Please advise by telegraph in advance of the date when the notes will be
made public in Haiti so that arrangements for simultaneous release may
be made here.
[Enclosure]
Text of Note to the Haitian Government34
With reference to Your Excellency’s note of September 26, 1932, I am
instructed by my Government to reply as follows:
Your Excellency appears to have interpreted my note dated September
23, 1932, as implying that the Government of the United States, in
view of the action of the Haitian Legislature in declining
ratification of the treaty signed at Port au Prince on September 3,
1932, intends to stop any further Haitianization of the Garde. I can
assure Your Excellency that any such interpretation is entirely
unwarranted. Arrangements are now being carried forward for the
Haitianization of the Department of the South by December 31, 1932,
in accordance with plans formulated early this year by the Commander
of the Garde. The process of Haitianization of the Garde, in
accordance with the treaty of 1915 and following out the
recommendations of the President’s Commission for the Study and
Review of Conditions in the Republic of Haiti, will in any case be
carried forward. The accelerated rate of Haitianization of the Garde
provided in Protocol A of the new treaty, however, being a part of
the whole program of that treaty which hangs together and must be
carried out as a whole, would of course depend for its execution
upon the placing in effect of the treaty.
It appears to my Government that it would be helpful to review at
this time certain points in connection with the treaty of September
3, 1932, and in that connection to expand somewhat the views
expressed in my note of September 23. As stated in that note, my
Government views this treaty as the logical culmination of the
recommendations of the President’s Commission. The United States has
agreed, upon the ratification of this treaty, to turn over the
complete command of the Haitian Constabulary to Haitian officers by
December 31, 1934, instead of in May, 1936, as would be the case
under the treaty of 1915 now in force; to withdraw the Marine
Brigade, beginning such withdrawal not later than December 31, 1934;
and to turn over the internal revenue service to Haitian control on
December 31, 1934. The new agreement furthermore specifically limits
and defines the powers of financial administration arising out of
existing agreements which obligate both Governments, as will be
pointed out in detail hereinafter.
My Government has noted with interest the report of the special
committee appointed by the Haitian Legislature to examine the treaty
of September 3, 1932. It feels that there has apparently been a
failure
[Page 690]
to understand the
real nature of the treaty. The special committee’s report
unfortunately contains certain errors which have evidently been the
cause of a misunderstanding of the situation. For instance, the
report states that the powers of the Fiscal Representative under
Protocol B of the new treaty are more extensive than those of the
Financial Adviser-General Receiver under the treaty of 1915 now in
force. As a matter of fact the very opposite is true and the powers
of the Fiscal Representative, as defined and limited in the new
treaty, are substantially less than those conferred on the Financial
Adviser-General Receiver by the Treaty of 1915. Under the treaty of
1915 the Financial Adviser-General Receiver was given and has
exercised exceedingly broad powers over all phases of the Haitian
Government’s financial organization, collecting all revenues, acting
as custodian of all funds, and controlling the allocation of funds
among the administrative departments. Under the new treaty the
Fiscal Representative will collect the customs revenues and merely
supervise the internal revenue service. He will have custody only of
the funds necessary for the payment of the expenses of revenue
collection and for the service of the foreign debt, and his powers
regarding the budget are limited to those necessary to see that
expenses are kept within the Government’s revenues. Such powers as
he will exercise are clearly specified and limited, so that there is
no broad general grant of power as in the 1915 treaty.
Furthermore, the special committee’s report states that the new
treaty may be continued in force indefinitely and subject only to
the power of the United States to put an end to it. This is, of
course, entirely erroneous. As pointed out hereinabove the treaty
provides for the complete Haitianization of the Garde by December
31, 1934, and the beginning of the withdrawal of the Marine Brigade
by that date. Protocol B of the treaty, dealing with financial
administration, provides in Article I that the powers of the Fiscal
Representative shall be exercised only “until the total retirement
or refunding of all bonds issued in accord with the Protocol of
October 3, 1919.” Article XIV of Protocol B reserves to the Haitian
Government the right to retire the bonds in advance of their due
date subject to an arrangement satisfactory to the holders of the
outstanding bonds, and states that in this case the provisions of
the protocol “shall automatically become null and void and of no
effect upon the completion of the refunding operation.” In other
words, these powers of financial administration exercised by virtue
of existing obligations entered into by both Governments to insure
adequately the interest and amortization of the Haitian bonds, will
cease and determine upon the retirement or refunding of the bonds.
It has been estimated by the Financial Adviser that the bonds issued
in
[Page 691]
accord with the
Protocol of October 3, 1919, will be completely amortized in
1943.
It is understood that there has been criticism in Haiti of the
reference in the exchange of notes between the American Minister and
the Haitian Government to the possibility that serious disturbances
or other difficulties in Haiti now unforeseen might arise to prevent
the carrying out of the program for the Haitianization of the Garde.
In this connection I am instructed to state that it is the desire
and definite intention of the United States Government, upon the
entrance into force of this treaty, to carry out in full the program
set forth in the agreement for the Haitianization of the Garde. The
possibility that serious disturbances or other difficulties now
unforeseen might prevent its execution was contemplated only in case
a serious emergency might arise, now entirely unforeseeable, which
might make it advisable in the interest of both Governments to delay
temporarily the completion of the program. Reference to this
possibility was made in the exchange of notes so that, if such an
emergency should arise and prevent temporarily the completion of the
program, there could be no question of bad faith imputed to either
Government. However, so far as can be foreseen at present there is
no reason to expect that any such serious emergency will arise in
the future and, as stated hereinabove, it is the desire and definite
intention of the Government of the United States, upon ratification
of the treaty, to carry out the program by the dates set forth
therein.
In my note of September 23 I referred to the interest my Government
had taken in President Vincent’s forceful statement of September 16, 1932,
regarding the negotiation of the new treaty and the advantages
accruing to Haiti under it. In that statement President Vincent referred to the obligations
assumed by both Governments in the past relating to financial
questions in Haiti. As was pointed out in my note, it is, of course,
clear that in negotiating this new treaty the freedom of action of
both Governments was necessarily limited by the existence of
definite obligations subscribed to by previous governments in Haiti
and the United States which must be respected and carried out. Your
Excellency’s note of September 26 referring to these financial
questions, suggests an agreement giving a form of adequate
protection “of an exclusively technical character.” My Government
feels that Protocol B of the new treaty, negotiated in accord with
the Haitian Government, is in fact such an agreement. As pointed out
above, this Protocol gives to the Fiscal Representative powers
substantially less than those conferred on the Financial
Adviser-General Receiver under the treaty of 1915 and, in the view
of my Government, it contains the maximum concessions
[Page 692]
in this direction
consistent with the obligations of existing agreements assumed by
both Governments.
The Government of the United States desires to withdraw its forces
from Haitian territory at the earliest practicable moment. It
desires to limit its responsibilities in connection with Haitian
financial matters to the minimum required by the existing
obligations undertaken by both Governments. It sincerely hopes that
the entire program set out in the treaty of September 3, 1932,
affecting the Garde, the Marine Brigade and Financial
Administration, which was drawn up with the foregoing objectives in
mind, may be put into force through the ratification of that treaty.
It is, of course, obvious that this program hangs together and must
be carried out as a whole and that it cannot be put into effect
piecemeal.
