893.51/73974/5
Memorandum by Mr. Alger Hiss, Assistant to the Adviser on Political Relations (Hornbeck)5
I showed the attached memorandum6 to Mr. Currie yesterday and discussed it briefly with him.
Mr. Currie seemed to be in agreement with the views expressed in it. He said that he did not think the term “board of review” would be a good name to employ because it would imply too much in the way of veto power or supervision. In general, he seemed to feel that we would have to rely primarily upon consultation and said that he thought the most effective consultation would have to take place in China.
[Page 477]He said that in addition to the points made in the memorandum as to why the United States has a significant interest in the uses to which the loan will be put, he considered it important to point out the necessity that the executive report to Congress on the use made of these funds. He remarked upon the fact that the loan had been consciously patterned after the Lease-Lend operations. The Lease-Lend Act specifically requires reports to Congress. He felt that as a practical matter the executive could do no less in regard to the loan than it is required to do in connection with operations under the Lease-Lend legislation. In this same connection he said that all Lease-Lend requests are individually scrutinized and passed upon by the United States Government. The loan procedure which we envisage is, he said, certainly far more liberal than the established Lease-Lend procedure.
I also showed a copy of the memorandum to Mr. Fox who expressed himself as entirely in agreement with the points made in it. At his request I let him have a copy for his own use and not for attribution.