841.24/6–3044: Telegram
The Ambassador in the United Kingdom (Winant) to the Secretary of State
[Received 4:50 p.m.]
5171. Embassy’s 4956 of June 22 and Department’s 4783 of June 16. Coulson of the Foreign Office69 in an informal conversation replied to the points raised concerning bulk food contracts. He stated emphatically that the British Government regards the arrangements under negotiation as transitional measures aimed at standardizing prices of scarce foods in the transition period. In no sense are they to be regarded as necessarily indicative of or as setting a precedent for long range policy. He called attention to the fact that the arrangements concern only products which it is agreed will be scarce in the immediate postwar period and which therefore in the absence of organized measures would be subject to excessive price rises. UK was dependent on imports of such foods perhaps more than any other [Page 53] country and therefore had the utmost concern to protect itself against excessive scarcity prices and against a fall in overseas production.
The British Government he said do not regard these measures as conflicting with the Article VII discussions. In those discussions it was recognized that exceptional measures would have to be taken in the transition period. The British regard the measures in question as justified under the Hot Springs Resolutions, especially Resolution XIII.70
Coulson added that the foods covered by such arrangements would be subject to reallocation by the appropriate authorities.
The nature of this reply seems to confirm the preliminary analysis given in Embassy’s 4956 of June 22. We should appreciate the Department’s views after consideration of these explanations.