611.3331/149
The Minister in Uruguay (Dawson) to the Secretary of State
[Received March 18.]
Sir: I have the honor to refer to the Department’s telegram No. 8 of March 4 (1938) 4 p.m., in which the Department acquaints me with the present outlook and its views respecting eventual trade agreement negotiations with Uruguay. The very full information furnished the Legation is greatly appreciated.
As stated in my telegram No. 19 of February 25, in view of his remarks of that morning to Mr. Reed,17 I was apprehensive lest Dr. Richling might have conveyed to the Uruguayan Government, and in particular to President Terra, the impression that trade agreement negotiations between the United States and Uruguay were more imminent than was probably the case. However, as reported in my telegram No. 22 of March 3, my subsequent interview of the latter date with Dr. Richling led me to believe that the misapprehension or misunderstanding which I had feared either had not arisen or no longer existed. From his remarks to me on March 3, I am satisfied that Dr. Richling appreciates the obstacles to trade agreement negotiations resulting from the fundamental differences between the American and Uruguayan trade policies and systems. I infer also that he has explained to the officials concerned the difficulties inherent in the situation and the Department’s attitude as respects measures which would have to be taken preliminary to any negotiations. As noted in my despatch No. 38 of March 3,18 Dr. Richling told me that on his return to Washington he would, in informing the Department of his Government’s desire to negotiate a trade agreement, acquaint it also with the situation which confronts Uruguay. From his statements and also from recent press notices (to be referred to below) I gather that the Uruguayan officials concerned are studying the matter and that their conclusions will be communicated to the Department by Dr. Richling.
I greatly appreciate the discretionary authority granted me by the Department to advise the Uruguayan officials of the substance of its [Page 902] telegram No. 8. My action in the premises will depend to a considerable extent upon what may develop in my conversations with Uruguayan officials and upon what further information I may receive from Dr. Richling before his departure. If it continues to appear that Dr. Richling has informed his Government accurately as respects the Department’s position, it may prove advisable, for the present at least, for me to take no action.
Press Notices regarding Trade Agreement Negotiations.
As stated in my telegram No. 21 of March 3,19 a Montevideo newspaper (El Diario, Riverista) reported on the evening of March 2 that the Uruguayan Ministers of Foreign Affairs20 and Finance21 and representatives of the United States Government were meeting to consider a trade agreement. Insofar as it referred to representatives of our Government, the report was of course wholly unfounded. However, as Dr. Richling informed me subsequently, trade relations with the United States were discussed at a meeting held at the Foreign Office on March 2, attended by the Ministers of Foreign Affairs and Finance and other high officials. On March 4 and 5 several Montevideo papers published the text of what appears to have been a Foreign Office communiqué. The brief notice, carried under various headings, such as “Negotiations with the United States”, and “A Treaty with the United States is Possible,” reads in translation as follows:
“Specially invited by the Minister of Foreign Relations, Dr. José Espalter, the following gentlemen met yesterday at the Foreign Office: Acting Minister of Finance, Dr. Raúl Jude; Uruguayan Minister in Washington, Don José Richling; President of the Frigorifico Nacional, General Eduardo Da Costa; Exchange Manager of the Bank of the Republic, Don Fermín Silveira Zorzi; Director of Commercial Affairs of the Ministry of Foreign Relations, Don Felipe S. Crucci; and the Secretary of the Advisory Council on Commercial Affairs of the Ministry of Foreign Relations, Don Arturo Terra Arocena.
“An ample conversation was held concerning the possibilities of a commercial treaty to be agreed upon with the United States of North America, and it was decided to draft a memorandum which will be studied with the necessary attention next week, taking into account the economic consequences which necessarily will be derived from a convention with the United States, given the vital interests involved and the volme of commercial transactions with that country.”
While this notice has thus far aroused no editorial comment, it is of some interest to observe that in its edition of March 4 El Diario (Riverista) published in adjoining columns the Foreign Office communiqué [Page 903] and an article entitled “Promises do not Suffice in the Field of Commercial Relations.” The article referred to a telegram from Washington concerning our Government’s desire to seek closer ties with the Latin American nations, and went on to say that it was time for tangible results. The following passages may be quoted:
“We are tired of hearing of the friendly disposition of the American people towards Latin America in the field of commercial ties, but what is certain is that the time for their effective realization never comes.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
“Against our products North America raises its formidable tariff barriers, under the disloyal and useful pretext of the health of the products of its States, and, of course, of a misunderstood agrarian protectionism, the unjust result being that while we purchase from it the Union does not correspond by applying the same reciprocal policy.”
The article concludes with the statement that it is necessary for the United States to establish effective commercial ties with these countries and that otherwise the latter will, in spite of speeches and promises, abandon the “expectant attitude which has already lasted too long,” and “examine our commercial policy with a view to the protection of our commercial interests.”
Respectfully yours,