Foreign Relations of the United States: Diplomatic Papers, 1945, Europe, Volume IV

611.5131/7–3045

Memorandum of Conversation, by Mr. Arnold H. Quirin of the Division of Commercial Policy

[Washington,] July 30, 1945.

Participants:	M. de Fouchier, Assistant Director, Bureau of Foreign Economic Relations, French Ministry of National Economy, Paris
	M. Tixier, Assistant Director, Bureau of Prices, French Ministry of National Economy, Paris
	M. Treuil, French Commercial Counselor, New York
	M. Charlois, Commercial Attaché, French Embassy
	M. Valensi, Financial Counselor, French Embassy
	M. Charles-Roux, Second Secretary, French Embassy
	M. Leroy-Beaulieu, French Supply Mission
	Mr. Wilcox,79 ITP
	Mr. Bonbright,80 WE
	Mr. Cameron, American Embassy, Paris
	Messrs. Brown, Phelps and Quirin, CP81

Mr. Wilcox opened the meeting by expressing pleasure at having this opportunity to discuss our common problems with M. de Fouchier and M. Tixier. He suggested that M. de Fouchier outline the matters which he would like to discuss with our government representatives in Washington.

M. de Fouchier replied that there were three principal problems which he would like to discuss. First, the question of OPA⁸² ceiling prices in relation to possible French exports to the United States. He indicated that in general, OPA ceiling prices were too low to permit the sale of French products in this country. These products, he went on to say, were chiefly luxury products such as wines, cognac and champagne, perfumes, gloves, and jewelry. Second, M. de Fouchier said that even if the OPA removed its price ceilings on imported French products, the prices of such products in this country would still be too high. He indicated that he would not wish to reopen trade under conditions where prices would be so high as to limit sales to a comparatively small number of units of each product. He hoped that French products would have a wider sale. Therefore, the second problem was that of seeking some adjustment of the disparity between the present high prices in France and prices in the United States (at the present exchange rate). Third, there was the question of resuming private trade between the United States and France. M. de Fouchier indicated that he would like to discuss returning, initially, a small portion of French imports from the United States to private trade channels. In this connection he mentioned the recent agreement concluded between France and the U.K. which returned a limited group of French imports from the U.K. to private trade.

Mr. Wilcox commented briefly on the three topics which M. de Fouchier had presented. Regarding the first, he said that the responsibility for price control in this country rested with the OPA and that we had arranged for M. de Fouchier to discuss this problem with that agency.

With respect to the second problem mentioned by M. de Fouchier, Mr. Wilcox indicated that we would be glad to have the French program of “equalization” explained to us and that we would consider French problems sympathetically in the light of our own laws and regulations.

In respect of the third topic, Mr. Wilcox said that one of our basic policies was to return our foreign trade to private channels and to remove our wartime restrictions on trade as rapidly as circumstances would permit. In this way we hoped to see multilateral international trade on a private basis gradually resumed.

Mr. Wilcox admitted the urgency of the problems M. de Fouchier had mentioned but said that there were other problems which we felt should also be presented to him. These are problems of longer-term commercial and economic policy which we felt should be considered now in order that short-run transitional measures should insofar as possible facilitate the achievement of our long-range objectives. Mr. Wilcox then outlined the main subjects which had been studied by this Government.

1. Commercial Policy. He said that it was our feeling that a reduction of both tariff and non-tariff barriers to international trade was very necessary for a healthy and prosperous world economy. In addition, it was our belief that this trade should be conducted on a nondiscriminatory basis.

2. Private business practices which restrict international trade. Mr. Wilcox expressed this Government’s belief that the commercial and economic policy of a government should be in the hands of its public officials and not in the hands of private individual organizations. He had in mind particular restrictive cartel practices. He indicated that it was our belief that these practices should be closely restricted by international agreement.

3. Commodity agreements. Mr. Wilcox said that we were studying the position of commodity agreements in the post-war world. We were considering the possibility of commodity agreements for certain primary commodities in chronic world surplus. On the other hand, we felt that these commodity agreements should be concluded only in cases of real necessity, in accord with internationally agreed rules, and in the light of a policy directed towards an expansion of multilateral international trade.

With these things in mind Mr. Wilcox referred to the Secretary’s speech of last April in which it was suggested that an international trade conference be called to consider these problems. He indicated that we were studying the possibility of setting up an international trade organization paralleling the Monetary Fund and that we thought that the international trade organization might have sections concerned with the three main subjects referred to above. At the same time, Mr. Wilcox said, our whole thinking on international trade was based on the policy of full employment in the individual countries. In addition, we are also considering the need for certain exceptions to our general principles, designed to meet particular circumstances in particular countries.

M. de Fouchier expressed keen interest in what Mr. Wilcox had said and indicated that there might be points on which French and American policy might not coincide. He mentioned, as illustrations, the French belief in the usefulness of regional economic agreements and cited the agreement for economic consultation which had been signed earlier in the year between France, the Netherlands and the Belgo-Luxemburg Economic Union. He also referred to France’s economic problems in relation to her colonies. M. de Fouchier said that he would report Mr. Wilcox’s remarks to his Government which he was sure would find them extremely interesting and useful.

It was suggested that on the return of M. de Fouchier and M. Tixier from Canada in mid-August, it would be possible to go into some of these long-range problems in more detail.

79. Clair Wilcox, Director of the Office of International Trade Policy.
80. J. C. H. Bonbright, Assistant Chief, Division of Western European Affairs.
81. Winthrop G. Brown, Chief, Division of Commercial Policy; Vernon L. Phelps,. Assistant Chief, Division of Commercial Policy.
82. Office of Price Administration.