SEPTEMBER 25, 1936

[Page LII] [Page LIII]
Date and number Subject Page
1936 June 6 (467) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
From Cochran: Discussion, relative to devaluation of the French currency, with Finance Minister Vincent Auriol, who suggested a plan for a monetary truce based on bilateral conversations leading to an announcement of a general agreement.
535
June 15 Memorandum by the Chargé in the United Kingdom
Concern of the Chancellor of the Exchequer lest there develop in Washington a prejudice against British policy and methods, and his explanation of British attitude on trade relations, devaluation of French currency, and the British Equalisation Fund.
537
June 23 Memorandum by the Under Secretary of State
Conversation between the President and the French Financial Attaché at London, temporarily in Washington, who expressed desire for U. S. and British support in the French program of devaluation; President’s suggestion that matter be approached through London.
539
Sept. 4 (831) From the Chargé in France (tel.)
For Secretary of the Treasury from Cochran: Auriol’s request for advice as to procedure for submission of a prepared draft of a pre-stabilization agreement; understanding as to content of draft.
541
Sept. 4 (337) To the Chargé in France (tel.)
For Cochran from Secretary of the Treasury: Advice of preference for simultaneous presentation of draft document to Treasuries of Great Britain and the United States.
543
Sept. 8 (843) From the Chargé in France (tel.)
From Cochran: Receipt of draft, and intention to cable English translation September 9.
543
Sept. 9 (844) From the Chargé in France (tel.)
From Cochran: Confidential text of proposed French note relative to cooperation with Great Britain and the United States on currency devaluation, and text of proposed pre-stabilization agreement.
543
Sept. 9 (342) To the Chargé in France (tel.)
For Cochran from Secretary of the Treasury: Text of message to be delivered verbatim to the French Government, containing a statement of the U. S. position, without specific suggestion of revision of French text.
545
Sept. 14 (348) To the Chargé in France (tel.)
For Cochran from Secretary of the Treasury: Advice of British note (summary printed), with indication that the position taken in it is similar to that of the United States; instruction to inform French of receipt of British note.
546
Sept. 15 (870) From the Chargé in France (tel.)
For Secretary of the Treasury from Cochran: Advice of execution of instructions; comments on the financial situation by an official of the Finance Ministry.
548
Sept. 17 (884) From the Chargé in France (tel.)
For Secretary of the Treasury from Cochran: Proposed text of joint declaration, with French comments thereon, including a declaration of intention to secure the adherences of Switzerland, the Netherlands, and Belgium.
(Footnote: Citation to text of adherences of the three extra countries.)
548
Sept. 18 (892) From the Chargé in France (tel.)
For Secretary of the Treasury from Cochran: French willingness to consider U. S. suggestions, including those relative to simultaneous texts and omission of reference to eventual return to the international gold standard.
551
Sept. 19 (893) From the Chargé in France (tel.)
For Secretary of the Treasury from Cochran: French advice that British also objected to mention of the eventual return to the gold standard and suggested revision in phraseology; and that Auriol still insists upon a simultaneous common declaration.
552
Sept. 19 (359) To the Chargé in France (tel.)
For Cochran from Secretary of the Treasury: Restatement of U. S. position, with text of a statement the United States would be prepared to make.
553
Sept. 23 (908) From the Chargé in France (tel.)
For Secretary of the Treasury from Cochran: Request for reply to two questions, raised by an official of the Bank of France, relating (1) to the exchange of dollars against gold and (2) to the closing of stock and exchange markets for a short period prior to declaration of agreement.
554
Sept. 23 (367) To the Chargé in France (tel.)
To Cochran from Secretary of the Treasury: Confidential copy of possible reply (text printed) to the first question; and information that the United States would not close exchanges, but that influence might be used to prevent speculators from taking advantage of the temporary situation.
557
Sept. 24 (920) From the Chargé in France (tel.)
For Secretary of the Treasury from Cochran: Transmittal of a British draft text which the British and French are willing to accept integrally.
558
Sept. 25 (370) To the Chargé in France (tel.)
From Secretary of the Treasury to Cochran: Transmittal of U. S. redraft of proposed simultaneous declaration, with instructions to ascertain views of the French; and advice of similar approach to the British.
559
Sept. 26 (926) From the Chargé in France (tel.)
From Cochran: Simultaneous release of French declaration with corresponding British and U. S. declarations.
559
Sept. 25 Statement by the Secretary of the Treasury
Text of statement made by authority of the President.
(Footnote: Information of similar statements issued simultaneously by the United Kingdom and France.)
560
Sept. 26 Statement by the Secretary of State Issued to the Press
Gratification over virtually identical statements of policy issued by the three powers and characterization of them as an advance toward stability.
561
Oct. 6 (970) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
For Secretary of the Treasury from Cochran: Reference to telephone conversation in which the Secretary of the Treasury mentioned a possible statement on gold to be made simultaneously with the British and French; suggestion that only one by the United States is needed, with full reasons for his position.
562
Oct. 6 (971) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
For the Secretary of the Treasury from Cochran: Conversation with the Minister of Finance, who expressed gratification over the simultaneous currency declarations, and at their favorable reception by most European countries, Germany being the principal exception.
563
Oct. 8 (393) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
For Cochran from Secretary of the Treasury: Transmittal of proposed statement on gold, which, if satisfactory, will be released October 13, with explanation of purpose and meaning.
565
(Note: Citation to text of statement of October 13, which is the same as that transmitted.) 565

STATUS OF INTERGOVERNMENTAL DEBTS OWED THE UNITED STATES BY REASON OF THE FIRST WORLD WAR

Date and number Subject Page
1936 (Note: Citation to summary of intergovernmental debts and correspondence connected therewith.) 566

POSITION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE WITH RESPECT TO THE TREATMENT OF FOREIGN WAR DEBTS

Date and number Subject Page
1936 Apr. 14 Memorandum by the Legal Adviser
Review of legislation providing for loans to foreign countries during World War I and of Congressional authorizations toward settlement; conclusion that the Secretary of State would not be warranted in entering into negotiations for their readjustment without prior Congressional authorization.
567
May 11 Memorandum by the Assistant Economic Adviser
Analysis of procedures and agencies involved in connection with the attempt to collect the war debts, and consideration of probable difficulties in the way of future attempts at settlement.
570
June 19 Memorandum by the Assistant Economic Adviser
Notation that in the course of a conversation on another subject the Secretary of State told the Secretary of the Treasury that the latter’s Department had full jurisdiction in war debt matters.
575
Dec. 29 Memorandum by Mr. John H. Spencer of the Division of Far Eastern Affairs
Analysis of textual changes in replies of Italy, Great Britain, and France to debt statements, and attempt at evaluation of their possible import.
575

France

[Page LIV]
Date and number Subject Page
1936 Apr. 17 (2693) From the Ambassador in France
Excerpts from an election speech by former Premier Herriot, in which his references to the debt to the United States seemed to indicate a certain interest in the reconsideration of the debt by the leftist parties.
579
May 14 (410) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Information from French sources that Socialist Party leader Blum will, upon assuming Premiership, present to Parliament a foreign policy statement including reference to the advisability of settling the war debt to United States.
582
May 19 (2768) From the Ambassador in France
Advice of Blum’s personal statement before the American Club indicating intention of reopening debt issue when he becomes Premier on June 3; background of statement, and discussion of press comments.
583
May 23 From the Ambassador in France to President Roosevelt
Advice of press intimation that the Secretary of the Treasury plans conferences linking currency stabilization and war debts; references to Ambassador’s previous suggestion, and to present French interest in debt settlement.
(Footnote: Informal referral of letter to the Department of State.)
585
Undated Suggested Draft of a Letter for the Signature of President Roosevelt to the Ambassador in France
Nonintention of linking war debts to stabilization, or too closely to American purchases of foreign goods and services.
(Footnote: No record in the files that the letter was sent.)
586
Dec. 1 (1176) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Conversation with Blum, who was informed of U. S. determination to stay out of European wars and involvements and, also, that French reconsideration of debts would not cause the United States to take the position it took in 1917.
586
Dec. 1 (1177) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Continuation of résumé of conversation with Blum relative to war debts in which Blum was told that “war stocks” could not be separated from a general debt agreement.
587
Dec. 10 (1225) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Discussion of debts with Blum and Auriol, during which the latter explained French desire to announce their intention to work out a debt settlement, and suggested method of raising funds.
588
Dec. 31 Memorandum by the Chief of the Division of Western European Affairs for the Acting Secretary of State
French Ambassador’s account of a conversation with the President, who thought the time inopportune for discussions of French war debts.
589

Italy

[Page LV]
Date and number Subject Page
1936 Jan. 31 From the Ambassador in Italy to President Roosevelt
Suggestion that U. S. purchase of present Embassy could be applied against Italian war debt; balance of which could then be completely liquidated by the Italian Government.
590
Feb. 27 (17) To the Ambassador in Italy (tel.)
Instructions to ascertain definitely if settlement can be arranged and the Embassy secured as part payment, in accordance with the Ambassador’s suggestion of January 31.
591
Mar. 2 (66) From the Ambassador in Italy (tel.)
Foreign Minister Suvich’s interest in arrangement.
591
Mar. 14 (80) From the Ambassador in Italy (tel.)
Belief that Italian authorities are considering the debt matter; Suvich’s reference to a U. S. settlement with Greece.
592
Apr. 14 (106) From the Ambassador in Italy (tel.)
Continuing interest of the authorities in a settlement.
592
Apr. 20 (107) From the Ambassador in Italy (tel.)
Mussolini’s interest in regularizing his position with the United States so that Italy could float a loan there through private bankers.
593
June 1 (185) From the Chargé in Italy (tel.)
Information from the Finance Minister that Italy wishes U. S. views as to how conversations pertaining to a debt settlement might be initiated and where held.
594
June 3 Memorandum by the Under Secretary of State
Secretary of the Treasury’s approval of draft reply to Rome; its submission to the President.
595
June 5 (56) To the Chargé in Italy (tel.)
Information that notification of debt payment due, sent to the Italian Ambassador, states that the U. S. Government is fully disposed to discuss through diplomatic channels any proposals the Italian Government may have.
595
June 8 (199) From the Chargé in Italy (tel.)
Communication of information to the Minister of Finance, who said he would confer with the Chief of the Government.
596
Nov. 13 Memorandum of Press Conference
Reply, in answer to correspondent’s inquiry, that the Department has heard that the Italians were trying to borrow privately in New York, but that the Department has nothing to do with the matter; comments on the Johnson Act.
596
Dec. 2 (503) From the Ambassador in Italy (tel.)
Advice from a variety of well-informed sources that the Italian Government plans to inaugurate discussions in Washington on its war debts.
597

Rumania

Date and number Subject Page
1936 Dec. 14 Memorandum by the Counselor of Embassy in France
Inquiry of Rumanian financial representative in Paris as to possibility of negotiating a new settlement of war debts, and reply that U. S. Government is prepared to consider any proposal for submission to Congress; comments relative to French position.
597
[Page LVI]

OPPOSITION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE TO PROPOSALS TO INCREASE TARIFF RATES ON IMPORTS FROM COUNTRIES IN DEFAULT ON WAR-DEBT PAYMENTS

Date and number Subject Page
1935 Feb. 1 To Representative Robert L. Doughton, Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee
Statement of the case against H. R. 2051, providing for additional tariff on goods from countries in default on debts, including the warning that retaliation begets counter-retaliation—all hurting not only the country against which resentment is directed but also the volume of general trade.
599
1936 Apr. 20 To Representative Harry B. Coffee
Reply to inquiry relative to a 10 percent ad valorem tariff on all imports from countries in default on debt payments, with a tabulation of trade figures of the principal debtors, and transmittal of a copy of the letter to Doughton.
601

VIEWS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE ON BILL PROVIDING FOR ACQUISITION OF ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES BY CREDITING PURCHASES AS PAYMENTS ON WAR DEBTS AND BY OTHER METHODS

Date and number Subject Page
1936 Mar. 19 From the Acting Director of the Budget
Request for Secretary’s views on H. R. 11001 providing for the common defense by acquiring essential commodities by crediting purchases as payments on war debts and by other methods.
603
Apr. 6 To the Acting Director of the Budget
Department’s agreement with objectives of bill because of U. S. need for the minerals mentioned therein; belief, however, that methods authorized in the bill would raise questions relating to the field of U. S. foreign policy for the answering of which the bill offers no solution.
603

REPRESENTATIONS BY FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS AGAINST PROPOSED LEGISLATION RESTRICTING TOURIST CRUISES FROM AMERICAN PORTS TO AMERICAN SHIPS

[Page LVII]
Date and number Subject Page
1936 Mar. 17 From the Canadian Legation
Canada’s objections to H. R. 112 (Bland Bill) restricting to American ships tourist cruises from American ports, with illustrations of adverse effect on Canadian shipping.
605
Mar. 17 From the French Ambassador
Representations against H. R. 112, including citation of a letter by former Secretary of State Stimson objecting to an identic measure proposed in 1932.
608
Mar. 18 Memorandum by the Under Secretary of State
Information that when the French Ambassador presented his Government’s case against the proposed measure, he pointed out that its passage would invite retaliation.
610
Mar. 19 From the German Embassy
Expression of serious objections to H. R. 112 as a restriction of the principle of freedom of navigation, and as being incompatible with the U. S.-German treaty of 1923.
610
Mar. 20 (914) From the Netherland Minister
Objections to H. R. 112 which, if enacted, would ruin an important branch of Netherland trade; failure to see how certain voyages, affected by the bill, could possibly be classed as coastwise trade reserved for American ships.
612
Mar. 23 From the Polish Embassy
Explanation of effect measure, if passed, would have on Polish shipping; argument that it is in contravention to the U. S.-Polish treaty of 1931; and indication of position of Stimson, former Secretary of State, on an identical proposal of 1932.
612
Mar. 23 To Representative Schuyler O. Bland
Information of Swedish objections similar to those made in 1932 against an identical proposed measure, and transmittal of the Swedish note of February 24, 1932. Advice of earlier transmittal of Canadian and Netherland representations.
614
Mar. 23 To the French Ambassador
Receipt of note relative to H. R. 112, and information that it is being transmitted to the appropriate agencies.
(Footnote: Similar replies to other countries lodging protests.)
615
Mar. 23 To Representative Schuyler O. Bland
Detailed expression of objections to H. R. 112 in reply to a letter from Bland; intention to name representatives to attend hearing as suggested.
(Footnote: Names of representatives attending hearing, and citation to text of testimony.)
615
Dec. 22 Memorandum by the Assistant to the Legal Adviser
Information, in reply to inquiry of an official from the German Embassy, that no action had been taken by the House Committee on the “Cruises to Nowhere Bill” (H. R. 112).
617

REPRESENTATIONS OF CERTAIN FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS AGAINST PROPOSED LEGISLATION PROVIDING FOR ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS WITH RESPECT TO RADIO FACILITIES ON CARGO SHIPS

[Page LVIII]
Date and number Subject Page
1936 May 15 From the British Embassy
Objections to S. 4619, introduced by Senator Copeland, requiring certain cargo vessels to carry two radio operators or one operator and an automatic alarm apparatus.
618
May 18 From the Swedish Legation
Protest against the pending safety measure as being in some respects more burdensome for certain foreign vessels than the Convention of 1929, not yet ratified by the United States.
619
May 25 From the Norwegian Legation
Objections to S. 4619 as implying important alterations on a large number of Norwegian ships, and as tending to counteract aim of the Convention of 1929, to provide for safety through similarity of laws in all countries.
620
May 26 (1713) From the Netherland Chargé
Objection to pending legislation as tending to defeat the very object of the Convention of 1929, the promotion of uniformity in safety regulations.
621
June 3 From the Danish Legation
Objection to proposed measures raising requirements for vessels over those required by the Convention of 1929.
621
June 8 To Representative Schuyler O. Bland
Transmittal of copies of protests against safety measure (S. 4619), passed by the Senate and now in committee in the House; Department’s favorable view of every possible safeguard for life at sea, but fear of retaliatory legislation if measures are applied to foreign vessels.
622
June 10 (2332) From the Belgian Embassy
Objection to pending legislation as having provisions which exceed obligations of those of the Convention of 1929.
624
June 11 From Representative Schuyler O. Bland
Committee decision to table bill for remainder of the session.
(Footnote: Information that interested Embassies and Legations were notified of decision by telephone.)
624

PARTICIPATION BY THE UNITED STATES IN THE CONFERENCE FOR THE SUPPRESSION OF THE ILLICIT TRAFFIC IN DANGEROUS DRUGS, GENEVA, JUNE 8–26, 1936

Date and number Subject Page
1936 (Note: Citations to text of proceedings of the Conference, text of Convention signed by all participants except the United States, and U. S. statement setting forth reasons for inability to sign; also citations to other material pertaining to American participation.) 625

PARTICIPATION BY THE UNITED STATES IN THE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE FOR THE STANDARDIZATION OF THE KEEPING AND OPERATION OF HERDBOOKS, ROME, OCTOBER 12–14, 1936

Date and number Subject Page
1937 [Jan. 13] Memorandum by Mr. John H. Lord of the Division of Protocol and Conferences
List of countries represented at the Conference by delegates with full powers to sign a convention, and information that J. Clyde Marquis signed for the United States.
626
(Note: Explanation of extent of U. S. governmental interest in the convention.) 626

EXTRADITION TREATIES SIGNED BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND CERTAIN OTHER COUNTRIES

Date and number Subject Page
1936 (Note: Citation to texts of supplementary treaties with Denmark, France, and Rumania, and to text of an original treaty with Liechtenstein.) 628
[Page LIX]

THE BRITISH COMMONWEALTH OF NATIONS

UNITED KINGDOM

Efforts of the Secretary of State To Secure the Cooperation of the British Government in His International Trade Program; Preliminary Discussions Respecting a Trade Agreement Between the United States and the United Kingdom

[Page LX] [Page LXI] [Page LXII] [Page LXIII]
Date and number Subject Page
1936 Jan. 22 Memorandum by the Secretary of State
Résumé of a conversation with the British Ambassador in which the fundamentals of the U. S. international trade agreements program were discussed and the importance of world economic rehabilitation was stressed.
629
Feb. 5 Memorandum by the Secretary of State
Conversation with the British Ambassador in regard to conferences between the United States and Great Britain to bring about British cooperation in a U. S. trade agreements program.
633
Feb. 13 (1130) To the Chargé in the United Kingdom
Memorandum on U. S. international trade policy (text printed), and instructions to open preliminary conversations with Foreign Secretary Anthony Eden, pointing out that British tendency to force trade into controlled bilateral channels may check U. S. effort to revive general world trade.
635
Feb. 26 (79) From the Chargé in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Eden’s agreement with Chargé’s opinion that it is vital for the economic welfare of the world that the two great trading nations agree in principle to work for the abolition of trade barriers; his promise to take up the matter with Government officials.
644
Feb. 28 (81) From the Chargé in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Speech by Runciman, President of the Board of Trade (excerpts printed), criticizing U. S. trade policy.
644
Feb. 28 (70) To the Chargé in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Request for information as to whether Eden had talked to Runciman on the subject of trade agreements before the speech was made.
645
Feb. 29 (82) From the Chargé in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Advice that Eden had not talked to Runciman before the latter made his speech.
646
Mar. 18 (84) To the Chargé in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Inquiry as to whether a copy of Department’s memorandum had been given to the Foreign Office or any other Government official.
646
Mar. 19 (136) From the Chargé in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Information that the memorandum was read to Eden but that no copy was given to him.
647
Mar. 28 (103) To the Chargé in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Memorandum on U. S. general trade policies (text printed), with instructions for bringing the matter to the attention of the British Government.
647
Mar. 30 Memorandum by the Special Assistant to the Secretary of State and Chief of the Division of Western European Affairs
Submission of the two memoranda on U. S. general trade policy to the British Ambassador with the assurance that all that was desired at this time was a general declaration of intention and policy.
649
Apr. 1 Memorandum by the Secretary of State
British Ambassador’s indication that it might be difficult for the British Government to reverse its present course of restrictive commercial policy and to announce the intention to move in the direction of liberal commercial policy, as proposed by the U. S. Government.
650
Apr. 7 (184) From the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Submission to Eden of memorandum quoted in Department’s No. 103 of March 28; Eden’s intention to avoid a conflict of trade policy between Great Britain and the United States. Board of Trade official’s view that the Cabinet favored continuance of a policy of economic expediency in view of the European political situation.
655
Apr. 11 (124) To the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Secretary’s statement at press conference (text printed) in response to questions regarding negotiations for a reciprocal trade agreement between the United States and Great Britain.
656
Apr. 11 (125) To the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Intention to continue efforts to induce the British Government to make a public announcement indicating its plans of lowering trade restrictions and putting trade arrangements on a basis of equality; instructions to present informal memorandum (text printed) to Eden and Runciman.
656
Apr. 28 (231) From the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Presentation of memorandum to Eden, who welcomed the opportunity for an exchange of views and referred to the preparation of a British memorandum.
659
Apr. 29 (234) From the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Presentation of memorandum to Runciman, who maintained that British aims are substantially similar to those of the United States.
660
May 1 (238) From the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Summary of Runciman’s Chamber of Commerce speech in which he indicated that the British Government would be ready to cooperate with the United States in promoting a freer flow of international trade.
661
May 26 (277) From the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Receipt of memorandum on British commercial policy from Eden, who was pleased at measure of cooperation from the Board of Trade.
662
May 26 (281) From the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
British memorandum (text printed) explaining reasons for and operation of British commercial policy, and expressing the belief that no real divergence either of interest or of policy exists on the part of the two countries; willingness to restate previous policy announcements regarding the improvement of the international trade position.
(Footnote: President Roosevelt’s comment on the British memorandum.)
663
June 17 Memorandum by Mr. William A. Fowler of the Division of Trade Agreements
Résumé of a discussion between Department officials and Mr. Chalkley, Commercial Counselor of the British Embassy, regarding the preparation of a tentative list of products on which concessions could be granted, with view to preparing a basis for an Anglo-American trade agreement.
666
June 18 (214) To the Chargé in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Instructions to present a memorandum (text printed) to the British Government, stating that a declaration along the lines of the British memorandum of May 26 would be of greatest value in furthering the reduction of obstacles to international trade.
668
June 19 (319) From the Chargé in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Presentation of memorandum to Eden, who expressed the wish to handle the matter personally after his return from Geneva.
669
June 24 Memorandum by Mr. Richard Eldridge of the Division of Trade Agreements
Conversation with Chalkley, who presented a tentative list of commodities for which concessions would be requested and in turn asked for a list of products entering the United Kingdom.
669
June 25 (323) From the Chargé in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Presentation of U. S. memorandum of June 18 to Neville Chamberlain, Chancellor of the Exchequer; conversation with Runciman, who favored a British policy declaration but felt it would be more effective if followed by an announcement of practical achievement.
671
June 26 (326) From the Chargé in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Conversation with Chamberlain, who referred to pending trade agreement negotiations, and felt the time not propitious for the contemplated public policy declaration.
672
July 3 (234) To the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Secretary’s disappointment at deferment of commercial policy statement, and instructions to leave with Cabinet members a memorandum (text printed), urging courageous leadership in the fight for sane and peaceful trade conditions.
672
July 9 (341) From the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Opinion as to inappropriateness of presenting memorandum to other Cabinet Ministers during Eden’s absence; suggestion of changes in memorandum.
674
July 20 Memorandum by the Secretary of State
Informal discussion with the British Ambassador of Runciman’s speech in the House of Commons July 15 (extract printed), and expression of disappointment over British lack of action in seeking a liberal commercial policy.
675
July 25 (283) To the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Advice that, in the light of Runciman’s speech, the memorandum transmitted in Department’s 234, July 3, should not be presented until revised.
680
July 28 (378) From the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Conversation with Eden, who explained the circumstances of Runciman’s speech.
680
Sept. 3 (324) To the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Instructions to résumé discussions with Eden and Runciman and to leave a memorandum (text printed) with the British Government.
680
Sept. 9 (425) From the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Information that attempt will be made to see Eden as soon as he recovers from an illness.
684
Sept. 19 (439) From the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Account of a conference with Eden upon presentation of memorandum embodied in Department’s No. 324, September 4.
684
Sept. 21 Memorandum by Mr. John R. Minter of the Division of Western European Affairs
Conversation with Chalkley, who inquired about the outlook for continuing conversations regarding a trade agreement with the United Kingdom.
685
Sept. 29 Memorandum by the Chief of the Division of Trade Agreements
Informal discussion with Chalkley as to the status of studies in regard to trade agreement negotiations.
687
Oct. 22 Memorandum by the Secretary of State
Elaboration, in informal discussion with the British Ambassador, on the advantages of U. S. international trade policy as an alternative program of peace and trade restoration in contrast to British defensive foreign policy.
688
Nov. 3 Memorandum by the Secretary of State
Reiteration, in informal discussion with British Ambassador, of scope and nature of U. S. economic program, and stress of the necessity of a joint U. S.-British proclamation of the fundamentals of the program.
691
Nov. 16 Memorandum of Conversation, by Mr. Constant Southworth of the Division of Trade Agreements
Exploratory discussion between technical representatives of United States and United Kingdom; informal exchange of tentative concessions (texts printed) likely to be requested by the two countries as possible basis for a trade agreement.
692
Nov. 20 (552) From the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Résumé of a conversation with Eden, who presented a memorandum (text printed) on trade policy, in reply to U. S. memorandum transmitted in telegram No. 324, September 3.
700
Undated [Rec’d Jan. 12, 1937] Memorandum by the American Ambassador in the United Kingdom of a Conversation With the President of the British Board of Trade, December 18, 1936
Runciman’s opinion that some of the informally discussed U. S. proposals ran counter to the Ottawa Agreement to which his Government was pledged, but that an agreement along the lines of the U. S.-Canadian agreement might be accomplished.
702
Dec. 19 Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State
Information from the British Ambassador that his Government was giving close consideration to the matter of a trade agreement with the United States.
703
Dec. 26 Memorandum by the Chief of the Division of Trade Agreements
Chalkley’s statement that the British Government definitely wanted to negotiate a trade agreement, but was anxious to find a mutually acceptable basis before starting official negotiations; his promise to submit a detailed statement specifying concessions the British could make.
704

Informal Discussions Regarding Proposed Restriction of Trade Between Australia and New Zealand to British Shipping

Date and number Subject Page
1936 Feb. 10 (124) From the Consul General at Sydney
Conversation with Prime Minister, who outlined Australian determination to join in principle with New Zealand in taking measures to “preserve British shipping lines on the Pacific”, including the reservation of the Tasman trade.
706
Feb. 24 Memorandum of Conversation, by Mr. John R. Minter, of the Division of Western European Affairs
Conversation between the Commercial Counselor of the British Embassy and a Department official regarding the contemplated legislation in Australia and New Zealand concerning the Tasman trade.
708
Apr. 29 (183) From the Consul General at Sydney
Advice of London conference between representatives of Great Britain, Australia, Canada, and New Zealand as to ways and means of enabling British shipping to successfully compete in the Pacific with the Matson Line.
710
Oct. 26 (312) From the Consul General at Sydney
Information that the New Zealand Government has introduced enabling legislation to restrict the Tasman trade to British shipping; Australian intention to take parallel action.
711
Oct. 28 Memorandum by the Secretary of State
Conversation with the British Ambassador indicating that British position on the Tasman trade matter, set forth in a note of October 23, may lead to a U. S.-British controversy; suggestion that the interested American and British shipping groups present their complaints to the Shipping Board.
714
Nov. 3 Memorandum by the Secretary of State
British willingness to withdraw note of October 23 and to discuss the Australian-New Zealand shipping matter orally.
715
Dec. 3 From the Consul at Sydney (tel.)
Advice that enabling legislation was introduced in Australian Parliament to exclude American vessels from the Tasman trade.
716
[Page LXIV]

Supplementary Convention Between the United States and the United Kingdom, Australia, and New Zealand Respecting the Tenure and Disposition of Real and Personal Property, Signed May 27, 1936

Date and number Subject Page
1935 Dec. 27 (1888) From the Ambassador in the United Kingdom
Attempt to secure British reply as to the status of a draft convention relating to the disposal of real and personal property, extending the convention signed March 2, 1899, to outlying territories of both countries.
716
1936 Jan. 27 (1933) From the Chargé in the United Kingdom
British reply (text printed) enclosing draft of the proposed supplementary convention between the United States and the United Kingdom, Australia, and New Zealand, but not the Union of South Africa.
717
Feb. 15 (55) To the Chargé in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Approval of draft convention, and instructions to inquire at the Foreign Office about certain technicalities.
719
Apr. 2 (171) From the Chargé in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Information requested on February 15.
719
(Note: Citation to text of supplementary convention signed May 27, 1936.) 719

Reciprocal Arrangements Effected by the United States With the United Kingdom, Canada, and the Irish Free State for Trans-Atlantic Air Service

Date and number Subject Page
1936 Apr. 30 (141) To the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Instructions to present a note to the Foreign Office (text printed) relative to the establishment of trans-Atlantic air service, indicating U.S. readiness to approve application of Imperial Airways, Ltd., pending British confirmation of certain points.
720
June 29 (328) From the Chargé in the United Kingdom (tel.)
British reply (text printed) explaining position on U.S. points, and expressing hope that on basis of these explanations the United States will grant permits to Imperial Airways in exchange for British permits to Pan American Airways.
722
July 9 (245) To the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Instructions to communicate two notes to the Foreign Office (texts printed): (1) setting forth consideration of the British position and (2) confirming the acceptability of Pan American Airways for the proposed services.
724
Aug. 18 (2464) From the Ambassador in the United Kingdom
Note from the Foreign Office (text printed), with draft permits for Pan American Airways.
727
Oct. 9 (2569) From the Ambassador in the United Kingdom
Copy of Embassy’s note to the Foreign Office (text printed) indicating U. S. acceptance of British suggestions relative to a permit for Imperial Airways, and suggesting certain changes in the Pan American Airways permit.
728
Dec. 30 (633) From the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Foreign Office note (text printed) in regard to Pan American Airways permits necessary to the commencement of the trans-Atlantic service.
730
(Note: Information that reciprocal exchanges of permits with the United Kingdom, Irish Free State, and Canada were effected in the spring of 1937.) 730
[Page LXV]

Refusal of the British Government To Recognize the Right of the United States To Exercise Control Outside Territorial Waters Over Any Vessel Flying the British Flag, Except as Provided by Treaty

Date and number Subject Page
1936 Sept. 21 (305) From the British Chargé
Reference to a bill approved by Congress on June 22, defining jurisdiction of U. S. coastguards, and advice that the British Government cannot recognize the U. S. right to exercise any powers outside territorial waters over vessels flying the British flag, except as provided for by the Convention of January 23, 1924.
(Footnote: Information that U. S. note of September 28 acknowledged receipt of this communication.)
730

Informal Representations Against Proposed Preferential Tariff Rates in Certain British West African Colonies Favoring Empire Trade

Date and number Subject Page
1936 Aug. 18 (2466) From the Ambassador in the United Kingdom
Memorandum prepared by the Agricultural Attaché (text printed) regarding possible imposition by Nigeria and the Gold Coast of preferential duties on Empire-grown tobacco, and advisability of early attempt to forestall action.
731
Sept. 21 Memorandum of Conversation, by Mr. John R. Minter of the Division of Western European Affairs
Representations to Chalkley, British Commercial Counselor, against the proposed preferential duty.
733
Oct. 13 (1460) To the Ambassador in the United Kingdom
Transmittal of a memorandum prepared in the Department of Agriculture on West African tobacco trade; instructions to informally express U. S. concern over proposed action.
734
Oct. 23 (379) To the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Instructions for informal representations against proposed preferential duties as inconsistent with recently expressed policies by leading trading nations, including Great Britain, and detrimental to future trade agreement negotiations.
734
(Note: Assurance by British Foreign Secretary that no steps would be taken without consultation.) 735

Recognition of the United Kingdom by the United States Government as a Reciprocal Country Under the Mineral Leasing Act of February 25, 1920

[Page LXVI]
Date and number Subject Page
1935 Dec. 30 (367) From the British Ambassador
Advice that the British Secretary of Mines has received applications for oil prospecting licenses from the Anglo-American Oil Company; inquiry whether under the U. S. Mineral Leasing Act of February 25, 1920, the United Kingdom is regarded as a reciprocal country.
736
1936 June 3 To the British Ambassador
Attorney General’s opinion (text printed) indicating that under certain conditions Great Britain is to be regarded as a reciprocal country.
738
July 6 (203 (C. 277)) From the British Ambassador
Information that the Secretary of Mines is prepared to grant licenses to the Anglo-American Oil Company if the U. S. Government does in fact regard Great Britain as a reciprocal country.
740
July 20 To the British Ambassador
Advice that the Interior Department is prepared to recognize Great Britain as a reciprocal country under the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920.
741

AUSTRALIA

Unsatisfactory Trade Relations Between the United States and Australia

[Page LXVII] [Page LXVIII] [Page LXIX]
Date and number Subject Page
1936 Mar. 4 From the Consul General at Sydney (tel.)
Request by Sir Henry Gullet, Minister in charge of trade treaties, that United States initiate trade negotiations in view of Australian serious trade position.
742
Mar. 6 To the Consul General at Sydney (tel.)
Instructions to inform Gullet of reasons for U. S. disinclination to undertake suggested negotiations at this time; and to enlarge on the ultimate benefits to Australia from the generalization of concessions to other countries.
743
Mar. 16 From the Consul General at Sydney (tel.)
Gullet’s disappointment over U. S. decision, and his opinion that the Government may be forced to introduce measures to restrict U. S. trade, in view of the precarious position of Australia’s London funds.
743
Apr. 2 From the Consul General at Sydney (tel.)
Gullet’s announcement in Parliament that a special subcommittee had been appointed to explore possibilities of correcting the adverse trade balance; opinion that some formal adverse action is to be expected.
744
Apr. 6 From the Consul General at Sydney (tel.)
Probability that Parliament will advocate legislation drastically affecting U. S. trade; suggestions for a letter to the Prime Minister to counteract this trend.
745
Apr. 10 To the Consul General at Sydney (tel.)
Communication to Prime Minister (text printed) explaining the aims of the trade agreements program and expressing the hope that Australia’s commerce will indirectly benefit from U. S. program of gradually lowering trade restrictions.
746
Apr. 24 From the Consul General at Sydney (tel.)
Impression that drastic action restricting U. S. trade with Australia may be postponed.
748
May 7 From the Consul General at Sydney (tel.)
Explanation, in Prime Minister’s reply (extracts printed), to Secretary’s letter that considerations of restrictions against the free flow of imports are dictated by Australia’s economic situation.
749
May 21 From the Consul General at Sydney (tel.)
Indication that the Prime Minister will present an amending tariff schedule to Parliament, designed to correct the adverse trade balance with the United States.
750
May 22 From the Consul General at Sydney (tel.)
Imposition of drastic measures by the Government, including higher duties on certain products and prohibiting importation of certain items from countries outside the British Empire except under license issued by the Minister of Customs.
751
May 23 From the Consul General at Sydney (tel.)
Analysis of Government’s new trade measures.
752
May 27 To the Consul General at Sydney (tel.)
Note for formal delivery to the Government (text printed) protesting against import restrictions on U. S. items to be applied under a tariff measure tabled May 22; U. S. intention to continue concessions extended to Australia as long as it is able to enjoy equal treatment by Australia.
753
May 29 From the Consul General at Sydney (tel.)
Information that Parliament is in recess and that the note will be delivered in Melbourne; belief that Government will not be deterred from its discriminatory policy, and request for instructions as to publicity.
754
June 1 To the Consul at Melbourne (tel.)
For Moffat: Instructions that sense of note may be used in any conversation, but not for publicity at the present time.
755
June 1 From the Consul at Melbourne (tel.)
From Moffat: Presentation of note (dated May 29) to the Minister for External Affairs, who held out no hope of any modification of Government policy.
755
June 4 To the Consul General at Sydney (tel.)
Instructions to inform the Australian Government of the alarm caused among American exporters by Australia’s recent actions; suggestion that Government broadcast sufficient information as to the true implications of its restrictive measures:
755
June 2 From the Consul General at Sydney (tel.)
Inadvisability of requesting formal broadcast of information; brief summary of situation insofar as it affects American trade.
756
June 5 To the Consul General at Sydney (tel.)
Formal note for Australian Government (text printed) requesting advice as to whether the Customs Collector in Sydney is acting under instructions in refusing applications for U. S. products while licenses for like products of other foreign origin were granted. Contemplated countermeasures in event of unfavorable reply.
757
June 6 From the Australian Minister for External Affairs to the American Consul General at Sydney
Reply to note of May 29, explaining reasons for trade measures, and indicating that benefits from the U. S. trade agreements program are more theoretical than real.
757
June 10 From the Consul General at Sydney (tel.)
Belief that suspension of trade agreement rates can no longer be postponed if confirmation is obtained that Customs Collector was acting under instructions.
761
June 24 To the Consul General at Sydney (tel.)
Request for clear evidence as to actual discrimination against U. S. trade before recommendation of suspension of trade agreement concessions is made to the President.
761
June 25 From the Consul General at Sydney (tel.)
Advice that customs collectors are continuing to refuse import licenses for U. S. goods while granting them for like goods of other countries; citation of actual cases of discrimination.
762
June 27 From the Consul General at Sydney (tel.)
Australian reply to note of June 5 (excerpts printed), including the statement that customs collectors, in declining U. S. import permits, were acting in accordance with the policy of the Government.
762
June 29 To the Consul General at Sydney (tel.)
Instructions to inform the Government that the President has directed the suspension of trade agreement concession, effective August 1.
763
Aug. 7 (278) From the Consul General at Sydney
Analysis of Australian situation, and outline of possible approach to improve trade relations.
763
Aug. 26 Memorandum by the Secretary of State
Résumé of informal conversation with British Chargé and Premier Stevens of New South Wales, during which the Secretary discussed the objectives of U. S. trade agreements program and expressed disappointment over Australian obstruction of the program.
766
Oct. 10 To the Consul General at Sydney (tel.)
Request for suggestions relative to a contemplated note (draft printed), expressing hope for better trade treatment from Australia, to be handed to Foreign Secretary Eden for transmittal to Australia.
767
Oct. 12 From the Consul General at Sydney (tel.)
Suggestions as to text of note, and opinion that note should be handed to Eden only in case of active British support of U. S. thesis.
769
Oct. 16 (376) To the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (tel.)
Instructions to call on Eden and to enlist British aid in the appeal to Australia to alter its trade policy.
770
Oct. 27 From the Consul General at Sydney (tel.)
Expected approval of Government’s trade diversion policy in Parliament debates November 4 and 5.
771
Oct. 31 To the Consul General in Sydney (tel.)
Advice that Eden has promised an early reply in the Australian trade matter; instructions to go ahead with delivery of note, if Eden’s reply does not come soon.
771
Nov. 5 From the Consul General at Sydney (tel.)
Delivery of note, which will be considered at next full Cabinet meeting.
772
Nov. 18 To the Consul General at Sydney (tel.)
Inquiry as to whether special representations in specific cases would be of avail in securing import permits.
773
Nov. 19 From the Consul General at Sydney (tel.)
Extension of tariff measures to December 1, and postponement of debate on trade diversion program.
(Footnote: Information in telegram dated December 4 that Australian trade diversion policy was passed by both Houses of Parliament.)
773
Nov. 20 From the Consul General at Sydney (tel.)
Opinion that individual representations in regard to import permits would constitute tacit acceptance of Australia’s trade diversion policy and weaken U. S. position in trying to effect a general recommendation.
774

Informal Arrangements Between the United States and Australia Respecting the Importation of American Aircraft and Aircraft Parts Into Australia

[Page LXX]
Date and number Subject Page
1935 Dec. 21 From the Consul General at Sydney (tel.)
Summary of a formal note of December 16 from the Minister of External Affairs, outlining conditions under which license permits for import of American aircraft will be issued.
774
1936 Feb. 1 To the Consul General at Sydney (tel.)
Opinion that conditions outlined in Australian note are unreasonable; instructions to endeavor to persuade Australian authorities to accept procedure outlined in the arrangement in force between the United States and Great Britain.
775
Feb. 10 From the Consul General at Sydney (tel.)
Doubt that Australia will be willing to exchange notes along lines of the present British-American agreement, but may modify procedure to bring it into line with other countries.
776
Feb. 12 From the Consul General at Sydney (tel.)
Australian objection to a reciprocal exchange of notes and insistence on a unilateral proposal of requirements, but willingness to consider U. S. suggestions.
777
Mar. 13 From the Consul General at Sydney (tel.)
Australian unwillingness to agree to an informal temporary arrangement to cover planes already ordered, but readiness to make certain modifications in proposals of December 16.
778
Mar. 30 To the Consul General at Sydney (tel.)
U. S. counterproposal, agreeing to furnish the Australian authorities with certain technical data and documents upon receipt of a note that import license has been furnished.
779
July 24 To the Consul General at Sydney
Reply to a despatch from the Consul General regarding Australian readiness to enter into an arrangement based on U. S. counterproposal; preference to have arrangement effected by an exchange of notes.
780
1937 Jan. 5 (345) From the Consul General at Sydney
Opinion that it would be wise not to suggest a formal exchange of notes, since the system evolved is working satisfactorily despite the Australian Government’s diversion policy.
781

CANADA

Informal Discussions Between Officials of the United States and Canada With Respect to Trade Relations

Date and number Subject Page
1936 June 4 Memorandum by the Assistant Chief of the Division of Western European Affairs to the Under Secretary of State
Transmittal of two memoranda (one printed) covering conversations with the Canadian Prime Minister in Ottawa with respect to U. S.-Canadian trade relations; elaboration on matters not covered in these memoranda.
783
Nov. 3 Memorandum by the Secretary of State
Conversation with the Canadian Minister and the Counselor of Legation, during which the Secretary summed up the present and prospective status of the reciprocal trade program and its relation to economic welfare and peace.
786

Convention Between the United States and Canada Respecting Income Taxation, Signed December 30, 1936

Date and number Subject Page
1936 Oct. 26 Memorandum by Mr. James C. H. Bonbright of the Division of Western European Affairs
Conversation with the Counselor of the Canadian Legation relative to a treaty on taxation, in which it was agreed to postpone negotiations until November.
790
Undated [Rec’d Nov. 4] From the Canadian Legation
Transmittal of draft of a proposed agreement between the United States and Canada to prescribe maximum rates of taxation to be levied by either Government on income paid to individuals and corporations of the other country.
791
Nov. 28 Memorandum by Mr. Francis Colt de Wolf of the Treaty Division
Informal discussion between members of the State and Treasury Departments and Canadian Legation officials regarding the proposed treaty on taxation; acceptance of the Treasury draft (text printed) with few exceptions.
793
Dec. 14 From the Canadian Legation
Transmittal of revised draft of tax convention.
795
(Note: Citation to text of convention, signed December 30, 1936.) 795
[Page LXXI]

Protests of the Canadian Government Against Certain Provisions of the Liquor Tax Bill; Settlement of United States Claims Against Canadian Distillers

[Page LXXII] [Page LXXIII]
Date and number Subject Page
1936 Jan. 13 To the Secretary of the Treasury
Objections by Mr. Wrong, the Canadian Chargé, to section 403 of the Treasury’s proposed liquor tax bill. Letter of Secretary of State to the Attorney General (excerpts printed) expressing doubts as to the effectiveness of the proposed measure.
796
Jan. 18 Memorandum by Mr. James C. H. Bonbright of the Division of Western European Affairs
Telephone conversation with the Minister in Canada, who said that Prime Minister King had made forceful representations against section 403 of the proposed liquor tax bill.
798
Jan. 20 From the Secretary of the Treasury
Intention to recommend to Congress that provisions of section 403 be modified.
799
Jan. 20 Memorandum by the Economic Adviser
Conversation between the Secretary of the Treasury and Wrong, who felt that his Government’s attitude toward the United States might be affected by the liquor tax matter.
800
Mar. 12 Memorandum by Mr. James C. H. Bonbright of the Division of Western European Affairs
Telephone conversation with the Minister in Canada, who explained the vigorous opposition in the Canadian Government to the proposed liquor tax bill.
800
Mar. 12 Memorandum by the Under Secretary of State
Explanation to Wrong of Department’s efforts to prevent adoption by the Senate Finance Committee of section 403 of the liquor tax bill.
801
Mar. 18 To the Assistant Secretary to the President
Résumé of the situation in the Canadian liquor matter, including possibility that Canada will denounce the trade agreement with the United States; Wrong’s disappointment in the redrafted version of section 403.
801
Mar. 19 Memorandum by the Under Secretary of State
Conversation with Wrong, who conveyed his Government’s dissatisfaction with redraft of section 403.
802
Mar. 23 From President Roosevelt
Suggestions as to minimum requirements for the settlement of U. S. claims against Canadian distillers.
803
Mar. 24 Memorandum by the Under Secretary of State
Discussion with the Assistant Secretary of the Treasury and Wrong in regard to President Roosevelt’s suggestions.
804
Mar. 25 Memorandum by the Under Secretary of State
Instructions telephoned to the Minister in Canada to follow up representations made to Wrong.
805
Mar. 25 Memorandum by the Under Secretary of State to the Assistant Chief of the Division of Western European Affairs
Telephone conversation with the Minister in Canada, who reported Canadian desire for a conference between the Treasury Department and representatives of Canadian distillers against whom the Treasury Department has claims.
806
Mar. 26 Memorandum by the Assistant Chief of the Division of Western European Affairs
Record of a conversation between the Under Secretary of State and Wrong, who brought a memorandum (substance printed) expressing desirability of settling claims in a conference between Canadian distillers and the Treasury Department.
807
Mar. 27 Memorandum by the Secretary of State
Résumé of a conversation with Wrong, who reviewed the Canadian position.
808
Mar. 28 From the Acting Secretary of the Treasury
Treasury’s willingness to enter into discussions with Canadian distillers provided practical assurances mentioned in President Roosevelt’s note of March 23 are given.
809
Mar. 28 Memorandum by the Under Secretary of State
Transmittal of a message to Wrong, based on a letter from the Treasury to the Department; Wrong’s doubt as to usefulness of contemplated meeting under conditions laid down by the Treasury Department.
809
Mar. 31 Memorandum by the Assistant Chief of the Division of Western European Affairs of a Conference at the Treasury Department on March 30, 1936
Inconclusive discussions between representatives of the State and Treasury Departments and Canadian officials and representatives of Canadian liquor interests.
810
Apr. 1 Memorandum by the Assistant Chief of the Division of Western European Affairs of a Conference at the Treasury Department on March 31, 1936
Continuation of conversations with Canadian distillers who offered a proposal for settlement of the tax matter.
813
Apr. 1 Memorandum by the Under Secretary of State
Conversation with Wrong, who presented a memorandum of the discussions prepared by the distillers’ representatives, and inquired about the prospects for continued delay in the Senate.
814
Apr.11 Memorandum by the Assistant Chief of the Division of Western European Affairs
U. S. proposal for an amicable settlement of the liquor tax matter (text printed), handed to Wrong by the Under Secretary on April 10.
815
Apr. 15 Memorandum by the Under Secretary of State
Conversation with Wrong, who presented the reply by the Canadian distillers to U. S. proposals, indicating acceptance of proposals in substance, but suggesting minor changes.
818
Apr. 27 (37) To the Minister in Canada (tel.)
Concern over lack of progress in Washington talks with Canadian distillers, and instructions to make representations to the Canadian Under Secretary.
819
Apr. 27 Memorandum by the Under Secretary of State
Résumé of a conversation with Wrong, who said that the stand of the Treasury and Justice Departments would end in complete disruption of the negotiations.
820
Apr. 29 Memorandum by Mr. James C. H. Bonbright of the Division of Western European Affairs
Telephone conversation with the Minister in Canada, who summarized his conversations with the Prime Minister and Under Secretary and said that the latter seemed to favor the Government’s withdrawal from the negotiations.
821
May 9 Memorandum by the Assistant Chief of the Division of Western European Affairs to the Secretary of State
Report on the unsatisfactory negotiations of the Treasury and Justice Departments with the Canadian distillers; indication that failure to reach a settlement would be a serious blow to U. S.-Canadian relations.
821
May 12 Memorandum by the Under Secretary of State
Transmittal to Wrong of President’s proposal that U. S. claims be settled for $3,000,000, as a gesture of good will to Canada.
(Footnote: Willingness of Canadian distillers to settle for $3,000,000.)
824
May 13 Memorandum by the Assistant Chief of the Division of Western European Affairs
Telephone conversation with Justice Department official concerning desire of one Canadian company for assurances through the State Department and the Canadian Legation in respect to criminal aspects of case; indication that the U. S. Government regards the cases as closed and that State Department will communicate this information to the Canadian Legation.
824

Negotiations Respecting the Revision of the Convention for the Preservation of the Halibut Fishery of the Northern Pacific Ocean and Bering Sea

[Page LXXIV]
Date and number Subject Page
1936 Mar. 5 (267) To the Minister in Canada
Advice of a report submitted by the International Fisheries Commission proposing changes in the Halibut Convention now in force between the United States and Canada; instructions to submit a new draft convention (text printed) to the Dominion authorities for their consideration.
825
May 8 (41) To the Minister in Canada (tel.)
Request for information regarding any changes in draft convention the Canadian Government may desire.
829
May 14 (62) From the Minister in Canada (tel.)
Canadian Government’s favorable view of U. S. suggestions, and consideration of further alterations of its own.
830
July 21 (466) To the Chargé in Canada
Comments on Canadian suggestions for alterations in the draft convention, contained in a Canadian note of June 16.
830
Sept. 28 (967) From the Minister in Canada
Canadian note (text printed) indicating views with regard to certain alterations in the draft convention.
832
Nov. 27 (591) To the Minister in Canada
Transmittal of revised draft convention, incorporating changes suggested by the Canadian Government; authorization to sign the convention.
(Footnote: Information that convention was signed January 29, 1937.)
833

Proposed Negotiation of a New Treaty To Deal With the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Basin as a Whole, Including the Niagara Falls

Date and number Subject Page
1935 Feb. 21 (638) To the Minister in Canada
Review of unsuccessful attempts to secure ratification of a 1929 convention between the United States and Canada for the preservation and improvement of Niagara Falls; instructions to present a note to the Canadian Government, requesting consideration of an arrangement for joint construction of the planned remedial works.
834
1936 Jan. 20 (201) To the Minister in Canada
Transmittal of copy of a letter from Representative Andrews of New York to President Roosevelt, indicating continued interest in the preservation of Niagara Falls through construction of remedial works.
836
Feb. 25 (262) To the Minister in Canada
President Roosevelt’s proposal to have the St. Lawrence Treaty and Niagara Falls Convention withdrawn from Senate, and to negotiate a new treaty with the Canadian Government, embodying principles of the two conventions.
837
Feb. 26 (441) From the Minister in Canada
Account of interview with the Prime Minister, who expressed doubt that the waterways portion of the treaty would be of benefit to Canada at the present time.
838
Mar. 10 (474) From the Minister in Canada
Summary of Canadian reaction to the question of reopening the St. Lawrence Waterway Treaty matter.
839
Mar. 11 (481) From the Minister in Canada
Further report regarding Canadian reaction to the waterways question, and Prime Minister’s opinion that time is not propitious for reopening the matter.
842
May 19 Memorandum by the Minister in Canada
Explanation of President Roosevelt’s interest in the suggested new treaty to the Prime Minister, who continued to show little enthusiasm for the project.
844
Dec. 7 (1058) From the Minister in Canada
Informal conversations between visiting American and Canadian Government officials, during which the various phases of the waterways question were discussed.
845
[Page LXXV]

IRISH FREE STATE

Disinclination of the United States To Enter Into a Trade Agreement With the Irish Free State

Date and number Subject Page
1936 Aug. 3 Memorandum by the Economic Adviser
Irish desire to negotiate a commercial agreement with the United States in view of the fact that Irish purchases of U. S. goods greatly exceeded U. S. purchases of Irish goods.
847
Aug. 5 Memorandum by the Chief of the Division of Trade Agreements
Conversation between Department officials and the Secretary of the Irish Legation, during which the impediments to negotiation of a trade agreement were considered, the benefits of the U. S. trade agreements program to Irish trade were explained, and continuation of most-favored-nations treatment was suggested.
848

NEW ZEALAND

Representations Regarding Discrimination Against American Commerce in the New Zealand Mandate of Western Samoa

Date and number Subject Page
1936 June 5 (2242) From the Chargé in the United Kingdom
Foreign Office note (text printed) transmitting New Zealand’s reply to U. S. request for national treatment for U. S. vessels and goods throughout the mandated territory of Western Samoa.
852

UNION OF SOUTH AFRICA

Efforts To Meet Complaints From South Africa That American Import Regulations Unduly Restricted South African Exports to the United States

[Page LXXVI]
Date and number Subject Page
1936 July 18 To the Consul at Capetown (tel.)
Instructions to investigate truth of a press report indicating that the South African Wine Growers Association is exhorting its members to buy British goods, in view of its inability to sell South African wines in the United States due to U. S. import regulations.
855
July 20 From the Consul at Capetown (tel.)
Advice that Association is conducting a violent propaganda campaign against American goods, obtaining support from deciduous fruit growers; request that it be ascertained from Agriculture Department whether revision of Plant Quarantine Order 362 is contemplated.
855
July 22 To the Consul at Capetown (tel.)
Information from Agriculture Department that BPQ 362 makes provision, under certain specifications, for entry of grapes from countries where the Mediterranean fruit fly exists, and that experiments are under way to devise methods more suitable for South African needs.
856
July 29 To the Consul at Capetown (tel.)
Information that an investigation in regard to complaints by the Wine Growers Association has revealed no discrimination against South African wine imports which are subject to the same regulations as similar imports from other countries.
856
July 30 Memorandum by Mr. Samuel Reber of the Division of Western European Affairs of a Conversation Between the South African Minister and the Assistant Chief of the Division
Résumé of unsatisfactory discussion regarding alleged discrimination by the United States against South African products.
857
Aug. 8 To the South African Minister
Memorandum (text printed) containing a study made in the interest of finding a mutually satisfactory solution to the difficulties connected with shipments of South African wines and fruits.
859
Aug. 15 To the South African Minister
Detailed information regarding regulations for wine and spirits, and expression of hope for an early settlement of the trade difficulties.
862
Aug. 24 From the South African Minister
Informal note explaining reasons for the rising tide of South African resentment against the United States, and suggesting changes in U. S. import regulations.
863
Aug. 26 (7) To the Minister in the Union of South Africa (tel.)
Account of efforts to clear up the wine and fruit matter.
868
Sept. 14 Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State
Résumé of a conversation between the South African Minister and an Agriculture Department official regarding plans of Agriculture Department to admit grapes.
869
Sept. 14 Memorandum by Mr. John R. Minter of the Division of Western European Affairs
Information given to a representative of a group of exporters regarding plans of the Agriculture Department to admit South African fruits.
870
Sept. 18 To the South African Minister
Information as to encouraging developments in solution of wines and spirits question and grape question.
871
Sept. 19 (8) To the Minister in the Union of South Africa (tel.)
Advice regarding future changes in regulations and consideration by Agriculture officials for ultimate admission of South African grapes and fruits.
873
Nov. 13 (10) To the Minister in the Union of South Africa (tel.)
Instructions to convey to appropriate officials developments leading to the ultimate admission of grapes sterilized outside the United States.
873
Dec. 19 To the South African Minister
Acknowledgment of receipt of two notes concerning the first trial shipment of grapes.
875
1937 Jan. 12 (1) To the Minister in the Union of South Africa (tel.)
Explanation for delay in trial shipment due to misunderstanding regarding the inspection of vessels.
875
Jan. 27 (4) From the Minister in the Union of South Africa (tel.)
Advice that authorities are satisfied with U. S. efforts to assist in the inauguration of shipments.
(Footnote: Information regarding departure of two shipments of grapes.)
876