Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, 1925, Volume I

723.2515/1711: Telegram

The Secretary of State to the Ambassador in Chile (Collier)

[Paraphrase]

Washington, December 3, 1925—11 p.m.

78. Embassy’s No. 126, December 2, 11 p.m. I greatly regret that the Chilean press is continuing to abuse General Pershing and to impugn motives of the United States touching its Latin-American policy. I am glad to learn that Minister for Foreign Affairs had not authorized publication of Edwards’ letter; but Edwards stated to Commission that he was directed by his Government to publish it, and I do not understand how it happened to be telegraphed to all chancelleries of the world.⁷⁹

I have not been informed what General Pershing said in his speech to Commission on November 21. It is true that Pershing, replying to Edwards’ letter of November 21, wrote him long communication stating reasons for delay and setting forth in detail acts of violence, intimidation, and deportation of Chilean authorities in Tacna and Arica. General Pershing did not publish this answer, although Edwards published his of the 21st. I have given no statements to press as I was desirous of not adding anything to bitterness which now exists and which Edwards seems bound to foment.

You are entirely justified in your statements to Minister for Foreign Affairs in way I feel about these publications. Do not, however, make any further suggestion about removal of Edwards as that is matter for Chilean Government to decide. Likewise it would be better not to make further reference to presumption that Pershing had taken no important steps without being convinced that he represented ideas of Arbitrator. I would not again open subject; and I have kept the President out of it entirely, because, while he has greatest confidence in Pershing, he must maintain detached position, and will, of course, pass on any question brought before him on its merits, I desire to thank you for all that you have done in this matter. I do not know where it is going to end. Should be glad to receive any suggestions you care to make.

Kellogg

79. On Dec. 7, 4 p.m., the Ambassador telegraphed the Secretary that the report that the letter had been sent to the chancelleries was now stated to be erroneous and was probably caused by confusing the speech with the informative material given out in Washington and other capitals (file No. 723.2515/1731).