611.47H31/76
Mr. John R. Minter of the Division of Western European Affairs to the Assistant Secretary of State (Sayre)
Mr. Sayre: At your direction I received this morning the New Zealand delegation, consisting of Mr. R. M. Campbell, Mr. J. W. Collins (New Zealand Trade Commissioner at Toronto), and Mr. W. J. Stevenson (New Zealand Customs Representative in New York). Mr. John L. Stewart of the Department of Agriculture was also present.
The New Zealand gentlemen attempted to expand the subjects which Mr. Coates mentioned briefly to you yesterday. The first was the question of meat imports. Like Mr. Coates, these gentlemen were under the impression that it was possible for the government to take some action which would result in increased imports of beef. They asked that we take 20,000 tons per annum for a limited period of, say, two or three years. I told them that, in the absence of a national emergency, there was no means of reducing the duty on meat except in connection with a trade agreement. I then gave them a full explanation of the process of concluding a trade agreement, and gave them literature, such as the Trade Agreements Act and various press releases.
They said that Mr. Coates was, of course, anxious to get something done in quick order and that they feared that a trade agreement, if a basis could be found for negotiating such, would come into effect at a date too late to be of service to Mr. Coates politically. We regretted that we could not help Mr. Coates politically and that there was no way of avoiding the tedious process which we are obliged to use with other countries.
Mr. Stewart, who is conversant with market conditions in this country, expressed surprise that New Zealand was not now enjoying a good market for beef. He said the market was there if they would take advantage of it, and that with prices as they are now the present 6 cents per pound duty should be no obstacle. He said that there was no control of the production or importation of beef under the A. A. A.13 Meat prices are extremely high and a reduction by 3 cents per pound [Page 80] of the total landed cost would help very little. Mr. Collins seemed heartened by this information and said that he would look into the possibilities. Mr. Campbell said “At least we have something to tell them at home”; and the delegation seemed satisfied at our promise that we would explore further the possibilities of negotiating a limited agreement.
When I stated that, of course, an agreement would necessitate mutual concessions, the delegation was silent except to refer again to the uneven balance of trade and to reiterate their belief that we were obligated to give more than we receive in the way of concessions in order to approximate a balance. In answer to this I repeated the arguments which you used with Mr. Bruce14 last year, and they again stated that they were being pressed by other countries who were in the same position with respect to them as they are with respect to us.
Mr. Campbell asked whether we would consider Mr. Coates’ oral request as an official request from the New Zealand Government. I said that it would not ordinarily be considered a formal request, but that in view of there having been last year formal overtures from them for the negotiation of a trade agreement, I thought that we could send a formal reply through our Consul General after we have had time fully to explore the possibilities. Recalling your statement to Mr. Coates that you could hold out little hope, I continually stressed that point.
The subject of meat was then dropped and the question of customs penalties for mismarking was raised. From another room I telephoned Mr. Nead in the Customs Bureau, who agreed to see Mr. Collins later that morning concerning the penalties imposed for the use in marking of the initials N. Z. instead of the full words New Zealand. Mr. Nead told me over the telephone that the case was hopeless, but agreed to see Mr. Collins later that morning.
The next subject discussed was the question of American apples on the United Kingdom market in April, May and June. Mr. Campbell reiterated Mr. Coates’ statement that their representations on this point were not official but that, having been told by British authorities that a continuation of the market conditions which have prevailed in recent spring months might force the United Kingdom to put a duty on apples, they thought it proper to drop a hint to us. It was the thought of these gentlemen that the two countries or sections which ship apples to the United Kingdom might form some kind of a gentlemen’s agreement. It seems that the excess carryover of late American apples on the British market has the effect first of depressing the [Page 81] price for Australasian apples, which in turn has the effect of inducing too large a carryover of Australasian apples. The final effect seems to be depressed prices for British grown apples. Mr. Stewart said that it was extremely difficult to bring about an accord between the eastern and western apple growers in this country and he doubted whether they would agree in concert to check exports as suggested. He promised, however, to have the question studied in the Department of Agriculture. He said that one of their field men, who is the apple expert, was well known to all apple growers and that possibly he could have him broach the subject to the growers. Mr. Stewart will report to me the result of his efforts in this direction, as he will do in regard to the meat proposal.
- Agricultural Adjustment Administration.↩
- Stanley Melbourne Bruce, Australian High Commissioner in London. See telegram of June 13, 1934, 3 p.m., to the Consul General at Sydney, Foreign Relations, 1934, vol. i, p. 842.↩