we had contemplated at the time the tariff bargaining bill was drafted last spring. I added that in my opinion until we knew definitely what our general method of approach was going to be it would be useless to discuss a trade agreement further with the Canadian Government. I went on to say that I had no doubt that upon Secretary Hull's return from London he would go into this matter fully with the President with the view of obtaining a decision as to the precise form which our trade agreements will take. I explained that the countries which had been invited to enter upon informal conversations with us had been selected because of the fact that the products which they export to the United States present fewer difficulties and complexities than in the case of other countries. At this point, Mr. Wrong raised the question of whether this was true of Argentina, and I replied that it was not, but that that country had been added at the earnest insistence of the Argentine Ambassador here, who is firmly of the opinion that there is abundant room for a satisfactory trade agreement between the United States and the Argentine, despite the fact that their principal exports are products which we also produce in large quantities. I emphasized the fact that we are keenly desirous of entering upon negotiations with Canada as soon as we know the type of agreement which we will be in a position to conclude, and that if we had selected a list of countries for negotiations from the standpoint of the importance of trade relations with the United States, Canada would, of course, have been at the head of the list. J[OHN] D. H[ICKERSON] 611.4231/840 Memorandum by the Under Secretary of State (Phillips) of a [WASHINGTON,] November 20, 1933. The Canadian Minister talked to me at length today in regard to the necessity of doing something to stimulate trade relations between Canada and the United States; he referred to Prime Minister Bennett's visit to Washington last spring and to the public statements made along these lines; he said it was high time to move forward in this respect; he had not pressed the matter because he was well aware of the emergency program undertaken by the N. R. A.12 and felt that Canada should not interfere with the remedies which the American people were putting into effect to find a solution for their own economic difficulties; he felt, how12 National Recovery Administration. ever, that a point had been reached where there was now a parting of the ways—if the American tariffs against Canadian imports were raised further; that there was bound to be further retaliation in Canada against the United States; in these circumstances it was essential to make an effort now to work out an exchange of commodities on a reciprocal basis which would turn the tide away from a complete stoppage on the Canadian border; he had not in mind a reciprocal trade agreement, necessitating submission to the Senate, but rather the selection of a few items which, by an exchange of notes, could be facilitated entrance. The Minister asked that we consider the idea of asking the Tariff Commission to study the 50% reduction of tariffs on potatoes, lumber, cattle and fish and in return he could promise facilitating the entry into Canada of American vegetables and fruits, farm machinery and other manufactured articles. He felt sure that the Tariff Commission would consent to a 50% reduction because of the similarity in the costs of production in both countries; Mr. Herridge felt the need of creating some machinery which would start trade moving; it need not be very important; it might well be limited to three or four items from Canada; the point which he had in mind was to make a start in the right direction and, once reciprocity was established, other items would normally be added. W[ILLIAM] P[HILLIPS] CONTINUED NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE CANADIAN GOVERNMENT REGARDING DAMAGES TO PROPERTY IN THE STATE OF WASHINGTON BY FUMES FROM THE SMELTER AT TRAIL, B. C.18 711.4215 Air Pollution/407b No. 841 The Secretary of State to the Chargé in Canada (Boal) WASHINGTON, February 10, 1933. SIR: For a number of years a serious situation in the State of Washington has obtained because of damage caused by fumes from the smelter of the Consolidated Mining and Smelting Company at Trail, British Columbia, a few miles from the international boundary between the United States and Canada. Fumes from this smelter carried by the wind across the international boundary did some damage in the State of Washington as early as 1918. Increased activities on the part of the smelter resulted in greater damage, and by 1923 the effect of these fumes in the State of Washington reached serious proportions. The fumes have injured vegetable growth as far as thirty or forty miles from the international boundary. 13 For previous correspondence on this subject, see Foreign Relations, 1928, vol. 11, pp. 78 ff. This situation is not only serious but anomalous. There are, of course, many smelters in the United States and Canada, but in no other instance, so far as I am aware, has the area adjacent to a smelter been compelled to submit without indemnification or any other remedy to continued exposure to fumes. It has been possible in ordinary cases for the injured parties by resorting to the remedies afforded by the courts to obtain that protection which the United States and Canada guarantee to their respective nationals. It is my understanding that even in the case of the smelter at Trail, British Columbia, the Canadian property owners in British Columbia have been able to obtain indemnification through the medium of the Canadian courts. No such remedy is, however, available to the American community in the State of Washington. On August 7, 1928, after a somewhat protracted correspondence, the Governments of the United States and Canada referred this question to the International Joint Commission, United States and Canada, for investigation and report. After a series of hearings the International Joint Commission rendered a report on February 28, 1931,14 on the question. The Department has given careful consideration to this report of the International Joint Commission. I recognize that this report is not an arbitral decision which must be accepted by both Governments, but it is in the nature of a group of recommendations for the consideration of the two Governments to facilitate the reaching of a settlement. The report of the International Joint Commission of February 28, 1931, upon its publication, caused dissatisfaction and protest in the interested part of the State of Washington. The injured property holders insisted that the recommended award of $350,000 for damages up to and including January 1, 1932, was inadequate, and that the report in general accorded too little recognition to the complaints of the people in that section of Washington. The Government of the United States shares with the Government of Canada a certain pride in the helpful work of the International Joint Commission since its establishment, and this feeling has impelled me to regard the report of February 28, 1931, as recommendation which, while not satisfactory to the injured parties in the United States, is entitled to the most serious consideration of this Government. The report of the International Joint Commission expressed the view that damages in the State of Washington from fumes from the smelter at Trail would practically cease by the end of 1931. Unfortunately, that has not been the case and extensive damage has continued. It is the view of the Government of the United States that a means must be found to bring about adequate relief for this section of the State of "Trail Smelter Question, Documents, Series A, Appendix A 3: Report of the International Joint Commission, signed at Toronto, 28th February, 1931 (Ottawa. J. O. Patenaude, I.S.O., 1936). Washington. It seems just that our people concerned should be given no less protection than that which citizens of both countries are customarily able to obtain in the proper courts, and which the people of the State of Washington could indeed obtain were it not for the fact that the smelter which causes the damage is situated in a foreign jurisdiction. In these circumstances I propose that a treaty be concluded between the United States and Canada to give effect to the principal features of that report and to provide substantially: 1. That the sum of $350,000 be paid as indemnity to cover damages which occurred prior to January 1, 1932. This sum of $350,000 shall be paid to the Government of the United States to be distributed as the Government determines. 2. That damages occurring subsequent to January 1, 1932, shall be assessed by a board or commission to be established for that purpose. Damages so assessed shall be paid to the Government of the United States and distributed by it. 3. That, in accordance with a schedule agreed upon in the treaty by the two Governments, the amount of sulphur dioxide discharged by the smelter and the rate of discharge shall be progressively reduced by means of extraction works or any other device which the smelter chooses to employ until no further damage is done in United States territory. 4. That the two Governments shall establish an agency to continue investigations, to report progress on the schedule agreed upon for the progressive reduction of the amount of sulphur dioxide and to assess damages. The members of the agency established by the two Governments shall have access to the smelter and to property affected in the United States and shall be furnished with information pertaining to the operations of the smelter. An agreement such as is proposed above would be in substantial conformity with the report of the International Joint Commission with minor variations pertaining chiefly to the modal features of the report. The Department feels that an adjustment of the international problem presented by the operation of the smelter could best be effectuated by concluding a treaty between the two Governments. An outline of the substance of a treaty is set forth above. That description of the proposed treaty would, of course, be subject to such amendment and elaboration as might be deemed necessary as discussion progressed. Please obtain an interview with the Prime Minister,15 communicate the above-mentioned views to him, and inquire whether the Government of Canada will agree to designate a representative to confer with a representative of the United States with a view to formulating an agreement along these lines. You may leave with the Prime Minister a note in the sense of this instruction. It is essential that you impress upon 15 Richard Bedford Bennett. the Prime Minister that this is a serious situation for which a solution must be found. Please keep in touch with the proper authorities after your interview with the Prime Minister in an endeavor to expedite their reply as much as possible. Very truly yours, 711.4215 Air Pollution/413 Telegram HENRY L. STIMSON The Chargé in Canada (Boal) to the Secretary of State OTTAWA, February 25, 1933-11 a. m. [Received 2:30 p. m.] 6. Department's instruction 841 of February 10, 1933. I presented the press release 16 and a note in the sense of this instruction to the Prime Minister yesterday with our representations as instructed. In the note the word treaty has throughout been changed to the word agreement in order to leave the Canadians a little more leeway as to form. I shall make it clear in due course that ratification in the United States of any treaty, convention or other form of agreement reached between the two countries will probably be necessary. The Prime Minister has telegraphed to Mr. James J. Warren, President of the Consolidated Mining and Smelting Company, to consult with him regarding the suggestions made in our note. He also wanted to defer the press release until he had a reply from Warren but I explained that this would be very awkward and he then said that in that case he would prefer that the release be made without any reference to him. Therefore when release is made it should be done without any mention of the Prime Minister and without any suggestion that he might have knowledge of it. The word treaty in the release should also be changed to agreement. BOAL 711.4215 Air Pollution/414 Telegram The Chargé in Canada (Boal) to the Secretary of State OTTAWA, March 1, 1933-4 p. m. [Received March 2-5:54 a. m.] 7. Reference despatch No. 1255, February 27, 1933,17 the following is the pertinent part of Canadian Government's reply: "You are doubtless aware that there is a difference of opinion between 15 19 A draft press statement enclosed with instruction No. 845, February 21, 1933 7114215 Air Pollution/407a), not printed. The press release apparently was not issued. 17 "Not printed; it enclosed copy of note dated February 17, 1933, handed to the Canadian Prime Minister on February 24, in accordance with Department's instruction No. 841, February 10, p. 52. |