Office of the Historian

817.00 Woodward Electoral Mission/137: Telegram

The Minister in Nicaragua (Hanna) to the Secretary of State

Managua, July 31, 1932—5 p.m.
[Received 7:45 a.m.]

146. Department’s telegram No. 77, July 27, 1 p.m. The following is from Admiral Woodward:

“With regard to the contents of the second paragraph State Department telegram No. 77, dated July 27th, the Comision General Electoral organized by the March 1932 convention at Leon was designated by me to supervise and conduct the forthcoming Liberal Party plebiscite for the election of party authorities, even though I found the alleged national governing bodies of both factions to be illegal, for the following reasons:

(1)
The convention delegates and the national junta elected in 1927 were legally in office at the time of the November 1931 convention at Leon.
(2)
This latter convention was legally convened and its reforms of the party statutes were lawfully adopted.
(3)
This latter convention created and organized a General Electoral Commission to supervise and conduct party elections vice the national governing body then in office.
(4)
The said governing body opposed said reforms and convoked the Leon convention of February 1932 for the purpose of causing the cancellation of said reforms.
(5)
Before the said governing body discovered that it could not bring about cancellation of those reforms and before its adherents bolted the convention, the said General Electoral Commission was legally reorganized by said convention.
(6)
The action taken by those delegates who bolted said February convention at Leon and authorized the Managua convention was illegal whereas the action taken by those delegates who remained in convention at Leon was legal.
(7)
The Managua convention in 1932 was entirely illegal under the prevailing party statutes.
(8)
The March convention at Leon was legal.
(9)
This latter convention legally suspended [the majority?] of the members of the national governing body pending trial for insubordination.
(10)
This latter convention appointed the provisional national governing body which action was illegal as it had no power to do this because the party statutes required that the national governing body must be elected at popular party election.
(11)
This latter convention lawfully reorganized the General Electoral Commission, the personnel of which has not since been changed.
(12)
The members of the suspended national governing body caused a party plebiscite to be held on April 3rd for the election of party authorities.
(13)
This plebiscite was unlawfully held and was against the orders March convention at Leon.
(14)
Hence the national governing body elected by this plebiscite (and to whom the members of the suspended body surrendered their offices) was not lawfully in office.
(15)
The result was that the General Electoral Commission, appointed by the March convention at Leon, was the only remaining party organization which could or should hold the lawful party plebiscite for the election of party authorities, including a new national governing body, in accordance with the party statutes and pursuant to the orders of the March convention at Leon. Thus, to summarize, it was found that the national governing body alleged to have been elected on April 3rd, and which represented the Managua faction, was illegal. The old suspended national governing body, which also represented the Managua faction, had left office and was in a suspended status anyway. The provisional national governing body appointed by the March Leon convention, and which represented the Leon faction, was illegally appointed because the convention, though otherwise entirely legal, had no power to appoint a national governing body. The General Electoral Commission appointed by the said March Leon convention was legally appointed and legally organized. It was charged with the duty of conducting and supervising the next party plebiscite as ordered by the said convention. Therefore, the said General Electoral Commission was designated by me to conduct said elections of party authorities.

With respect to the contents of the third paragraph of aforesaid telegram, I carefully studied and considered the personnel of the November, February and March General Electoral Commission. Whereas, the commission as organized in February may have been actual representatives of the Managua Arguello faction in its membership, and whereas, the commission as organized in March may have been composed of members who were not favorable to the Managua Arguello faction, I could not have designated the February commission as the body which should hold the plebiscite and still have correctly interpreted the party statutes. I gave this deep consideration and decided to adhere to the law which applied. I considered [Page 820] ways and means of permitting the old suspended national governing body, which will become favorable to the Managua Arguello faction, to appoint members on the said March General Electoral Commission but concluded that there was no legal way in which this could be done. However, I did note that of the nine members of the said March General Electoral Commission, five had sat on either the February or the November commissions. These gentlemen are responsible and respected members of long standing in the Liberal party.

During the past week, I addressed a letter to the head of the Managua junta (the national governing body alleged to have been elected in the April 3rd plebiscite) which was in answer to inquiries made by him concerning the aforesaid matters referred to by the Secretary of State in his telegram of July 27th. In the same letter I again strongly advised the rival factions of the Liberal Party to reach an early accord and stressed the fact that it was entirely tangible with respect to both factions and candidates. I also personally conferred with each of the four leading candidates for the Liberal presidential nomination and their principal adherents, counselling them to adjust their differences as soon as possible. As a direct result of these measures, these said candidates, together with the representatives of both rival factions met at the residence of the President of the Republic, adjusted their differences, and upon withdrawal of Dr. Arguello’s candidacy agreed on Dr. Juan Sacasa as the party’s sole candidate for president, and furthermore unanimously decided to participate amicably in the forthcoming party plebiscite, to be held on July 31st, and August 1st, such action being considered by them as in the best [interests?] of the party.

I have sent observers of the various departments so that I may know if the plebiscite is fairly and honestly held in substantial accord with the party statutes. At the present time the affairs of the Liberal Party appear to be adjusting themselves both rapidly and effectively.” [Woodward].

Hanna