835.5151/685

The Chargé in Argentina (Wilson) to the Secretary of State

No. 1609

Sir: With reference to my telegram No. 71 of May 21, 11 a.m., I have the honor to state that on May 19 Mr. Clark, the Commercial Attaché, and I saw Mr. Louro the Chief of the Exchange Control Board. This visit was made in pursuance of a suggestion from the Minister of Finance in reply to a letter which I addressed to him on May 13 stating that inasmuch as I had received no reply to my written request of May 5 for an interview, the Minister might, in view of his numerous engagements, find it more convenient for me to see some person in his Ministry authorized to discuss the subject of exchange. In designating Mr. Louro as the person whom I should see, the Minister stated that he would be willing to see me at a subsequent date.

As stated in my aforementioned telegram, Mr. Louro did not indicate definitely when the Argentine Government would answer the Department’s note of February 3, saying that this depends on the Finance Minister. He spent considerable time defending the Argentine viewpoint on the subject of granting official exchange to American importers, the substance of his argument being that Argentina, since it is a producer of raw materials subject to the vicissitudes of climate, markets and prices which do not affect manufactured goods, must protect the former by means of bilateral commercial agreements in which special exchange treatment is granted by Argentina. In view of these agreements it was impossible to accord similar treatment to countries with which no such conventions had been concluded. He referred with evident chagrin to the delay which has occurred in the [Page 243] ratification of the Sanitary Convention,35 although he expressed his appreciation of the Secretary’s efforts, and dismissed as commercially unimportant the unconditional most-favored-nation treatment accorded to Argentina by the various bilateral trade agreements recently entered into by the United States.

During the conversation I referred specifically to the argument set forth in the note of February 3 and the Department’s telegram No. 34 of April 24, pointing out that I have been informed by my Government that much resentment is prevalent among American importers owing to the exchange discrimination to which they are being subjected. I gave him a list of leading American articles of import which do not receive official exchange and stated that I hoped this information would be helpful to the Argentine authorities should they conclude to extend the list compiled last year, adding that if more liberal treatment were granted, the resentment to which the Department referred would very probably be lessened and that this result would tend to be beneficial in the event conversations looking to the conclusion of a trade agreement should be initiated.

Mr. Louro then asked whether he should understand by this that a commencement of negotiations for a commercial treaty was contemplated, to which Mr. Clark and I replied categorically that he should not. I consider, however, that this inquiry reveals the interest in the subject which prevails among Argentine officials.

Yesterday evening I had occasion to discuss informally the subject of trade relations with the Minister of Agriculture. He said that if the Sanitary Convention were not ratified, Argentine interest in a commercial agreement would be greatly lessened, but he did not intimate that Argentina would in such an instance decline to negotiate. Nevertheless it is very definitely apparent that the moral factor inherent in the ratification of the Sanitary Convention looms very large in the Argentine mind.

Respectfully yours,

Orme Wilson