Office of the Historian
  1. Home
  2. Historical Documents
  3. Foreign Relations of the United States, 1948, Germany and Austria, Volume II
  4. Document 543

862.515/5–2248: Telegram

The Ambassador in the United Kingdom (Douglas) to the Secretary of State

2219. For Lovett (Eyes Only) from Douglas.
top secret
us urgent
London, May 22, 1948—11 a. m.

1.
Clay has this minute called me from Berlin to tell me that on his arrival there,1 he was informed by Koenig that the French, who had previously agreed to institute currency reforms on a certain date—according to my recollection June 10—had said that they must postpone the time for thirty days. The reasons for this change as given are economic and political. (Embtel 2214, May 212).
2.
This may throw some additional light on the attitude of the French.
3.
It is possible that Massigli, when he stated yesterday afternoon that his government was prepared to proceed with currency reforms according to the time schedule, did not know of the change in policy of his government. If, however, he had been informed, then Koenig’s communication to Clay throws doubt upon the good faith with which the French are negotiating.

It is not without relevance to point out that the French note3 to the British Government, a copy of which was sent to Washington, states quite categorically that the French Government is prepared to proceed with currency reforms “at once.”4

Douglas
  1. General Clay had been in London as an adviser to the United States Delegation to the London Six Power Conference on Germany. For documentation on that conference, see pp. 191 ff.↩
  2. Ante, p. 266.↩
  3. Presumably the note under reference here is that transmitted to the Department in telegram 2724, May 21, from Paris, not printed. See footnote 2, p. 266.↩

  4. In a memorandum of May 22, 1948, to Charles Hilliard, not printed, Assistant Secretary of State Saltzman commented as follows in connection with this telegram:

    “As the effective date of proposed currency reform to the Western Zones grows imminent, I do not recall that we have yet received from the Army a clear indication of such of the elements of the proposed reform as we or other interested agencies such as the Treasury and the NAC should have. If this is the case, will you please on Monday find out from Army whether they can provide us with such information as we appropriately need in view of our policy responsibilities and if they are unable to do so, please request them to obtain such information as promptly as possible.” (862.515/5–2248)

    ↩