693.119/346: Telegram

The Minister in China (Crane) to the Secretary of State

248. Legation’s despatch no. 3118, December 7th [5th], 1919.98 Inasmuch as Vickers contract is being supplemented [implemented?] and carried out without hindrance and various nationals are attempting to complete contracts including air commercial routes along the Yangtze and coastwise, [does] Department object to sale and delivery American aeroplanes to the Chinese Government on terms similar Vickers [contract] without monopolistic features for commercial type planes? If it is the policy of the United States Government to prohibit exportation aeroplanes for China it should be noted that the indisposition of other governments to forbid exportation aeroplanes and apparent impossibility securing exclusive commercial type plane from U.S. would appear to militate against American commercial interests while on the other hand purchase of aeroplanes by the Chinese Government is undeniably a useless and great extravagance and planes will no doubt be put to military use. Gillis claims he is being discredited through lack of action by Curtiss on [contract] by Sevenot, former Curtiss representative with Chinese Navy, see Department of Commerce telegram of August 6th number 6 to commercial attaché Peking,99 and is proposing to throw business to others. Is War Trade Board ruling 8411 to be interpreted as permitting importation of aeroplanes etc. into China?

[Page 747]

Legation has been supporting application [of] Bonner, American citizen, holding assigned rights from Northwest Trading Company and A. O. Anderson Company, American concern, for importations four navy type planes for commercial use in China under American corporation with some Chinese interest. No action has been taken yet.

Legation desires to reply to [several] notes from Japanese Minister regarding rumored American aeroplanes contracts.

Crane
  1. Not printed.
  2. Not found in Department files.
  3. Ante, p. 743.