Arizona sun., 1947-11-28

u.-. where the repre-
sentatives Of the
Is European countries sat down IN
the state department to carry on
their daily, and sometimes nightly.
seminars with the representatives
Of our government.
These discussions went through
three phases. The first phase was a
careful expansion of details lacking
In the formal report drawn up by
the Paris conference.
You would be surprised at the
number and scope of those details,
many of which had to await special
memoranda from technical experts
in the countries involved. For in
stance, we can imagine conversa-
ton something like this:
|'Just q moment" one of the
American officials says, with his
pencil poised over the pad in.
trent of him, ''YOu say that it
will be impossible to increase
the output of the mines in COun-
try x without additional mining
machinery. You gave us the fig
ureS for the total equip
ment estimated, but 1 wish you
would describe specifically the
types and the quantity you
need"
II the foreign expert had the sta
tistics with him, they were checked,
and the discussion of that particular
item ended. If not, the next point
was taken up, awaiting the detailed
figures which had to be cabled from
Country x.
However, that phase was con-
cluded without any serious casual
ties. In fact, understand it gradu-
ally blended into the third phase,
which was a two-sided discussion,
bringing out exactly how the Paris
report was formulated. Whether, for
instance, it was a synthetic combi-
nation of various separate view
points and separate plans, or
whether the parts were fitted to-
gether with due relation to each
other SO that they could be taken
apart and put together again. The
Americans took it apart and, We
were told, it went together all right.
AS I say, this was two-sided dis
cusSion, and l understand that it
developed a common appraisal of
the plan. In other words, when it
was completed, either American
criticism had been satisfied, or the
European viewpoint had been suffi-
ciently altered to achieve harmoni-
Gus agreement.
In setting forth their views, GER
tain main factors" were empha-
sized by the Europeans.
In the first place, in normal times,
Western Europe traditionally i'm
ported more goods from the western
hemisphere than they exported to
us. However, this imbalance was
compensated for by the trade be-
tween the Far East and Western
Europe. This trade furnished West
ern Europe with sufficient dollars to
make up part of the difference.
Secondly, in normal times, par
ticularly in the case Of Great Brit
ain, there was the factor of ''in-
visible income" This invisible in
come" was made up, in part, of in
vestments held by individual Brit
ons and the British government, of
the income in commissions and
other fees which the British and
other nations earned as a clearing
house Of merchandise, through the
use of shipping facilities and many
other services which it was con-
venient and practical for European
nations to provide for the world. But
this invisible income" has largely
disappeared now.
We asked one Of the European
representatives what had hap
pened to il. The partial answer
of course, was obvious: With
world trade at q Standstill,
many of the services no longer
are being provided. And as to
the personal holdings, one Euro
pean representative said: BE
fore the war, owned 100 shares
Of A.T.&T.. and 20 shares of
General Motors. But they had to
70 long before the war was over
the interruption Of my earning
power, high taxes and SO on"
Still another important factor is
the consideration Of the normal
trade which formerly existed be.
tween Eastern and Western Europe
II was interesting to note at this
point. that considerable optimism