882.01 Foreign Control/9
Memorandum by Mr. Ellis O. Briggs, of the Division of Western European Affairs56
As a result of the corruption and ineptitude of the Americo-Liberian governing minority, conditions in Liberia have now grown so serious,— and will shortly become so public,— that the American Government may be faced with a strong demand on the part of certain racial groups, philanthropic and religious organizations and others, in favor of positive action. It is the purpose of this memorandum to outline the principal elements in the present situation and to indicate briefly the course which the Department of State proposes to follow.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
[Page 392]4. Conclusion; Proposed Course of Action.
To bring about the reforms demanded at present, or any substantial part of them, is beyond the capacity or manifested desire of Liberian officials, but in the present temper of the world regarding slavery, forced labor and elementary measures of public health, it is doubtful whether the United States and other nations associated therewith in binding engagements in support of international social betterment, can longer remain indifferent to the corruption generated by the Liberian governing class and now about to be made public for the first time.
It follows that the achievement of Liberian reforms must depend upon the substitution of external for Liberian control.
Should the United States assume this responsibility alone, it would inevitably lead to active and long-continued participation in Africa which, while doubtless justified by many on philanthropic or racial grounds, could not fail to arouse the hostility of others as imperialism. The establishment of a virtual American colony in Africa might render the continued espousal of the Monroe Doctrine difficult to justify, and it would unquestionably arouse the suspicion of Europe and South America. Such a course would be contrary to American traditions and contrary to the real,—as contrasted with the sentimental or emotional,—best interests of the United States. No compensating gain, in profit or in prestige, would accrue to the United States if it took over Liberia.
It is proposed, therefore, to consider the present Liberian situation as an international question, and if necessary to cooperate, but not to accept exclusive responsibility, in its solution. The United States is a party to the International Slavery Convention of 1926 and it was partly in this connection that the recent inquiry by the International Commission was initiated. The United States has frequently communicated with the League of Nations on humanitarian and social subjects, and copies of its note and memorandum to Liberia of November, 1930, have already been made available to the other governments parties to the Slavery Convention, through the League of Nations.
Some form of international control for Liberia during the immediate future will probably be found necessary, and in this event, it is believed that the American Government should participate to the extent of representation upon such an international body. Since the United States would not desire to accept this responsibility itself, nor would American public opinion readily consent to seeing Liberia pass under the exclusive control of some foreign country or countries, the only [Page 393] alternative appears to be joint international action. The United States can participate therein as a party to, and in accordance with, the International Slavery Convention of 1926.
Summary. The following alternatives therefore confront the United States:
- (1)
- The United States itself to take over Liberia, assuming full responsibility therefor;
- (2)
- Some other nation to take over Liberia on the above basis;
- (3)
- The United States to cooperate with other nations in some form of joint international control for Liberia; American participation to be on the basis of membership in the International Slavery Convention of 1926.
This memorandum is initialed by Ellis O. Briggs, J. Theodore Marriner, Chief of the Division, and William R. Castle, Jr., Assistant Secretary of State.
An attached memorandum by the Secretary of State, dated January 3, 1931, reads: “I discussed this question with the President, who favors the third alternative outlined on page twelve: American participation in cooperation with other countries, on the basis of the precedent that there is American membership in the International Slavery Convention of 1926. H[enry] L. S[timson].”
↩