Foreign Relations of the United States: Diplomatic Papers, 1944, The American Republics, Volume VII

561.333D3/12–2344

Memorandum by the Chairman of the Inter-American Coffee Board (Cale)⁴⁷

[Washington,] December 23, 1944.

In my memorandum of December 18, of which a copy is attached,⁴⁸ I requested authorization to vote for an increase in the quotas under the Inter-American Coffee Agreement during a meeting of the Inter-American Coffee Board on the afternoon of December 19, should it be apparent that representatives of the coffee producing countries were unwilling, after the meeting with Judge Vinson earlier in the day, to acquiesce in his decision that there is to be no increase in coffee ceiling prices.

Actually, I did not vote for a quota increase during the meeting for the following reasons:

1. It was not apparent that representatives of the coffee producing countries would not acquiesce in Judge Vinson’s decision.

2. I felt, as a result of developments during the meeting, that recommending a quota increase, immediately after the meeting in Judge Vinson’s office, might incite the Board to make a public statement continuing the uncertainty that has prevailed during recent weeks regarding the coffee price situation (it appeared to me to be more important to prevent the Board from making an undesirable statement at that time than to increase the quotas since an increase in the quotas is likely to have little immediate effect in making a larger supply of coffee available to this country).

3. The Brazilian delegate did not attend the meeting and as the delegate of Ecuador was also away, we did not technically have a quorum, although the Brazilian delegate authorized the delegate of El Salvador by telephone to represent the Brazilian delegate during the meeting (the Coffee Agreement provides that authorization for such representation should be in writing).

4. The possibility that an increase in the quotas might be used as an excuse by Brazil for refusing to ship further coffee to this country under the Memorandum of Understanding, which expires on January 1.⁴⁹

5. The desire on my part to obtain as much support as possible from the producing countries before recommending a quota increase (the delegate of Colombia had advised me prior to the meeting that he was under instructions to oppose a quota increase. I hope that his Government may revise its instructions as a result of the meeting in Judge Vinson’s office).

I have been informed since the meeting that coffee rationing may be reinstituted on January 1. I understand that controls on a number of commodities will be considerably tightened up on December 27 and that it is feared that this action will cause the public to buy coffee in larger quantities and thus make prompt resumption of coffee rationing necessary. I believe, therefore, that we should attempt to increase the quotas before that date and that a special meeting of the Board should be called for this purpose. I have already issued the call for the meeting in view of the fact that the Inter-American Coffee Agreement requires that notice of all special meetings shall be communicated to the delegates not less than three days before the date fixed for the meeting and because some of the delegates live in New York City and need to be informed as far in advance of the meeting as possible in order to have a better opportunity to make travel arrangements. Please inform me immediately if you do not concur in my opinion as to the action that should be taken at the meeting.

Edward G. Cale

47. Addressed to the Chief (Stinebower) and the Assistant Chief (Haley) of the Division of Economic Studies, the Assistant Director, Office of American Republic Affairs (Wright), and to the Assistant Secretary of State (Clayton).
48. Ante, p. 165.
49. For the substance of this memorandum, see telegram 2048, July 3, 10 p.m., to Rio de Janeiro, p. 155.