740.00119 Council/3–548: Telegram
The Ambassador in the United Kingdom (Douglas) to the Secretary of State
894. Delsec 1616. Tenth meeting German problems morning March 5 approved with few slight amendments Working Party report on Agenda Item F—Political and Economic organization1—and discussed draft communiqué. Copies of report as revised are being airmailed. Agreement reached many important points; it was recommended [Page 132] working party be convened Berlin by three Military Governors to continue discussion disagreed points. Summary of paper follows:
(A) Form and scope future German govt:
Federal Legislative Bodies: It was agreed there should be two houses, Upper House composed equal number representatives each Land, nominated by Land govts, and Lower House with representation proportional to population of Laender.
No agreement reached on manner electing representatives to Lower House. US and UK favored direct elections by Laender populations under arrangements to be made by individual Laender which would choose own electoral systems. French and Benelux wanted individual Landtage to elect members lower house in proportion to strength of political parties in each Landtag.
Federal Executive Bodies: It was agreed that Federal Minister President should be chosen by two Federal Legislative houses in manner to be agreed by them.
No agreement on methods selecting Federal Ministers; whether they should be individually elected by both Houses, chosen by Minister President, or elected by Lower House. (Only British favored latter method.)
No agreement whether Ministers collectively or individually responsible to parliament. French and Benelux favored individual responsibility and US/UK favored collective responsibility, US being willing reverse its position if parliamentary responsibility of executive established as principle and in accordance German views. USDel requested further consideration be given to possibility of, (a) independent Executive, and (b) mixed term for independent or parliamentarily responsible Executive.
Chief of State: Opinion remained divided on advisability creating Chief of State.
Division of powers between federal houses: It was agreed two houses should have equal powers initiating legislation except that initiation money bills might be reserved to Lower House and certain [Page 133] powers connected with foreign affairs and confirmation of certain appointments might be reserved to Upper House.
UKDel considered Upper House should have power of suspensory veto only. Other delegations favored equal powers of legislation for two houses, subject reservations mentioned above.
Division of powers between Federal and Land Govts: Agreed Federal Govt should enjoy only powers expressly delegated under constitution. Detailed division of powers will be studied by Working Party in Berlin on understanding that following powers will not be delegated to Federal govt: education, public health, public welfare, police, cultural and religious affairs and local government.
Taxation: Agreed question specific allocation and methods collecting taxes as between Federal and Land govts will be considered further in Berlin; that Federal govt should have power dispose of monies only for purpose for which it set up; and that Federal govt should be empowered set rates for certain specified taxes. US/UK delegations believed Federal govt must enjoy power collect taxes in certain specified fields; French and Benelux held that cash collecting power should invariably rest with Laender except for customs duties.
Federal Judiciary: Agreed that there should be Federal Supreme Court with power to settle conflicts between Federal and Land authorities, and with appellate jurisdiction to protect civil rights of individuals against Federal govt acts and to insure application with due regard for uniformity of Federal law; that Germans should be instructed establish system insuring complete independence of judiciary. USDel wanted Germans encouraged to debate establishment of system of Federal courts. UK had no objection but French and Benelux opposed.
Civil Rights: Agreed that Federal constitution should provide adequate guarantees of civil rights of individual.
Execution of Federal Law: US/UK believed certain Federal administrative agencies, staffed by Federal personnel, required for execution Federal law at Land and local level. French and Benelux believed such agencies should be exceptional and to maximum possible extent staffed under arrangements made by Land authorities.
Citizenship: US, French and Benelux favored dual citizenship; UK opposed.
General Recommendations: Final statement of allied requirements in connection with constitution should be in terms of minimum requirements, leaving maximum scope to Germans.
B) Landtag Boundaries and German Constituent Assembly.
Land Boundaries: Agreed existing Laender boundaries in some cases inconsistent with tradition and otherwise anomalous; therefore [Page 134] necessary changes should be made before constituent assembly set up. (It was understood that for purpose studying question no consideration would be given to present location occupation troops.)
Constituent Assembly: Agreed it should be formed on basis to achieve compromise between principle of equal Land representation and principle of representation in proportion to Land population; that it is not essential have trizonal fusion before constitution comes into force; that constitution should be ratified at least by majority of votes in majority of Laender, and also by majority of total votes cast. Details will be worked out in Berlin.
No agreement whether constitutent Assembly should be composed of representatives of the Laender, from the Laender, or of the people of the Launder.
No agreement when Constituent Assembly should be summoned (US/UK strongly favored this be done before end of 1948. French and Benelux prepared give this serious consideration). End summary.
French indicated in reply to Douglas question they could not make decision on date convoking Assembly without consulting govt, but that they prepared recommend favorable action to govt.
Agenda Item G Provisional Territorial Arrangements: It was agreed leave this item over until next session.
Communiqué: Several suggestions made and draft referred back to Working Party. Discussion will continue afternoon meeting.
Sent Department 894, repeated Berlin 50, Paris 91, Moscow 43, Hague 25, Brussels 37 (please keep Luxembourg informed), Oslo 19, Copenhagen 21, Stockholm 27, Borne 42.
-
At its’7th Meeting, March 2, the London Conference on Germany decided to establish a Working Party to consider and report to the Conference on the various problems related to a future German government; see telegram 829, Delsec 1599, March 2, from London, p. 114. The principal members of this Working Party were: for the United States—Edward Litchfield; for the United Kingdom—Christopher Steel; for France—Maurice Couve de Murville; for Benelux—Col. Albert Wehrer. The agreed report of the Working Party was circulated to the Conference as document TRI/4, March 4, 1948, not printed.
Document TRI/8, March 5, 1948, recorded the following decisions of the London Conference on Germany with respect to the convening of a working party in Berlin:
The approved version of document TRI/4 included the following paragraph:
↩“To recommend that a working party be convened by the three Military Governors in Berlin to consider those points in the record below which require further study; and that the proceedings of the working party should be kept secret.”
The following additional decisions were also agreed upon:
“It was understood that the Military Governors would call in those other representatives in Berlin who have the best right to express their views.”
“It was understood that for the purpose of this study no consideration would be given to the convenience of the present occupation troops.”