851.6363/173
The Chargé in France (Marriner) to the Acting Secretary of State
[Received December 13.]
Sir: Referring to my despatch No. 335 of October 20, 1933,18 I have the honor to report that the special petroleum commission, charged with reporting to Parliament with regard to ways and means for the institution of a monopoly on the importation of petroleum and as to the practicability of a refining monopoly, met again yesterday. According to the information given to the press, the commission issued a statement to the effect that, regardless of the ultimate recommendations of the commission, the present rights and powers of the Government in the matter of the importation of petroleum products and derivatives will not be curtailed in any way. This pronouncement is interpreted as an effort to conciliate Socialist opinion, it being evident from the subsequent deliberations of the commission that that body is not prepared to go to the lengths advocated by the Socialist group.
The commission then rejected by a large majority the proposal of M. Charles Baron, Socialist deputy and chief protagonist of a state monopoly. M. Baron’s project would have given to the Government, represented by the Office of Liquid Combustibles, the right to conduct the operations of the purchase and importation of petroleum products, a less drastic plan than the outright monopoly originally advocated by him. The rejection of the Baron bill is warmly welcomed by oil interests since they feel that his project having been more simple and direct than [Page 176] other proposals likely of consideration, the chances of the adoption at this time of monopolistic legislation are to that extent diminished.
It must nevertheless be remembered that it is not the prerogative of the special commission to approve or reject the principle of a monopoly. Its task is to report to Parliament regarding the practical means for a monopoly, the question of a decision lying with the legislative body. In that spirit the commission has now commenced the study of two projects for the organization of a “monopoly” presented by M. Poisson. The first would institute state administration (régie) and the second would group the several importing organizations and the refining organizations into two national companies (sociétés) with state participation. It is said that this state participation would follow the formula employed in connection with the Compagnie Générate Transatlantique and the Compagnie Air-France. That is, the Government would enjoy a 33% control. The attitude of the commission towards the Poisson proposal will not be known until after the next meeting, which is scheduled for Tuesday, December 5.
Respectfully yours,
- Not printed.↩