838.51/995
The Secretary of State to the Minister in Haiti (Bailly-Blanchard)
Sir: Reference is made to your telegram Number 75 of October 13, 2 p.m., 1920,45 in which you refer to that sentence in the Department’s telegram Number 88 of October 8, 12 noon, 1920, which reads as follows:
“The Department does not consider that Article V of the Treaty, in view of the fact that the revenues collected by the General [Page 812] Receiver are now sufficient to meet all expenses, can be construed as implying that this Government has the right to withhold the current expenses of the Haitian Government.”
In your telegram you report that if the customs revenues collected by the Receiver General and affected by the laws granting pledges to guarantee the payment of the public debt, are allocated in compliance with Article V there would be available for July, August and September, 1920, the respective amounts of $6,125.39, $5,277.28 and $796.22 to be applied to the current expenses of the Government, which average $200,000 per month.
The Department desires to call your attention to the fact that Article V of the Treaty merely requires the General Receiver to pay the interest and sinking fund of the public debt of the Republic of Haiti, after the salaries and allowances of the General Receiver and Financial Advisor and of their assistants are paid. There is nothing in the Treaty which expressly requires the General Receiver to segregate the entire pledged portion of the revenues, provided the interest and amortization of the public debt is paid. According to the figures contained in the monthly reports of the General Receiver for the months of March and April, 1920, the excess of revenues collected over expenditures made under the Treaty was $272,310.04 and $239,211.24, respectively. The sum of $200,000 a month segregated from the customs revenues is, apparently, judging from your telegram dated [October 13, 1920, 2 p.m.] considered sufficient by the Financial Advisor to pay the interest and sinking fund of the public debt of the Republic of Haiti, as required by Article V. If the debt service is, therefore, faithfully performed the Treaty would not seem to require the Receiver General to segregate from the revenues pledged or “affected” a larger amount than is necessary to pay the interest and amortization.
Assuming, however, that the General Receiver should segregate all that part of the revenues that is pledged to the payment of the debt service, this would not authorize him or the Financial Advisor to select the salaries of the President and Members of the Council of State as the ones which should not be paid from the small remaining part of the revenues. At the most, it would authorize a proportional reduction in the salaries of those officials.
I am [etc.]
- Not printed.↩