723.2515/2240½
Memorandum by the Chief of the Division of Latin American Affairs (White)
The Chilean Ambassador called on the Secretary on Saturday, May 1, at his request. The Secretary told him that he wished to speak with him very frankly in view of messages received from Ambassador Collier. The Ambassador stated that he had had no news whatsoever from Santiago. The Secretary then read to the [Page 413] Ambassador a portion of the resolution proposed in the Chilean Senate by Senator Cariola as follows:
“Although the representative of the United States of America on the Commission at one time said that in his opinion conditions did not permit holding an honest and correct plebiscite this opinion must be considered as having disappeared because he has since intervened in voting the election law to regulate the plebiscite and afterwards in fixing the dates for registration and voting and finally because on March 25, he declared his willingness to go on with the plebiscite and saw no use in delay.”
The Secretary stated that if this was the feeling in Chile he might as well call their attention at once to the statements made by General Lassiter in voting for the various resolutions. The Secretary then read to the Ambassador the statement made by General Lassiter in the meeting of the Plebiscitary Commission on March 1, when voting affirmatively upon the resolution approving the notices that registration would start March 15, as follows:
“The preliminary work of the Commission is now approaching its close and we are about to begin the actual registration of prospective voters. In my view this passage from the previous phase of preparation for the plebiscite to that of actual execution involves no commitment as to the conditions which now affect or which in the past have affected the carrying on of a plebiscite. These conditions must in the future as in the past be under constant scrutiny and the whole body of information thus gained must be used in arriving at a judgment of the acceptability of the result or of the action to be taken.”
The Secretary then read to him General Lassiter’s statement, made in the meeting of the Commission on March 25, in voting in the negative upon the Chilean member’s motion asserting that all the requisites prescribed by the Commission for a free plebiscite had been complied with by the Chilean Government, as follows:
“In my judgment by no means all of the prerequisites to a fair plebiscite stated by the Commission have been complied with in substance, furthermore, the Commission has not sought formally to restate in its resolutions all the requirements affirmative and negative laid upon the Chilean authorities by the Opinion and Award of the Arbitrator moreover, under the Award the Commission cannot bind itself irrevocably to proceed with registration and voting according to any particular time schedule. I am, therefore, constrained to vote and do vote no upon the Chilean member’s substitute resolution.”
The Secretary finally read to the Ambassador General Lassiter’s statement in the meeting of March 25, when abstaining from voting on [Page 414] the motion of the Peruvian member declaring the impracticability of the plebiscite. This statement was as follows:
“As stated before when voting on the resolution introduced by the Peruvian member for indefinite postponement, I am prepared to continue plebiscitary proceedings with a hope that appropriate safeguards for the plebiscite will be provided and with the intention of observing conditions and utilizing all information gathered throughout the plebiscite to formulate a judgment as to further decisions to be taken. An expression of the conclusions of the Commission upon plebiscitary conditions is at this moment not essential or advantageous. I therefore abstain from voting on the resolution.”
The Secretary stated that it was clear from this that General Lassiter has reserved his position all the way through and has kept a perfectly free hand in the matter. The Secretary then read from a telegram from Ambassador Collier70 in which General Lassiter was reported to have said in the meeting of April 26, in voting for a prolongation of the registration period that “this motion has been presented for the purpose of maintaining the status quo. In adopting it the Commission is not exhausting all its facilities [powers?]. Certain observations made by me in the sessions of March 1, 14, and 25, relate to this matter.” The Secretary said that right up to the very last General Lassiter has maintained his position without changing it and it was entirely wrong for the Chileans to go on any other assumption. The Secretary of course was not stating what the President as Arbitrator or even the Commission will do but he was merely pointing out these statements which apparently had not been taken into consideration in the Chilean Senate, certainly not by Senator Cariola.
The Secretary then stated that he had received a telegram from Ambassador Collier70 stating that in a talk which he had had with the President of Chile on April 28, the President had shown very great irritation because of General Lassiter’s declaration last above quoted. Ambassador Collier had reported that the President had said that this was a clear and express declaration by the representative of the Arbitrator to hold up the juridical proceedings and in order to force Chile to accept good offices. …
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The Secretary then read the Ambassador a statement in yesterday’s Evening Star to the effect that Chile considered that the Department of State had not had the courage to prevent the commencement of registration and would not now have the courage to call the election off. The Secretary stated that we had not yet arrived [Page 415] at the moment to make any declaration but when the moment has arrived the proper decision will be taken but he did not want Chile to misunderstand his attitude at all, it was necessary that this should be made absolutely clear. The Secretary had not attempted to coerce Chile in any way whatsoever to make an outside settlement through good offices. The Secretary had been urged to do so by Chile and the Secretary was glad to do what he could to try to make a settlement that would be equitable to both parties. The Secretary naturally could not say what the decision of the Commission would be nor could he tell what attitude the Arbitrator would take but he must point out to Chile that as far as he personally was concerned he could not ignore the vast amount of cumulative evidence that he is receiving which would make it very difficult to consider as valid any election that might take place now in Arica.
The Secretary stated that as a matter of fact he had brought more pressure to bear on Peru than he had on Chile in order to bring about a settlement especially a settlement on the basis of the division of territory. The Secretary thought that it was legitimate to do this and he had consequently advised Peru that it was to the interest of all that a proper settlement be made. The Secretary said that he thought he had only done what was right in making this statement. He certainly could not be charged with bringing pressure to bear on Chile to coerce her into an outside settlement that she did not want. This matter would have to be decided by Chile. If they did not want an outside settlement well and good. He would be very glad to have them say so and we will then proceed with the question of whether an election can be held or not. The Secretary did not desire to pass on this now, he could not say what the Arbitrator would eventually decide but as he had said before he must frankly say to the Ambassador that the accumulation of evidence that is being sent to him from Arica is very strong that Chile has not acted properly in this matter.
The Ambassador stated that the Secretary was quite right, that the Secretary had certainly never threatened or brought pressure to bear on him. If he might venture to say so his feeling had been that if prejudiced at all the Secretary was prejudiced in favor of Chile. … One thought occurred to him, namely, that it might be possible for the Secretary to declare in favor of holding the plebiscite, as that seemed to be their fixed idea in Santiago, and then have Chile at the same time say that as soon as the plebiscite was over it would turn the provinces into the Secretary’s hands to be disposed of as he should think proper. The Secretary stated very definitely that he could not commit himself in any way to the carrying on of the plebiscite, could not make any statement at this time which would indicate that he thought that a plebiscite could and should be held. When the [Page 416] time comes the matter will be considered on the basis of the evidence submitted and the Secretary cannot now commit himself to the carrying out of the plebiscite. He stated that he must again say that the evidence coming to him of conditions in the provinces were such that he could not ignore it nor in any manner commit himself with regard to the holding of a plebiscite.