711.38/138
The Minister in Haiti (Bailly-Blanchard) to the Secretary of State
[Received January 2, 1920.]
Sir: Referring to this Legation’s cable of August 21—4 p.m.,2 and in compliance with the Department’s cable instruction of August 30—2 p.m.,3 I have the honor to forward herewith copy and translation of the agreement of August 24, 1918,4 between the Government of the United States and the Government of Haiti regarding the submission by the Haitian Government to the Representative of the United States to Haiti of all proposed legislation bearing upon any of the objects of the Treaty for the information of the Government of the United States and if necessary for discussion between the two Governments prior to the enactment thereof, and to report that having seen the promulgation in the official Gazette Le Moniteur of certain laws which had been passed without their having been previously communicated to this Legation, contrary to the above mentioned agreement, I at once notified the Minister of Foreign Affairs in each case that under the circumstances these laws would not be recognized as law by my Government. I also advised the Treaty officials concerned in order that they might act accordingly.
These Laws are:
| Law | on | Pensions |
| “ | “ | Trade Marks |
| “ | “ | Mines, Mining Concessions |
| “ | “ | Preparation of Primary School Teachers |
| “ | “ | Preparatory Manual Training |
| “ | “ | Duty on Automobiles, Trucks, etc. |
| “ | “ | Railroads and Tramways. |
This last was communicated to the Legation, discussed at a meeting of the Treaty Officials and referred to the Government Engineer under the Treaty for his consideration and report; but the Law was passed and promulgated before the Legation could receive the Engineer’s report, and advise the Foreign Office as to its attitude.
I enclose herewith copies of the correspondence on the subject with the Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Treaty Officials concerned.5
My contention has always been that the agreement above mentioned covers all proposed Legislation, and having had considerable difficulty with Mr. Borno, regarding its interpretation, I took advantage of the first visit of Mr. Benoit, Mr. Borno’s successor as Minister of Foreign Affairs, to impress upon him the necessity in order to attain the aims of the Treaty of a close cooperation between us, and to that end it was paramount that he see that all proposed legislation be communicated to the Legation before its being submitted to the Legislative Body; that if any project of law so communicated did not bear upon any of the objects of the Treaty it would immediately be returned to him with a statement that the Legation saw no objection to it. If the project was not contrary to the terms of the Treaty but had some objectionable features we would endeavor to come to an understanding for their removal.
Mr. Benoit assured me of his readiness to cooperate in this manner, but his subsequent acts in this and other matters were so contrary to this understanding that I was compelled on several occasions to call upon the President and bring to his attention the obstructive methods of Mr. Benoit which finally resulted in his removal on October 17, 1919. I am happy to state that the present Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr. Barau, has shown every disposition to fully cooperate with the Legation.
Until their publication in Le Moniteur I had no prior knowledge of the proposed passage and promulgation of these laws for the reason that the proceedings of the Legislative Body (Conseil d’Éitat) are published months subsequent to the sittings of that body.
It is understood with the Haitian Government that the above mentioned laws will be taken up at the next session of the Council of State together with two other laws on Public Works and Carrying of Fire Arms and Traffic in Arms and Ammunition, concerning which the Foreign Office and this Legation were in accord, but which were modified by the Council of State and so passed, with the assent of the interested Minister. On my learning of this by chance, I at once called upon the President and after relating the facts demanded that these laws be not promulgated but be returned to the Conseil d’État to be passed as originally agreed upon. The President after a conference [Page 762] in which the interested Ministers of Public Works and Interior participated, decided that these two laws would not be promulgated, which would render them ineffective, and as stated above that they would be taken up at the next session of the Legislative Body.
In order to avoid future difficulties regarding laws which had been passed without being communicated to this Legation the President agreed with me that on the receipt of any law passed by the Legislative Body and submitted to him for his action, he would communicate it to the Legation before promulgation, and he has acted accordingly.
The President has given me the most formal assurances that next year there would be no recurrence of these difficulties regarding the passage of laws and that he himself would take charge of them. To this end the President after conference with his Cabinet and the Members of the Council of State announced to me that the following modus operandi would be followed:
1. The Government to be in accord with the Conseil d’État in its advisory capacity upon any project of law before its submission to the Legation.
2. If the Legation has no objection to the proposed law it will be sent to the Conseil d’État to be passed as agreed.
3. Should the Legation find objections, negotiations towards an understanding will be entered into with the Government, and the agreement reached communicated to the Conseil d’État in its advisory capacity, for their accord.
The Government, the Conseil d’État and the Legation, being in accord, the project of law will then be sent to the Conseil d’État in its legislative capacity to be passed as agreed.
4. To guard against any possible errors, the law after its passage by the Legislative Body and its submission to the President for his action, will be sent by him in communication to the Representative of the United States, before promulgation.
I believe that the above procedure is of a nature to avoid a recurrence of any of the difficulties with which we have had to contend in the past, in these matters.
I have [etc.]
- ibid., p. 336.↩
- See ibid., p. 309, footnote 6.↩
- ibid., p. 309; also quoted in full, post, pp. 778 and 784.↩
- Not printed.↩