File No. 658.119/575
The Chargé in Sweden ( Whitehouse) to the Secretary of State
[Received August 23, 1.05 p.m.]
2695. My colleagues and I haying examined the memorandum referred to in my 2694, August 22, 10 p.m., decided that it contained information of so serious a nature that pending instructions from our Governments on the subject we ought at once to hand to the Prime Minister the following collective note:
After having taken cognizance of the pro memoria handed in the name of the Royal Government by Marcus Wallenberg to Sir Esme Howard1 and of the verbal explanations given at the same time, the undersigned Ministers have the honor to inform the Royal Government that they have drawn the attention by telegraph of their respective Governments to the facts exposed in this document, facts which seem to them to constitute a grave prejudice to the London agreement of May 29 last.
While waiting to make known the opinion of their Governments in this regard the undersigned Ministers believe it their duty to express the firm hope that the Royal Government will completely abstain from any act incompatible with the letter and spirit of the abolition of [aforesaid?] agreement.
The Prime Minister after reading the note first of all pointed out that the words “grave atteinte” seemed to him more serious than the occasion warranted. He explained the point of view of the Swedish Government in the negotiations as both he and Mr. Wallenberg had done before stating that the Government had been compelled to make an agreement with the German Government in order to obtain the coal they required, and that having made this agreement and issued licenses accordingly they considered that they were covered by the terms of letters 19 and 20 [9 and 10] and could export the articles for which licenses had been granted without contravening the London agreement. We replied, without wishing to impugn the good faith of the Swedish Government, we considered that it would only have been proper on their part to inform the Associated Governments when they signed the agreement containing these letters of the nature of the obligations they had entered into with the German Government and we contested the right of the Swedish Government to interpret letters 19 and 20 [9 and 10] as giving them the right to export goods prohibited by the London agreement without coming to a previous understanding with our Governments.
We pointed out that instead of doing this the Swedish Government had only notified us of these exports after a great many had [Page 1285] been made and nearly three months after the signature of the London agreement. The Prime Minister replied that the Swedish Government had always intended to give us this information but that it had taken the Handels Kommission up to last week to get the exact figures, and he again referred to the fact that it was recognized on both sides in London that there must be a transitory period before the provisions of the agreement could actually be enforced. He claimed that such difficulties were inevitable in the beginning of an agreement, which to a great extent altered the whole course of trade and referred to the delays in the export of goods from the United States to which Sweden was entitled under the agreement such as copper and oils and the difficulty being experienced by the steamer Stockholm in obtaining the cargo for which she was sent.
Returning to our note we asked if the Swedish Government intended to export the remainder of the goods mentioned in their memorandum which had not yet left for Germany. He replied that the Swedish Government must fulfill their obligations in this respect, except for the pyrites which was only a private agreement. He ended by advocating [adjuring?] us not to aggravate the [incident] but to endeavor to persuade our Governments to come to an understanding, which would enable the Swedish Government to carry out its intention of loyally executing the agreement in every respect.
We consider that these explanations of the Prime Minister cannot be accepted as satisfactory as it appears that the Swedish Government were, firstly, making an agreement with our enemies which was in conflict with the agreement they were at the time negotiating with us, secondly, carrying out the conditions of the German agreement and keeping back all information about it for nearly three months after which they place before us a fait accompli.
While we consider that it is not in our interest to take any action which would lead to the abandonment of the [agreement, we should protest] to the Swedish Government in such terms as will deter them from similar agreement in the future and make them understand we are not to be trifled with.
We consider that we should be authorized to hand in a collective note on the following lines:
After a short recapitulation of what has occurred we might state that while we have no doubt of the good faith of the Swedish Cabinet we regret to state that their action in the matter has produced a most unfavorable impression.
Secondly, that in these circumstances it is [not?] advisable [for] Associated Governments to agree to the demands put forward in favor of further exports to our enemies in the memorandum submitted by the Handels Kommission on July 11 and in the memorandum under reply.
[Page 1286]Thirdly, that we should demand as a reparation that the two steamships Otago and Edmond-Gustave which have been bought by Swedes from English and French owners respectively since the beginning of the war and are still under the British and French flags be time-chartered to us for the duration of the war over and above the 4,000,000 [400,000] tons of the tonnage agreement and be granted passage through the Kogrund channel.
Fourth, that before the end of each month we should be supplied with full export statistics with country of destination of the preceding month, failing which we shall be compelled to cease exports to Sweden in the measure which circumstances may demand.
Fifth, we might also ask to have officially communicated to us the text of the German coal agreement and the text of any arrangement made with the German Government regarding safe conducts.
I respectfully suggest that I may be authorized to join my colleagues in making a reply in the above sense. Embassy at London has received copies of this and preceding telegram.
- British Minister to Sweden.↩