500.A15A4/1106: Telegram
The Ambassador in Great Britain (Mellon) to the Secretary of State
[Received June 8—2:10 p.m.]
198. By early arrangement I made appointment to discuss your 172, June 7, 2 p.m., with Simon and Baldwin before Cabinet meeting this afternoon when disarmament conversations are scheduled. [Page 159] When I had finished giving a summary of your views Baldwin, after asking Simon’s permission to speak first, stated in substance us follows:
“When Norman Davis and Gibson were here I had one or two informal discussions with them as man to man but Simon and I had no idea that anything we said was considered as more than a personal discussion of phases of disarmament phraseology, certainly no one there was believed to be speaking for his Government. Indeed, Davis and Gibson had no authority to speak for their Government. If I was advancing any views other than strictly personal thoughts as the conversation developed I should have insisted that they be present. If I may say so, disarmament deliberation results in Geneva so far really have amounted to little more than ‘fle’, and it was on the basis of what possibilities lay in disarmament that would really put tang into Geneva that the four of us (Davis, Gibson, Simon and myself) developed personal suggestions in the course of an hour’s conversation along one another’s trains of thought. No record was kept of the conversation by Simon and myself, and I am as much surprised that a summary ever reached Colonel Stimson as I was when I learned the Ambassador had asked to see me today.”
I replied that Mr. Baldwin need have no misapprehensions since Secretary Stimson expressly stated that the résumé of the Gibson-Davis conversation had reached him in an informal and personal manner. Sir John Simon stated he was relieved by my assurance because he would not like to think the British Navy or, above all, anyone connected with the American Navy should have any suspicions that the question of abolition of capital ships had been put forward by the British Government to Davis and Gibson. On getting up to go Baldwin stated he felt it important that you had a clear idea of his remarks, the substance of which I have quoted above. Upon his departure, Sir John Simon said that he took the object of your telegram under discussion was merely for purpose of safeguarding, but he did want to make clear what Baldwin had said that no record of the conversation existed, and it was understood by both himself and Mr. Baldwin that the conversation with Gibson and Davis was purely an expression of personal thoughts on disarmament matters. Both Baldwin and Simon assured me that if they had any proposals for Geneva which they regarded in any way seriously affecting the point of view of the United States they certainly would officially consult the American Government in private conversations beforehand rather than risk divergence of views between the two Governments in open discussion, when harmony, as you state, was most essential. Sir John Simon added that in his memory of the conversation the point of view expressed regarding capital ships to which his mind clung was the financial advantage accruing if the [Page 160] World adopted a gradual policy not for the abolition of capital ships but for a World acceptance of limitation of size of capital ships. In other words, navies and capital ships in particular should be reduced “as though seen through the wrong end of a telescope”.
As I was about to leave Sir John Simon informed me that he and the Prime Minister were leaving Saturday morning for Paris where they would spend Sunday discussing various pending subjects with Herriot who was “exultant” upon the vote of confidence received in the Chamber. On Monday morning Simon and the Prime Minister will leave for Geneva arriving there Monday evening. They will spend all Tuesday in Geneva and Wednesday morning leave for Lausanne.
Copy to Geneva.