702.1211 Laredo/32: Telegram

The Governor of Texas ( Moody ) to the Secretary of State

Understand from your wire December 18th37 that Mexico contends reason for closing port at Laredo is because from several incidents lasting over considerable period of time it is felt that Laredo isn’t a safe point for their public citizens to pass in traveling. Have telegram from John A. Valls, District Attorney, from which the following is taken:

“I assure you that I will recognize with pleasure and as a faithful officer, anywhere in my district, any legal immunity from arrest granted by my Government legally to any diplomatic representative of a foreign country traveling under diplomatic visa and I will transact in my office with courtesy any official business which any legal representative of any foreign country may have with me as District Attorney.”

Have received letter from said Valls from which following is taken:

“Mexican citizens do receive and will receive the full protection of our laws and the courtesy that the Mexican Consul demands will be given not only to Mexican citizens but to all others.”

It does not seem to me that Mexico has any right to contend for or ask for more. Some representative of the Mexican Government made the statement that Valls’ resignation should be demanded or that he should be removed. Such a statement on the part of an accredited representative of Mexico, is, to say the least, unusual and in view of an attitude expressed in Valls’ telegram and letter, the suggestion of the Mexican authorities that I ask his resignation or remove him is an unreasonable one. Let me assure you that the situation brought about by the closing of the port is a serious one. Approximately three-fourths of the commerce crossing the Rio Grande passes through Laredo. Am advised by reputable businessmen of that city that there are more than [a?] hundred carloads of freight now waiting to go through the port. In your telegram of December 18th you state that question involved is one of Mexican administrative concern. If my understanding of Mexican tariff law is correct the embargo levied at this place and the closing of consulate injuriously affects citizens of this country and investments made in this country and is broader than one of Mexican administrative concern. The State of Texas and the territory surrounding Corpus Christi in conjunction with United States Government have built a port on the gulf coast at Corpus [Page 526] Christi. A through line of railroad, The Texas-Mexican Railroad, runs from Corpus Christi to Laredo, the Missouri-Pacific System extends from San Antonio to Laredo. The closing of this port seriously reduces the commerce passing over these lines of railroads and in my judgment will have a serious effect upon the port recently constructed and developed at Corpus Christi. It is my understanding of the new Mexican tariff act which went into effect within the week that unless the manifest is signed by a consular officer in the city at which the port is located that the articles of commerce must pay double duty; therefore the closing of the Consulate at Laredo imposes an added burden upon commerce of the United States passing through that port. The impression is gathered from your wires that you regard this as a state problem. If it were only a state problem I would have long since opened this port with the Texas National Guard but you realize that I could not do this without infringing upon Federal laws which demonstrates that it is not a state problem. It is an international problem involving comity between nations and is exclusively for the State Department. I hope that your Department can, through diplomatic negotiations, succeed in opening the port and bringing about the reestablishment of the consulate but if this will not avail the port should be opened.

Dan Moody
  1. See telegram No. 545, December 18, 1929, 7 p.m., to the Chargé in Mexico, p. 520.