Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T06:34:37.175Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Informal Entente: Public Policy and Private Management in Anglo-American Petroleum Affairs, 1918–1924

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 June 2012

Michael J. Hogan
Michael J. Hogan
Affiliation:
Doctoral Candidate in History, University of Iowa
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In the years following World War I, British and American diplomats and businessmen fashioned a cooperative approach to the problems of international oil rivalries, building an informal entente which was institutionalized at the private level, surrounded with the mystique of enlightened capitalism, and masked behind tortured concessions to competitive symbols.

Type
Articles
Information
Business History Review , Volume 48 , Issue 2 , Summer 1974 , pp. 187 - 205
Copyright
Copyright © The President and Fellows of Harvard College 1974

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 For the best recent studies from a regional perspective, see DeNovo, John, American Interests and Policies in the Middle East (Minneapolis, 1963), 167–184Google Scholar, and Tulchin, Joseph, The Aftermath of War: World War I and U.S. Policy Toward Latin America (New York, 1971), 118–154.Google Scholar The best studies from the industry point of view are Gibb, George Sweet and Knowlton's, Evelyn H.book on Jersey Standard, The Resurgent Years, 1911–1927 (New York, 1956)Google Scholar, and Williamson, Harold F.et al., The American Petroleum Industry: The Age of Energy, 1899–1959 (Evanston, Ill., 1963).Google ScholarNash, Gerald D., United States Oil Policy, 1890–1964 (Pittsburgh, 1968)Google Scholar, is especially good on domestic oil policy. Although all of the above deal in some respect with business-government relations, Nash, and Wilson, Joan Hoff, American Business & Foreign Policy, 1920–1933 (Lexington, Ky., 1971), 184–200Google Scholar, are especially helpful.

2 Feis, Herbert, Petroleum and American Foreign Policy (Stanford, 1944), 3–8Google Scholar; DeNovo, John, “The Movement for An Aggressive American Oil Policy Abroad, 1918–1920,” American Historical Review, LXI (July, 1956), 854–876CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Reed, Peter M., “Standard Oil in Indonesia, 1898–1928,” Business History Review, XXXII (Autumn, 1958), 311–337CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Tulchin, Aftermath of War, 118–129; and British White Paper, “Government Investments in Registered Companies,” enclosed in Post Wheeler, Counselor of the American Embassy, London, to the Secretary of State, December 1, 1921, Record Group 59, General Records of the Department of State (National Archives), file: 841.6363/185 (hereafter cited as RG 59).

3 “The Menace of Foreign State Monopolies to the American Petroleum Industry,” a report by the Foreign Relations Committee of the American Petroleum Institute enclosed in Thomas O'Donnell, President of the Institute, to the Secretary of State, September 30, 1919, RG 59, file: 800.6363/89; Secretary of State Colby to Senator Reed Smoot, November 19, 1920, RG 59, file: 811.6363/21b. The Commerce Department also attacked the Phelan Plan. See Secretary of Commerce J. W. Alexander to Smoot, July 26, 1920, and Acting Secretary of Commerce E. F. Sweet to Smoot, July 28, 1920, RG 59, file: 811.6363/25. See also in this connection, A. C. M. (Millspaugh), Memorandum, April 12, 1921, RG 59, file: 811.6363/46; A. C. M. to Dearing, May 10, 1921, RG 59, file: 800.6363/328; Ralph Arnold, American Institute of Mining and Metallurgical Engineers, to Secretary of Commerce Herbert Hoover, April 23, 1921, Herbert Hoover Papers (Herbert Hoover Presidential Library, West Branch, Iowa), Commerce, Official File, box 218 (hereafter cited as HHP, HHPL); and DeNovo, “Movement for an Aggressive Oil Policy,” 872–873.

4 See Williamson et al., American Petroleum Industry, 300–301, 316–320; and Nordhauser, Norman, “Origins of Federal Oil Regulation in the 1920's,” Business History Review, XLVII (Spring, 1973), 53–56.Google Scholar

5 See for example, Hoover, Herbert, American Individualism (Garden City, N.Y., 1922), 32–47Google Scholar; Hoover, , The New Day (Stanford, 1928), 9–44Google Scholar; and Requa, Mark L., The Relation of Government to Industry (New York, 1925).Google Scholar I am indebted to Professor Ellis Hawley for allowing me to read his unpublished essays, “Herbert Hoover, The Commerce Secretariat, and the Vision of an Associative State, 1921–1928,” “Herbert Hoover; Associational Progressive, 1921–1933,” and “Herbert Hoover and American Corporatism, 1929–1933.”

6 Lane to Van H. Manning, September 24, 1919, in Lane, Anne W. and Wall, Louise H., eds., The Letters of Franklin K. Lane, Personal and Political (Boston and New York, 1922), 315–316Google Scholar; Nash, United States Oil Policy, 23–48; Wilson, American Business & Foreign Policy, 186; Nordhauser, “Origins of Federal Oil Regulation,” 54–56.

7 Requa to J. Howard Pew, President of the Sun Oil Company, October 12, 1925, HHP, HHPL, Commerce, Personal File, box 75. See also Requa's “The Petroleum Problem,” Saturday Evening Post reprint, 1920, and “Conservation,” an address before the American Petroleum Institute, November 19, 1920, in HHP, HHPL, Commerce, Official File, box 220.

8 The syndicate was designed for foreign operations. An outline of the company signed by Requa and dated November 15, 1920, is in HHP, HHPL, Commerce, Official File, box 220. See also, Requa to Hoover, April 23 and May 2, 1921, and Ira Jewell Williams to Requa, May 12, 1921, HHP, HHPL, Commerce, Official File, box 251; A. C. M. (Millspaugh), “Proposed Combination of American Oil Companies for Operation Abroad,” May 13, 1921, RG 59, file; 811.6363/73; Hoover to Assistant Secretary of State Henry Fletcher, April 14, 1921, RG 59, file: 800.6363/272; and Wilson, American Business & Foreign Policy, 185–187.

9 On the May conference, see HHP, HHPL, Commerce, Official File, box 219; Bedford to Hughes, May 21, 1921, RG 59, file: 890g.6363/28; and DeNovo, American Interests in the Middle East, 186.

10 See Walter Teagle to Hughes, August 25, 1922, December 13, 1922, and December 22, 1922, and Hughes to Teagle, December 15, 1922, and December 30, 1922, in U.S. Department of State, Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, 1922, 2 vols. (Washington, 1928), II, 344–345, 347–352Google Scholar (hereafter cited as FR); A. W. D. (Dulles), Memorandum, December 15, 1922, Teagle to Hughes, December 18, 1922, and A. W. D., Memorandum of a Telephone Conversation with Mr. Wellman, December 30, 1922, RG 59, file: 890g.6363T84/81, 82, 83, 84.

11 Stanley Hornbeck of the Economic Adviser's Office to Assistant Secretary Leland Harrison, November 22, 1922, Assistant Secretary William Phillips to Hughes, August 18, 1922, A. C. M. (Millspaugh), Memorandum of a Conference in Mr. Phillips' Office attended by Guy Wellman of Standard Oil, Mr. Dulles and Mr. Millspaugh, June 13, 1922, and A, C. M., Memorandum of a Conversation with Mr. Naramore of the Sinclair Company, June 27, 1922, all in RG 59, file: 891.6363 St. Oil/263, 238, 216, 231.

12 In Venezuela, lack of cooperation stalled plans for constructing facilities to transport oil across a sand bar at the mouth of Lake Maracaibo. See, Harry J, Anslinger, American Vice Consul, La Guaira, to the Secretary of State, July 3, 1924, Economic Adviser's memorandum, “Petroleum Situation in Venezuela,” February 20, 1925, RG 59, file: 831.6363C73/4 and 831.6363/278. In Costa Rica, there was also a minor clash between Sinclair, California Standard, and the United Fruit Company. See, Hughes to Harding, March 30, 1921, Lester Woolsey, representing the United Fruit Company, to Hughes, July 11, 1921, and D. G. M. (Munro), “American Oil Concessions in Costa Rica,” February 16, 1924, all in RG 59, file: 818.6363/107a, 93, 166. See also, Tulchin, Aftermath of War, 137, 150–152.

13 The quotation is from Heinrich Riedemann, head of Jersey Standard's German operations, speaking specifically about Jersey's relations with Dutch-Shell and cited in Gibb and Knowlton, The Resurgent Years, 349.

14 See, for example, Hoover, “The Future of Our Foreign Trade,” address at the Export Managers Club, New York City, March 16, 1926, HHP, HHPL, Commerce, Personal File, box 24; and Hughes to Coolidge, October 31, 1923, RG 59, file: 890g.6363T84/117a.

15 Phillips to Hughes, May 4, 1921, RG 59, file: 856d.6363/94.

16 See Ambassador John Davis, London, to Secretary Colby, June 18, 1920, enclosing Davis to Curzon, May 12, 1920, Colby to Davis, July 26, 1920, Colby to Davis, November 23, 1920, enclosing Colby to Curzon, November 20, 1920, in FR, 1920, 3 vols. (Washington, 1935), II, 651–655, 658–659, 668–673.

17 Under prodding from the Administration and from the petroleum industry, Congress approved the Mineral Lands Leasing Act of 1920, authorizing the barring of foreign nationals whose governments denied equal opportunities to American citizens. The act was applied against the Netherlands as a result of its discrimination against American citizens in the East Indies. See DeNovo, “Movement for an Aggressive Oil Policy,” 867–873; and Reed, “Standard Oil in Indonesia,” 311–337.

18 A. C. M. (Millspaugh), “Informal and Provisional Memorandum on the General Petroleum Situation, Outstanding Petroleum Questions, and the Position Taken by the Department Relative Thereto,” February 19, 1921, RG 59, file: 800.6363/325; and Memorandum of a Conference on December 15, 1921 attended by Mr. Dearing, Dr. J. B. Moore, Mr. Robbins, Dr. Kornfeld, and Mr. Millspaugh, December 16, 1921, RG 59, file: 891.6363St. Oil/71.

19 Stewart Johnson, American chargé, San José, to Lansing, June 6, 24, 26, and August 31, 1918, and Lansing to Johnson, July 1, August 29, and December 9, 1918, in FR, 1918, 2 vols. (Washington, 1934), 1, 872–876. See also Tulchin, Aftermath of War, 135–136.

20 Ambassador Davis to the Secretary of State, August 11, 1920, enclosing Foreign Office Note, August 9, 1920, in FR, 1920, III, 665; and Davis to the Secretary of State, March 1, 1921, in FR, 1921, 2 vols. (Washington, 1936), II, 84.

21 Caribbean Petroleum was a subsidiary of the General Asphalt Company of Philadelphia, which, in turn was controlled by Dutch-Shell through its Burlington Investment Company. The Colon Development Company was also a subsidiary of Burlington, but one in which Henry Doherty, J. P. Morgan & Co., and other Wall Street interests held a minority share through their Carib Syndicate. See Tulchin, Aftermath of War, 147.

22 See, for example, Preston McGoodwin, American Minister, Venezuela, to the Secretary of State, November 21, 1919, and Breckinridge Long, Assistant Secretary of State, to Mc Goodwin, April 1, 1920, RG 59, file: 831.6363/18.

23 Adee to Diplomatic and Consular Officers, August 16, 1919, RG 59, file; 800.6363/16a. These instructions corresponded with recommendations by the Department's Economic Liaison Committee. See Economic Liaison Committee Report, July 11, 1919, RG 59, file: 811.6363/45.

24 McGoodwin to the Secretary of State, April 7, 1920, April 26, 1920, and June 11, 1920, and C. K. MacFadden to the Secretary of State, May 3, 1920 and June 16, 1920, HG 59, file: 831.6363/22, 26, 33, 27, 35.

25 British Ambassador to the Secretary of State, March 23 and May 9, 1921, in FR, 1921, 1, 649, 661–662; and Graham to Colby, July 2, 1920, and Colby to Graham, July 20, 1920, RG 59, file: 818.6363Am6/41. See also Tulchin, Aftermath of War, 137.

26 Assistant Secretary Norman Davis to McGoodwin, June 24, 1920, McGoodwin to the Secretary of State, March 25, 1921, May 4, 1921, and June 14, 1921, RG 59, file: 831.6363/33, 53, 54, 58, 63.

27 Latin American Division memorandum, April 27, 1921, Dearing to McGoodwin, May 6, 1921, RG 59, file: 831.6363/93, 33; and Hughes to Diplomatic and Consular Agents in Latin America, August 26, 1921, RG 59, file: 810.6363/5a.

28 The Costa Rican affair can be followed in FR, 1921, 1, 649, 661–663. On Johnson and Welles, see S. J. (Johnson) to Hughes, September 10, 1921, and S. W. (Welles) to Hughes, April 8, 1921, RG 59, file: 818.6363Am6/107, 121.

29 A. C. M. (Millspaugh), “Informal and Provisional Memorandum on the General Petroleum Situation,” February 19, 1921, RG 59, file: 800.6363/325. In the margin of the memorandum, Assistant Secretary Van S. Merle-Smith noted the significance of Millspaugh's recommendations, commenting that they ran “counter” to the usual “strategic considerations” in the Panama Canal area.

30 A. C. M. (Millspaugh) to Hughes, May 2, 1921, A. C. M. to Dearing, May 14, 1921, and A. C. M. to Welles, July 8, 1921, RG 59, file: 818.6363Am6/124, 85, 93. With reference to proposals for making the Western Hemisphere a preferred field for American oil interests, Millspaugh wrote Dearing that he did not think the solution to the international oil problem could be found in the partition of the world but in an understanding with the French and British. See A. C. M. to Cumberland and Dearing, April 23, 1921, RG 59, file: 810.6363/12.

31 Hughes to American Diplomatic and Consular Officers in Latin America, August 26, 1921, RG 59, file: 810.6363/5a; D. G. M. (Munro), “American Oil Concessions in Costa Rica,” February 16, 1924, RG 59, file: 818.6363/166; and FR,1921, 1, 646–668.

32 Hughes to American Minister Willis Cook, September 25, 1922, RG 59, file: 831.6375C23/29a; and Tulchin, Aftermath of War, 149.

33 Charles DeVault, American Vice Consul, London, to the Secretary of State, April 6, 1923, and Robert Skinner, American Consul General, London, to the Secretary of State, May 2, 1922, RG 59, file: 831.6363/ 132, 98.

34 Hughes to Cook, July 28, 1923, A. C. Bedford of Standard Oil to Hughes, August 21, 1923, Solicitor's Office Memorandum, August 31, 1923, Economic Adviser's Office Memorandum, September 11, 1923, Phillips to Cook, September 19, 1923, D. G. M. (Munro), Memorandum, February 16, 1924, Francis White, Memorandum, March 20, 1924, Frederick Chabot, American chargé, Caracas, to Hughes, June 7, 1924, and August 9, 1924, and American Consul, Venezuela, to the Secretary of State, February 12, 1926, all in RG 59, file: 831.6363/140, 142, 231, 232, 205, 230, 313.

35 In 1921, the State and Commerce Departments had helped engineer a tentative concession over the northern provinces to Jersey Standard. In return, Jersey promised a $5,000,000 loan to the Persian government. See A. C. M. (Millspaugh), “Memorandum of a Conversation with the Persian Minister and the Counselor of the Persian Legation,” December 17, 1920, and Hoover to Hughes, November 28, 1921, RG 59, file: 891.6363 St. Oil/16, 49½.

36 A. W. D. (Dulles) to Phillips and Harrison, August 14, 1922, and W. P. (Phillips) to Hughes, August 18, 1922, RG 59, file: 891.6363 St. Oil/237, 238.

37 Unsigned Memorandum of a Conference attended by Dr. John Bassett Moore and Mr. Millspaugh, December 9, 1921, RG 59, file: 891.6363 St. Oil/63; Gibb and Knowlton, The Resurgent Years, 310.

38 The problem was that virtually all revenues available as security for a loan were already pledged for the redemption of bonds held by the British. The British government was unwilling to allow Persia to compromise this pledge by undertaking another loan from a third party. This obstacle was only removed when the AP and Jersey Standard agreed to support a Persian loan jointly. See Unsigned Memorandum of a Conference on December 15, 1921, December 16, 1921, J. B. Moore to Hughes, December 20, 1921, W. R. (Robbins) to Dearing and Millspaugh, January 16, 1922, A. C. M. (Millspaugh), Memorandum of a Conference with Mr. Dearing, A. C. Bedford, and Mr. Millspaugh of January 16, 1922, January 17, 1922, Hughes to Ambassador Auckland Geddes, British Embassy, January 30, 1922, Geddes to Hughes, January 31, 1922, A. C. Bedford to Hughes, February 21, 1922, all in RG 59, file: 891.6363 St. Oil/71, 77, 105, 108, 104, 128, 142.

39 A. W. D. (Dulles), Memorandum for Mr. Phillips and the Secretary, January 30, 1923, RG 59, file: 890g.6363T84/79; Moore to E. J. Sadler, December 16, 1921, enclosed in Moore to Hughes, December 20, 1921, American charge, Teheran, to the Secretary of State, November 27, 1921, Hoover to Hughes, December 22, 1921, all in RG 59, file: 891.6363/77, 70, 81.

40 Memorandum by Lord Curzon, March 1, 1922, enclosed in American Minister Joseph Kornfeld, Teheran, to Hughes, September 5, 1922, RG 59, file: 891.6363 St. Oil/246.

41 Kornfeld to Hughes, from London, January 20, 1922 (quoting Greenway), Unsigned Memorandum of a Conference on December 15, 1921, December 16, 1921, Moore to Hughes, December 20, 1921, enclosing Moore to Sadler, December 16, 1921, Bedford to Hughes, February 21, 1922, all in RG 59, file: 891.6363 St. Oil/ 111, 71, 77, 142.

42 Memorandum by Dearing and Feltcher, December 22, 1921, Geddes to Hughes, December 31, 1921, in FH, 1921, 11, 653–655; Memorandum of a Conversation with Mr. Chilton, Counselor of the British Embassy, January 10, 1922, by H. P. F. (Fletcher), Hughes to Geddes, January 11, 1922, and Geddes to Hughes, January 16, 1922, RG 59, file: 891.6363 St. Oil/86, 104.

43 D. (Dearing) to Millspaugh, March 2, 1922, RG 59, file: 891.6363 St. Oil/153. See also, A. C. M. (Millspaugh) to Dearing, February 11, 1922, Dearing to Fletcher, February 2, 1922, and W. D. R. (Robbins) to Dearing, March 1, 1922, RG 59, file: 891.6363 St. Oil/137, 130, 148.

44 D. (Dearing) to Millspaugh, March 13, 1922, RG 59, file: 891.6363 St. Oil/160. See also D. to Millspaugh, March 4 and March 7, 1922, RG 59, file: 891.6363 St. Oil/156, 158.

45 See R. Crandall to Hughes, September 6 and October 9, 1922, A. W. D. (Dulles) to Harrison, September 27, 1922, William B. Heroy to Hughes, March 12, 1923, and A. W. D. to Hughes, November 5, 1923, RG 59, file: 891.6363 St. Oil/247, 255, 254, 276, 304.

46 Harrison to Sinclair Company, October 6, 1922, Hughes to Harding, October 28, 1922, Harding to Hughes, October 30, 1922, and A. W. D. (Dulles) to Hughes, November 5, 1923, RG 59, file: 891.6363 St. Oil/247, 256a, 257, 304; and Hughes to Coolidge, November 8, 1923, in FR, 1923, 2 vols. (Washington, 1938), 11, 717–718.

47 On the Department's alleged neutrality, see Hughes to American Legation, Teheran, November 8, 1923, RG 59, file: 891.6363 St. Oil/304. See also A. C. M. (Millspaugh) to Phillips and Hughes, June 14, 1922, A. C M., Memorandum of a Conversation of the Secretary with Mr. Bedford and Mr. Wellman, June 12, 1922, Harrison to Sinclair Company, October 6, 1922, RG 59, file: 891.6363 St. Oil/219, 229, 247; and Memorandum of an Interview with Thomas Lamont by Telephone, March 24, 1923, in the Leland Harrison Papers (Library of Congress), box 6, General Correspondence.

48 For Millspaugh and Hughes on the Khostaria concession, see A. C. M. to Dearing and Fletcher, December 19, 1921, A. C. M. to Dearing, January 3, 1922, A. C. M. to Fletcher, January 9, 1922, A. C. M., Memorandum, March 1, 1922, Persian Minister to Hughes, March 6, 1922, and Hughes to Persian Minister, March 14, 1922, all in RG 59, file: 891.6363 St. Oil/ 145, 74, 88, 92, 149, 157.

49 A. W. D. (Dulles) to Phillips and Harrison, August 14, 1922, and W. P. (Phillips) to Hughes, August 18, 1922, RG 59, file: 891.6363 St. Oil/237, 238.

50 A copy of the Solicitor's report dated August 25, 1922 can be found in RG 59, file: 891.6363 St. Oil/2431/2.

51 The Department betrayed its failure to remain neutral in many other ways. As late as January 1924, for example, Dulles was suggesting to Jersey Standard officials that the Department had not yet investigated the Khostaria claim. Also in January 1924, Dulles authored a memorandum for Hughes specifying the several occasions on which the Department had assured Jersey officials and others of its warm support for the Jersey Standard-AP combine. Indeed, the American Minister at Teheran apparently advised Sinclair's representative there that he was wasting his time trying to get a concession over the northern provinces. See, A. W. D. (Dulles), Memorandum of Conversation with Mr. Wellman, January 24, 1924, A. W. D. to Hughes, January 29, 1924, and A. C. M. (Millspaugh), Memorandum of a Conversation with Chester Naramore of the Sinclair Company, May 25, 1922, RG 59, file: 891.6363 St. Oil/328, 331, 206.

52 A. C. M. (Millspaugh), Memorandum for Dearing and Hughes, October 20, 1921, and A. C. M., Memorandum of Conversations in New York on November 26, 1921,” November 26, 1921, RG 59, file: 890g.6363/49a, 76.

53 Hoover to Hughes, April 17, 1922, A. C. M. (Millspaugh), Memorandum on the Proposed Letter to the Secretary of Commerce, April 29, 1922, Hughes to Hoover, May 2, 1922, RG 59, file: 890g.6363/96, 181.

54 A. C. M. (Millspaugh), Memorandum on the Proposed Letter to the Secretary of Commerce, April 29, 1922, RG 59, file: 890g.6363/181; Gibb and Knowlton, The Resurgent Years, 294–295, 298–307.

55 A. C. M. (Millspaugh), Memorandum of a Conversation of the Secretary with Mr. Bedford and Mr. Wellman of the Standard Oil Company, June 22, 1922, RG 59, file: 890g.6363/147; A. W. D. (Dulles), Memorandum, December 20, 1922, RG 59, file: 890g.6363T84/83; and Hughes to Teagle, August 22, 1922, December 15, 1922, and December 30, 1922, in FR, 1922, 11, 342–344, 348–349, 351–352.

56 Hoover to Hughes, August 19, 1922, HHP, HHPL, Commerce, Personal File, box 47; Hughes to Hoover, March 31, 1923, and A. W. D. (Dulles), Memorandum, December 15, 1922, RG 59, file; 890g.6363T84/91a, 81.

57 A. W. D. (Dulles) to Hughes, October 26, 1923, RG 59, file: 890g.6363T84/117; and Dulles, Memorandum, January 22, 1924, in FR, 1924, 2 vols. (Washington, 1939), 11, 224–225. See also “Comments on the General Oil Controversy Between the United States and Great Britain,” an address by Van H. Manning, at the International Chamber of Commerce Conference, London, June 27-July 2, 1921, HHP, HHPL, Commerce, Official File, box 192.

58 See draft agreement of April 1923 and the proposed convention between the new consortium and the government of Mesopotamia (Iraq), in FR, 1923, II, 224–225.

59 See again the first two items cited in footnote 57.

60 A. W. D. (Dulles) to Hughes, October 26, 1923, RG 59, file: 890g.6363T84/117; and H. C. Morris to Christian Herter, November 23, 1923, HHP, HHPL, Commerce, Official File, box 219.

61 A. W. D. (Dulles) to Hughes, October 26, 1923, and S. K. H. (Hornbeck), Memorandum, April 26, 1923, and S. H. (Hornbeck) to Dulles, February 8, 1924, RG 59, file: 890g.6363T84/117, 142. The economic reasoning behind the American Group's argument had been expressed earlier by Foreign Trade Adviser Wesley Frost. “To my mind,” he wrote in late 1920, “the open door formula does not aid very materially because in most countries the supply of petroleum is so limited that the door cannot remain open except until two or three companies have actually taken control of the resources.” See Frost to Van Manning, November 27, 1920, RG 59, file: 800.6363/205a.

62 A. N. Y. (Young), Memorandum, May 10, 1923, RG 59, file: 890g.6363T84/92.

63 A. C. M. (Millspaugh), Memorandum of a Conversation of the Secretary with Mr. Bedford and Mr. Wellman, June 22, 1922 (first quote), RG 59, file: 890g.6363/47; Hughes to Coolidge, October 31, 1923 (second quote), RG 59, file: 890g.6363T84/117a.

64 Coolidge to Hughes, October 31, 1923, RG 59, file: 890g.6363T84/118; Hughes to Teagle, November 8, 1923, in FR, 1923, II, 257–259. The Department did not change its opinion when, in late 1927, the business aspects of the arrangement between the TPC and the American Group were finally completed and the agreement was presented for the approval of the Department. See Economic Adviser's Memorandum, April 13, 1928, and G. Holland Shaw to Guy Wellman, April 16, 1928, RG 59, file: 890g.6363T84/321, 320.