763.72119/4815: Telegram
The Commission to Negotiate Peace to the Acting Secretary of State
[Received May 1, 3.33 a.m.]
1873. Your 1722, April 23 [24], 4 p.m. From recent conversations with French and British Colonial and Foreign Office officials it is clearly apparent that the chief interest of England and France in Liberia is the maintenance of order on their borders. The anarchical conditions in the hinterland are a source of constant expense and annoyance to them. The existing Government of Liberia is unable to cope with this situation. Hence before withdrawing from the international receivership and disinteresting themselves in the future of Liberia England and France desire the United States to assume in some form or other responsibility for effective administration.
In our opinion this is the fundamental question involved in the Liberian negotiations. France, while not welcoming American intervention in West Africa, is apparently reconciled to it and will probably withdraw from Liberia if the United States agrees to assume such responsibility. England has informally and also semiofficially proposed that the United States accept a mandate for Liberia from the League of Nations. The agreement [argument] advanced in favor of this proposal is that the functions of the United States under the reform program outlined in the memorandum of November 19, 1918 are essentially the same in character as those of the proposed mandatories for other backward peoples and that it would be inconsistent on the part of the United States to stand sponsor for the mandatory system when others are concerned and to ignore it in the work she proposes to do in Liberia. This was and probably still is the position of the British Government, but it was our opinion three weeks ago that this view might not be pressed if some other means were found for giving England and France the desired assurances.
Hence it was proposed to negotiate the treaty whose draft was [submitted to you]. Were the United States and Liberia the only parties concerned the situation would be comparatively simple and the arrangements outlined by you in your 1722, April 23rd [24th] would not encounter the difficulties that confront us. We note your opinion as to the probable attitude of the Senate toward the proposed treaty. On the other hand if we attempt again to secure British and France [French] withdrawal on the basis of the memorandum of November 19, 1918 they will probably again ask engagements on the part of the United States with them that will also [Page 477] require the consent of the Senate. It was to obviate this latter difficulty that the proposed treaty with Liberia was drafted.
In the meanwhile the League of Nations Covenant has been adopted by the Peace Conference. It is quite probable that the plan proposed by us is no longer feasible here and that Mr. Balfour21 will now advocate more strongly than before his proposal for a Liberian mandate.
If in the light of the foregoing you consider your proposed procedure practicable, kindly cable to us text of documents by which England and France are to agree to withdraw and we shall endeavor to secure their assent. Lansing.
- Arthur James Balfour, British Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, attached to the British delegation to the Peace Conference.↩