723.2515/2263: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Consul at Arica (Von Tresckow)
For Lassiter. Your telegram May 7, 6 p.m. … Peru has not abstained from the registration in compliance with any suggestion from the Government of the United States; instead, she has abstained in face of most emphatic statements that plebiscitary process, even after acceptance of good offices, could not be suspended save by agreement of both the parties. There is no room left for misunderstanding on that subject. Record is clear and I am anxious that you yourself should not remain under any misapprehension. Offer of good offices was made in identical terms to both Chile and Peru; nothing was said about suspension and, therefore, acceptance could not operate as a suspension. On March 25, after Peru’s acceptance and two days before registration had begun, I suggested to Governments of both Chile and Peru that in view of acceptance of good offices they take appropriate steps to bring about a suspension; obviously no useful purpose would have been served in asking Chile and Peru to cooperate in this matter if suspension had already been arranged. On March 261 advised you that it was impossible to get word from Governments of Chile and Peru in time to advise you finally about suspension on that day, and suggested that you arrange for adjournments from day to day.86 In reply to your telegrams insisting upon termination of the plebiscite I cabled you on March 27, 4 p.m., that only question open for determination was over suspension of plebiscitary proceedings while the negotiations were going on. I stated that there was no choice but to continue with the registration, even though, for the time being, Peru declined to participate. On March 29 I again explained the situation to both parties and quoted my telegram to Ambassador Collier to you in my telegram of that date, 7 p.m., and stated that similar analysis had been sent to Peru. On April 1 (see my telegram that date, 10 a.m.) I called attention to press reports that Peruvian voters were being removed from the territory without registering them, and I asked for full report on the matter. In same telegram I said I had asked Ambassador Velarde and his counsel why the Peruvian voters were not registered and had received no reply. In my telegram April 1, 7 p.m., I quoted in full an identic communication to Chile and Peru in which I submitted a concrete program for their approval. This program made suspension to depend upon their accepting in principle a basis of adjustment in the negotiations. I indicated the acceptance of this program by both [Page 427] Chile and Peru in my telegram April 5, 11 a.m.,87 and stated that as soon as agreement for suspension was reached, I would advise you. It is quite incomprehensible, on this record, that Peru should contend that either I or this Government had countenanced, or advised, or suggested her abstention from registration. It is precisely the contrary that is true. I do not see how I could possibly have made matter clearer.