With regard to the customs union, I can be precise. Most-favoured-nation treatment has not hitherto been extended to customs unions made between two countries, or even, in fact, to identical customs standards which are adopted as between contiguous countries. As a matter of fact, if this country likes to enter into the same relation with Austria as Germany is at present entering into, there is an offer at the moment that that should be done, and the country has only to accept that offer to get these terms. It is not, however, offered by reason of this Treaty.
With regard to the interpretation of the phrase "the most-favoured-nation treatment" there is some difficulty, but more in its application to new policies that are being discussed at the moment at Geneva than otherwise. It is quite clear that I cannot decide here a matter which the League of Nations has thought of such importance as to establish a Special Committee to deal with. As the term is understood at the moment, it has a pretty clear application, in a rough and ready way, that we favour no country more with regard to the specific matters mentioned, that is, that whatever is regarded by Germany as favoured treatment must also be given to them.
With regard to quotas, the view largely held is that they would be fraught with such difficulties in their determination that they would almost lead to the denunciation of the most-favoured-nation clause in treaties. That view, of course, is not completely held. I would not like to say it is held as the majority opinion of the nations whose commercial relations are based upon most-favoured-nation treatment. At any rate, that question can only be decided in the particular circumstances of a particular scheme with regard to quotas. The principle is fairly clear that a nation must get the treatment which is given to the nation that is most favoured in the commercial relations of this country in the specific cases that are mentioned.