841.24/689: Telegram
The Ambassador in the United Kingdom (Winant) to the Secretary of State
[Received August 19—10:30 a.m.]
3722. Personal for Oscar Cox. In answer to your 3165 of August 15, I had a long talk with Mr. Purvis the morning of August 14. We discussed at some length the negotiations in regard to the treatment of British exports in relation to the materials received from the United States under Lend-Lease. He was leaving that afternoon at Lord Beaverbrook’s30 request for Scotland to take a plane back to the United States without having finished the contacts he meant to make here or completing discussions on important items. He intended to return to London within 4 or 5 days. He told me that he had not as yet taken up with the Chancellor the draft letter from General Burns directed to the chairman British Supply Council. When I called on the banker yesterday afternoon he confirmed this fact. I gave Sir Kingsley Wood a copy of General Burns’ letter which he read and after reading said he wanted to take time to consider it. When I saw him the last time in regard to this matter I explained that it would be necessary to wait until Mr. Hopkins returned before reaching a decision. I told Mr. Hopkins this just before he left. Mr. Purvis planned to talk about this situation again with Mr. Hopkins as a result of our conversations. He also took with him a letter to Mr. Hopkins and copies of all exchanges of messages on this subject. This letter was burned with all other documents that Mr. Purvis took with him. I had copies made immediately but due to the delay in arrival of the American transport plane it will probably not leave before Thursday. It should reach Mr. Hopkins the end of the week as I explained to him in my message 3653 of August 15, 3 p.m.31
You suggest in your message 3175 [3165], August 15, 6 p.m. “that the only basic difference between our statement and Sir Kingsley Wood’s is that his criterion for limitations on re-export is short supply whereas ours is competition”. The idea of including short supply as the criterion was suggested by Mr. Hopkins and I insisted on its inclusion in my discussions with the Chancellor.
I found indirectly that a copy of General Burns’ letter had been forwarded from the United States to the [apparent omission] here and had at least been discussed by the men who have to deal directly with these problems.
The British would like to export cotton goods and other articles where the raw materials are not in short supply in the United States. [Page 26] Your first principle of competition would seem to prevent this but your second principle would seem to allow it. Since the British consider cotton goods exports to be important it would be helpful to receive your interpretation of whether your draft proposals would allow such exports. A decision on this commodity might or might not apply to other commodities. In my discussions with Mr. Purvis he suggested exceptions and said he thought that you had committee machinery in Washington that might deal with these specific problems.
Would you please ask Mr. Hopkins after he has read your cable to me and my reply to you if he would personally take the matter up with Mr. Morgenthau explaining the reasons for delay which trouble me as I realize that a conclusion on the subject in principle at least should be reached promptly.