611.2531/629

The Secretary of State to President Roosevelt

My Dear Mr. President: I have received your memorandum of December 20, 1939,43 enclosing a letter from the Honorable Claude G. Bowers, American Ambassador of Chile, commenting on the proposals for Schedule II of the trade agreement with Chile.

I am enclosing a draft reply for your signature if you deem it appropriate.

Faithfully yours,

Cordell Hull
[Enclosure]

Draft of Letter From President Roosevelt to the Ambassador in Chile (Bowers)

Dear Claude: I have received your letter of December 13. In regard to the trade agreement proposals, it seems to me from information furnished by the State Department that you may not have taken sufficiently into account in your appraisal of the situation that in an arrangement of this kind the binding of duties may be of as much or greater importance than duty reductions from a long-range viewpoint. I am told that on the basis of both duty bindings and reductions, our proposals cover 55 percent of our imports from Chile [Page 439] in 1938, whereas our requests cover only 39 percent of Chilean imports from this country. One of the bindings which we offered was on nitrate, and we were able to make this offer only after considerable discussion necessitated by certain views expressed by the War Department. Your computation does not seem to give weight to the importance of this concession to Chile.

I agree that on the whole, the concessions we are now able to offer leave something to be desired. It must be kept in mind, however, that we are facing bitter opposition to the continuance of the trade-agreements program which will come to a head when the Trade Agreements Act comes up for renewal at the next session of Congress. In these circumstances, it is necessary to proceed with caution.

With regard to our requests for tariff concessions from Chile, it may be that these can properly be regarded as excessive, but it must be borne in mind that in formulating our requests, we naturally must indicate what would serve our interest. If the Chilean Government considers them unreasonable and will indicate the ground on which it finds them so, we will, of course, be glad to reconsider them.

We are hopeful that Pedregal can present specific proposals for the proper utilization of the $5,000,000 credit, for the mutual benefit of both countries. As yet, however, there seems to be little of a concrete nature to report. I have asked the State Department to keep you currently informed.

Very sincerely yours,

  1. Not printed; it requested the Secretary to draft a reply to the enclosed letter (ante, p. 432).