723.2515/1660: Telegram
The Consul at Arica (Von Tresckow) to the Secretary of State
[Received October 28—12:48 p.m.]
From Pershing: Referring to diplomatic settlement of Tacna-Arica question, when Chilean Commissioner returned from Santiago he was very positive that his Government would not consider division of the territory; Peruvian Commissioner was very doubtful whether Government of Peru would ever consider division; and so discussion was dropped. During course of conversation with Freyre in August he expressed opinion that situation might arise when Arbitrator could say that plebiscite was impossible and could then suggest diplomatic settlement. Between that time and present, change in plebiscitary situation has no doubt raised Peruvian spirits. Situation and probable outcome as I have reported them and as Edwards has frankly stated in conversation, seem fully appreciated by Government of Chile, as proposition to compromise indicates. Chilean attitude toward plebiscite no doubt partially due to serious difficulty Chile would find in yielding to our construction of award, and she does not care to face consequences of refusal to accept that construction. It is unlikely, however, that Chile will go much further in plebiscite, and certainly she will not unless she can retain sufficient control to assure her of victory.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
After careful study and consideration of situation confronting us here, I am forced to conclusion that, with Chile in control of local government, establishment of conditions favorable to holding of plebiscite having even semblance of fairness is impossible. If any reasonable basis can be found by Arbitrator upon which to abandon plebiscite and initiate diplomatic negotiations, it would be wise to adopt it as best way out of dilemma. Regardless of my own convictions on situation, Arbitrator may rest assured that I and my advisers will continue most earnest efforts to complete task assigned us.
- Pershing
- Von Tresckow