The Ambassador in Peru (Dearing) to the Secretary of State

No. 4360

Sir: Referring to the Embassy’s despatch No. 4326 of December 20, 1935 (File FA 611.3231/49 [611.2331/51])47 concerning the possibility of the inauguration of negotiations for a trade agreement between Peru and the United States, I have the honor to report that on my visit to the Foreign Office on January 7th, I inquired of the Minister for Foreign Affairs48 whether or not he had been able to give any further consideration to the matter of the exploratory conversations for the purpose of discovering whether a basis exists for a Trade Treaty between Peru and the United States.

At first Dr. Concha was of the opinion that it would be useless to proceed with the conversations unless something could be done to help dispose of Peru’s sugar surplus.49 He added that Peru sold practically nothing in the United States. My reply to this was that nothing would give me more pleasure than to be able to assist in bringing it about that Peru could market 200,000 tons of its sugar in the United States and thus relieve the difficult condition created for the Peruvian Government by the excess of sugar produced in Peru. I also expressed the opinion that sugar was certainly not the only export in which Peru was interested and said that it seemed to me [Page 929] that there was so broad a field for doing something with all the other Peruvian products that the matter should be studied so as to find a way by which a number of them could find a market, or a larger market, in the United States, while the interests of our exporters might be satisfied through concessions on the part of Peru. I stressed the point that the very reason for exploring the possibilities was contained in his statement that Peru was not selling any great amount of her products in the United States. I suggested that a way might be found to do so. Dr. Concha, thereupon, replied that he would consider the matter and let me know whether his Government felt it would be in any way worth while for Peru to go on with the exploratory conversations.

At the close of the conversation Dr. Concha said that he had read in the newspapers about the recent decision of the United States Supreme Court50 declaring the Agricultural Adjustment Act51 unconstitutional in certain respects. He inquired whether this might have any effect on the sugar quotas which he believed were related somehow to this legislation. My reply to the Minister was that I had not yet seen the text of the decision to which he referred and therefore could say nothing about it. I added that if it did so develop that some consideration could be given the sugar matter again, I would not fail to let him know about it.

Respectfully yours,

Fred Morris Dearing
  1. Foreign Relations, 1935, vol. iv, p. 944.
  2. Carlos Concha.
  3. See pp. 893 ff.
  4. United States v. Butler et al., Receivers of Hoosac Millis Corp., Jan. 6, 1936; 297 U. S. 1.
  5. Approved May 12, 1938, 48 Stat. 31.