838.105/377: Telegram

The Acting Secretary of State to the Minister in Haiti (Munro)

47. Legation’s urgent 69, June 25, 12 noon. The Department has carefully and sympathetically reconsidered the situation with respect to Aarons as it has been presented in your several telegrams. While recognizing the importance of the reasons you have advanced in support of your contention that Aarons’ promotion should be insisted upon by this Government, the Department has again reached the conclusion that the case is not of sufficient importance, either in itself or because of the principle it involves, to warrant a definite rupture of the negotiations with respect to the general plan of Haitianization.…

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

[Page 489]

You are authorized therefore to conclude with the Haitian Government a written agreement substantially along the following lines:

The Government of the United States acquiesces in the resignation of Mr. Colvin and the Government of Haiti will indemnify him in the manner already agreed upon;
The Government of the United States acquiesces in the views of the Haitian Government with respect to Lieutenant Aarons;
The Government of the United States acquiesces in the proposal of the Haitian Government that the American personnel be withdrawn on October 1 from the Public Works, Public Health, and Agricultural Services with the indemnification specified;
The Government of Haiti acquiesces in the program regarding the Public Health Service set forth in the Legation’s telegram No. 68, June 23, 11 p.m. (to which the Navy Department perceives no objection);
The Haitian Government formally and explicitly obligates itself to respect the treaty provisions governing the Garde, as well as the Garde Agreement.
The Government of the United States is prepared to effect with the Government of Haiti the further Haitianization of the Garde, within the scope of the Haitianization schedule prepared by the Commandant of the Garde and submitted by the Legation as transmitted with the Legation’s despatch No. 94 of April 4, 1931,
With respect to the Financial Service this Government is prepared to relinquish the administration of the land registration within the scope of the instructions issued to you at the time of your last visit to Washington, including of course the negotiation of a new financial convention.

The Department feels that you should change your tactics in the negotiation. As long as you are discussing piecemeal the Haitianization plan, individual cases such as the Colvin and Aarons cases arise and the Haitians focus full attention on these incidents and make their settlement a condition to further progress, and minor matters, such as the Aarons case, then grow into very much larger proportions. This is not a case, as already stated, on which this Government can make a fight. We absolutely can not get support in this country in this individual case. The Department feels therefore that you should at once draw up and submit in writing to the Haitian Government your whole program of Haitianization and discuss it as a whole. Of course this does not mean that minor changes of detail could not be made as desirable, but, by discussing the whole matter en bloc, you will get away from the position of having everything depend on one individual case. The Department feels that you should do this and push it to a decision as quickly as possible before other similar cases are brought up. If the Haitians refuse to discuss the matter, or break off the negotiations, then you have a reasonable plan that you have submitted which they have [Page 490] rejected or have blocked and this Government is in a position in which it can get public support. Then you can go ahead and make a public statement of the facts and put into effect unilaterally our own plan of Haitianization as suggested in your cable No. 69 of June 25, noon.

Under the present method of negotiation you are fighting a trench battle, falling back from individual trench to individual trench, whereas under the plan outlined above you would be carrying on a fight along the whole front and should be able to advance and make progress.

The Department is not unmindful of the fact that acquiescence in the views of the Haitian Government in respect of the Colvin and Aarons cases may encourage that Government to advance new demands before it fulfills the commitments it has tacitly made on the basis of such acquiescence. You may, should you deem it advisable, inform the Haitian authorities that this Government’s attitude, as has been frequently stated, is governed by its sincere desire to meet the wishes of the Haitian Government and to facilitate the Haitianization program and that these concessions will be immediately withdrawn should there be any endeavor on the part of the Haitian Government to evade wholehearted compliance with its commitments.