500.A15a3/731b: Telegram
The Acting Secretary of State to the Chairman of the American Delegation (Stimson)
168. [From the President.] Referring to the Department’s telegram No. 154, February 28, 5 p.m., it is asserted here repeatedly and with assurance that you are personally in favor of expanding the Kellogg Pact by a Presidential declaration.
With regard to this question it is also asserted that the delegation is divided, and that Senator Robinson disapproves.
We do not believe either of these reports, but the agitation is assuming dangerous proportions, as witness the petition sent you this morning by the Foreign Policy Association. Such agitation will undoubtedly result in placing upon our shoulders the blame for the failure in relation to France.
From the beginning our assumption was that the Kellogg Peace Treaty marked a new era in international relations and that the provisions of this treaty warranted a reduction in strength by the naval powers of the world. Upon this thesis the whole Conference was launched and not upon the theory that before such a reduction could take place it would be necessary to have further political agreements. The Kellogg Pact would be repudiated if the Conference were launched on any other basis.
[Page 41]We are of the opinion that the American public in the end will resent French cooperation at the expense of expanding the Kellogg Pact and we are not disposed to expand it as the price of French cooperation. The objectives of such extension will be interpreted by our public as involving us directly in the politics of France for the purpose of giving them guarantees. The entanglement of political guarantees in these negotiations, though they may be indirect, is more dangerous than anything else to the whole American acceptance of results. We could expect only the most embarrassing and dangerous consequences if we were to make a declaration of what we believe to be the logical procedure under the Kellogg Pact in case of international controversy, under the present situation. If it were made at any other time than in connection with this Conference it might have no dangerous results.
The French, for instance, are bound to use it as a tangible justification for some action and this would in turn be proof to the people of this country of a dangerous involvement on our part with the Republic of France.
If any such political appendix is entered into by the Conference, Senator Robinson is being accepted by the Democratic Party to lead the opposition. Such a point of opposition would also be welcome to certain independent Republicans. I am of the opinion that even if the President were to make any coincidental declaration that could be interpreted as such a policy there would not be the remotest possibility of ratifying a naval agreement. Such a declaration independent of any naval agreement which might be entered into might have the effect of an acceptance of the naval agreement by the Senate, but it would certainly result in a reservation or a resolution denying the authority or binding character of any such declaration in order to humiliate the President or to serve political purposes. In order that you might fully understand our next telegram, the President has sent you the foregoing.