No. 41.
Mr. Trescot
to Mr. Frelinghuysen.
Viña del Mar, Chili, January 27, 1882. (Received March 7.)
Sir: On Thursday, January 26, 1882, I sent you a telegram requesting that neither any of General Kilpatrick’s dispatches nor my instructions be published.
The reasons for the telegram are these:
In the first interview with Mr. Balmaceda, I called his attention to certain dispatches from Mr. Christiancy, Mr. Osborn, and General Kilpatrick, informing their government of the wish and purpose of the Chilian Government to establish and strengthen the Calderon government in Peru.
General Kilpatrick’s dispatches went further, and assured the Department that both the late and present Chilian Government were prepared to conform to the wishes of the United States, give the Calderon government a cordial support, and make no demand for cession of territory until full opportunity had been given to Peru to pay an adequate indemnity.
The secretary appeared a good deal surprised when these dispatches were read, and said that while he was unauthorized to say what had passed between General Kilpatrick and the late government, he could certainly say that no communication on the subject had ever taken place between himself and General Kilpatrick.
Some days after he called on me, and said that he would like to address me a confidential note in reference to Kilpatrick’s dispatches, but as the General had detailed private conversations with very prominent and distinguished officials, which they wished to contradict, he did not desire that his letter should be published, and this would be obligatory upon him if these dispatches of General Kilpatrick were published in the United States. I thought his suggestion judicious, for the reason that I had had the opportunity of learning somewhat of the conference to which General Kilpatrick refers. In his dispatch he alluded to a gentleman of great consideration, a member of the Chilian Congress, a very distinguished lawyer, who had held cabinet position, and who has been remarkable for the moderation of his views in regard to the settlement of the terms of peace. He attributes to this gentleman a large [Page 64] part in the conference and its results. The gentleman to whom I refer assured me that so far as he was present or informed, General Kilpatrick’s statements were calculated to give an entirely erroneous impression of what had occurred, and the detail which he gave me satisfied me that the officials to whom General Kilpatrick referred would contradict his most positive assertions.
Mr. Balmaceda admitted that the dispatch was sufficient to justify the action of the United States, and in correcting it he was anxious to avoid an unpleasant issue as to the correctness of the statements of one who was now dead, and whose long and painful illness was a sufficient explanation of any misconception of facts into which he may have been led.
As the papers just received contained the publication of a large portion of the correspondence with our ministers at Lima and Santiago, and as further publication seemed to be expected, he expressed a wish that I would telegraph. I included my instruction in the request, as a large portion of General Kilpatrick’s dispatch is incorporated in it. Of course the secretary did not ask that my instructions should not be published, as he has not seen them, and did not know what they contained. But to make the two requests separately would have increased considerably and unnecessarily the cost of the telegram.
In this connection, while I do not doubt that a controlling necessity of which I am not informed, required in the discretion of the Department the recent publication of much of its correspondence with the United States ministers at Lima and Santiago, I ought to say that the publication has not helped me.
The dispatches have all been republished here, with the editorial comments of the home papers, and the impression has been unfortunately made that the administration had some policy which had excited strong popular opposition, and that the government found itself compelled to explain away what was deemed objectionable. The inference drawn from this is that I am not empowered to take anything like strong or positive action in reference to the settlement of the terms of peace. I need not add that some uncertainty on the part of the Chilian Government, as to the extent to which the United States were prepared to go, until in the natural development of the negotiation it was officially informed, would not have been without its influence in recommending a reasonable modification of the terms.
I have, &c.,