Foreign Relations of the United States: Diplomatic Papers, 1945, European Advisory Commission, Austria, Germany, Volume III

740.00119 EW/10–2945

The Secretary of State to the Ambassador in France (Caffery)

Washington, November 2, 1945—8 p.m.

5142. For Angell No. 5. Reurtel No. 2 Oct 29.⁹⁰ At request Coordinating Committee ACC Reparation Deliveries Restitution Directorate has submitted definition of restitution⁹¹ under which (1) restitution would be confined to identifiable goods (a) which existed at time of occupation of country and taken out of country by enemy whatever may have been means of dispossession and (b) which were produced during occupation and acquired by enemy through act of force, (2) replacement by similar or comparable property of looted property lost or destroyed would be confined to objects of unique character such as works of art, etc., (3) property prior to restitution would where practicable be repaired, with Germany bearing cost, and (4) restitution would be to government of country from which object was looted.

Brit representative expressed reservations on point (2) pending instructions from Govt. and US accepted subject to reservation based on lack of instructions.⁹² Gold not covered by definition owing your discussions in Paris regarding which OMGUS, Berlin wishes you to keep it advised.

Dept requesting War Dept to cable OMGUS⁹³ accepting points (3) and (4) as well as point (2) provided replacement really confined to objects of unique character which can definitely not be replaced from current output. Point (1) also approved with observation that it will probably prove difficult to determine whether goods produced during occupation were actually acquired by enemy through act of force. While anxious in general to obtain broad restitution program, Dept will accept any agreement on restitution which other occupying powers will accept.

Dept has no further information on discussions in ACC re interim reparation deliveries other than that communicated to you in our No. 1⁹⁴ and by USPolAd, Berlin in his 97⁹⁵ and 99.⁹⁶

War Dept instructing OMGUS to repeat to you cables to War Dept on reparation and restitution. Suggest you repeat messages to Dept same subjects to USPolAd, Berlin.

Sent to Paris, repeated to Berlin as Dept’s 800.

Byrnes

90. Reference is to telegram 6285, October 29, midnight, from Paris, which requested information concerning discussion in the Allied Control Council on restitution (740.00119 EW/10–2945).
91. Text of this definition was transmitted to the Department in telegram 909, October 31, midnight, from Berlin, not printed.
92. In telegram CC–18900, November 14, General Clay indicated his dissatisfaction with this part of the definition. He did not feel that the United States should accept responsibility for replacement of unique cultural objects because of the difficulty in agreeing on what constituted such objects and on what museums and collections in the different zones would provide the replacement items. The War Department replied in telegram 83352, November 15, expressing assent to Clay’s objections and authorizing revision of the definition. (Copies of telegrams obtained from Department of the Army files.)
93. The instructions here summarized were transmitted to OMGUS in telegram Warx 81251, November 3, to Berlin, not printed.
94. See telegram 5005, October 26, 8 p.m., to Paris, p. 1362.
95. See telegram 842, October 25, noon, from Berlin, p. 1360.
96. Reference is to telegram 870, October 28, 10 a.m., from Berlin, which concerned transmission of lists of plants made available for advance reparations deliveries (462.00R/10–2845).