893.74/388
The President of the Radio Corporation of America (Harbord) to the Secretary of State
[Received August 17.]
My Dear Mr. Secretary: Confirming my promise, made by long distance telephone in conversation with Mr. MacMurray, I submit the following account of the interview had by Mr. Owen D. Young and myself with representatives of the Marconi’s Wireless Telegraph Company, Ltd., and the Compagnie Générate de Télégraphie sans Fil, in London, on July 19th, on the subject of radio communication in China.
We had in our possession at this time the information that Mr. Schwerin had succeeded in securing the signature of the Chinese Government to the modification of the Federal contract, but with an injunction from the American Minister in Peking that this was to be considered confidential until August 1st.
We opened the conversation by a statement, in substance, that the Federal contract would probably either be signed in the near future, or that under the option which we have with the Federal Company of California, we would probably declare it operative and be prepared to proceed in making traffic agreements with our associates along the general lines of the second paragraph of the Minute of the Experts, dated February 4, 1922.
The representative of the British Marconi Company at once challenged the probability of Mr. Schwerin being able to obtain the signature of the Chinese Government, stating that he had very definite information, through his Foreign Office, that the contract would not be signed.
Mr. Young stated that we had certain confidential information, which led us to believe that the contract would be signed before August 1st, but which we could not divulge except under an absolute seal of confidence.
The British Marconi representative replied that he was practically in daily communication with representatives of his Foreign Office, [Page 819] and could not undertake to withhold from them any information bearing on the negotiations, which he might receive.
Mr. Young and I then stated that that necessarily ended any desirability for prolonging the conference further at that time.
There followed some general conversation in which the British representative, in discussing the Federal contract, called attention to the absolute monopoly, on external communications for China, of the Great Northern Cable Company, which does not expire until 1929. He pointed out that this ante-dated the Limitation of Armament Conference by many years; also that it ante-dated the Mitsui contract for a station at Peking, and expressed his belief that our Government would probably not undertake to say that communication should be opened under the Federal contract—supposing it were to be signed—until 1929, when the Great Northern monopoly would expire. He added that, of course, any different action would meet with the very quick protest of the various Governments interests, including that of Denmark.
He stated that the Peking Station would like to make tests with our stations about July 25th, and was told that we would ask our State Department if there was any objection to our making tests. You will recall that immediately after this conversation we addressed a cablegram to you, through the American Embassy in London, asking the Department’s attitude with reference to the Great Northern monopoly, and also requesting its permission to make tests.
I believe this letter will bring the Department up to date with reference to what transpired in London.
Upon being informed of the willingness of the Department that we should make the tests with the Peking Station, I informed the British Marconi Company of that fact in a letter which was quoted to the State Department in a cablegram sent to [from?] the American Embassy in Paris.28
Respectfully yours,
- Not printed.↩