723.2515/3342 supp.: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Ambassador in Peru (Moore)
49. With further reference to my 48, April 26, 7 p.m., I desire to state that when I made the suggestion to the President that he might with propriety and with the approval of both Chile and Peru suggest the terms of final settlement between them, I had in mind only the terms in dispute when the matter was brought before me, namely, the location and conditions of the proposed port or facilities to be allowed in Peru in the settlement. It was not my intention that the President should recommend any provisions in a settlement which might affect adversely a third power, such as Bolivia. Bolivia has strongly contended that such would be the result of such an agreement [Page 781] not to concede any part of the territory or alter the actual system of international railways without previous agreement between both parties. You can readily understand how under such circumstances any suggestion which would cover this proposal might be deemed by Bolivia as a most unfriendly act on the part of the United States. If President Leguia or Señor Figueroa have any different intentions or views, I desire to be informed immediately, because I am certain that the President would be unwilling to recommend over Bolivia’s objection any agreement which that nation asserts will unfavorably affect her interests. You will recall that the President only agreed to make suggestions with the understanding that his so doing was agreeable to the parties involved. If the scope of the agreement is now to be extended so as to affect the interests claimed by a third power, such an agreement must, of course, be acceptable to such power if the President is to propose it.