611.1231/427
Memorandum of Conversation, by the Chief of the Division of Commercial Policy and Agreements (Hawkins)
Dr. Beteta called on his own initiative in connection with the trade-agreement negotiations. He said he is now authorized to accept our reservation regarding the Canal Zone.
He also referred to the sanitary clause and stated the reasons for proposing that disputes on sanitary matters be made in effect a matter for arbitration, the reasons for this proposal being the belief that sanitary restrictions may sometimes be imposed for other motives. I outlined at some length the objections to the proposal, and he said that he would take up with his Government the question of accepting our draft as submitted.
He next referred to the transit clause which the Mexican Government had proposed and mentioned the sanitary aspects of this matter. I told him that any sanitary measure, whether or not in connection with transit, would presumably be covered by the provision referred to above; and that we would look into the feasibility of including the clause from the purely transit standpoint.
With reference to Schedule I, Dr. Beteta said that Mexico could not make concessions on agricultural products. I explained to him [Page 509] why such concessions are essential from our standpoint, and he seemed to understand the reasons stated. In this connection, he referred to our request for a concession on apples and asked whether we could not consider putting the concession on a seasonal basis as such a limitation would help him defend the concession in Mexico.
With reference to Schedule II, Dr. Beteta asked that Mexico be given the full 50 percent reduction in duty on tomatoes and that the season during which the concession applies be extended to two months. I explained to him how a further reduction of duty would result in a further reduction to Cuba and the reasons why this is objectionable, which reasons he seemed fully to understand.
In regard to the extension of the season, I said that I did not know the situation but that our people were presumably looking into the matter if the question had been raised with them, which he said it had.
With reference to petroleum, Dr. Beteta asked how soon we could get a decision, what concession we were seeking to get Interior to agree to, and whether we were trying to get the quota removed entirely. I said it is a little difficult to give a precise answer to this question, but I could assure him that we would get the best concession possible. With reference to the time, I said that I could not tell him definitely but that I hoped we would be in a position to tell him within a few days.
Dr. Beteta said it is difficult to talk about concessions which they will grant, or to urge his Government to accept our proposals, without knowing what we were prepared to offer on so important an item as petroleum. I suggested that if it is impossible to go ahead with important matters of substance, that our two delegations might clear away technical details, such as translations and so forth, pending a continuation of the discussions on important questions of substance. He agreed that this is desirable.