List of Papers

(Unless otherwise specified, the correspondence is from or to officials in the Department of State.)

SEVENTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF AMERICAN STATES HELD AT MONTEVIDEO, DECEMBER 3–26, 1933

Preliminaries

Date and number Subject Page
1933 (Bibliographical Note: List of material and reports pertinent to the Seventh International Conference of American States held at Montevideo, December 3–26, 1933.) 1
Feb. 8 (15) To the Ambassador in Chile (tel.)
Instructions to ascertain whether press reports are well-founded that postponement of the Seventh Pan-American Conference was discussed by the Argentine and Chilean Foreign Ministers at the Mendoza Conference.
2
Feb. 9 (17) From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Information from a member of the Chilean delegation at the Mendoza Conference that no question has been raised with regard to postponement of the Pan-American Conference, and that the only conclusion so far reached concerns the desirability of accord on the subjects to be discussed at the forthcoming Conference.
2
Feb. 11 (18) From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Foreign Minister’s assurance that press report concerning his desire for postponement of the Pan-American Conference is unfounded.
3
Feb. 13 (31) From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.)
Chilean assurance that no decision was taken at Mendoza with respect to postponement of the Conference but that subject was discussed since Uruguay, according to reports, was desirous of delay.
3
Mar. 23 (433) From the Minister in Uruguay
Information that Foreign Minister reports that Uruguay has received favorable replies from practically all of the American Governments in support of the Uruguayan proposal that the Conference be held in 1933 and that he was advised of U. S. willingness to participate in the Conference at any date that might prove acceptable to the majority of American States.
(Footnote: Information that acquiescent replies had been received from all the American States by June 6.)
3
Mar. 29 Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State
Discussion with Argentine Ambassador and with representatives of various other Latin American Governments concerning plans for expediting consideration of the Chaco and Leticia disputes, either by calling a special conference prior to the Seventh Pan-American Conference or by advancing the date of the Pan-American Conference and limiting the agenda.
4
[Page VI]Apr. 1 Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State
Advice that Mexico favors advancing the date of the Pan-American Conference to August 1 and limiting the agenda to questions of peace and economic relations.
5
Apr. [May] 10 (A. 500) (L. D. 641) From the Salvadoran de facto Minister for Foreign Affairs
Suggestion that an exchange of notes be made between the respective delegates to the Conference in order that a uniform basis of conduct might be determined with regard to the salient points of the program to be developed at the Conference.
5
July 13 (62) From the Chargé in Colombia (tel.)
Advice that the Department will be approached by the Colombian Government as to the possibility of presenting to the Conference the fourth step proposed in President Roosevelt’s disarmament message of May 16.
7
July 17 (65) From the Chargé in Colombia (tel.)
President Olaya’s explanation that his hope is for U. S. presentation of a resolution incorporating all proposals in Roosevelt’s disarmament message.
7
July 29 Memorandum of Conversation With the Mexican Minister of Finance
Finance Minister’s views with regard to limitation of the agenda for the Montevideo Conference; information concerning President Roosevelt’s belief that the subject of peace on the Western Hemisphere should come up for discussion at the Conference.
8
Aug. 7 From the Uruguayan Minister for Foreign Affairs
Uruguayan Government’s invitation to the United States to participate in the Seventh Pan-American Conference to be held at Montevideo, December 3.
9
Aug. 10 From the Colombian Minister
Colombian proposal that the United States present to the Conference a resolution embodying the proposals of Roosevelt’s disarmament message.
10
Aug. 28 (27) From the Minister in Uruguay (tel.)
Uruguayan hope that Secretary of State Hull will head the U. S. delegation to the Conference.
11
Sept. 5 (16) To the Minister in Uruguay (tel.)
Advice that personnel of the U. S. delegation to the Conference will be discussed with the President shortly.
11
Sept. 14 (603) From the Ambassador in Mexico
Mexican suggestion for form of the Fourth Chapter of the Agenda of the Conference (text printed), on economic and financial problems.
11
Sept. 20 To the Uruguayan Minister for Foreign Affairs
U. S. acceptance of the Uruguayan invitation of August 7 for participation in the Conference.
14
[Page VII]Sept. 22 (348) From the Chargé in El Salvador
Information regarding Salvadoran concern with respect to the status of the Salvadoran delegation to the Conference in view of the fact that the Martinez regime has not been accorded recognition by the United States; request for Department’s opinion in the matter.
15
Sept. 22 Memorandum by the Secretary of State
Exchange of views with the Mexican Ambassador concerning question of consideration at the Conference of Latin American public and private indebtedness to private creditors in the United States; U. S. plan for alleviating the situation.
16
Sept. 28 (137) To the Ambassador in Mexico (tel.)
Instructions to ascertain whether the Mexican Government intends to press for extension of the Conference agenda to include discussion of revision of Government external indebtedness and possible modification of the Monroe Doctrine.
17
Sept. 29 (197) From the Ambassador in Mexico (tel.)
Information that Mexican policy on external indebtedness and modification of the Monroe Doctrine has not been fully determined.
17
Sept. 29 From the Ambassador in Mexico
Further information concerning Mexican views on moratorium of indebtedness and modification of the Monroe Doctrine.
18
Oct. 2 Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State
Conversation with the Mexican Ambassador, who stated that the Mexican Government will not urge the additions to the agenda of the Conference as proposed by the Foreign Minister.
19
Oct. 4 (86) From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Advice that question of postponing Montevideo Conference will be discussed shortly between Argentine and Brazilian officials.
20
Oct. 6 (668) From the Ambassador in Mexico
Foreign Minister’s memorandum (text printed) comprising his ideas on the Monroe Doctrine and its amplification at the Montevideo Conference.
20
Oct. 9 (205) From the Ambassador in Mexico (tel.)
Advice that Foreign Minister Puig’s memorandum on the Monroe Doctrine (supra) has the approval of President Rodriguez.
28
Oct. 10 (77) To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Request for further information with regard to advice transmitted in telegram No. 86, October 4.
28
Oct. 10 (76) To the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Instructions to ascertain Argentine attitude toward postponement of the Conference.
28
[Page VIII]Oct. 13 (94) From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Advice concerning informal conversation with Assistant Chief of Protocol, who stated that there had been no change to his knowledge in the Argentine Government’s attitude toward holding the Conference as scheduled.
28
Oct. 13 (90) From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Information that postponement of Conference was not discussed between Argentine and Brazilian officials; Foreign Minister’s personal view that Conference should be postponed due to the tense situation arising from the Cuban, Leticia, and Chaco questions.
29
Oct. 13 (79) To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Instructions to make discreet inquiry of the Foreign Minister as to whether he does not believe that it would be of interest to the other American nations to have his views concerning postponement of the Conference brought to their attention.
29
Oct. 15 (95) From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Advice that the Under Secretary of Foreign Affairs considers it too late now to postpone the Conference.
29
Oct. 17 (95) From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Advice that a Mexican note requesting Brazilian support in adding debt question to Conference agenda has been withdrawn as a result of Mexican Foreign Minister’s alleged assurance from the Secretary that the debt question would be taken up on American initiative; further advice of another Mexican note requesting Brazilian support for securing consideration by the Conference of a redrafted text of chapter IV of the agenda.
30
Oct. 17 (96) From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Information that the Foreign Minister is reluctant to volunteer his views on postponement of the Conference since his initiative led to previous postponement.
30
Oct. 17 (140) To the Chargé in El Salvador
Department’s attitude toward the status of the Salvadoran delegates at the forthcoming Conference, that participation in an international conference does not affect the status of recognition or nonrecognition of a participating government.
30
Oct. 19 (83) To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Information that Department has not given any assurance that the question of debts would be taken up on American initiative at Montevideo; advice that if other states insist on discussing the question, such discussion will not be opposed by the United States.
31
Oct. 21 (97) From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Opinion that the matter regarding alleged Mexican receipt of U. S. assurance that debt question would be taken up on American initiative is the result of an inaccuracy in the transmission of the Mexican Foreign Minister’s instructions to the Mexican Ambassador at Rio de Janeiro.
32
[Page IX]Oct. 24 (97) From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Conversation with Foreign Minister, who gave assurance that press editorial urging postponement of the Conference did not represent the views of his Government.
33
Oct. 25 (78) To the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Instructions to ascertain exactly what Foreign Minister’s views are regarding postponement of the Conference.
33
Oct. 27 (98) From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Conversation with the Foreign Minister, who said that he favored continuing plans for the Conference; his opinion, however, that other nations favored postponement but were reluctant to initiate the proposal, and observation that the holding of the Uruguayan Presidential elections in December might complicate the situation.
33
Oct. 28 (99) From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Foreign Minister’s views regarding necessity for postponement of the Conference; statement (text printed) by the U. S. Minister in Uruguay in refutation of the Argentine Foreign Minister’s comments on critical nature of the Uruguayan political situation.
34
Oct. 30 (101) From the Chargé in Chile (tel.)
Report of Argentine efforts to interest Chile, Peru, and Brazil in backing a move to postpone the Conference for 3 months; advice that Chile is awaiting an indication of the Peruvian attitude before taking any action in the matter but sees no gain in delay.
35
Oct. 30 (37) From the Minister in Uruguay (tel.)
Uruguayan preparations for the Conference despite apparent reluctance of Argentina toward the plans in general and non-receipt of that Government’s official acceptance of the invitation to participate.
35
Oct. 31 Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State
Argentine Ambassador’s inquiry as to U. S. attitude in connection with the Argentine Foreign Minister’s desire to bring about postponement of the Conference; statement (text printed) of U. S. attitude on the subject.
36
Nov. 2 (22) To the Minister in Uruguay (tel.)
Instructions to inquire of the Foreign Minister whether it is correct that the Secretary General of the League of Nations has received and accepted an invitation from the Uruguayan Government to send an “observer” to the Pan-American Conference; further instructions to make representations to the effect that such invitation is in violation of article 23 of the regulations approved by the Governing Board of the Pan American Union in May 1932.
36
Nov. 4 (39) From the Minister in Uruguay (tel.)
Advice of press report announcing Argentine intention to participate in the Conference.
37
[Page X]Nov. 4 (40) From the Minister in Uruguay (tel.)
Uruguayan explanation that official invitation was not extended to the League of Nations but that Nogueira, Uruguayan member of the League Secretariat Information Section, will attend the Pan American Conference but will not in any way participate.
37
Nov. 5 (41) From the Minister in Uruguay (tel.)
Report of a conversation with the Foreign Minister regarding the Argentine attempt to obtain the support of Chile, Peru, and Brazil in securing postponement of the Conference.
38
Nov. 7 (84) From the Ambassador in Argentina
Conversation with Foreign Minister wherein he stated that, in his opinion, the Montevideo Conference was badly planned; his further opinion that, in all the circumstances, subjects discussed at the Conference should be limited to those of juridical rather than political character.
39
Nov. 12 (43) From the Minister in Uruguay (tel.)
Information that Spain has requested permission to send an observer to the Conference and that Argentine Foreign Minister has supported the request by a note to the Uruguayan Government; further information that Uruguayan Chargé in Washington has been directed to submit the request to the Governing Board of the Pan American Union.
40
Nov. 24 (15) To the Chairman of the American Delegation to the Seventh International Conference of American States
Information concerning Spanish inquiry as to U. S. attitude toward the presence of a Spanish observer at the Conference.
40
Nov. 24 (116) From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
From the Secretary of State (Chairman of the American delegation) for the President, Acting Secretary of State Phillips, and Assistant Secretary of State Caffery: Foreign Minister’s advice as to plans of Cuban representatives to the Conference to make a condemnation of the U. S. Government because of the latter’s refusal to extend recognition to the Grau San Martin regime in Cuba.
40
Nov. 25 (18) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Advice concerning statement (text printed) given the Chilean Ambassador in reply to his reference to the possibility of a move by various Latin American States to recognize the Grau San Martin regime before the Montevideo Conference.
41
Nov. 27 (14) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Request for information as to what modifications should be made in the U. S. economic proposal first advanced at the London Economic Conference preparatory to the offering of such proposal at the Montevideo Conference.
42
Nov. 29 (25) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Information concerning those elements covered by the London proposal which might properly be presented before the Montevideo Conference.
42
[Page XI]

SEVENTH PAN-AMERICAN CONFERENCE

Instructions to Delegates

Date and number Subject Page
1933 Nov. 10 Instructions to the Delegates to the Seventh International Conference of American States, Montevideo, Uruguay
Instructions relating to general policy, agenda items, U. S. position on supplementary matters not on the agenda, and background information on subjects of interest in connection with conversations at the Conference.
(Footnote: Membership of delegation.)
43

Proceedings

Date and number Subject Page
1933 Dec. 1 (19) From the Chairman of the American Delegation to the Seventh International Conference of American States (tel.)
Efforts of the heads of the delegations to eliminate minor provisions of the agenda from consideration at the Conference by means of informal preliminary conversations; information concerning unofficial discussions on the Chaco question.
156
Dec. 2 (21) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Information regarding the economic proposal which it is desired to introduce to the Conference; request to be advised of the President’s views on the matter.
157
Dec. 4 (24) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Advice concerning organization of the Conference and consideration of the chapters of the agenda.
157
Dec. 5 (27) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Information with regard to Argentine Foreign Minister’s press statement concerning an inter-American economic conference to be held at the close of the present Conference and the reconvening of the World Economic Conference.
158
Dec. 5 (29) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Advice that a Mexican financial proposal presented at a meeting of the Steering Committee has been referred to a subcommittee; further advice that organization of all 10 committees of the Conference has been completed.
159
Dec. 6 (44) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Observations after discussion with the President concerning economic proposal to be presented at the Conference.
159
Dec. 6 (30) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Advice concerning an application to the Steering Committee requesting permission for the League of Nations to send an observer to the Conference; further advice of U. S. motion that all such applications be referred to a special committee on policy.
160
Dec. 7 (31) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
For Phillips: Elaboration of the terms which it is hoped to include in the economic proposal to be offered to the Conference.
161
Dec. 7 (33) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Additional considerations regarding terms of U. S. economic proposal.
162
[Page XII]Dec. 7 (49) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Advice that a communication addressed to Secretary Hull has been received from Frank B. Kellogg, Judge of the Permanent Court of International Justice, suggesting that the Secretary bring to the attention of Argentina and Brazil the importance of their adhesion to and ratification of the Pact of Paris; further suggestion that the Secretary use his influence to obtain the adhesion of other American States who have not ratified the Pact.
162
Dec. 7 (35) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Approval by Steering Committee of subcommittee recommendation that the entire Mexican financial and economic proposals be referred to the Inter-American High Commission for consideration. Advice that League of Nations’ request for permission to send an observer to the Conference was not an official League request.
163
Dec. 7 (36) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Request for Department’s approval of proposed resolution in connection with discussions on topic 1 of the agenda concerning methods for the prevention and pacific settlement of inter-American conflicts.
164
Dec. 7 (52) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Department’s approval of Secretary’s motion that League application be referred to a special committee on policy; Department’s general views regarding the unwisdom of fundamentally altering the character of the Pan-American Conferences as strictly inter-American gatherings.
164
Dec. 8 (53) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Approval of the action referred to in telegram No. 35, December 7; inquiry as to whether it is proposed to revive the Inter-American High Commission.
165
Dec. 8 (54) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Department’s approval of proposed resolution concerning topic 1 of the agenda as requested in telegram No. 36, December 7.
166
Dec. 8 (55) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Advice concerning Ecuadoran Chargé’s request for U. S. support at the Conference of an Ecuadoran resolution urging the rapid settlement of Amazonian problems.
166
Dec. 8 (37) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Report of the progress of the Conference with respect to chapter I of the agenda.
167
Dec. 8 (56) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Advice of President’s approval of the terms included in the Secretary’s economic proposal as transmitted in telegram No. 31, December 7; President’s suggestion of adequate exceptions and reservations as a safeguard for any long term economic plan.
168
[Page XIII]Dec. 8 (38) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Report of the organization of the Second Commission, which will work on chapter II of the agenda; request for Department’s views on the wisdom of making an agreement incorporating certain principles of state responsibility previously agreed to among delegates at the 1930 Hague Conference on codification of responsibility of states.
168
Dec. 9 (39) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Information that the Inter-American High Commission has been named as the organization to undertake discussion of the Mexican financial proposals.
169
Dec. 9 (40) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Request for information concerning any possible changes in Latin American tariff truce membership; inquiry as to whether Bolivia and Ecuador should be considered members.
169
Dec. 9 (218) From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
Request for information as to the accuracy of a statement reported by the press to have been made by Secretary Hull concerning closer alignment of the Pan American Union with the League of Nations.
170
Dec. 9 (59) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Transmittal of inquiry of Minister in Switzerland regarding the authenticity of the Secretary’s statement as reported by the press.
170
Dec. 9 (41) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Request for comment on proposed U.S. presentation of a resolution convening the Third Pan American Financial Conference for the purpose of studying the Mexican economic proposals.
171
Dec. 9 (61) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Information with regard to changes in Latin American tariff truce membership; advice that Bolivia and Ecuador are still considered members of truce.
171
Dec. 9 (62) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Department’s views, as requested in telegram No. 38, December 8, with regard to the making of an agreement incorporating certain principles of state responsibility as previously agreed to among delegates at the 1930 Hague Conference.
171
Dec. 10 (44) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Account of Secretary’s success in obtaining the consent of Saavedra Lamas, Chairman of the Argentine delegation, to undertake the presentation of a resolution on peace simultaneously with the Secretary’s presentation of the economic proposal.
173
Dec. 10 (43) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Clarification of Secretary Hull’s statement as reported by the press concerning closer cooperation between the Pan American Union and the League of Nations.
174
Dec. 10 (64) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Advice that proposed resolution convening the Third Pan American Financial Conference has been approved by the President.
174
[Page XIV]Dec. 11 (66) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Information with respect to instructions to the delegation regarding proposed treaties covering nationality of women and equal rights for women.
174
Dec. 11 (46) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Request for President’s views as to possibility of amendment of U.S. Executive Order No. 5869 so as to waive passport and visa requirements for citizens of all countries of the Western Hemisphere in view of discussions that will occur in connection with topic 9 (d) of the agenda (promotion of tourist travel).
175
Dec. 12 (48) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Argentine draft project on interpretation of treaties (text printed); results of preliminary discussion of the draft; request for Department’s views regarding Argentine project.
176
Dec. 12 (71) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Information that Nicaragua has withdrawn as a member of the Latin American tariff truce.
177
Dec. 12 (52) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Expectation that both the U. S. economic proposal and the Argentine peace resolution will be supported by the Conference.
177
Undated Memorandum by Mr. J. Butler Wright
Conversations between the Secretary of State and members of the various delegations concerning the economic and peace proposals.
178
Dec. 13 (73) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Department’s views concerning the Argentine draft project on interpretation of treaties.
185
Dec. 13 (72) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
President Roosevelt’s observations at a press conference with respect to questions concerning Secretary Hull’s economic proposal and plans to increase foreign trade.
186
Dec. 14 (77) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Advice that representations have been made by the National Association of Women Lawyers in favor of the Equal Rights Nationality Treaty; further advice that opposition to the Treaty has been expressed by the National League of Women Voters.
187
Dec. 14 (78) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
President Roosevelt’s suggestion (text printed) for an air service engineering project, to be financed by the United States, for the improvement of commercial relations with South America.
187
Dec. 14 (56) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Report of the satisfactory progress of the U. S. economic proposal and the Argentine peace resolution.
188
Dec. 15 (58) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Information concerning request made by the Director General of the Pan American Union for presentation by U. S. delegation of a resolution in connection with the assignment of short-wave radio frequencies to various American Republics; request for Department’s advice as to advisability of delegation’s initiation of such resolution.
189
[Page XV]Dec. 15 (59) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
For the President and Acting Secretary of State Phillips: Report of favorable action on and probability of passage of U. S. economic proposal and Argentine peace resolution.
189
Dec. 16 (61) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Request for reply to inquiry with regard to possible amendment of the Executive Order concerning passport and visa regulations.
190
Dec. 16 (90) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Observations with regard to the resolution proposed by the Director General of the Pan American Union concerning assignment of short-wave radio frequencies to American Republics.
191
Dec. 16 (62) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Unanimous passage of the economic and peace proposals in the plenary session; information that consideration has been given to the Chaco matter but that U. S. involvement has been avoided.
192
Dec. 17 (92) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
President Roosevelt’s willingness to make suggested amendment of Executive Order waiving passport and visa formalities in certain instances.
192
Dec. 18 (65) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
For the President and Phillips: Proposed announcement of U. S. support of an Argentine proposal to extend the codification of international law beyond the Conference, and of U. S. position pending completion of the proposed work.
193
Dec. 18 (67) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
For Phillips and the President: Inquiry by Mr. Spruille Braden, member of the American delegation, as to whether to extend U. S. approval of a proposed Mexican resolution (text printed) on stabilization of currencies; his request for authorization to make a short statement explaining that it is impossible at present for the United States to say when it will be in a position to discuss currency stabilization and related matters.
194
Dec. 18 (96) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Advice of further representations made by the National Association of Women Lawyers in favor of the Equal Rights Nationality Treaty.
195
Dec. 18 (99) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
President’s approval of Mexican resolution transmitted in telegram No. 67, December 18, and suggestion in regard to Mr. Braden’s proposed statement in connection therewith.
196
Dec. 18 (69) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Information that a friendly conversation of a general nature was held with a member of the Cuban delegation.
196
Dec. 19 (100) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Approval, subject to minor modifications, of proposed announcement in support of Argentine codification proposal.
196
[Page XVI]Dec. 19 To President Roosevelt
Information regarding the position taken by the American delegation at Montevideo with respect to the proposed treaty for equality of sexes in nationality matters.
197
Dec. 19 (70) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
For the President: Request for approval of a modification in the airways development program proposed in telegram No. 78, December 14, in view of unfavorable opinions expressed toward the program by Latin Americans and by American technical aviation experts.
198
Dec. 19 (74) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Request for authorization to introduce a general agreement with respect to multilateral action in carrying out the U. S. economic proposal as adopted by the Conference.
199
Dec. 19 (75) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
For the President: Proposed revised announcement (text printed) concerning Argentine codification resolution and U. S. policy pending completion of the project.
199
Dec. 19 (101) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
President Roosevelt’s approval in general of proposed modification of the airways development program.
200
Dec. 19 (104) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
President Roosevelt’s approval of U. S. signature of proposed treaty for equality of sexes in nationality matters, with a reservation that U. S. adherence is subject to Congressional action.
201
Dec. 19 (77) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
For the President and Phillips: Submission of subcommittee report on the Rights and Duties of States; information concerning U. S. vote and statement of policy (text printed) in regard to article concerning nonintervention in external or internal affairs of states.
201
Dec. 20 (105) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
President Roosevelt’s views concerning the resolution in regard to equality of sexes in nationality matters.
203
Dec. 20 (106) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Advice that the National Woman’s Party has been informed that the United States will sign the Treaty on Nationality.
204
Dec. 20 (109) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Department’s views with regard to proposed general agreement referred to in telegram No. 74, December 19.
204
Dec. 22 (114) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Request for information as to whether text of the Convention on Nationality is the same as that previously published in the handbook for the use of delegates.
205
Dec. 23 (117) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
President’s suggestion that a conference of experts from the interested countries be held in Washington for the promotion of the plan for fast air communication.
205
[Page XVII]Dec. 23 (81) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Information that disposition of all points on entire agenda is envisaged within the next week.
205
Dec. 23 (82) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Information with regard to text of the nationality convention which the American delegation proposes to sign.
206
Dec. 24 (83) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Information that the Conference approved a U. S. resolution (text printed) for the establishment of a commission to study the means of further accelerating inter-American air communication.
206
Dec. 24 (84) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
For the President and Phillips: Information that the Conference will formally adjourn on December 26.
207
Dec. 27 From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
From the Secretary of State: Information concerning Conference resolution, in connection with passport formalities, for a system of gratis tourist passports to facilitate entry into all countries in the Americas, and concerning U. S. attitude toward joining such a move.
207
Dec. 27 (32) To the Minister in Uruguay (tel.)
Instructions to report action taken by the American delegation with respect to the Convention on Nationality of Women, and by the Conference and the American delegation in regard to the general convention on nationality.
207
Dec. 28 (47) From the Minister in Uruguay (tel.)
Information that the Conference approved and the American delegation indicated it would sign with reservations the Convention on Nationality of Women and the general convention on nationality; advice that conventions will be signed shortly.
208
Dec. 28 (33) To the Minister in Uruguay (tel.)
Instructions to withhold signatures from the general nationality convention until the Department has more complete information concerning its provisions.
208
Dec. 29 (48) From the Minister in Uruguay (tel.)
Translation (text printed) upon which English version of the general nationality convention is based.
209
Dec. 29 To the Consul at Geneva
Views on an unofficial League memorandum prepared for the use of the Seventh Pan American Conference.
210
Dec. 30 (50) From the Minister in Uruguay (tel.)
Advice concerning U. S. submission to the Conference of a preliminary report compiled by engineers of the Bureau of Public Roads in connection with consideration of the Inter-American Highway project.
210
Dec. 30 (51) From the Minister in Uruguay (tel.)
Further advice concerning U. S. presentation of engineers’ report referred to in telegram No. 50, December 30.
211
[Page XVIII] (Bibliographical Note: List of conventions adopted at the Seventh International Conference of American States.) 211
Dec. 26 Convention on the Nationality of Women
Text of convention signed at Montevideo.
212
Dec. 26 Convention on Rights and Duties of States
Text of convention signed at Montevideo.
214
Dec. 26 Convention on Extradition
Text of convention signed at Montevideo.
219
Dec. 26 Additional Protocol to the General Convention
Text of additional protocol signed at Montevideo.
226

DECISION OF THE UNITED STATES TO ADHERE TO THE ANTI-WAR, NONAGGRESSION AND CONCILIATION TREATY, SIGNED AT RIO DE JANEIRO, OCTOBER 10, 1933

Date and number Subject Page
1933 Mar. 3 To the Argentine Ambassador
Explanation of the reasons for the U. S. disinclination to conclude the Anti-War Treaty proposed by the Argentine Government.
228
Undated (Rec’d. Oct. 4) (87) From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Request for instructions as to what reply should be made to a Brazilian inquiry as to whether the United States will sign the Argentine Anti-War Treaty.
231
Oct. 6 (75) To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Instructions for replying to the Brazilian Government’s inquiry as to the U. S. position in regard to signature of the proposed Anti-War Treaty.
232
Oct. 31 Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State
Conversation with the Argentine Ambassador, who said that U. S. adherence to the Argentine Anti-War Treaty, reservations notwithstanding, would insure Argentine cooperation in other matters at the Montevideo Conference.
232
(Note: Information concerning U. S. position with respect to adherence to the Argentine Anti-War Treaty as defined in the Instructions to Delegates to the Seventh International Conference of American States; further data pertinent to the subject.) 233
Oct. 10 Anti-War Treaty on Nonaggression and Conciliation
Text of treaty signed at Rio de Janeiro.
234
(Note: Information concerning U. S. Senate ratification of treaty with reservation; data concerning other signatories to the treaty.) 239
[Page XIX]

CHACO DISPUTE BETWEEN BOLIVIA AND PARAGUAY

Date and number Subject Page
1933 Jan. 4 (1) To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Instructions to ascertain as far as possible the attitude of the Brazilian Government toward the Neutral Commission’s request of December 31, 1932, for cooperation of the neighboring powers in settling the dispute between Bolivia and Paraguay.
(Footnote: The same telegram, January 4, to the diplomatic representatives in Argentina, Chile, and Peru.)
241
Jan. 4 (3) From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Information that the Government of Peru is in accord with the general aims of the Neutral Commission but is reluctant to propose any action until Argentine, Brazilian, and Chilean points of view have been received.
241
Jan. 4 (4) From the Chargé in Chile (tel.)
Foreign Minister’s advice that he has reached no conclusion with respect to the inquiry of the Neutral Commission.
241
Jan. 5 (2) From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Indication that Argentina will issue a declaration of neutrality in Bolivian-Paraguayan matter if no conclusion can be reached with respect to the Neutral Commission’s inquiry.
242
Jan. 6 (2) From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Information that prompt Brazilian reply to the Neutral Commission’s inquiry is forthcoming.
(Footnote: Information that Brazilian reply was made in telegram of January 11, p. 251.)
242
Jan. 6 (6) From the Chargé in Chile (tel.)
Advice, after further conversation with Foreign Minister, that there is no indication that he has been active in advancing any proposals concerning the Chaco dispute.
242
Jan. 7 (4) From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.)
Explanation that Paraguayan Government’s delay in replying to the last Neutral Commission’s communication is due to its expectation of receiving a proposal from either Argentina or Chile.
243
Jan. 7 To the Diplomatic Missions in Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Paraguay, and Peru (circ. tel.)
Information that the Bolivian Government has replied to Argentine and Chilean proposals for holding of conversations for solution of Chaco dispute with a suggestion that the neutral governments agree on a joint solution to be offered to the belligerents, and further proposed that the four neighboring powers join in the efforts of the Neutral Commission; instructions to report any information available concerning Bolivian proposal.
243
Jan. 7 The President of the Council of the League of Nations to the Chairman of the Commission of Neutrals (tel.)
Advice that League Council is desirous of obtaining information concerning the Chaco dispute since such dispute is on the agenda of the next Council meeting.
244
Jan. 8 (5) From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.)
Paraguayan President’s suggestion that a joint presentation by the neighboring powers and the Neutral Commission of a modification in the Commission’s proposal of December 15 might be accepted by Paraguay and Bolivia.
244
[Page XX]Jan. 9 (4) From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Information that the Peruvian Government is in accord with the suggestion outlined in Department’s circular telegram, January 7.
245
Jan. 9 (4) From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Information that Foreign Minister will make a favorable reply to Argentine Foreign Minister’s plan to transmit a proposal to governments of interested nations for settlement of the Chaco question.
245
Jan. 9 (4) From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Details of Argentine proposal and information that Paraguay has indicated its willingness to accept terms.
246
Jan. 9 Memorandum by the Chairman of the Commission of Neutrals
Information that the Chilean Chargé presented a telegram from the Chilean Foreign Minister (text printed), making informal inquiry as to plans of the Neutral Commission for cooperation with the four neighboring countries, and that a memorandum (text printed) in reply was handed to the Chargé, advising that the neighboring countries should come to an agreement among themselves which could then be discussed with the Neutral Commission.
246
Jan. 10 (4) To the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Information from Chilean Foreign Minister that Paraguay and Bolivia would be disposed to consider a proposal by the five Neutrals and the four neighbors in conjunction for settlement of the Chaco dispute; inquiry as to whether Peru is in accord with Chile in the matter.
(Footnote: The same telegram, January 10, to the diplomatic representatives in Argentina and Brazil.)
248
Jan. 10 (2) To the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Instructions to ascertain Bolivian point of view in regard to the plan reported in telegram No. 4, January 10, to the Ambassador in Peru.
(Footnote: The same telegram, January 10, to the Minister in Paraguay as telegram No. 1.)
249
Jan. 10 (6) From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Conversation with the Foreign Minister, who reported his intention to communicate with the neighboring countries and the Neutrals as soon as he arrives at a concrete proposal based upon his sounding out of the Bolivian and Paraguayan Governments.
249
Jan. 10 (6) From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Advice that the Peruvian Government is in accord with the Chilean Government in desiring to have the neighboring countries act together and in support of the Commission of Neutrals.
249
Jan. 11 (6) From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.)
Indication that Paraguay, although willing to consider joint proposals by the Neutrals and the neighboring powers, doubts whether any acceptable guarantee other than demilitarization could be devised as a condition for the cessation of hostilities pending discussion of the dispute.
250
[Page XXI]Jan. 11 (5) From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Indication that Bolivian acceptance of Chilean proposal is not likely.
250
Jan. 11 From the Brazilian Minister for Foreign Affairs to the Chairman of the Commission of Neutrals (tel.)
Brazilian acceptance of the Neutral Commission’s proposal of December 31, 1932, and willingness to cooperate with the neighboring countries in leading the Governments of Bolivia and Paraguay to reestablish a definitive peace.
251
Jan. 11 (7) From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Reply to Department’s telegram No. 4, January 10, indicating that Peru will accept proposed plan.
251
Jan. 11 From the Argentine Ambassador to the Chairman of the Commission of Neutrals
Argentine reply (text printed) to Neutral Commission’s inquiry of December 31, 1932, advising that Argentina will formulate a proposal for settlement of the Chaco conflict, of which it will advise the neighboring countries.
251
Jan. 12 Memorandum by the Chairman of the Commission of Neutrals
Suggestion to the Argentine Ambassador that his Government initiate a proposal on behalf of the neighboring countries, insisting that Bolivia and Paraguay cease hostilities and accept the Commission’s proposal of December 15, 1932, as a basis for discussion of the problem.
252
Jan. 12 (6) From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Information that Brazil would be in accord with any proposal agreed upon by the Neutral Commission and the neighboring countries, but is withholding a specific reply to the Chilean proposal in expectation of the receipt of a proposition from Argentina.
254
Jan. 12 (7) From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Information concerning Argentine negotiations for a successful settlement of the Chaco dispute, and attitude as to unacceptability of the Chilean formula.
254
Jan. 12 (6) From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Advice that the Bolivian Government has rejected the Chilean proposal and has suggested the revival of the Neutral Commission’s proposal of December 15.
255
Jan. 13 Memorandum by the Chairman of the Commission of Neutrals
Conversation with the Peruvian Ambassador concerning the nature of the Commission’s inquiry of December 31 and the subsequent responses of Argentina, Brazil, and Chile.
256
Jan. 14 Memorandum by the Chairman of the Commission of Neutrals
Conversation with the Chilean Chargé concerning the views of the interested countries toward the Chilean proposal.
257
Jan. 16 (26) From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Information from the Chilean Ambassador that Bolivia and Paraguay have agreed with Chilean proposal and that efforts are being made to bring all four neighboring countries into line with proposal.
258
[Page XXII]Jan. 17 (13) To the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Advice that Chilean information as reported in telegram No. 26, January 16, is inaccurate; Department’s view that the four neighboring countries and the Neutral Commission should agree in advance upon some plan before approaching Bolivia and Paraguay.
258
Jan. 18 (4) From the Minister in Uruguay (tel.)
Conversation with the Foreign Minister, who said that Paraguayan representatives have been seeking his support of a proposal that the Commission of Neutrals be dissolved or its activities transferred to Montevideo since Uruguay enjoys an advantageous position for cooperation with the other interested powers.
259
Jan. 20 (2) To the Minister in Uruguay (tel.)
Instructions to express to the Foreign Minister the U. S. Government’s appreciation for his cooperation in the attempt to solve the Chaco matter.
260
Jan. 24 (17) From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.)
Advice that the Foreign Minister will propose a conference with the Argentine Foreign Minister at Mendoza to discuss plans for ending the Chaco dispute.
260
Jan. 25 (11) From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Information that the Foreign Minister has accepted the Chilean Foreign Minister’s invitation to meet at Mendoza.
260
Jan. 26 (13) From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.)
Inquiry by Chile as to Paraguay’s position concerning the Chilean and Argentine proposals; indication that Paraguay’s reluctance to express a preference will bring about a joint proposal from the two countries.
261
Jan. 26 (13) From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Foreign Minister’s hope that his forthcoming conversation with the Chilean Foreign Minister will lead to agreement between their Governments on procedure in the Chaco dispute; his suggestion of bases for solution of the dispute.
261
Jan. 27 (86) From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
Information that in view of the apparent failure of efforts to bring about a peaceful settlement of the Chaco dispute, the League of Nations Council Committee is considering the appointment of a commission of inquiry, composed of an American, an Argentine, and a national of a small European state, for the purpose of seeking a solution to the conflict.
262
Jan. 30 (60) To the Minister in Switzerland, at Geneva (tel.)
Department’s opinion that appointment of a League commission at present would complicate matters, in view of the fact that the scheduled meeting of the Foreign Ministers of Argentina and Chile promises tangible results toward agreed action on the Chaco question.
263
Jan. 31 (87) From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
Confidential information from the Secretary General of the League concerning the Paraguayan attitude toward the sending of a League commission; advice that Secretary General believes it advisable to delay action on the Chaco problem.
264
[Page XXIII]Jan. 31 (88) From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
Bolivian delegate’s opinion that the Chaco dispute should be settled by American nations; his further opinion that Bolivian reply concerning League’s proposal of a commission of inquiry should be delayed until the action of the neighboring states has been cleared up.
264
Feb. 2 From the Chairman of the Commission of Neutrals to the Minister in Switzerland, at Geneva
Conversation with the Bolivian Minister, who said that his Government objected to the inclusion of an Argentine on the suggested League commission of inquiry.
265
Feb. 2 (12) To the Ambassador in Chile (tel.)
Instructions to endeavor to ascertain discreetly from the Foreign Minister the result of his conversation at Mendoza with the Argentine Foreign Minister.
266
Feb. 2 (90) From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
Information that League Council Committee will report to the Council that Bolivia and Paraguay are of the opinion that any League action should be delayed pending negotiations by the neighboring states; further information that Committee report will state that the United States and the Neutrals, both unofficially consulted, hold similar views.
266
Feb. 2 (62) To the Minister in Switzerland, at Geneva (tel.)
Advice that the Commission of Neutrals, as such, was not consulted, but that Department believes that its views in the matter are shared by members of the Commission.
267
Feb. 2 (91) From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
Information that Council Committee report will add only that the United States and Argentina had been unofficially consulted.
267
Feb. 3 (37) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
League Council’s adoption of a report by the Committee on the Chaco dispute, which recommends postponement of further consideration of sending a commission of inquiry, with reservation covering possibility of later action; League telegram (text printed) indicating that a communication has been sent to both disputants.
267
Feb. 3 (22) From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.)
Provisions of a secret agreement on the Chaco question signed by the Foreign Ministers of Argentina and Chile at Mendoza; information that Argentina and Chile are planning to consult with Brazil and Peru with a view to reaching an agreement on a peace formula which later would be communicated to the Neutral Commission for its approval.
268
Feb. 6 Memorandum by the Chairman of the Commission of Neutrals
Advice that Chilean Chargé has been requested to transmit to Foreign Minister Cruchaga the Neutral Commission’s appreciation of his successful negotiations at Mendoza.
269
Feb. 8 Memorandum by the Chairman of the Commission of Neutrals
Advice of informal discussion in the Neutral Commission concerning the Mendoza meeting and new aspects of the Chaco situation.
269
[Page XXIV]Feb. 9 (44) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Bolivian reply of February 4 (text printed), to League communication of February 3, expressing willingness to cooperate in any just peace effort.
270
Feb. 9 (22) From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.)
Paraguayan reply, February 8 (excerpt printed), in answer to the League communication of February 3, asserting that Bolivian aggression is the cause of the continuance of hostilities.
270
Feb. 14 Memorandum by the Chairman of the Commission of Neutrals
Information from Chilean Chargé that Brazil is in accord with the Chilean and Argentine proposal and that a favorable reply from Peru is anticipated; Chargé’s advice that as soon as Peru answers, Paraguay and Bolivia will be sounded out and then the Neutral Commission will be consulted in regard to the formulation of a joint proposal.
271
Feb. 21 (25) From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.)
Receipt of reports implying that Chile’s reversal of policy in the matter of passing war materials through Arica for Bolivia was brought about by diplomatic pressure from the United States. Issuance by President Ayala, as a result of Chilean action, of a decree calling a special session of the Paraguayan Congress on February 24 to secure authorization for the Executive to declare war against Bolivia.
272
Feb. 25 (26) From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.)
Advice that President’s message to the special session of Congress asked constitutional authorization to declare war and that Congress will probably take action thereon on February 27th; further advice that peace proposal was jointly submitted by Argentine, Brazilian, Chilean, and Peruvian representatives and that if Paraguay’s answer is favorable, it will then be laid before the Neutrals.
272
[Feb. 25] (27) From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.)
Points of the ABCP proposal; information that Paraguay will accept the proposal in principle but will probably hold out for modification of the stipulated retirement lines for troops.
273
Feb. 27 (7) To the Minister in Paraguay (tel.)
Information that Department has not intervened in the matter of transit of Bolivian munitions through Chile.
274
Feb. 28 (28) From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.)
Paraguayan acceptance of the ABCP proposal with minor reservations.
274
Feb. 28 Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State
Conversation with the Argentine Ambassador, who inquired as to the U. S. attitude toward an Argentine proposal to force an armistice on Bolivia and Paraguay; U. S. opinion that the best hope of success rests in the recent ABCP proposal.
275
Feb. 28 (16) From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Information from the Chilean Minister that in view of Paraguayan acceptance of the ABCP proposal, he has been instructed by his Government to urge prompt acceptance of the proposal by Bolivia.
276
Mar. 1 (29) From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.)
Review of Paraguayan reservations to the ABCP proposal.
276
[Page XXV]Mar. 1 (18) From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Advice of the conditions of settlement suggested by Bolivia as prerequisite to her acceptance of the ABCP proposal.
277
Mar. 1 (549) From the Minister in Bolivia
Bolivian reply, February 28 (text printed), to the ABCP representatives in regard to the proposal for settlement of the Chaco dispute.
278
Mar. 3 (31) From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.)
Information that the Senate has given authorization to the Executive to declare war on Bolivia.
281
Mar. 6 (41) From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.)
Advice that Chilean and Argentine Foreign Ministers will transmit to the Neutrals the Paraguayan and Bolivian replies to the ABCP proposal and will request the support of the Neutrals to persuade Bolivia and Paraguay to declare an armistice immediately and to retire their forces to the lines referred to in the original proposal.
281
Mar. 8 (19) From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Information that Chile will urge Bolivia to omit point 5, concerning delimitation of the arbitral zone, from her reply to the ABCP proposal.
282
Mar. 8 (33) From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.)
Paraguayan notification to Peru of concern over the possibility of transit of Bolivian war materials through Mollendo.
282
Mar. 9 Memorandum by the Chairman of the Commission of Neutrals
Argentine Ambassador’s inquiry as to whether the Neutral Commission would support a move for an armistice in the Chaco matter.
282
Mar. 9 (20) From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Advice that Bolivia has refused to delete point 5 from her reservations to the ABCP proposal.
283
Mar. 10 Memorandum by the Chairman of the Commission of Neutrals
Conversation with the Bolivian Minister, who revealed his Government’s displeasure with the Argentine and Chilean attitude toward the Bolivian reservations to the ABCP proposal; Bolivian insistence that any new suggestions in the matter be advanced by the four countries in unison; submission for personal information of the Chairman, of the Bolivian reply, March 2 (text printed), to the ABCP proposal and confidential memorandum on Chilean proposed modifications of Bolivian counterproposal.
283
Mar. 10 (44) From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.)
Advice that Chilean Foreign Minister was informed by the Bolivian Minister that the Bolivian Government is not disposed to modify in any way the conditions laid down in its reply to the ABCP proposal.
285
Mar. 13 To the Chairman of the Commission of Neutrals
Transmission of Bolivian request that the Neutral Commission be officially advised in the matter of the Bolivian reply to the ABCP proposal and in regard to the changes proposed by Chile to Bolivia’s counterproposal.
285
[Page XXVI]Mar. 15 (1405) From the Ambassador in Chile
Further information concerning Chile’s reversal of policy on the arms embargo against Bolivia.
286
Mar. 17 (35) From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.)
Anticipation of Paraguayan declaration of war against Bolivia within the next few days.
287
Mar. 20 (36) From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.)
Information that Paraguay has been approached by Uruguay concerning an independent proposal for an armistice; further information that the Chilean and Brazilian Ministers, by instruction of their Governments, have appealed to the Paraguayan President not to declare a state of war.
287
Mar. 20 From the Peruvian Ambassador to the Chairman of the Commission of Neutrals
Information concerning reservation made by Peruvian Government at signature of the ABCP peace proposal to Bolivia and Paraguay (infra).
287
Mar. 20 From the Argentine, Brazilian, and Peruvian Ambassadors and the Chilean Chargé to the Chairman of the Commission of Neutrals
Communication of the Act of Mendoza, signed February 2 (text printed), which contains the ABCP peace proposal to Bolivia and Paraguay, and of the Bolivian and Paraguayan replies (texts printed) to this proposal.
288
Mar. 20 From the Argentine, Brazilian, and Peruvian Ambassadors and the Chilean Chargé to the Chairman of the Commission of Neutrals
Request for the cooperation of the Neutrals in undertaking immediate negotiations with Bolivia and Paraguay for the purpose of bringing about a cessation of hostilities.
293
Mar. 22 (9) To the Minister in Paraguay (tel.)
Information that Neutral Commission has been requested by ABCP powers to join in representations to Bolivia and Paraguay for an immediate cessation of hostilities for 60 days, in order to conduct peace negotiations under the Mendoza formula; request for views of Paraguayan Government in the matter.
(Footnote: The same telegram, March 22, to the Minister in Bolivia.)
293
Mar. 22 (37) From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.)
Advice that Paraguay will not agree to an armistice based on present troop positions; opinion that if the Bolivian Government were to accept the Mendoza formula of retirement, Paraguay would likewise agree.
294
Mar. 23 (23) From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Indication that Bolivia will not agree to a cessation of hostilities, irrespective of the question of present positions, unless prior agreement has been made for the settlement of the fundamental question.
294
Mar. 23 From the Commission of Neutrals to the Argentine, Brazilian, and Peruvian Ambassadors and the Chilean Chargé
Acknowledgment of note of March 20 and expression of willingness to support the peace proposal of the limitrophe countries; advice that Bolivian and Paraguayan Governments may be so informed in arranging for cessation of hostilities.
295
[Page XXVII]Mar. 27 (10) To the Minister in Paraguay (tel.)
Information concerning position of Neutral Commission with respect to ABCP peace proposal and request for representations to Bolivia and Paraguay for an immediate cessation of hostilities.
295
Mar. 30 (25) From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Information concerning Bolivian views on determination of the arbitral zone; further information that the Bolivian Minister in Washington has advised his Government that in his opinion the Neutral Commission is not supporting the activities of the limitrophe countries.
296
Mar. 30 (7) To the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Advice that there is no justification for the statement made by the Bolivian Minister as reported in telegram No. 25, March 30.
297
Apr. 1 Memorandum by the Chairman of the Commission of Neutrals
Conversation with the Argentine Ambassador and the Chilean Chargé concerning the desire of their Governments to have the cooperation of the Neutrals in support of the Mendoza formula by joint action; Chairman’s suggestion that informal representations be made in La Paz and Asunción by both U.S. representatives and representatives of the limitrophe countries with a view toward persuading Bolivia and Paraguay to modify their reservations in regard to the peace formula.
297
Apr. 6 Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State
Conversation with the Brazilian Ambassador, who was informed that the United States was cooperating with the ABCP countries in preliminary explorations to see whether Bolivia and Paraguay would be willing to modify their reservations, and that if these negotiations succeeded, then the Neutral Commission and four neighbors would act again.
298
Apr. 6 (41) From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.)
Advice that President believes that Paraguayan reservations could be waived but that Bolivia will not be disposed to waive its reservations; further advice that President is averse to delaying the declaration of a state of war beyond a few days longer, irrespective of the progress of negotiations.
299
Apr. 6 (8) To the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Instructions to join with Argentine and Chilean colleagues in an endeavor to persuade Bolivia to accept retirement to Ballivian and Robore and to withdraw her reservation with respect to the limits of the arbitrable territory.
299
Apr. 6 (11) To the Minister in Paraguay (tel.)
Instructions to cooperate with Argentine and Chilean colleagues in an effort to have Paraguay withdraw her reservation requiring that Bolivian troops retire to Villa Montes.
300
Apr. 7 (42) From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.)
President’s assurance that Paraguay will accede to the request that she withdraw her reservation in regard to the retirement of Bolivian troops.
300
Apr. 7 (28) From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Advice, before making representations requested in Department’s telegram No. 8, April 6, that results will probably be negative, but that representations will be made unless contrary instructions are received.
301
[Page XXVIII]Apr. 7 (9) To the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Instructions to proceed with representations as previously-advised in conjunction with the representatives of Argentina and Chile, and also Brazil and Peru if they are willing to join in.
301
Apr. 9 (29) From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Information that a plan of action concerning representations to be made to Bolivia was discussed with the Brazilian and Chilean Ministers but that no action was taken pending Chilean Minister’s receipt of further instructions from his Government; opinion that present negotiations will be fruitless unless mediating countries act in unison.
301
Apr. 10 (43) From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.)
Meeting with Argentine, Brazilian, and Chilean representatives and Foreign Minister, and lack of unanimity in presenting to the Foreign Minister joint representations with respect to the Mendoza agreement; Paraguayan identic memorandum (text printed) handed to the Argentine, Brazilian, Chilean, and U. S. representatives.
302
Apr. 10 (30) From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Information that in reply to individual representations concerning the possible modification of the two principal Bolivian reservations, the Bolivian Foreign Minister indicated that his Government would not withdraw its reservations on these points but that it would entertain further suggestions as to modifications thereof.
303
Undated [Rec’d. Apr. 11] From the Bolivian Minister
Memorandum defining in detail the reasons for Bolivia’s non-agreement to the proposals presented to date for settlement of the Chaco dispute.
304
Apr. 14 Memorandum by the Chairman of the Commission of Neutrals
Discussion with the Brazilian Ambassador concerning Bolivian position on the Chaco question; suggestion by the Chairman that a new proposal be presented combining the provisions of the Mendoza formula for Bolivian withdrawal to Ballivian and Robore with the features of the Neutrals’ proposal of December 15, 1932, concerning zone limitation and arbitration.
309
Apr. 14 (10) To the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Inquiry as to the possibility of finding a solution under a new proposal based on Neutrals’ proposal of December 15 and Mendoza formula.
309
Apr. 19 (57) From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.)
Advice of Foreign Minister’s proposal that similar notes be sent by the United States and the ABC countries to Bolivia urging the withdrawal of the latter’s reservations to the Mendoza formula.
309
Apr. 20 (33) From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Indication by the Foreign Minister that the new proposal, outlined in Department’s telegram No. 10, April 14, would be acceptable as a basis for discussion.
311
[Page XXIX]Apr. 20 (34) From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Informal conversation with the Foreign Minister, during which certain general principles were suggested upon which a concrete proposal might be based and inquiry made as to whether such proposal would be favorably received by Bolivia.
311
Apr. 23 (37) From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Advice that the Bolivian Government is perturbed over the receipt of a note from Chile (text printed) and a similar one from Argentina, pointing out Bolivian responsibility in the event of failure of the Mendoza formula, and that the success of the Mendoza proposal may have been seriously prejudiced.
312
Apr. 24 (35) From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Information that Brazil will submit a suggestion to Argentina concerning the method of determining retirement lines of Bolivian and Paraguayan armies in the Chaco and the territory to be submitted to arbitration.
312
Apr. 27 Memorandum by the Chairman of the Commission of Neutrals
Conversation with the Argentine Ambassador concerning the ineffectiveness of the independent representations of the ABC countries to the Bolivian Government; reiteration of the Chairman’s view that the best solution lies in a proposal based upon concerted agreement among the neighboring countries in conjunction with the Neutral Commission.
313
Apr. 27 Memorandum by the Chairman of the Commission of Neutrals
Chilean Chargé’s presentation of an aide-mémoire (infra) paraphrasing a cable from the Chilean Foreign Minister; repetition to Chargé of the views previously expressed by the Chairman to the Argentine Ambassador.
314
Undated From the Chilean Embassy
Aide-mémoire requesting U. S. cooperation with the ABC countries in a further effort directed toward obtaining Bolivian consent to the Act of Mendoza.
314
May 5 (41) From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Further conversation with the Foreign Minister concerning the proposal suggested in telegram No. 34, April 20, and inquiry as to the possibility of a compromise between Bolivia and Paraguay with respect to the arbitrable zone.
315
May 5 (183) From the Bolivian Minister for Foreign Affairs to the Bolivian Diplomatic Missions in Argentina, Colombia, Brazil, Chile, Cuba, Mexico, Peru, the United States, and Uruguay (tel.)
Instructions to express the Bolivian Government’s view that since Bolivia has made known her territorial claims in the Chaco, a definite statement of Paraguay’s position in the matter would facilitate arbitral solution of the dispute; reiteration of Bolivian willingness to receive proposals of ABCP countries and Neutrals regarding arbitrable zone.
(Footnote: Information that a copy of this telegram was left with the Chairman of the Commission of Neutrals by the Bolivian Minister on May 6, and that the Chairman would call a meeting of the Commission for May 8.)
316
May 6 Memorandum by the Chairman of the Commission of Neutrals
Conversation with the Paraguayan Minister concerning the possibility of finding a satisfactory solution to the Chaco conflict.
316
[Page XXX]May 8 Memorandum by the Chairman of the Commission of Neutrals
Discussion at the opening meeting of the Neutral Commission of the Bolivian circular telegram of May 5; decision to invite the neighboring countries for consultation on May 9.
317
May 8 (42) From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Information that the Bolivian Government has suggested Rio de Janeiro as the seat of a conference for the purpose of continuing negotiations for a peaceful settlement of the Chaco question.
317
May 9 Memorandum by the Chairman of the Commission of Neutrals
Report of meeting of Neutral Commission, at which Brazilian and Peruvian Ambassadors were present, and were advised of Commission’s willingness to meet with ABCP countries and the two disputants for an exchange of views relative to a solution of the Chaco matter; withdrawal of Brazilian and Peruvian representatives and drafting by Commission of identic notes to Argentine Ambassador and Chilean Chargé (infra).
318
May 9 From the Chairman of the Commission of Neutrals to the Argentine Ambassador
Advice that in view of Bolivian and Paraguayan expressions of interest in the continuation of good offices of the Neutrals and neighboring nations, it is thought that an exchange of ideas between delegates of the nine countries would be useful and favorable to the interests of peace.
(Footnote: Identic note, May 9, to the Chilean Chargé and copies to the Brazilian and Peruvian Ambassadors and to all Neutral members.)
318
May 10 From the Paraguayan Minister
Notification that Paraguay has declared a state of war with Bolivia.
319
May 10 Memorandum by the Chairman of the Commission of Neutrals
Conversation with the Paraguayan Minister concerning the declaration of war on Bolivia; Minister’s opinion that arbitral settlement of the conflict is impossible.
319
May 10 (39) From the Chargé in Argentina (tel.)
Foreign Minister’s opinion that his Government should refrain from taking any further mediatory steps in the Chaco dispute at present.
320
May 10 (13) To the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Advice that Argentine representation at the consultation of the nine countries depends upon a satisfactory Bolivian reply to the latest Argentine communication concerning the Chaco question; instructions to discuss the matter with the Foreign Minister.
320
May 11 (93) From the Ambassador in Mexico (tel.)
Information that a press announcement of Mexico’s intention to continue to cooperate with the ABCP group and the Neutrals in efforts to adjust the Chaco conflict, despite the recent formal declaration of war, was confirmed by the Foreign Minister.
321
[Page XXXI]May 11 (45) From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Conversation with the Foreign Minister, who expressed Bolivia’s reluctance to reply to the last Argentine note, but said that matter would be given serious consideration; opinion that a reply will be made within the next few days.
322
May 11 From the Secretary General of the League of Nations to the Chairman of the Commission of Neutrals (tel.)
Council’s receipt of Bolivian telegram (text printed) denouncing Paraguayan action in declaring war; Council’s reply (text printed) requesting to be advised of Bolivian attitude toward arbitration of the matter.
323
May 12 (14) To the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Argentine Ambassador’s advice that any cooperation of Argentina in the nine-power conference depends upon the nature of Bolivia’s reply to the last Argentine note and that if reply is unsatisfactory, Argentina will break off diplomatic relations with Bolivia.
323
May 12 From the Chairman of the Commission of Neutrals to the Secretary General of the League of Nations (tel.)
Assurance of the Commission’s continued cooperation in the Chaco matter.
324
May 12 Memorandum by the Chairman of the Commission of Neutrals
Conversation with the Brazilian Ambassador, who said that his Government had advised him that, Argentina having said that she would not take part in any Chaco peace negotiations, Brazil would not do so either; Chairman’s explanation that Argentina had replied to the Commission that her participation depends upon a favorable reply from Bolivia.
324
May 13 (46) From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Information that Bolivian reply to the last Argentine note will be brief but cordial in tone.
324
May 15 Memorandum by the Chairman of the Commission of Neutrals
Conversation with the Bolivian Minister, who said that his Government’s reply to the League reiterated the Bolivian position that territorial claims in the dispute should be determined before the matter is submitted to arbitration.
325
May 18 (182) From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
Transmission of partial text of a report by the League Council relating to a proposed solution of the Chaco dispute; request for Department’s views with respect to the procedure contemplated by the League.
325
May 19 (48) From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Information concerning Bolivian Government’s reply to the last Argentine note.
328
May 20 Memorandum by the Chairman of the Commission of Neutrals
Résumé of conversations with the Argentine and Brazilian Ambassadors and the Chilean Chargé, in regard to Bolivian reply to the Argentine and Chilean notes, and suggestion that the nine countries support the League proposal so that there would be but one proposal before the two disputants.
328
[Page XXXII]May 20 (15) To the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Inquiry as to whether Bolivian Government has replied to the Chilean note.
329
May 20 (105) To the Minister in Switzerland, at Geneva (tel.)
Information concerning recent developments in regard to Bolivian reply to Argentine and Chilean notes. Intention to endeavor to have the nine countries, composed of five Neutral nations and four neighbors, unite in supporting League proposal.
329
May 20 (184) From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
Letter (excerpt printed) from the Secretary General of the League, expressing hope for U. S. action recommending Bolivian acceptance of League report, and quoting a telegram from the League to the Commission of Neutrals and Argentina and Chile in respect to League action on the Chaco dispute.
330
May 21 (49) From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Advice that Bolivian reply to the Chilean note, identical to that made to Argentina, was delivered to Chilean Foreign Office by the Bolivian Minister in Chile.
331
May 22 Memorandum by the Chairman of the Commission of Neutrals
Bolivian inquiry as to whether the consultation of the nine countries will be held; Chairman’s explanation that the Commission is still awaiting replies from Argentina, Chile, and Brazil concerning their intention to participate.
331
May 22 (51) From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Information that the Bolivian Government will not accept intervention of the League, that the Government desires, instead, a renewal of the negotiations by the Neutral Commission and the ABCP.
332
May 23 Memorandum by the Chairman of the Commission of Neutrals
Conversation with the Argentine Ambassador concerning the uncertainty of his Government’s action in the peace negotiations; Chairman’s hope that Argentina will send a note to Bolivia in support of the League proposal and will make public the text of such note.
332
May 23 (155) From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Information that Bolivian Minister will urge Peruvian acceptance of Department’s invitation to ABCP nations to cooperate with Neutral Commission in Chaco matter, and desires American Embassy’s support; request for instructions.
333
May 23 (53) From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Advice that the Bolivian Government has instructed its Ministers in the four neighboring countries to urge acceptance of the invitation to join with the Neutrals in the renewal of negotiations.
333
May 24 (26) To the Chargé in Argentina (tel.)
Instructions to ascertain Argentina’s intention concerning participation in the consultation of the nine countries and to endeavor to have a definite statement in regard thereto sent to the Commission.
334
[Page XXXIII]May 24 (64) To the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Information concerning the Neutral Commission’s invitation to the ABCP countries to participate in an exchange of ideas concerning the Chaco question and the League’s latest proposal; hope that Peru will accept the invitation.
335
May 25 Memorandum by the Chairman of the Commission of Neutrals
Conversation with the Chilean Chargé who said that although a satisfactory answer had been received from Bolivia, his Government intended to refrain from any action in support of the League; Chairman’s reiteration of desire to have the nine countries come to a common agreement in support of the League proposal.
335
May 25 Memorandum by the Chairman of the Commission of Neutrals
Conversation with the Bolivian Minister, who expressed his Government’s concern at the failure of Chile and Argentina to participate in the meeting with the Neutrals; Minister’s further advice that both of these countries have been active in Geneva in endeavors to have the League support the Mendoza formula.
336
May 26 (45) From the Chargé in Argentina (tel.)
Interview with the Foreign Minister, who maintains the position that Argentina should not participate further in the Chaco matter.
336
May 29 (54) From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Advice that the Bolivian Government desires a renewal of the Neutral and ABCP negotiations for an immediate peace on the basis of arbitration, and as a last resort, would accept cooperation of the League.
337
May 31 (58) From the Chargé in Brazil (tel.)
Information that the Brazilian Government does not desire to participate in joint American and League efforts to effect a settlement of the Chaco conflict, but feels that the problem should be settled by American means alone.
338
June 1 Memorandum by the Chairman of the Commission of Neutrals
Conversation with the Bolivian Minister, who indicated that Bolivia would be willing to withdraw to Villa Montes once an agreement had been signed with Paraguay to settle the Chaco matter in accordance with the Neutrals’ suggestion of December 15.
339
June 2 (55) From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Advice concerning reply made by the Argentine, Brazilian, and Peruvian Ministers in answer to a Chilean request for their opinion as to whether Bolivia would consent to allow the four neighboring countries to determine the arbitral zone.
340
June 9 To President Roosevelt
Advice concerning opinion, shared by both the Chairman of the Neutral Commission and the Acting Secretary, that the Commission should be liquidated and that U. S. activities should be withdrawn entirely from mediation in the Chaco dispute so as to leave the matter in the hands of the League and the South American countries.
340
[Page XXXIV]June 21 Memorandum by the Chairman of the Commission of Neutrals
Meetings of the Neutral Commission on June 16 and 17, during which discussions were held on the Chairman’s proposal that the Commission be disbanded.
341
June 27 (118) To the Minister in Switzerland, at Geneva (tel.)
Commission’s statement to the press (text printed) concerning its withdrawal from the peace negotiations; instructions to mention informally to either the Secretary General of the League of Nations or the League Committee that, should it be decided by the League to send a commission to the Chaco, the United States does not desire representation on such commission nor that an American citizen be appointed thereon.
343
June 28 Memorandum by the Chairman of the Commission of Neutrals
Unanimous agreement of the Neutrals to disband.
344
June 28 From the Paraguayan Minister to the Chairman of the Commission of Neutrals
Expression of appreciation for the Commission’s efforts to bring about a peaceful settlement of the Chaco dispute.
345
June 29 From the Chairman of the Commission of Neutrals to the Paraguayan Minister
Acknowledgment of Paraguayan note of appreciation.
345
July 6 (59) From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Information that the Brazilian Government has suggested that the ABCP countries intimate to the League their willingness to organize an investigating commission and to arrange a direct agreement between Paraguay and Bolivia as to arbitration.
346
July 15 (61) From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Bolivian and Paraguayan acceptance in principle of the ABCP suggestion initiated by Brazil.
346
July 25 (62) From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Advice that the Bolivian and Paraguayan delegations have received instructions to request that the League give a mandate to the ABCP countries to organize a commission of investigation and to make proposals for an arbitral agreement.
346
July 25 (69) From the Chargé in Brazil (tel.)
Information that the Foreign Office will issue a public statement to the effect that the ABCP countries will participate under League auspices in the settlement of the Chaco dispute.
347
July 26 (78) From the Chargé in Paraguay (tel.)
Advice that Paraguay has given her acceptance to the suggestion recently originated in Brazil and later approved by the other members of the ABCP group and the League.
347
July 26 (4171) From the Chargé in Brazil
Foreign Office statement (text printed) referred to in telegram No. 69, July 25; advice that the Foreign Minister has expressed regret over the relinquishment by the Neutral Commission of its jurisdiction over the Chaco peace efforts.
347
July 27 (79) From the Chargé in Paraguay (tel.)
Information that the advice transmitted in telegram No. 78, July 26, was in error in stating that the League had approved the Brazilian suggestion.
348
[Page XXXV]July 27 (177) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Communiqué issued by the League Secretariat (text printed) concerning the Bolivian and Paraguayan request for a League mandate to the ABCP states; advice that League Committee of Three has requested that the two countries submit a complete explanation of the meaning and scope of their proposal.
348
July 28 (63) From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Advice that Bolivia will not make the explanation requested by the League until next week, and that, in the meantime, she is considering the advisability of suggesting to the ABCP countries that the neutral countries be invited to participate in the negotiations in the event that the League consents to give a mandate to the ABCP group.
349
July 29 (4182) From the Chargé in Brazil
Brazilian Foreign Minister’s views concerning negotiations now in progress to bring about League appointment of the ABCP countries as a commission to the Chaco; reiteration of his regret that the Neutral Commission has abandoned the problem to the League.
350
Aug. 4 (178) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Summary of League Council’s report proposing action by the limitrophe countries under mandate of the League.
351
Aug. 10 (64) From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Information from Foreign Minister that Argentina, Chile, and Peru are insisting upon cessation of hostilities as a condition precedent to further negotiations, and that Bolivia has advised the Brazilian Government that she cannot accept that condition and would prefer to have the negotiations returned to Geneva.
352
Aug. 23 (184) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Information that League is expecting a reply from the limitrophe countries saying that they are unable to secure conditions necessary for the execution of the Council mandate; further information that, if the reply is a clear-cut refusal, it is believed that the Committee of Three will proceed at once with the dispatch of the League Commission.
352
Aug. 23 (15) From the Ambassador in Brazil
Memorandum of a conversation with the Foreign Minister on August 21 with respect to the progress of the Chaco negotiations.
353
Aug. 24 (90) From the Chargé in Chile (tel.)
Information concerning the Brazilian formula agreed upon by the neighboring countries and soon to be presented by Brazil to the two belligerents.
354
Aug. 27 (86) From the Chargé in Paraguay (tel.)
Advice that the new ABCP proposal will be discussed at a Cabinet meeting; opinion that Paraguay will accept the proposal as presented.
355
Aug. 28 (185) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Advice that League’s proposal has been accepted by the Brazilian Foreign Minister in the name of the ABCP countries, and that negotiations are in progress toward securing a “preliminary conciliation formula” from the belligerents.
355
[Page XXXVI]Aug. 29 Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State
Information from a Chilean source that the Chaco formula agreed upon by the ABCP countries had been altered later by the Brazilian Foreign Minister, thereby creating “a delicate situation for the four powers involved”.
356
Sept. 8 (90) From the Chargé in Paraguay (tel.)
Foreign Minister’s note (text printed) conveying Paraguayan acceptance of the ABCP proposal.
356
Sept. 12 (80) From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Advice from Foreign Minister that his proposal has been accepted by Bolivia with very minor changes; outline of points covered by the proposal.
356
Sept. 22 (71) From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Opinion that Bolivia’s suggested modification of the arbitral zone will nullify the effect of that Government’s official acceptance of the ABCP proposal.
357
Sept. 26 (92) From the Chargé in Paraguay (tel.)
Paraguayan President’s opinion that the ABCP proposal will have little chance of success owing to his Government’s refusal to consider the Bolivian suggestion as to modification of the arbitral zone.
357
Sept. 26 (83) From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Report concerning present state of Chaco negotiations; indication that Foreign Minister would like Department’s support of his proposal.
358
Sept. 27 (23) To the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Instructions to convey to the Foreign Minister informally the U. S. Government’s gratification over the favorable progress of the present Chaco negotiations.
(Footnote: The same, mutatis mutandis, September 27, to the Chargé in Paraguay; text repeated for information to the Ambassador in Brazil.)
359
Sept. 28 (75) From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Information that the Bolivian Government has been advised by the Brazilian Foreign Minister that ABCP acceptance of the League mandate is contingent upon Bolivia’s willingness to accept without reservation either the ABCP proposal of August 25th or the Chilean suggestion for a double arbitration.
360
Sept. 29 (93) From the Chargé in Paraguay (tel.)
Foreign Minister’s expression of appreciation for the friendly interest manifested by the United States.
360
Sept. 29 (204) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Review of status of the Bolivia-Paraguay conflict at meeting of the Council Committee; Paraguayan representative’s reaffirmation of his country’s willingness to cooperate in settlement of the dispute; Bolivian delegate’s statement that he would refrain from entering into a discussion.
360
Sept. 29 (94) From the Chargé in Paraguay (tel.)
Paraguayan note (text printed) informing the U. S. Government that Paraguay has accepted without reservations the proposal of the mediators acting under mandate of the League.
361
[Page XXXVII]Oct. 2 (208) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
ABCP reply to the League Council (text printed), declining the latter’s invitation to participate in settlement of the Chaco dispute.
361
Oct. 3 (211) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Advice that the League Chaco Commission is being notified to be prepared to proceed at an early date.
362
Oct. 4 Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State
Conversation with Bolivian Minister concerning the recent course of events in the ABCP efforts to settle the Chaco dispute; Minister’s remark that his Government would welcome at any time an effort on the part of the United States alone, or in association with other powers, to mediate in the controversy.
362
Oct. 5 (216) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Information that the Committee of Three has solicited the cooperation of the limitrophe states in the work of the League Commission.
363
Oct. 13 (92) From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Conversation with the Foreign Minister, who said that Argentina and Brazil had drafted a fresh proposal to be made to Paraguay and Bolivia.
363
Oct. 24 (82) From the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.)
Advice that Bolivia has appointed Dr. Carlos Calvo as special envoy to participate in negotiations relative to a new peace proposal initiated by Argentina and Brazil.
364
Oct. 26 (83) From the Chargé in Bolivia (tel.)
Information that the Calvo Mission has been indefinitely postponed in view of Paraguayan rejection of the Argentine-Brazilian proposal.
364
Oct. 31 (278) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Résumé of note received by the League Secretariat from the Bolivian representative, wherein the Bolivian Government attributes the failure of all previous negotiations to conclude an arbitral agreement to the circumstance that the parties have not agreed on a delimitation of the zone to be arbitrated; advice concerning Council Committee’s reply to the note.
364
Nov. 4 (282) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Information concerning reply made by Bolivia in answer to a request from the League for the name and rank of the Bolivian representative appointed as assessor to the Chaco Commission.
365
Nov. 8 (287) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Bolivian communication to the Council citing certain conditions as being prerequisite to Bolivia’s collaboration with the Chaco Commission, and Commission’s conciliatory reply thereto; request for instructions as to whether Department desires that such information as may be obtained in regard to the situation continue to be transmitted from Geneva.
366
Nov. 11 (124) To the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Instructions to keep the Department informed of important developments.
367
[Page XXXVIII]Nov. 17 (299) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Advice that the Bolivian Government has extended an invitation to the Chaco Commission to come to La Paz and has also expressed its intention of appointing an assessor to the Commission.
367
Nov. 19 (107) From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.)
Information that League Commission has arrived at Asunción and will leave for the Chaco shortly; Paraguayan confidence that Bolivia will modify her attitude.
367
Nov. 20 (108) From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.)
Advice concerning League Commission’s interviews with Paraguayan officials, during which Paraguayan President set forth his Government’s terms for settlement of the Chaco conflict; further advice that the Commission has left Asunción for the Chaco and is expected to return within a week.
368
Nov. 24 (302) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Information that the League has published the correspondence between the ABCP powers relating to their mediatory action in the Bolivia-Paraguay dispute.
368
Dec. 2 (109) From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.)
League Commission’s return to Asunción from the Chaco on November 28 and meeting with the Paraguayan President on November 29; advice as to Commission’s findings in the Chaco.
369
Dec. 5 (110) From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.)
Transmission of telegram (text printed) which has been sent to the American delegation at Montevideo in regard to possible consideration of the Chaco question by the Pan-American Conference.
370
Dec. 5 (111) From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.)
Request for approval of proposal to repeat to the American delegation at Montevideo and the Legation at La Paz telegrams to the Department concerning Paraguayan-Bolivian relations.
(Footnote: Approval of request, December 7.)
370
Dec. 6 (94) From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Advice that the League Commission has arrived in La Paz and has been warmly welcomed.
371
Dec. 9 (95) From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Information that League Commission has held sessions with Bolivian officials for the consideration of historical questions; report that Bolivian military forces have suffered a severe reverse.
371
Dec. 11 (112) From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.)
Report concerning the Paraguayan offensive launched on December 5, which culminated in the unconditional surrender of two Bolivian divisions.
371
Dec. 12 (97) From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Advice that rumors of revolution in Bolivia are unfounded; also that travel of the military members of the League Commission to the front has been delayed.
372
[Page XXXIX]Dec. 12 (50) From the Chairman of the American Delegation to the Seventh International Conference of American States (tel.)
For the President from Secretary Hull (Chairman of the American delegation): Advice of plan to promote peace in the Chaco by having telegrams read at the Conference from a few heads of Governments expressing hope for success of the peace efforts being made by the Conference, the League, and other agencies; request that President either send a suitable telegram or that authorization be granted the Secretary to deliver such to the President of the Conference.
372
Dec. 12 (69) To the Chairman of the American Delegation to the Seventh International Conference of American States (tel.)
Message from President Roosevelt to the President of the Conference (text printed) along the lines indicated in telegram No. 50, December 12.
373
Dec. 14 (314) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Information concerning League action on a request of the Chaco Investigating Commission for support by League members at Montevideo of the Commission’s formula for settlement of the dispute.
373
Dec. 14 (210) From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Advice from Foreign Minister that his last information from La Paz indicates the likelihood of a revolution and the overthrow of the Bolivian Government; his anticipation that the way will very soon be open for a further effort to bring about peace.
375
Dec. 15 (317) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Instructions by various League members to their delegates at Montevideo for support of Chaco Investigating Commission.
375
Dec. 16 (85) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Approval of suggested alteration of a Chilean proposal that the Conference be placed on record as supporting the League in the application of the Covenant to the Bolivian-Paraguayan controversy.
376
Dec. 16 (60) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
For the President and Acting Secretary of State Phillips: Advice that steps have been taken to avoid obligation of the U.S. Government with respect to sanctions as set forth in the Chilean proposal to end the Chaco war.
376
Dec. 18 (100) From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Information that three members of the League Commission, having been assured of Bolivian agreement to integral arbitration, are returning to Asunción expecting acceptance from the Paraguayan President but difficulties with other leaders.
376
Dec. 18 (64) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Advice concerning a form of declaration on the Chaco question which was submitted in a private meeting of the heads of the delegations; request for Department’s views.
377
Dec. 18 (66) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Information that entire committee approves of and wishes to take final action on the declaration referred to in telegram No. 64, December 18; request for immediate reply.
377
[Page XL]Dec. 18 (94) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Department’s approval of the Chaco declaration.
377
Dec. 19 (113) From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.)
For the Secretary: Information that the League Commission has received a communication from the Paraguayan President proposing a 10-day general armistice; that the Paraguayan Government has earnestly requested a direct answer so that orders to cease hostilities may be issued.
378
Dec. 19 (114) From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.)
For the Secretary: Advice that Bolivia has accepted the armistice proposed by Paraguay; also that the League Commission hopes to arrive in Montevideo on December 24 where it will be at the disposal of the Bolivian and Paraguayan plenipotentiaries.
378
Dec. 19 (71) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Conference President’s hope that Bolivia and Paraguay will reach a definitive agreement as to demobilization and arbitration before the Conference closes.
378
Dec. 19 (102) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Congratulations for recent achievement in the Chaco peace efforts.
379
Dec. 22 (115) From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.)
For the Secretary: Manifestation of growing demand in Paraguay for peace commensurate with sweeping military successes, and indication that submission to arbitration by any agency of the territorial question will be resisted.
379
Dec. 22 (115) To the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
Advice that the Bolivian Government has complained of a violation of the truce on the part of the Paraguayan Government.
380
Dec. 22 (80) From the Chairman of the American Delegation (tel.)
For the President and Acting Secretary of State Phillips: Delay in the plenary session of the Conference owing to threats made by the Bolivians in connection with their charges of Paraguayan truce violation; subsequent agreement of the two belligerents to submit the controversy to a commission.
380
Dec. 23 (102) From the Minister in Bolivia (tel.)
Information that the Bolivian Government has accepted the suggestion that the truce violation question be given to a subcommittee designated by the League Commission.
381
Dec. 28 From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
For the President and Acting Secretary of State Phillips from Secretary of State Hull: Report that in conference with the Argentine President, the Secretary urged that Argentina make special efforts to induce Paraguay to agree to arbitrate; advice that Bolivia is already agreeable to arbitration.
381
Dec. 29 From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.)
Telegram (text printed), which was sent to the Legation at Montevideo and repeated to the Secretary of State at Buenos Aires, reporting conversation with the Paraguayan President in regard to his Government’s attitude toward possible extension of the armistice and demobilization.
381
[Page XLI]Dec. 29 From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.)
Advice that Paraguay has agreed to an 8-day extension of the armistice.
382
Dec. 29 (323) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Advice concerning a series of cablegrams summarizing recent action by the Pan American Conference and the Investigating Commission in regard to the Chaco dispute received by the League Secretariat from the Investigating Commission.
382
Dec. 29 (124) From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
For the President and Acting Secretary of State Phillips from Secretary Hull: Discussion of Chaco problems with the Argentine President and Foreign Minister, wherein the Secretary stated his belief that Argentina is in a better position than other Governments to influence Paraguay to extend the armistice and agree to arbitration.
383

LETICIA DISPUTE BETWEEN COLOMBIA AND PERU

Date and number Subject Page
1933 Jan. 4 Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State
Expression of regret to Colombian Minister, Fabio Lozano, that Colombia has rejected the good offices of the Permanent Commission at Washington in the dispute with Peru over Leticia.
384
Jan. 5 Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State
Advice by the Peruvian representative before the Permanent Commission that the Peruvian Government has now accepted a Brazilian proposal for solution of the Leticia dispute, which has already been accepted by Colombia, and that the Permanent Commission is being informed, since its connection with the question is at an end, at least for the present time.
384
Jan. 5 Memorandum by the Secretary of State
Concern of Uruguayan Minister, as Chairman of the Permanent Commission, over Colombian refusal to have a conference under the Gondra Treaty, and his desire that the question be taken up with Assistant Secretary White.
385
Jan. 5 (2) To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Colombian Minister’s notification of his Government’s acceptance of Brazilian proposal; instructions to inform Brazilian Government of U. S. satisfaction upon learning that negotiations will take place in Rio de Janeiro.
386
Jan. 6 (1) From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Information that in view of Peruvian objections, Brazil has now suggested that Colombian-Peruvian conversations at Rio de Janeiro take place before, instead of after, Leticia has been returned to Colombia, and that the Brazilian Government requests U. S. views and assistance in obtaining Peruvian acceptance of this new proposal.
386
[Page XLII]Jan. 6 Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State
Telephone conversation with President Olaya of Colombia, who expressed dissatisfaction with a Peruvian counterproposal which would result in restoring Leticia to the Peruvian rebels in the event of unsuccessful negotiations; his further comment that, while he is willing to consider any Peruvian suggestions, he cannot promise in advance the revision of the boundary treaty of 1922 desired by Peru.
387
Jan. 7 Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State
Telephone conversation with the Counselor of Embassy in Brazil indicating Department’s willingness to support Brazilian proposal as requested in Embassy’s telegram No. 1, January 6 on condition that Department be informed as to exactly what the proposal is, and whether Colombia has accepted it.
389
Jan. 7 Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State
Telephone conversation with the Ambassador in Brazil, who explained revised proposal and said he had been informed that it was acceptable to Colombia; Department’s agreement to send a telegram to Peru in support of the proposal.
390
Jan. 7 Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State
Request, in telephone conversation with the Minister in Colombia, to be advised whether Colombia has accepted new Brazilian proposal, as reported; intention to suspend delivery of proposed message to Peruvian Government pending receipt of this information.
392
Jan. 7 (7) From the Minister in Colombia (tel.)
Information that President Olaya has not, as reported, agreed to new Brazilian proposal.
392
Jan. 7 (8) From the Minister in Colombia (tel.)
Information that President Olaya has telegraphed to the Colombian Legation at Rio de Janeiro a summary (text printed) containing the formula agreed to by Colombia, together with observations as to Colombian position regarding revision of the boundary treaty of 1922.
393
Jan. 7 (4) To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
From White (Assistant Secretary of State): Information that Department will not take up with Peruvian Government matter of support for second Brazilian proposal until question of Colombian acceptance is straightened out.
393
Jan. 8 (5) To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Transmittal of contents of telegram No. 8, January 7, from the Minister in Colombia.
394
Jan. 9 (6) To the Minister in Colombia (tel.)
Inquiry as to Colombian objection to the modified formula proposed by Brazil.
394
Jan. 9 (3) To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Request to be informed immediately concerning Brazilian plans for obtaining Peruvian and Colombian acceptance of proposed formula.
394
[Page XLIII]Jan. 9 Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State
Telephone conversation with Ambassador in Brazil, expressing Department’s concern over the advance of Colombian troops up the Amazon River, with danger of an imminent conflict, and failure of Colombia and Peru to reach a definite understanding on Brazilian proposal.
395
Jan. 9 (3) From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Information that Colombian Minister has received the telegram from his Government repeated to Department in telegram No. 8, January 7, from the Minister in Colombia; willingness of Peruvian Minister in Brazil to confer informally with Colombian Minister on Leticia problem.
397
Jan. 9 (9) From the Minister in Colombia (tel.)
Comment, with regard to modified Brazilian proposal, that any government which agreed to a further 3–month delay in the recovery of Leticia would be turned out of office.
398
Jan. 10 (5) From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Report of Brazilian intention to support proposition presented by Colombian Minister, and to request U. S. action to endeavor to persuade Peruvian Government to accept this proposal.
398
Jan. 10 Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State
Conversation with Brazilian Ambassador concerning nature of new proposal of Brazilian Government to Colombia and Peru, and his assurance that it agrees with that reported in telegram No. 5, January 10, from the Ambassador in Brazil; U. S. consent to urge Peruvian Government’s acceptance of this proposal.
399
Jan. 10 (5) To the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Note for Foreign Minister (text printed), for immediate presentation, urging Peruvian acceptance of new Brazilian proposal; instructions to inform Brazilian colleague when note is delivered, and to cooperate with him in supporting proposal.
400
Jan. 11 Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State
Brazilian Ambassador’s expression of thanks on behalf of his Government for U. S. support of proposal with Peruvian Government.
401
Jan. 12 (13) From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Refusal by President and Foreign Minister to accept second point of new Brazilian proposal, concerning delivery of Leticia to Colombia, and request that, instead, Brazil occupy Leticia pending final outcome of negotiations.
401
Jan. 13 Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State
Conversation with Peruvian Ambassador, who mentioned various factors involved in Leticia dispute.
401
Jan. 15 (21) From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Formal presentation, January 13, of Brazilian plan to Peruvian Government with request for an early reply.
403
Jan. 16 (25) From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Peruvian reply, January 14 (text printed), to U. S. note of January 10, advising that U. S. desires and opinions will be carefully considered in connection with the Brazilian proposal.
404
[Page XLIV]Jan. 16 (6) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Telegram from the President of the League of Nations Council to the Colombian Government, January 14 (text printed), quoting a telegram to the Peruvian Government, which advised that Colombia has submitted its views on the Leticia situation and invited Peru to present its views also.
405
Jan. 17 (7) From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Information that Colombian ships have left Manãos but will stop at Teffe provided Peru’s attitude is modified.
405
Jan. 17 (19) From the Minister in Colombia (tel.)
Information that President Olaya will not follow a recent intimation of League of Nations of its willingness to intervene in the Leticia question, but that he will make an appeal to the Kellogg Pact signatories.
406
Jan. 18 (7) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Telegrams to the President of the League Council from Colombia and Peru, January 16 (texts printed), replying to the League message cited in telegram No. 6, January 16, from the Consul at Geneva. Information that Leticia question is being placed on the agenda of the Council.
406
Jan. 18 (14) To the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Request for texts of the Brazilian proposal to Peru and the Peruvian reply.
407
Jan. 18 (31) From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Texts of Brazilian note and Peruvian reply requested in Department’s telegram No. 14, January 18.
408
Jan. 19 (14) To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Information that the proposal outlined by the Peruvian Ambassador as the one accepted by his Government differs from the Brazilian proposal in respect to the boundary modification provision, and that the Ambassador was advised that the United States will only support proposal as communicated by Brazil; instructions to advise the Brazilian Government accordingly.
(Footnote: The same telegram, except for last paragraph, to the Ambassador in Peru.)
411
Jan. 20 To the Secretary of the Navy
Information that in view of the situation between Peru and Colombia, the Peruvian Government has been informed that the use of the drydock at Balboa will not be available to the Peruvian cruiser now proceeding there; request that Commandant of the Fifteenth Naval District be informed accordingly.
412
Jan. 21 (21) From the Minister in Colombia (tel.)
Information that Colombian note to Kellogg Pact signatories, which had been delayed pending outcome of Brazilian mediation, will be transmitted as of January 21.
413
Jan. 23 Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State
Conversation with Peruvian Ambassador, who presented certain modifications desired by his Government in the Brazilian mediation proposal, and who was advised that the United States was unable to support such changes, although it would be willing under certain conditions to support an understanding that Leticia should be held by Brazil during negotiations.
413
[Page XLV]Jan. 23 (37) From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Summary of Brazilian note to Peruvian Government, reviewing Brazilian efforts at mediation and Colombian concessions in effort to reach an agreement, and requesting Peruvian reply.
416
Jan. 23 (41) From the Colombian Minister
Appeal to the United States to call the attention of the Peruvian Government to its obligations under the Kellogg-Briand Pact, with regard to the unlawful seizure of Colombian territory by Peruvian military forces.
418
Jan. 24 (9) From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Brazilian proposal to make circular request of all American powers for individual representations to the Peruvian Government for the maintenance of peace, in view of Peru’s intransigent attitude and the fact that the Colombian flotilla is only 4 days distant from Leticia.
420
Jan. 24 (17) To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Accordance with Brazilian efforts to maintain peace, and information concerning U. S. action in response to Colombian appeal under the Kellogg Pact.
420
Jan. 24 (17) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Telegram from Peru to the League of Nations, January 23 (text printed), requesting the League to order the suspension of all measures of force in the dispute between Colombia and Peru. Information that question is now under consideration by a Council committee.
420
Jan. 25 Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State and Comment Thereon by the Secretary of State
Discussion of Leticia dispute with British, French, Italian, German, and Japanese Ambassadors, who were informed of U. S. intention, in response to Colombian appeal, to send a note to Peru with respect to its violation of the Kellogg Pact.
421
Jan. 25 To the Peruvian Minister for Foreign Affairs (tel.)
Review of background of Leticia dispute, and urgent appeal to Peruvian Government to stand by its commitments under the Kellogg Pact and to accept the Brazilian proposal for settling the question.
423
Jan. 25 (9) To the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Transmittal, for information of the Secretary General of the League, of text of U. S. telegram to Peru of January 25.
428
Jan. 25 To All Diplomatic Missions in Latin America (cir. tel.)
Information concerning communication to Peru of January 25.
428
Jan. 26 (21) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Telegram from the League Council to Colombia (text printed), incorporating a telegram to Peru, referring to Peruvian duty to refrain from any intervention by force on Colombian territory; expression of confidence that Colombian authorities will avoid violation of Peruvian territory and exercise clemency in the restoration of their legitimate rights.
429
[Page XLVI]Jan. 26 (25) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Request of Drummond, Secretary General of the League, for the formal communication to him, with permission to circulate it, of Department’s telegram to Peru of January 25; Consul’s suggestion for the inclusion of an explanatory paragraph, referring to Colombia’s appeal under the Kellogg Pact.
430
Jan. 26 (10) To the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Instructions to make formal communication to Drummond of Department’s telegram of January 25 to Peru, with suggested explanatory paragraph.
431
Jan. 27 Memorandum by the Chief of the Division of Latin American Affairs
Proposal by Dr. Rowe, Director General of the Pan American Union, that the State Department call a meeting of heads of the Latin American missions in Washington to consider the attitudes to be taken by their respective Governments on the Brazilian proposal; U. S. feeling that such a meeting, if it were thought desirable to have one, should be summoned by Brazil.
431
Jan. 27 (26) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Drummond’s report of discussion with Colombian and Peruvian representatives concerning possible methods of reaching a settlement of the dispute, in which it was proposed that Brazilian occupation of Leticia should be extended from the period of 10 days to a month or 6 weeks; agreement of both delegates to submit this proposal to their respective Governments.
433
Jan. 27 From the Peruvian Minister for Foreign Affairs (tel.)
Reply to U. S. telegram of January 25, explaining Peruvian military and juridical position with respect to Leticia, affirming its intent to comply with the Kellogg Pact and other international obligations, but reiterating its desire for rectification of the Colombian-Peruvian boundary by revision of the Salomon-Lo-zano Treaty.
434
Jan. 30 (4) From the Minister in Ecuador (tel.)
Ecuadoran note to Peru with regard to Leticia dispute, expressing hope that Peru will observe its obligations under the Kellogg Pact; similar note to Colombia, omitting reference to Kellogg Pact. Foreign Minister’s renewal of request for assistance in securing Ecuadoran participation in negotiations for solution of Amazon territorial problems.
437
Jan. 30 (30) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Report of conversation between Drummond and the Colombian and Peruvian representatives, and their agreement to refrain from further suggestions at Geneva in order to allow time for developments in the various proposals now before the Peruvian Government.
438
Jan. 30 To the Peruvian Minister for Foreign Affairs (tel.)
Acknowledgment of Peruvian telegram of January 27, expressing hope for Peru’s immediate acceptance of Brazilian proposal without modification.
439
[Page XLVII]Jan. 30 (18) To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Instructions to make suggestion to the Foreign Minister, in the event of Peruvian nonacceptance of Brazilian proposal within a reasonable period, for a last Brazilian appeal to Peru to secure the peaceful occupation of Leticia by Colombia, to be followed by the conference in Rio de Janeiro for the adjustment of outstanding Colombian-Peruvian differences.
439
Jan. 31 From the Peruvian Minister for Foreign Affairs (tel.)
Notification of unconditional acceptance of first and third bases of Brazilian proposal, and willingness to accept the second with certain modifications.
440
Jan. 31 (10) From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Foreign Minister’s willingness to adopt suggestion conveyed in Department’s telegram No. 18, January 30, should circumstances develop as outlined.
440
Feb. 1 To Certain Diplomatic Missions in Latin America (cir. tel.)
Instructions to report telegraphically whether the Government concerned has sent a note to Peru urging compliance with Kellogg Pact and acceptance of Brazilian proposal, and, if not, to point out the importance of its doing so.
441
Feb. 1 (25) To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
Instructions to discuss with Foreign Secretary a recent British aide-mémoire, which shows British misconception of Brazilian proposal, and to urge that British make representations to Peru in support of the Kellogg Pact and the bona fide Brazilian proposal.
441
Feb. 2 (18) From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.)
Report concerning Paraguayan telegram to Peru urging acceptance of Brazilian proposal.
444
Feb. 2 (3) From the Minister in Costa Rica (tel.)
Information that text of Costa Rican cable to Peru expressing hope that Brazilian proposal would be accepted has been transmitted to Department by despatch of January 31.
444
Feb. 2 (5) From the Minister in Guatemala (tel.)
Information concerning Guatemalan message to Peruvian Government.
444
Feb. 2 (8) From the Ambassador in Cuba (tel.)
Information that instructions (text printed) have been sent to the Cuban Chargé in Peru for representations in support of the Brazilian proposal, and that further instructions are being sent, but that they are not based on the Kellogg Pact.
444
Feb. 2 (2) From the Minister in the Dominican Republic (tel.)
Information that Dominican Government on January 30 telegraphed Peru urging acceptance of the Brazilian proposal.
445
Feb. 2 (25) From the Minister in Nicaragua (tel.)
Information that on January 27 Nicaragua sent a telegram to Peru urging acceptance of the Brazilian proposal.
445
Feb. 2 (24) From the Ambassador in Mexico (tel.)
Information that as Mexico has no diplomatic relations with Peru, it is not possible for Mexico to make any representations to Peru.
446
[Page XLVIII]Feb. 2 (22) From the Minister in Panama (tel.)
Panamanian Government’s representations to Peru, January 27 (text printed), based on Kellogg Pact.
446
Feb. 2 (5) To the Ambassador in Cuba (tel.)
Instructions to explain to the Foreign Minister Department’s view that it is important that Cuban representations to Peru in the Leticia dispute be based on the Kellogg Pact.
446
Feb. 2 (21) From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.)
Information that Chilean Foreign Minister intends to send a communication to Peru based on the Kellogg Pact, but is reserving action pending his conference with the Argentine Foreign Minister.
447
Feb. 3 (4) From the Minister in Costa Rica (tel.)
Information that Costa Rican telegram to Peru urging acceptance of Brazilian proposal made no mention of the Kellogg Pact.
447
Feb. 3 (9) From the Ambassador in Cuba (tel.)
Information that Cuban Chargé in Peru has been instructed to present a note supporting action on the basis of the Kellogg Pact.
448
Feb. 3 (5) From the Minister in Haiti (tel.)
Information that on January 28 the Haitian Government sent a telegram to Peru along the lines of Department’s circular telegram of February 1.
448
Feb. 3 (26) From the Minister in Nicaragua (tel.)
Information that Nicaragua will telegraph Peru, referring to its commitments under Kellogg Pact and declaration of August 3, 1932.
448
Feb. 3 (21) From the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
Information that British agree with American position as conveyed in Department’s telegram No. 25 of February 1, and that Foreign Minister is considering representations under the Kellogg Pact.
448
Feb. 3 (2) From the Minister in Venezuela (tel.)
Information that Venezuela is telegraphing Peru in support of position as outlined in Department’s circular telegram of February 1.
449
Feb. 3 (13) To the Ambassador in Chile (tel.)
Opinion as to importance of Chilean Government’s taking action on the basis of the Kellogg Pact.
449
Feb. 3 (27) To the Ambassador in Great Britain (tel.)
Hope that British Foreign Office will make representations to Peru under the Kellogg Pact, and information that Germany and Italy have authorized their representatives in Peru to make such representations when the British and French do so.
449
Feb. 3 (16) To the Minister in Colombia (tel.)
From Rublee (Financial Adviser to the Colombian Government): Inquiry as to whether President Olaya will accept Peruvian suggestion for a limited period of negotiations to be followed by arbitration in case of failure to reach accord, and if so, whether he will notify Brazil accordingly.
450
[Page XLIX]Feb. 3 (24) From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.)
Disinclination of Foreign Minister to take further action in the Leticia matter.
450
Feb. 4 (21) From the Minister in Paraguay (tel.)
Information that Paraguay has sent a further communication to Peru referring to the Kellogg Pact.
451
Feb. 4 (25) From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.)
Report of undecided attitude of the Foreign Minister with regard to action under the Kellogg Pact.
451
Feb. 4 (3) From the Minister in the Dominican Republic (tel.)
Information that express reference to the Kellogg Pact was not included in the Dominican Government’s first telegram to Peru, but will be made in a further communication.
451
Feb. 4 (27) To the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Receipt of information that British Government has now instructed its Minister in Peru to make representations on the basis of the Kellogg Pact; expectation that France will soon take similar action.
452
Feb. 4 (25) From the Minister in Colombia (tel.)
For Rublee: Advice that President Olaya would accept formula proposed in Department’s telegram No. 16, February 3, if it has been correctly understood, but would not suggest it to Brazil, which has declared its efforts at mediation are at an end.
(Footnote: Information that understanding of formula is correct.)
452
Feb. 5 (7) From the Minister in Haiti (tel.)
Information concerning proposed Haitian telegram to Peru expressing satisfaction at Peruvian decision to accept Brazilian proposal, and making direct reference to the Kellogg Pact.
453
Feb. 5 (26) From the Minister in Colombia (tel.)
Additional condition proposed by President Olaya to formula referred to in Minister’s telegram No. 25, February 4, which concerns freedom of movement for Colombian flotilla under Vasquez Cobo.
453
Feb. 6 Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State
Telephone conversation with Embassy in Brazil, which was instructed to take up with the Foreign Office question of modified proposal and continuance of Brazilian mediation efforts; further suggestion for arrangements for Brazilian flotilla to accompany Colombian flotilla to Colombian port of Leticia as a guarantee of nonaggression against Peru.
453
Feb. 6 Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State
Conversation with German and Italian Ambassadors, who were informed that the British had now made representations to Peru based on the Kellogg Pact, and were requested to suggest that their Governments proceed with representations without waiting for France.
455
Feb. 6 (8) From the Minister in Haiti (tel.)
Request for Department’s suggestions, if any, in regard to proposed Haitian telegram to Peru reported in Minister’s telegram No. 7, February 5.
456
[Page L]Feb. 6 (6) From the Minister in Costa Rica (tel.)
Information that Foreign Minister is cabling note to Peru invoking Kellogg Pact.
456
Feb. 6 (27) From the Minister in Colombia (tel.)
For Rublee: Olaya’s withdrawal of acceptance of modified proposal because of opposition of Foreign Affairs Advisory Committee and of representative at League of Nations.
456
Feb. 6 (94) From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
Drummond’s request for confirmation or refutation of reports of end of Brazilian mediation and possibility of an armed clash between Colombian and Peruvian forces on Colombian territory.
457
Feb. 6 (9) From the Minister in Haiti (tel.)
Haitian telegram to Peru (text printed), which is based definitely on the Kellogg Pact.
457
Feb. 6 (68) From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
British Minister’s oral representations to Foreign Minister concerning Peruvian obligations under the Kellogg Pact, and Peruvian determination to hold Leticia.
457
Feb. 6 (20) To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Advice with reference to telephone conversation of Assistant Secretary of State with Embassy in Brazil, February 6, that Olaya’s withdrawal of acceptance of proposal has changed the situation.
458
Feb. 6 (29) To the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Instructions to urge Foreign Minister to make representations to Peru concerning its obligations under the Kellogg Pact.
458
Feb. 6 (63) To the Minister in Switzerland, at Geneva (tel.)
Advice that Department’s information confirms reports contained in Minister’s telegram No. 94 of February 6, but opinion that way is still open for mediation and that best course is to continue support of Brazilian Government.
459
Feb. 6 (18) To the Minister in Colombia (tel.)
Information that Department has not yet been advised of the end of Brazilian mediation; disappointment at Olaya’s withdrawal of acceptance of recent proposal.
460
Feb. 6 (21) To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Determination to continue full support of Brazilian proposal, and desire to be kept informed of developments in the matter.
460
Feb. 6 (3) To the Minister in Haiti (tel.)
Observations with respect to proposed Haitian telegram to Peru, reported in Minister’s telegram No. 8, February 6.
461
Feb. 6 (12) From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Advice that Brazil has not abandoned mediation, but is unwilling to accept Peruvian suggestion with respect to long tenure of Leticia.
461
Feb. 7 Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State
German Ambassador’s advice that his Government is making representations to Peru with respect to its obligations under the Kellogg Pact.
461
[Page LI]Feb. 7 (13) From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Reports that Peruvian Government is in difficulties and may fall.
462
Feb. 7 (3) From the Minister in Venezuela (tel.)
Information that Venezuelan note to Peru supported Brazilian proposal and U. S. note, but did not mention Kellogg Pact.
462
Feb. 7 (10) From the Minister in Honduras (tel.)
Honduran representations to Peru (text printed), urging acceptance of Brazilian proposal and referring to Kellogg Pact.
462
Feb. 7 (28) From the Minister in Colombia (tel.)
Olaya’s agreement to renew acceptance of modified proposal with provision that Colombian ships will enter the Putumayo; his desire for Peruvian reply by February 8.
463
Feb. 7 (14) From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Brazilian acceptance of Peruvian suggestion for joint Colombian-Peruvian cession to Brazil of Leticia territory for period of approximately 60 days, and desire that U. S. Government advise Colombia to accept this plan.
463
Feb. 7 (54) From the Ambassador in France (tel.)
Information that French representative in Peru has been instructed to make representations reminding Peru of its obligations under the Kellogg Pact.
464
Feb. 7 (22) To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Request for text of revised Brazilian formula, and inquiry as to whether it is definitely understood that Colombia will receive Leticia whatever the outcome of the negotiations.
464
Feb. 7 (20) To the Minister in Colombia (tel.)
Information that it will be impossible to obtain Peruvian reply to revised proposal by February 8, and instructions to endeavor to have advance of Colombian ships delayed as much as possible.
465
Feb. 7 (4) From the Minister in the Dominican Republic (tel.)
Information from Foreign Minister that he does not recall receiving a request from Colombia, but that he is sending a telegram to Peru referring specifically to the Kellogg Pact.
465
Feb. 8 (5) From the Minister in the Dominican Republic (tel.)
Foreign Minister’s confirmation of facts reported in telegram No. 4, February 7.
466
Feb. 8 (16) From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Foreign Minister’s confirmation of understanding that Leticia is to be returned to Colombia; question as to when 60-day period of Brazilian tenure is to begin.
466
Feb. 8 (24) To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Reiteration of necessity, if effective action is to be taken, for Brazil to formulate its proposal and submit it to Peru immediately, and to furnish U.S. Government with the exact text.
466
Feb. 9 (17) From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Memorandum of Brazil’s position (text printed), submitted by Foreign Minister, upholding Brazil’s original formula, but expressing willingness to extend period of Brazil’s temporary occupancy of Leticia.
467
[Page LII]Feb. 9 Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State
Telephone conversation with Ambassador in Brazil in which important omissions in the Brazilian memorandum of February 9 were pointed out; request for actual text of proposal being sent to Peru, and suggestion that the same proposal should be sent also to Colombia.
467
Feb. 9 (18) From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Information that Brazilian proposal is being telegraphed to the Brazilian Embassy in Peru for submission to the Peruvian Government.
469
Feb. 9 (29) From the Minister in Colombia (tel.)
Critical position of Olaya domestically, but willingness to stand by his acceptance of formula exactly as contained in Minister’s telegram No. 25, February 4.
469
Feb. 10 (25) To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Information concerning difficulties in Colombia and Olaya’s position as reported in telegram No. 29, February 9, from the Minister in Colombia.
469
Feb. 10 (32) From the Minister in Colombia (tel.)
Foreign Minister’s emphasis on Colombian objections to use of certain phrases in proposal.
470
Feb. 10 (19) From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Foreign Office telegram to Colombia and Peru (text printed) setting forth mediation proposal.
470
Feb. 10 (33) From the Minister in Colombia (tel.)
Information that a delay in the advance of the Colombian flotilla has been ordered.
471
Feb. 10 (20) From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Foreign Office amplification of Brazilian note to Colombia and Peru.
471
Feb. 10 (30) From the Ambassador in Chile (tel.)
Information that Chilean response to Colombian request for action under the Kellogg Pact gave support of peaceful settlement in general terms only.
471
Feb. 10 (26) To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Desire that Brazilian proposal be clarified in certain respects; intention to make no representations in support of proposal until this is done, and to make no further request for delay in Colombian naval expedition.
472
Feb. 10 (21) To the Minister in Colombia (tel.)
Transmittal of contents of Department’s telegram No. 26, February 10, to the Ambassador in Brazil; expression of appreciation of Colombian policy of moderation in holding up expedition to Leticia.
473
Feb. 11 (21) From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Foreign Office agreement to make substitution in phrasing of proposal to meet Colombian objection.
473
[Page LIII]Feb. 11 (29) To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Observation that substitution suggested in telegram No. 21, February 11, appears satisfactory, but that provision for return of Leticia to Colombia after 60 days should also be included; instructions to impress Brazilian Government with need for haste.
473
Feb. 11 (22) From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Brazilian explanation concerning equivalent Spanish translation for Portuguese expression to which Colombia objects.
474
Feb. 12 (35) From the Minister in Colombia (tel.)
Information that Colombia refuses to accept wording “in compensation”.
474
Feb. 13 (23) From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Foreign Minister’s explanation as to why the changes requested by Colombia either need not or cannot be made in the proposal.
475
Feb. 13 (36) From the Minister in Colombia (tel.)
Information that Vasquez Cobo in charge of Colombian flotilla has arrived at the Brazilian-Colombian boundary near Tarapacá.
475
Feb. 13 Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State
Italian Ambassador’s advice that his Government has now made representations to Peru under the Kellogg Pact similar to those made by the British.
475
Feb. 14 From the Colombian Minister for Foreign Affairs (tel.)
Account of Peruvian air attack on Colombian vessels following delivery of a communication (text printed) from Vasquez Cobo, Commander of Colombian Expedition, to the inhabitants of Tarapacá, concerning Colombian intention to reoccupy that territory and restore order; observation that the attack was made while the ships were in Brazilian waters, 81 kilometers from the nearest Peruvian territory.
476
Feb. 14 Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State
Report by Colombian representatives of Peruvian attack on Colombian ships; discussion of Colombian proposal to try to secure a Brazilian squadron to accompany Colombian ships, and of U. S. policy concerning a declaration of neutrality where hostilities occurred without a declaration of war.
477
Feb. 14 (37) From the Minister in Colombia (tel.)
Report by Vasquez Cobo concerning Peruvian attack.
477
Feb. 14 (25) From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Brazilian intention to confine its efforts in Leticia hostilities to the preservation of the inviolability of Brazilian territory.
478
Feb. 15 (38) From the Minister in Colombia (tel.)
Report that Tarapacá has been occupied.
478
Feb. 15 (82) From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Official notification of the withdrawal of Brazilian mediation.
478
Feb. 15 (39) From the Minister in Colombia (tel.)
Colombian Government’s severance of diplomatic relations with Peru, but nonintention of declaring war.
479
[Page LIV]Feb. 15 (26) To the Minister in Colombia (tel.)
Explanation by Colombian representative of Colombia’s decision to attack and occupy certain Peruvian positions along the Putumayo; discussion as to effect of such action on Colombian assurances to the League and on its position before world opinion.
479
Feb. 16 (40) From the Minister in Colombia (tel.)
Information that after discussion Olaya changed military plans and will instruct the Colombian representative at the League of Nations to proceed under article 16 of the League Covenant; his desire for the presence of observers from the Department of State, the League, and Brazil, and his further request for discreet inquiry by Department concerning the possibility of a change in Brazilian attitude toward the Colombian expeditionary force.
480
Feb. 16 (115) From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
Information that League Council Committee has sent an inquiry to Peru concerning hostilities which are taking place on Colombian territory.
481
Feb. 17 (29) To the Minister in Colombia (tel.)
Department’s attitude concerning inadvisability of complying with Colombian requests for an official observer with Colombian forces, and for inquiry concerning Brazilian attitude.
482
Feb. 17 (35) To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Arrangements for dispatch of Military Attaché, Major Sackville, to scene of operations in Leticia to obtain accurate and impartial information concerning the entire situation; instructions to request Brazilian Government for permission and all possible facilities for him to proceed to that area.
482
Feb. 17 (67) From the Colombian Minister
Information concerning Colombian severance of diplomatic relations with Peru following outbreak of hostilities at Leticia.
483
Feb. 18 (52) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
League Council Committee’s further inquiry to Peru (text printed) concerning presence of Peruvian military posts on Colombian territory.
484
Feb. 18 (27) From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Brazilian Government’s willingness to afford observation facilities for Major Sackville.
484
Feb. 20 (28) From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Information as to arrangements for Major Sackville’s trip.
485
Feb. 20 From the Peruvian Minister for Foreign Affairs (tel.)
Historical background with relation to recent events in Leticia area.
485
Feb. 21 (53) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Account of meeting of the League Council in response to Colombia’s request and invocation of article 15; nonattendance of Peruvian delegate.
488
Feb. 23 (100) From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Information that Argentina, Brazil, and Chile contemplate making suggestions for settling the Peruvian-Colombian dispute.
489
[Page LV]Feb. 23 (124) From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
Information that the Council Committee has presented a memorandum to the Peruvian representative (text printed) and one to the Colombian representative (text printed), suggesting certain actions as preliminary to conciliation proceedings under article 15, involving evacuation of Leticia territory by Peru and the presence there of a League commission with command over Colombian forces.
490
Feb. 25 (76) To the Minister in Switzerland, at Geneva (tel.)
Information that U.S. reply (infra) to Peruvian Foreign Minister’s telegram of February 20 supports position taken by the League; assurance of future support of League action.
491
Feb. 25 To the Peruvian Minister for Foreign Affairs (tel.)
Reply to Peruvian telegram of February 20, reiterating previous U.S. views with regard to a peaceful settlement of the Peruvian-Colombian dispute, and expressing hope that Peru will now accept League proposal of February 23.
492
Feb. 25 (130) From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
Memorandum from Drummond (text printed), advising that upon receipt of satisfactory Peruvian assurances, an aide-mémoire, almost identical with that presented to Colombian representative on February 23, was given to Colombian and Peruvian representatives as Committee’s final and definite suggestion for a settlement.
492
Feb. 27 To the Colombian Minister for Foreign Affairs (tel.)
Expression of fullest support for League proposal of February 25 and hope that Colombian Government will accept it.
(Footnote: The same telegram, mutatis mutandis, February 27, to the Peruvian Foreign Minister; text also quoted to the Minister in Switzerland.)
493
Feb. 27 From the Colombian Minister for Foreign Affairs (tel.)
Information that Colombia is accepting without any modification the League proposal of February 25.
494
Mar. 2 Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State
Conversation with the Colombian Minister and Señor Guzman, Colombian special representative, concerning their belief that Colombia should take the Putumayo ports immediately, as Peru is delaying in order to improve its military position; U.S. refusal to express an opinion, but advice that League will soon proceed with its report, if Peruvian reply is not received within a reasonable time, and that Colombian Government should take this into consideration.
494
Mar. 7 (140) From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
Peruvian objections to League proposal; Committee’s intention to formulate draft report under paragraph 4, article 15 of the Covenant; discussion with Drummond of measures under consideration by the League, including possibility of an arms embargo against Peru, establishment of an advisory committee in the matter, and probable U.S. attitude concerning invitation to appoint an American member on the committee.
495
Mar. 10 (144) From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
Request for U. S. views on proposed arms embargo against Peru.
496
[Page LVI]Mar. 11 From the Peruvian Minister for Foreign Affairs (tel.)
Information that Peru has accepted the League proposal with the request that the police in the Leticia territory be of any other nationality than Colombian.
496
Mar. 13 (148) From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
Confidential summary of Committee’s draft report and draft recommendation to be submitted to the Council, latter of which includes appointment of an advisory committee with which the U. S. and Brazilian Governments will be invited to cooperate.
497
Mar. 15 (80) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Information that draft report and resolution, essentially as reported in telegram No. 148, March 13, will be submitted to the Council for final adoption within a few days.
499
Mar. 15 (88) To the Minister in Switzerland, at Geneva (tel.)
Instructions for reply with regard to probable invitation to United States to cooperate with advisory committee to be set up to watch the Leticia situation.
499
Mar. 16 Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State
Conversation with Colombian Minister and Dr. Guzman, who were advised that the United States and the League were acting independently in the Leticia situation; U. S. unwillingness to indicate in advance what action it will take on the forthcoming League report.
499
Mar. 16 From the Peruvian Embassy
Advice that Peru has accepted the proposals of the League on condition that occupying troops of some other nationality be substituted for Colombian forces; explanation of Peruvian demand.
501
Mar. 18 (81) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Information that report and resolution were adopted unanimously by the League Council, and accepted by Colombia, but not by Peru.
505
Mar. 18 (82) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Account of proceedings leading to adoption of report by League Council; intention of Advisory Committee to invite cooperation of United States and Brazil.
505
Mar. 18 (154) From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
Letter from Drummond concerning invitation for United States to collaborate in work of the Advisory Committee on Leticia, and reply in accordance with Department’s instructions in telegram No. 88, March 15 (texts printed).
506
Mar. 20 (34) From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
Information that out of courtesy Brazil is accepting the League invitation to cooperate with the Advisory Committee on Leticia, but is doubtful that its efforts will be successful.
508
Mar. 22 (155) From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
Account of Advisory Committee meeting, which U. S. representative attended in accordance with previously expressed conditions, at which the question of the application of an arms embargo against Peru was discussed.
508
[Page LVII]Mar. 22 (156) From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
Observations with regard to the League’s proposed arms embargo against Peru as to the precedent it would establish in relation to Japan and to possible eventualities elsewhere.
509
Mar. 23 (35) From the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
From Major Sackville: Request that permission be obtained for him to enter Peruvian and Colombian territory for purposes of observation and information.
510
Mar. 24 (157) From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
Information that Brazil is accepting participation in the League Advisory Committee on Leticia upon the same conditions as those imposed by the United States.
510
Mar. 24 (44) To the Ambassador in Brazil (tel.)
For Major Sackville: Advice that situation has changed and that it is not advisable to enter Peruvian or Colombian territory; instructions to make observations for a few days on the Brazilian side and then return to Rio de Janeiro.
510
Mar. 29 (44) From the Minister in Panama (tel.)
Information that the Panaman Legation in France has transmitted an inquiry from League Consultative Committee (text printed) as to Panama’s attitude toward prohibiting reexportation and transit of arms to Peru; Panaman desire to know U.S. attitude in the matter.
511
Mar. 31 (38) To the Minister in Panama (tel.)
U.S. nonintention to take any position in regard to arms embargo prior to League decision in the matter.
511
Apr. 5 (163) From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
Information that at meeting of the Advisory Committee a communication of March 30 from Peru was considered, which reported the seizure by Colombian forces on March 27 of the outer Putumayo Peruvian post of Giiepi.
511
Apr. 6 (164) From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
Report of Advisory Committee meeting at which there was brought up a new Peruvian proposal made to British and Italian representatives concerning Peru’s willingness to enter into discussions for a settlement of the Leticia dispute on the basis of the recommendations of the Committee of Three of February 25.
512
Apr. 7 (165) From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
Advisory Committee letter of April 6 to the Peruvian representative (text printed), advising that the Committee is deferring its reply to the Peruvian communication of March 30, in view of the possibility of securing the cooperation of the two interested parties in the execution of the Council recommendation of March 18.
513
Apr. 7 (167) From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
Communication from Chairman of the Advisory Committee (text printed) concerning arrangement for the execution of the Council’s recommendation of March 18, which the Peruvian representative has advised that his Government accepts, and which the Colombian representative is transmitting to his Government for approval; hope that the United States will urge Colombian acceptance.
514
[Page LVIII]Apr. 8 (40) To the Minister in Colombia (tel.)
Transmittal of telegram No. 167, April 7, from the Minister in Switzerland, with authorization to discuss arrangement with President Olaya and express hope that Colombia will accept it.
515
Apr. 11 (44) From the Minister in Colombia (tel.)
Information concerning telegram sent by the British Minister to his Government (text printed), reporting Colombia’s objections to the new League proposal, and containing a suggested formula to meet these objections, the principal point being a guarantee by the League of the recognition and protection of Colombian sovereignty over the Leticia area.
516
Apr. 12 (94) To the Minister in Switzerland, at Geneva (tel.)
Transmittal of telegram No. 44, April 11, from the Minister in Colombia.
518
Apr. 13 Memorandum by the Under Secretary of State
Conversation with the Peruvian Ambassador, who submitted a memorandum (infra), and made some observations with regard to the occupying forces for the Leticia area under the League plan.
518
Apr. 13 From the Peruvian Embassy
Desire of the Peruvian Government that the United States use its influence in an appeal to Colombia to accept the League plan.
519
Apr. 20 (168) From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
Conversation with Chairman of the Advisory Committee, who commented that Council’s action of March 18, recommending Peruvian evacuation of Leticia unconditionally, made Colombia’s position stronger legally and morally.
519
Apr. 21 (46) From the Minister in Colombia (tel.)
Colombian Government’s formula and two separate notes (texts printed) addressed to the League as proposed settlement of the Leticia dispute.
520
Apr. 27 (80) To the Chargé in Great Britain (tel.)
Transmittal of telegram No. 46, April 21, from the Minister in Colombia, with instructions to advise Foreign Office of U. S. opinion that it is a fair solution, and hope that British Government will urge its acceptance at the League.
521
Apr. 27 (96) To the Minister in Switzerland, at Geneva (tel.)
Transmittal of telegram No. 46, April 21, from the Minister in Colombia, with instructions informally to advise the Chairman of the Advisory Committee of U.S. view that it is a fair solution.
521
May 3 (42) To the Minister in Colombia (tel.)
Information that the Department has supported the Colombian proposal with the British Government and at the League, and, in response to British objections, has sent further instructions to London in support of the stipulation that the administration of the Leticia area shall be taken over in the name and the representation of the Colombian Government.
522
[Page LIX]May 3 (96) From the Chargé in Great Britain (tel.)
British Government’s willingness to support the Colombian formula with the League and with the Peruvian Government upon consideration of three points relating to the taking over of the administration of the Leticia territory and the occupation forces.
523
May 5 Memorandum by the Chief of the Division of Latin American Affairs
Discussion with Mr. Rublee, Special Financial Adviser to the Colombian Government, who said that President Olaya earnestly desired some effort by the United States to end the Colombian-Peruvian conflict; U.S. attitude that it had supported the Colombian counterproposal now under consideration by the League, and that nothing more could be done for the present.
524
May 9 (99) To the Minister in Switzerland, at Geneva (tel.)
Information concerning the application to Colombia and Peru of U.S. policy on the granting of facilities in the case of armed conflict between two American states.
525
May 10 (178) From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
Recommendations of the Advisory Committee to Colombia and Peru constituting settlement provided for in Council recommendations of March 18, and confidential letter to Colombian Government respecting use of Colombian troops (texts printed); request of Advisory Committee President that those members in a position to do so make representations to Colombia and Peru, in support of the document; request to be advised whether U. S. representatives will take such action.
525
May 11 (59) To the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Note for Foreign Minister (text printed) expressing hope that the recommendations of the League Advisory Committee of May 10 will be accepted.
(Footnote: Sent also to the Minister in Colombia as No. 45.)
527
May 12 (179) From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
Advice from President of Advisory Committee that the Peruvian representative has informed him that the leader of the Liberal Party in Colombia is being sent to Peru for the purpose of settling the dispute by direct negotiation, and that consequently an early reply to Advisory Committee’s recommendations is not expected.
528
Undated (49) From the Minister in Colombia (tel.)
Information that note transmitted in Department’s telegram No. 45, May 11 (see No. 59, May 11, to Peru) is being delivered, and that Colombian representative at the League has been instructed to accept the formula on behalf of the Colombian Government.
529
May 12 (141) From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Information that arrangements have been made for direct negotiations between Alfonso Lopez of Colombia and President Benavides of Peru; suggestion that note transmitted in Department’s telegram No. 59, May 11, be withheld pending further developments.
529
[Page LX]May 13 (61) To the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Instructions, in reply to telegram No. 141, supra, to present note immediately.
530
May 13 (144) From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Information that Department’s instructions in telegram No. 61, May 13, have been carried out.
530
May 13 (180) From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
Summary of Advisory Committee meeting, at which it was reported that the Colombian Government considered the League negotiations as the only official negotiations in the Leticia dispute, the Benavides-Lopez conversations being merely informal, and at which a decision was taken concerning furnishing of facilities to the Peruvian fleet.
530
May 14 (51) From the Minister in Colombia (tel.)
Information that Lopez is going to Peru in a personal, not an official capacity, and that Colombia has accepted League formula.
532
May 16 (145) From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Report of arrival of Lopez and party.
532
May 17 (53) From the Minister in Colombia (tel.)
Assertion by President Olaya that the Lopez negotiations appear to have been unsuccessful; his opinion that League recommendations of May 10 are the only hope of solution.
533
May 19 (148) From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Information from Foreign Office official that Benavides and Lopez have agreed in principle to accept League proposals; further report that Peru has agreed to pay an indemnity to Colombia.
533
May 19 (149) From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Acceptance by Benavides and Cabinet of last League proposal, and intention to request approval of Congress at special session May 20; information that question of indemnity and supervision of cessation of hostilities will be handled by the League Commission.
533
May 20 (104) To the Minister in Switzerland, at Geneva (tel.)
Information that the Colombian Minister has received a telegram from his Government (text printed), advising that no official notice has been received from Geneva of the settlement of the Leticia dispute, but that new Peruvian modifications to the League formula have been announced, which are unacceptable to Colombia.
534
May 20 (130) From the Consul at Geneva (tel.)
Exchange of telegrams between Peru and the League, May 17 and 18 (texts printed) concerning terms of arrangement providing for simultaneous evacuation of Leticia territory by Peru, and of Güepi and other Peruvian territory by Colombia; information that League has notified Peru of Colombian acceptance of proposal and requested an indication of Peruvian decision.
534
[Page LXI]May 20 (150) From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Information that Benavides-Lopez conversations resulted in only one change, with which Colombia has agreed, in the League proposal, respecting the method of recognizing Colombian sovereignty in the taking over of the Leticia territory by the League Commission.
535
May 22 (185) From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
Peruvian Government’s acceptance of Committee’s proposal subject to four minor alterations, and Secretary General’s comments regarding these points; Peruvian representative’s intention to request clarification of his Government’s instructions concerning tenure of Commission’s administration of the territory.
535
May 25 (187) From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
Information concerning Peruvian acceptance of the League proposal and arrangements for the conclusion of the accord between the two countries; suggestion for expression of gratification to the Secretary General and President of the Advisory Committee at the successful conclusion of League efforts to settle the Colombian-Peruvian dispute.
537
May 25 (110) To the Minister in Switzerland, at Geneva (tel.)
Instructions to make appropriate expressions of gratification as suggested in telegram No. 187, May 25.
538
May 26 (5602) From the Chargé in Colombia
Information that Colombian delegate to the League of Nations has reported that the commission to be appointed to administer the Leticia territory will be composed of an American, a Brazilian, and a Spaniard.
538
May 26 (157) From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Information that text of Geneva agreement signed May 25 was published in Peru with eight points substantially as contained in Department’s telegram No. 59, May 11, except for point 2 (text printed).
539
May 26 (190) From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
Discussion by League Advisory Committee of the question of appointment of members of the Leticia commission, in which suggestion was made for the appointment of an American army officer; request for early instructions concerning the appointment of an American member.
539
May 27 (52) To the Chargé in Colombia (tel.)
Instructions to express to Foreign Minister U. S. gratification at the conclusion of an agreement between Colombia and Peru for the settlement of the difficulties arising out of the Leticia incident.
(Footnote: The same, mutatis mutandis, to the Ambassador in Peru.)
540
June 1 (194) From the Minister in Switzerland (tel.)
League request for an early decision with regard to American member on Leticia commission.
541
June 1 (111) To the Minister in Switzerland, at Geneva (tel.)
Information that Col. Arthur W. Brown will be available for appointment as American member of the Leticia commission.
541
[Page LXII]June 23 (5679) From the Chargé in Colombia
Note from the Foreign Minister, June 21, and enclosed telegram from the President of the commission for the administration of the Leticia territory, June 19 (texts printed), advising that the commission has begun to function.
541
June 27 (168) From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Information that Leticia has been successfully delivered to the League commissioners.
543
June 27 (5685) From the Chargé in Colombia
Information concerning disposition of Colombian and Peruvian troops on the occasion of the delivery of the Leticia territory to the League commission.
543
June 29 (59) From the Chargé in Colombia (tel.)
President Olaya’s desire that Bogotá be selected as the site of the negotiations to be held under the League recommendations, and hope that the United States will suggest this to Peru.
544
June 30 (59) To the Chargé in Colombia (tel.)
Opinion that it would not be appropriate for the United States to intervene in the matter of the site of the Colombian-Peruvian negotiations, since this is a question for the League to decide.
545
July 7 (2905) From the Ambassador in Peru
Account of the turning over of Leticia by the Peruvian authorities to the League commission.
545
July 24 (68) From the Chargé in Colombia (tel.)
Foreign Minister’s telegram to the American Ambassador in Peru (text printed), requesting him to bring to the attention of the Peruvian Government the suggestion that the negotiations under the League recommendations be held at Geneva, with Panama or Washington as second choice.
546
July 25 (176) From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Request for instructions with regard to telegram No. 68, July 24, from Colombia.
546
July 26 (75) To the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Instructions to transmit message to Peruvian Government.
547
Aug. 1 (177) From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Inquiry as to method of transmittal of a memorandum from the Peruvian Government to the Colombian Government (text printed), making countersuggestion that one of several South American capitals be chosen as site of negotiations.
(Footnote: Department’s instructions to transmit memorandum directly to Colombia.)
547
Aug. 11 (70) From the Chargé in Colombia (tel.)
Colombian acceptance of Rio de Janeiro as site of Leticia negotiations, and desire that negotiations begin October 1.
548
Aug. 14 (71) From the Chargé in Colombia (tel.)
Information that Rio de Janeiro has definitely been agreed on, and the Brazilian Government informed, and that Peru has suggested that negotiations begin before October 1 if possible.
548
[Page LXIII]

ASSUMPTION BY THE AMERICAN EMBASSY IN PERU OF COLOMBIAN INTERESTS IN PERU; SACKING OF THE COLOMBIAN LEGATION

Date and number Subject Page
1933 Feb. 16 (32) To the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Instructions to advise the Peruvian Government and cable reply concerning U. S. arrangements with Colombian Government to take charge of Colombian interests in Peru, in view of severance of diplomatic relations between Colombia and Peru.
549
Feb. 16 (87) From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Foreign Minister’s cordial acquiescence in proposed U. S. assumption of Colombian interests.
549
Feb. 18 (89) From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Inquiry as to moment at which custodianship of Colombian archives and interests begins.
549
Feb. 19 (90) From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Account of sacking of Colombian Legation by a mob, and narrow escape of Colombian Minister.
550
Feb. 19 (91) From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Peruvian Government’s assurance of protection and promise of investigation and report in regard to sacking of Colombian Legation; recommendation, in view of present uncertain conditions, that a U. S. warship be sent to Callao.
550
Feb. 20 (92) From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Apprehension over huge patriotic demonstration to be held the afternoon of February 20.
551
Feb. 20 (36) To the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Opinion that the situation does not warrant the dispatch of a U. S. war vessel to Peruvian waters.
552
Feb. 20 (93) From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Request that Department seek Colombian authorization for payment of passages for repatriation of a group of Colombians, and for information as to possible future repatriations.
552
Feb. 20 (37) To the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Advice as to when responsibility for assumption of Colombian interests and custody of Colombian archives was begun, and instructions for guidance in carrying out duties.
553
Feb. 21 (38) To the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Instructions to communicate directly with the Legation at Bogotá with regard to arrangements for repatriation of Colombians.
553
Feb. 21 (5241) From the Minister in Colombia
Foreign Office request that Legation act as transmitting agent for Colombian Government’s cables to American Embassy at Lima in code.
553
Feb. 21 (95) From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Information that political demonstration on February 20 passed without unfortunate event.
554
Feb. 21 (96) From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Suggestion that United States offer to take charge of Peruvian interests in Colombia.
554
[Page LXIV]Feb. 22 (97) From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Diplomatic Corps’ intention to present to the Foreign Minister its views in regard to recent sacking of Colombian Legation, expressing expectation of a report in the matter and precautionary action by Peru in event of any new threat.
(Footnote: Information that Diplomatic Corps’ views were presented on February 23 with exception of reference to future precautions.)
555
Feb. 23 (99) From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Request for action on suggestion that United States offer to take charge of Peruvian interests in Colombia.
555
Feb. 24 (40) To the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Opinion as to inadvisability of U. S. action requested in Ambassador’s telegram No. 99, February 23.
556
Mar. 9 (490) To the Ambassador in Peru
Commendation for Ambassador’s conscientious actions on behalf of Colombian interests during sacking of Colombian Legation on February 19; general instructions as to informal nature of duties on behalf of Colombia, and other pertinent questions.
556
Mar. 31 (2733) From the Ambassador in Peru
Report of activities of the Embassy on behalf of Colombian interests; observations with regard to Colombian request for a report by the Embassy on the sacking of the Colombian Legation.
557
Apr. 20 (511) To the Ambassador in Peru
Concurrence in opinion as to inadvisability of complying with Colombian request for a report by the Embassy on the sacking of the Colombian Legation, and information that an appropriate instruction has been sent to the Legation at Bogotá (infra).
559
Apr. 20 (549) To the Minister in Colombia
Instructions to point out informally to the Foreign Minister the impropriety of the U. S. Embassy in Peru making a report on the sacking of the Colombian Legation.
(Note: Information that U.S. representation of Colombian interests in Peru continued until August 3, 1934.)
559

BOUNDARY DISPUTE BETWEEN ECUADOR AND PERU

Date and number Subject Page
1933 Jan. 4 Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State
Discussion with Ecuadoran Minister concerning Ecuador’s interest in the Leticia dispute between Colombia and Peru. Minister’s advice that negotiations in the boundary dispute between Ecuador and Peru are proceeding on the basis of the Ponce-Castro Agreement of 1924, under which the dispute will be brought to Washington if not settled by direct negotiation.
561
Jan. 9 (1) From the Minister in Ecuador (tel.)
Foreign Minister’s expression of Ecuadoran Government’s desire to participate in the negotiations at Rio de Janeiro regarding the Leticia dispute in order to protect its interests and to obtain a lasting settlement of boundary questions in the Amazon region.
562
[Page LXV]Jan. 11 Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State
Conversation with the Ecuadoran Minister, who was advised that the United States, in a note to Peru, has supported the Brazilian proposal in the Leticia dispute, which includes possibility of Ecuador’s being invited to participate in conversations to be held in Rio de Janeiro.
563
Jan. 11 (1) To the Minister in Ecuador (tel.)
Information that United States has supported in writing the Brazilian proposal in the Leticia dispute; understanding that Colombia has accepted the Brazilian proposal, including the participation of Ecuador.
564
Jan. 14 Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State
Conversation with Ecuadoran Minister, who was advised that Brazil, Colombia, and Peru have agreed not to include Ecuador in the Leticia negotiations; suggestion that, as Brazil and Colombia had indicated their willingness to include Ecuador, the Ecuadoran Government might endeavor to obtain Peruvian acceptance.
564
Jan. 16 (2) From the Minister in Ecuador (tel.)
Brazilian withdrawal of suggestion of invitation for Ecuador, leaving question of Ecuadoran participation in Rio de Janeiro conference up to Colombia and Peru; Ecuadoran request for use of U. S. good offices with Brazil in order to secure invitation for Ecuador.
565
Jan. 19 Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State
Ecuadoran Minister’s request that United States exert its influence with Peruvian Government, which is now apparently reluctant to include Ecuador in the conference; U. S. promise to examine the situation when the time comes and to do anything that can properly be done on behalf of Ecuador.
565
May 18 Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State
Ecuadoran Minister’s further request for U. S. action on behalf of Ecuador; U. S. views as to possible action which might be taken at appropriate time.
567
June 2 Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State
Discussion with the Ecuadoran Minister concerning Ecuadoran desire to be admitted to Leticia negotiations; advice that United States is sending instructions in the matter to U. S. missions in Colombia and Peru (infra).
568
June 2 (53) To the Chargé in Colombia (tel.)
Aide-mémoire for Foreign Minister (text printed) presenting for friendly consideration of the Colombian Government the desire of Ecuador to be admitted to the Leticia negotiations; information that instructions (text printed) have been sent to the Legation in Ecuador to inform the Foreign Minister of action taken.
(Footnote: The same telegram, June 2, to the Ambassador in Peru.)
569
June 6 (5634) From the Chargé in Colombia
Information that aide-mémoire was presented to the Foreign Minister, who said that he would endeavor to have a reply ready by June 7.
569
[Page LXVI]June 13 (5657) From the Chargé in Colombia
Foreign Office memorandum, June 12 (text printed), advising that it would be premature to express at the present time an opinion as to the possible inclusion of Ecuador in the conversations between Peru and Colombia.
571
June 27 (2891) From the Ambassador in Peru
Foreign Office memorandum, June 24 (text printed), in reply to U. S. aide-mémoire, advising that circumstances do not permit of a tripartite negotiation, but that Peruvian Government is prepared to negotiate directly with Ecuador with regard to the boundary dispute between the two countries.
572
Aug. 29 Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State
Ecuadoran Minister’s expression of his Government’s appreciation of U. S. action in bringing Ecuador’s views before the Colombian and Peruvian Governments.
574
Aug. 24 (183) From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Information from Foreign Minister that boundary negotiations will be conducted with the Ecuadoran Minister at Lima simultaneously with Leticia negotiations at Rio de Janeiro.
574
Aug. 29 From the Ecuadoran Minister
Expression of hope, since it has been decided by Colombia and Peru to conduct negotiations at Rio de Janeiro, that United States will renew its recommendation for the inclusion of Ecuador.
574
Sept. 7 Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State
Discussion with Ecuadoran Minister, who was informed that the Department was not inclined to take any further steps toward securing the inclusion of Ecuador in the boundary discussions between Colombia and Peru.
576
Sept. 15 (1133) From the Minister in Ecuador
Information that Ecuador is apparently seeking admission to the Leticia discussions as an interested observer. Probability that the proposed Ecuadoran-Peruvian boundary negotiations to be conducted simultaneously and parallel with the Leticia discussions will be held at Lima; Ecuadoran preference that they be held in Washington.
576
Sept. 20 (3042) From the Ambassador in Peru
Memorandum of conversation with the Foreign Minister, September 19 (text printed), concerning Peruvian readiness to undertake boundary negotiations with Ecuador at any time agreeable to Ecuador; attitude of Peru that an Ecuadoran observer at the Leticia negotiations would be undesirable, but willingness to give a written statement that Ecuadoran interests will not be involved in the discussions in any way.
578
Oct. 4 Memorandum by the Chief of the Division of Latin American Affairs
Discussion with Ecuadoran Minister concerning Ecuador’s right to participate in any territorial settlement in the Amazon Basin.
579
[Page LXVII]Oct. 18 From the Peruvian Ambassador
Information that Peruvian Government has addressed a note to Ecuador ratifying former assurance that Ecuadoran interests will not be involved in Leticia discussions, and formally inviting the initiation of direct boundary negotiations.
580
Oct. 19 (199) From the Ambassador in Peru (tel.)
Probability that Ecuador will accept Peruvian proposal for direct negotiations in lieu of participation in Rio de Janeiro conference.
581
Nov. 8 (54) From the Chargé in Ecuador (tel.)
Information that the Ecuadoran Minister at Lima has been instructed to reply affirmatively to Peruvian invitation for direct negotiations in Lima; unofficial information that Ecuador will ask that negotiations be held in Washington, in accordance with Ponce-Castro agreement.
581
Nov. 9 Memorandum by the Chief of the Division of Latin American Affairs
Conversation with Ecuadoran Minister, who requested U. S. assistance in efforts to have Peruvian-Ecuadoran boundary negotiations take place in Washington; U. S. attitude that the United States could not appropriately take such action.
581

NORTH AND CENTRAL AMERICAN REGIONAL RADIO CONFERENCE, MEXICO, JULY 10–AUGUST 9, 1933

Date and number Subject Page
1932 July 20 (730) To the Ambassador in Mexico
Information that the International Radio Conference will convene at Madrid, September 3, 1932, and will probably revise the International Radio Convention and Regulations signed in 1927; instructions to ascertain the Mexican Government’s views as to the desirability of discussing the bases of a possible North American regional agreement on radio within the framework of the Convention.
(Footnote: The same, mutatis mutandis, to the diplomatic representatives in Canada, Cuba, and Newfoundland.)
583
[Editor’s Note: Information that at the Madrid Conference, the American, Canadian, Cuban, and Mexican delegates agreed that regional arrangements under the new convention should be considered at a North American Radio Conference to be held at Habana in April, 1933; subsequent proposal by the Mexican delegation that the Conference be held in Mexico City, which proposal was acceptable to the interested Governments.] 584
1933 May 23 (9775) From the Mexican Minister for Foreign Affairs to the American Ambassador in Mexico
Invitation of the Mexican Government to the U. S. Government to attend the North and Central American Regional Radio Conference beginning July 10.
585
June 7 (67) To the Ambassador in Mexico (tel.)
Acceptance of the Mexican Government’s invitation.
586
[Page LXVIII]June 21 (62) To the Ambassador in Mexico
Instructions to ascertain the Mexican Government’s attitude with respect to the admission of representatives of private organizations and companies to the meetings of the Conference and of its committees; Department’s view that it is inadvisable to admit such representatives.
586
June 29 To the American Delegation to the North and Central American Radio Conference
General instructions to the delegates and advice that the main purpose of the delegation should be to endeavor to obtain the elimination of interference to American broadcasting stations with a minimum of sacrifice to U. S. interests.
587
June 30 (139) From the Ambassador in Mexico (tel.)
Advice that Foreign Office concurs in the Department’s views concerning nonadmittance of representatives of private organizations and companies to the Conference.
590
Aug. 29 From the Chairman of the American Delegation to the North and Central American Radio Conference
Report of the proceedings of the Conference; minutes of the closing plenary session (text printed).
590

INTERPRETATION OF ARTICLE IV OF HABANA CONVENTION ON COMMERCIAL AVIATION ADOPTED FEBRUARY 20, 1928

Costa Rica

Date and number Subject Page
1933 Oct. 13 (1663) From the Chargé in Costa Rica
Advice that correspondence exchanged between Legation and Foreign Office appears to establish on the part of the Costa Rican Government complete agreement with the U. S. interpretation of the convention on Commercial Aviation of 1928; request to be advised whenever appropriate U. S. authorities have been given instructions regarding the entry and clearance of private aircraft of Costa Rican registry.
607
1934 Jan. 3(9) To the Minister in Costa Rica
Advice that the appropriate American authorities have been instructed that no special authorization from the U. S. Government is necessary for the entry of Costa Rican civil aircraft into the United States.
608
Jan. 16 (92) From the Minister in Costa Rica
Advice that the Foreign Minister has been informed of U. S. action; opinion that the mutual operation of the Department’s interpretation of the convention has been definitely established.
609
[Page LXIX]

INTERPRETATION OF HABANA CONVENTION

Dominican Republic

Date and number Subject Page
1933 Jan. 27 (150) To the Minister in the Dominican Republic
Instructions to endeavor to reach an understanding with the Dominican Republic with a view toward establishing mutual operation of the Department’s interpretation of article IV of the Habana Convention on Commercial Aviation; advice that a similar instruction has been sent to the American diplomatic missions in Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, and Guatemala.
609
May 11 (971) From the Minister in the Dominican Republic
Note from the Foreign Minister, May 8 (text printed), advising that the Dominican Republic concurs in the Department’s interpretation of article IV.
612
June 7 (187) To the Minister in the Dominican Republic
Acknowledgment of Dominican concurrence with U. S. interpretation; advice that the Department of Commerce has been notified accordingly in order that it may communicate the information to interested aviators.
614

Guatemala

Date and number Subject Page
1933 Mar. 29 (909) From the Minister in Guatemala
Foreign Office reply, March 27 (text printed), to a Legation note relative to the Habana Convention, stating that clearance of civil aircraft will be handled by Guatemalan Consuls at the point of departure if such aircraft is that of a country which has a treaty with Guatemala on the subject of air navigation.
614
May 2 (276) To the Chargé in Guatemala
Instructions to ascertain and report whether it is to be understood that the Guatemalan Government concurs in the Department’s interpretation of the Habana Convention; request for more detailed information on the provision in regard to clearance by Guatemalan Consuls.
616
June 22 (971) From the Minister in Guatemala
Foreign Office note, June 12 (text printed), containing the report of the General Bureau of Civil Aeronautics on the points raised in Department’s instruction No. 276, May 2.
617
Aug. 25 (296) To the Chargé in Guatemala
Observations in regard to Guatemalan nonagreement with Department’s interpretation of the Habana Convention; instructions to assure Guatemala that the United States has no intention of insisting upon any procedure contrary to Guatemalan security regulations, and hopes that the two Governments may be able to agree upon a mutually satisfactory solution of the matter.
620
Jan. 3 (8) To the Chargé in Guatemala
Advice that Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Panama, all parties to the Habana Convention, are in accord with the U. S. interpretation of article IV of the Convention; that this information may be used in discussions with the Guatemalan authorities should it appear advisable.
625
[Page LXX]

Haiti

Date and number Subject Page
1933 June 7 (61) To the Minister in Haiti
Advice of U. S. Government’s desire to reach an understanding on the interpretation of article IV of the Habana Convention with the countries parties to that Convention.
626
Nov. 27 (106) To the Minister in Haiti
Information that Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, Nicaragua, and Panama have agreed with the U. S. interpretation of article IV; advice that this information may be used in discussions with the Haitian authorities if deemed advisable.
626

Honduras

Date and number Subject Page
1933 Dec. 1 (960) From the Chargé in Honduras
Honduran Government’s agreement with the U. S. interpretation of article IV of the Habana Convention and subsequent decision to dispense with the former Honduran requirement that permission be obtained from the Government for each flight of American private aircraft to Honduras.
627

Mexico

Date and number Subject Page
1933 Feb. 9 (2270) From the Ambassador in Mexico
Views expressed by the Chief of the Diplomatic Department of the Foreign Office in regard to interpretation of article IV of the Habana Convention.
628
May 12 (44) From the Ambassador in Mexico
Apparent agreement of the Mexican Government with the U. S. interpretation of article IV according to provisions of the Law of General Lines of Communication; information that the Foreign Office has been requested to make a definite decision on the matter.
629
June 9 (51) To the Ambassador in Mexico
Approval of action in requesting a definite decision by Mexican Government on the interpretation of the right of entry under the Habana Convention; general observations for use in case of further representations to the Mexican Government.
630
Nov. 8 (184) To the Ambassador in Mexico
Advice that the U. S. Government is reluctant to permit Mexican aviators to fly Mexican aircraft in the United States without requiring that the aviators obtain formal authorization for such flights, unless the Mexican Government is willing to act on a reciprocal basis.
632
Dec. 2 (208) To the Ambassador in Mexico
Indication that in further discussions with the Mexican authorities concerning the entry and clearance of foreign civil aircraft, the Ambassador may use the information that Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, Nicaragua, and Panama are in accord with U. S. views.
633
[Page LXXI]

Nicaragua

Date and number Subject Page
1933 Mar. 1 (1164) From the Minister in Nicaragua
Nicaraguan acceptance of the Department’s interpretation of article IV of the Habana Convention and readiness to enter into an agreement.
634
May 2 (560) To the Minister in Nicaragua
Instructions to advise the Nicaraguan Government that the United States is desirous of having Nicaraguan authorities concerned with the entrance of aircraft informed of the interpretation agreed upon by the two Governments.
635

Panama

Date and number Subject Page
1933 Feb. 6 (480) To the Minister in Panama
Instructions to explore the possibility of gaining recognition of the right of American registered aircraft to make flights in Panama on a reciprocal basis, under the conditions stipulated in the Habana Convention on Commercial Aviation.
635
May 11 (1520) From the Minister in Panama
Advice that the matter of reaching the agreement concerning interpretation of article IV desired by the Department will be pursued following receipt of information as to the action taken by the Commercial Aviation Commission, to which the question has been presented by the Panamanian Government.
636
June 21 (1559) From the Chargé in Panama
Information that the American members of the Commercial Aviation Commission have recommended to the President of the Commission that the United States and Panama enter into the proposed agreement; opinion that the Panamanian members will concur.
637
Aug. 23 (564) To the Chargé in Panama
Advice that Department does not contemplate entering into special agreements supplementing the Habana Convention, but desires merely to reach an agreement with respect to interpretation of article IV; request that Legation confer again with Panamanian officials.
637
Oct. 27 From the Minister in Panama
Exchange of notes between the American Chargé and the Panamanian Foreign Minister, October 23 (texts printed), indicating Panamanian concurrence in U. S. interpretation of article IV.
639
[Page LXXII]

ARGENTINA

Preliminary Discussions Respecting a Trade Agreement Between the United States and Argentina

Date and number Subject Page
1933 Mar. 16 Memorandum by the Secretary of State
Argentine Ambassador Espil’s inquiries as to the U. S. attitude toward entering into negotiations for improved commercial relations between the United States and Argentina; U. S. view that the forthcoming World Economic Conference should produce a program of economic policies upon which reciprocity arrangements with individual nations could be based.
642
Mar. 23 Memorandum by the Secretary of State
Conversation with Espil, who indicated a special interest in the matter of reciprocal commercial agreements based on mutual tariff concessions; Secretary’s advice that consideration of the commercial treaties would be contingent upon enactment of legislation authorizing the President to negotiate such treaties.
642
June 2 (2093) From the Chargé in Argentina
Additional indication of Argentina’s keen interest in beginning negotiations for a commercial agreement with the United States.
643
June 22 Memorandum by the Acting Secretary of State
Discussion with Espil, who was advised of the unlikelihood of trade agreement negotiations being undertaken with Argentina at the present time.
643
July 1 Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State
Argentine Ambassador’s request for a brief conversation with President Roosevelt concerning possible early negotiations for a treaty.
644
July 6 Memorandum by the Acting Secretary of State
Argentine Ambassador’s further attempt, as a result of urgent instructions from his Government, to ascertain the U. S. viewpoint with respect to a commercial treaty.
645
July 12 Memorandum by the Acting Secretary of State
Conversation with Espil regarding his recent interview with the President, wherein he was told that the United States was willing to undertake exploratory conversations with Argentina with a view to reaching a trade agreement.
646
July 12 (52) To the Chargé in Argentina (tel.)
Instructions to discuss informally with the Foreign Minister the Department’s plan to undertake preliminary conversations with the Argentine Ambassador; information that Ambassador may ask to have someone sent to assist him in the conversations.
647
July 13 (67) From the Chargé in Argentina (tel.)
Advice that information transmitted in telegram No. 52, July 12, has been communicated to the Foreign Minister; his intention to authorize Espil to begin conversations together with any technical experts whom the latter may desire sent.
647
July 14 Memorandum by the Acting Secretary of State
Argentine Ambassador’s conveyance of his Government’s satisfaction at the prospect of negotiating a trade agreement with the United States; Ambassador’s desire to await the arrival of one or two experts before beginning the conversations.
648
[Page LXXIII]Aug. 10 Memorandum by the Chief of the Division of Latin American Affairs
Conversation with the Argentine Ambassador concerning the schedule and preparation of data for the Argentine conversations.
648
Aug. 10 Memorandum by the Secretary of State
Conversation with the Argentine Ambassador during which the Secretary suggested, with regard to the forthcoming reciprocity negotiations, that it would be necessary to proceed gradually with a certain number of commodities and then contemplate enlarging the list from time to time.
649
Aug. 16 (2194) From the Chargé in Argentina
Observations regarding the Argentine tendency to encourage the development of a competitive spirit among foreign countries in order that satisfactory outlets for Argentine trade might be secured.
650
Sept. 8 (1) From the Ambassador in Argentina
Memorandum (text printed) of a conversation with Luis Fiore, member of the Argentine governmental commission handling commercial matters, concerning trade relations between the United States and Argentina and referring to the proposed trade agreement between Argentina and Great Britain.
651
Sept. 19 (9) From the Ambassador in Argentina
Résumé of an interview (text printed) granted by President Roosevelt on August 15 to James H. Drumm, manager of the National City Bank of New York, regarding the U. S. endeavor to effect a satisfactory trade balance with Argentina.
653
Oct. 2 Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State
Argentine Ambassador’s decision to present a memorandum to the Department outlining the general ideas of his Government pertaining to the treaty conversations.
660
Oct. 5 Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State
Argentine Ambassador’s informal presentation of a memorandum (infra) setting out general views of the Embassy in connection with possible U. S.-Argentine negotiations.
661
[Oct. 5] From the Argentine Embassy
Memorandum in regard to Argentine-American trade and reciprocity.
661
Dec. 11 Memorandum by Mr. Harry Hawkins, of the Treaty Division, of a Conversation Between the Assistant Secretary of State and the Argentine Ambassador
Ambassador’s inquiry as to the progress being made toward the formulation of a reply to the Argentine memorandum of October 5.
682
[Page LXXIV]Dec. 29 Memorandum by Mr. Harry Hawkins, of the Treaty Division, of a Conversation Between the Assistant Secretary of State and the Argentine Ambassador
Assistant Secretary’s advice that a draft reply to the Argentine memorandum of October 5 had been discussed with the President, who suggested that there should be further exploration of the subject of a proposed U. S.-Argentine trade agreement and that there should also be some consultation with Congressional leaders in order carefully to prepare the way for an agreement.
682

Representations Against Apparent Violation by Argentina of Most-Favored-Nation Clauses in Treaty of July 27, 1853

Date and number Subject Page
1932 Nov. 18 (1865) From the Ambassador in Argentina
Conclusion of an Argentine-Chilean provisional commercial agreement (text printed).
683
Nov. 25 (1877) From the Ambassador in Argentina
Note delivered to the Foreign Minister, November 24 (text printed), upon Ambassador’s own initiative, requesting, on the basis of article 4 of the U. S.-Argentine commercial treaty of 1853, that products from the United States imported into Argentina be accorded the reduction in duties provided for in the recent Argentine-Chilean modus vivendi; observation that these reductions have already been extended to the products of several countries other than Chile.
686
Nov. 30 (77) To the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Information from Commerce Department that Great Britain and Northern Ireland, France, and Italy have obtained reductions under the Argentine-Chilean mod us vivendi; inquiry as to what treaties were invoked by these countries.
689
Dec. 1 (104) From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Information requested in Department’s telegram No. 77, November 30. Report concerning representations made to Foreign Minister on behalf of U. S. commercial interests, and his intimation that treaty of 1853 did not provide unconditional most-favored-nation treatment; request for instructions.
689
Dec. 2 (1882) From the Ambassador in Argentina
Information concerning automatic extension to Great Britain, Northern Ireland, France, and Italy of concessions under the Argentine-Chilean modus vivendi; intention to await Department’s instructions before again taking up with Foreign Minister question of interpretation of article 4 of treaty of 1853 as providing for unconditional most-favored-nation treatment.
690
Dec. 9 (79) To the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Opinion that since tariff reductions were extended to Great Britain, France, and Italy under most-favored-nation treaty provisions, and not for equivalent concessions, the United States is entitled by treaty rights to receive similar treatment; instructions to press representations in accordance with this interpretation.
692
[Page LXXV]Dec. 15 (1897) From the Ambassador in Argentina
Note to the Foreign Minister, December 10 (text printed), in accordance with Department’s telegraphic instruction No. 79, December 9; memorandum of conversation with Foreign Minister, December 14 (text printed), in which he agreed to give careful consideration to U. S. views.
693
1933 Jan. 17 (6) To the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Argentine Ambassador’s request that the U. S. Government refrain from pressing its views as to its treaty rights to tariff reductions in connection with the Chilean modus vivendi, and U. S. advice that it must adhere to its position; inquiry as to whether a reply to U. S. note of December 10 has been received from the Argentine Government.
696
Jan. 18 (9) From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Foreign Minister’s assurance that a reply to U. S. notes will be made immediately.
696
Jan. 19 (1939) From the Ambassador in Argentina
Further discussion with Foreign Minister with regard to U. S. position on modus vivendi between Argentina and Chile, and impression that his attitude is one of procrastination.
697
Jan. 25 (7) To the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Instructions, if reply has not yet been received, to point out to Foreign Minister discriminatory effect of delay in granting tariff reduction to United States, and to express hope for a prompt and favorable reply.
697
Jan. 27 (1947) From the Ambassador in Argentina
Foreign Minister’s note, January 23 (text printed), rejecting U. S. claim for similar treatment with Chile, France, Great Britain, and Italy under Argentine-Chilean modus vivendi.
698
Jan. 28 Memorandum by the Chief of the Division of Latin American Affairs
Conversation with the Argentine Ambassador, who expressed his Government’s earnest desire that the United States would not press its views regarding concessions under the Argentine-Chilean modus vivendi.
707
Feb. 1 (1954) From the Ambassador in Argentina
Exchange of information with German Chargé with respect to representations made to the Argentine Government concerning the Argentine-Chilean modus vivendi and the Argentine reply.
708
Feb. 14 (11) To the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Request for confirmation of press report that difficulties between Germany and Argentina with regard to the Argentine-Chilean modus vivendi have been settled.
710
Feb. 15 (20) From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Information concerning amendment of Argentine-Chilean modus vivendi, which, by the elimination of certain articles, will give Germany practical satisfaction.
711
[Page LXXVI]May 19 (2073) From the Chargé in Argentina
Information that Argentine-Chilean modus vivendi has been renewed for 60 days to permit ratification of a new commercial treaty, which is being drafted.
711
May 23 (709) To the Chargé in Argentina
Instructions for replying to Argentine note of January 23, maintaining Department’s views on interpretation of most-favored-nation clauses; interest in being kept informed concerning Argentine commission created to study commercial relations, especially with regard to possible conclusion of a U. S.-Argentine reciprocity treaty.
712
May 31 (2087) From the Chargé in Argentina
Unofficial information concerning Argentine-Chilean commercial treaty, which indicates that Argentina has carefully avoided the question of most-favored-nation clause.
718
June 9 (2101) From the Chargé in Argentina
Information that a note was sent to the Foreign Minister based on Department’s instruction No. 709 of May 23.
719
Oct. 6 (37) From the Ambassador in Argentina
Information that Argentine-Chilean commercial treaty has been approved by the Congresses of both countries and will enter into effect as soon as ratifications are exchanged.
720
Nov. 7 (102) From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Information concerning two decrees issued by Argentina, one extending provisions of the Anglo-Argentine commercial agreement (the Roca Agreement) to merchandise enumerated in the agreement and its annexes without regard to country of origin, and the other providing that reductions and facilities accorded Chile under the recent Argentine-Chilean agreement should apply also to Great Britain and Northern Ireland, France, and Italy.
720
Nov. 10 (90) From the Ambassador in Argentina
Foreign Minister’s note, November 8 (text printed), advising that the provisions of the Anglo-Argentine agreement will be extended to U. S. merchandise, despite Argentina’s maintenance of position as to the conditional nature of the most-favored-nation clause of the U. S.-Argentine treaty of 1853, and anticipating the conclusion, at some future time, of a reciprocity treaty between the United States and Argentina.
721
[Page LXXVII]

Representations Regarding the Exchange Provisions of the Anglo-Argentine (Roca) Agreement of May 1, 1933, and Argentine Exchange Regulations

Date and number Subject Page
1933 Mar. 31 (29) From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Information concerning certain exchange provisions, involving a sterling loan which would release British blocked pesos, adopted in Roca Mission negotiations in London; advice that Anglo-Argentine agreement may have adverse effect on American interests.
722
Apr. 1 (18) To the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Request for views as to amount of British-held pesos which will be released, and as to why American interests would be placed at a disadvantage by this loan.
723
Apr. 4 (30) From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Estimate as to amount of British blocked pesos in arrears; advice that it is not the loan, but a proposed allotment of a fixed percentage of exchange for British interests, which would be prejudicial to American interests.
723
Apr. 7 (2027) From the Ambassador in Argentina
Information that the issue of the sterling loan depends upon settlement of the percentage of exchange to be allotted to British interests, upon which point no agreement has yet been reached.
723
Apr. 7 (19) To the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Request for opinion as to whether proposed allotment of 33 percent of all available exchange to Great Britain represents a fair proportion for that country, and as to whether it would be advisable to ask for an allotment for the United States.
725
Apr. 11 (32) From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Data concerning probable allotment of exchange to various countries on basis of percentage of exports; doubt as to acceptance by American firms of a loan arrangement similar to suggested British loan.
725
Apr. 21 (34) From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Information that full powers have been telegraphed to Roca to effect final arrangement and sign agreement.
726
May 2 (93) From the Chargé in Great Britain (tel.)
Report of signature of Anglo-Argentine trade agreement, and details of agreement.
726
May 4 Press Release Issued by the Department of State
Account of an exchange of views between representatives of the Argentine and U.S. Governments on subjects relating to the Economic Conference and to the Anglo-Argentine trade agreement.
727
May 5 (96) To the Chargé in Great Britain (tel.)
For Norman Davis (American representative on Organizing Committee for the Monetary and Economic Conference): View that proposed Anglo-Argentine trade agreement contains elements of discrimination in favor of British trade inconsistent with the aims of the Economic Conference; desire that U.S. position be made clear to the British Government.
727
[Page LXXVIII]May 5 (24) To the Chargé in Argentina (tel.)
Estimates as to amount of exchange to be affected by article 2, clause 1, of Anglo-Argentine agreement; request for verification and comments with regard to these estimates.
728
May 10 (40) From the Chargé in Argentina (tel.)
Advice that further information is being sought before replying to Department’s telegram No. 24 of May 5.
729
May 12 (2063) From the Chargé in Argentina
Data on exchange figures with respect to application and effect of article 2, clause 1, of the Anglo-Argentine agreement.
730
May 19 (2076) From the Chargé in Argentina
Argentine plans for initiation of conversations with the British respecting customs tariff provisions of the Roca Agreement.
733
May 31 (2085) From the Chargé in Argentina
Figures with respect to the estimated distribution of British exchange, furnished orally and from memory by President of the Exchange Control Commission.
734
June 2 (2090) From the Chargé in Argentina
Information that Roca Agreement is of provisional nature, subject to modification if affected by subsequent arrangements between Great Britain and other countries, or between Argentina and other countries, and also subject to conclusion of Anglo-Argentine tariff negotiations.
735
June 2 (2097) From the Chargé in Argentina
Memorandum for Foreign Minister, June 1 (text printed), quoting Exchange Control Commission circular instruction of May 31, which places the dollar in an inferior position with respect to other currencies; Foreign Minister’s promise to forward the memorandum immediately to the Finance Minister.
735
June 3 (30) To the Chargé in Argentina (tel.)
Instructions for representations to the Argentine Government, urging withdrawal of Exchange Control Commission decree of May 31; also protesting discriminatory effect on American interests of provisions of article 2, clause 1, of the Anglo-Argentine agreement.
737
June 5 (48) From the Chargé in Argentina (tel.)
Advice that matter of trade discrimination has been taken up with the Foreign Minister; information that an Exchange Control Commission circular of June 2 has relieved some of the restrictions against the dollar, but that question will be discussed with Foreign Minister at diplomatic reception on June 6.
738
June 5 (31) To the Chargé in Argentina (tel.)
Instructions to seek special interview with Foreign Minister for representations on matters of currency restrictions and trade discrimination.
739
June 7 (51) From the Chargé in Argentina (tel.)
Advice that Foreign Minister has requested written statement in regard to subjects under discussion.
739
[Page LXXIX]June 8 (53) From the Chargé in Argentina (tel.)
Intention of Argentine Government to rescind circular of May 31.
739
June 9 (34) To the Chargé in Argentina (tel.)
Authorization to present an aide-mémoire on each of the subjects under discussion.
740
June 9 (2100) From the Chargé in Argentina
Finance Minister’s note to Foreign Minister (text printed), replying to U. S. memorandum of June 1, and indicating satisfactory arrangements with regard to exchange regulations reached at meeting of Exchange Control Committee and representatives of American banking firms.
740
June 9 (2105) From the Chargé in Argentina
Information that copy of Exchange Control Committee circular of June 8, rescinding May 31 circular, has been received.
743
June 13 (37) To the Chargé in Argentina (tel.)
Argentine Ambassador’s expression of his Government’s concern at U. S. attitude with respect to exchange restrictions of Roca Agreement, and his suggestion that matter be discussed with Finance Minister.
743
June 16 (2118) From the Chargé in Argentina
Opinion that nothing would be gained at present by a discussion with the Finance Minister, but that in the future, an appeal might be made in some particular case.
744
June 26 (44) To the Chargé in Argentina (tel.)
Exchange of telegrams with the American delegation at the Economic Conference (texts printed) concerning the question, raised by Argentine representative, of suspension of discussion of Roca agreement for duration of the Conference.
746
June 28 (59) From the Chargé in Argentina (tel.)
Data concerning amount of exchange allotted to American interests recently.
747
June 28 (2135) From the Chargé in Argentina
Observations with respect to Argentine distribution of exchange being effected in accordance with Roca Agreement provisions; opinion that U. S. interests will receive adequate consideration while Economic Conference lasts.
748
July 20 (55) To the Chargé in Argentina (tel.)
Request for comment on reported resignation of Finance Minister and impending changes in Argentine financial policy.
750
July 20 (69) From the Chargé in Argentina (tel.)
Confirmation of report of resignation of Finance Minister; lack of information as to changes in financial policy.
750
Aug. 1 (71) From the Chargé in Argentina (tel.)
Information that principal Anglo-Argentine commercial convention has been approved by both Houses of Congress.
750
[Page LXXX]Sept. 27 From the Consul General at Buenos Aires (tel.)
Information that supplementary tariff convention to Roca agreement was signed September 26, ratification by Congress being subject to signature of loan agreement and unblocking of British funds.
(Footnotes: Information that loan agreement was signed September 28; also, that law approving supplementary convention was passed September 30 and promulgated October 9.)
751
Oct. 18 (12) From the Consul General at Buenos Aires (tel.)
From the Commercial Attaché for Commerce Department: Finance Minister’s prohibition of issuance of exchange permits for funds blocked prior to May 1, as contrary to Roca agreement; assumption that this order does not refer to documentary bills.
751
Oct. 19 From the Consul General at Buenos Aires (tel.)
Information concerning subscriptions to loan for unblocking British funds under Roca agreement.
751
Oct. 25 (13) From the Consul at Buenos Aires (tel.)
From the Commercial Attaché for Commerce Department: Further information concerning Exchange Control Commission prohibition against granting of exchange permits.
752
Nov. 15 (97) From the Ambassador in Argentina
New decree issued by the Finance Minister November 10, by which importers may obtain exchange permits in advance when making orders; observation that new regulations, while an improvement over former ones, may permit discrimination against American importers.
752
Nov. 29 (118) From the Chargé in Argentina (tel.)
Two new Finance Ministry decrees, one further regulating exchange control, and the other creating a grain regulating board.
754
Dec. 16 (120) From the Chargé in Argentina (tel.)
Two additional decrees issued by Finance Minister December 15, one suspending application of tax on remittances by private persons, the other modifying exchange regulations decree reported in telegram No. 118, November 29.
754

Agreement Between the Government of Argentina and American Holders of Blocked Funds in Argentina, Executed December 1, 1933

Date and number Subject Page
1933 Aug. 12 Memorandum by the Chief of the Division of Latin American Affairs
Advice from the Argentine Ambassador that a New York business group is considering possibility of negotiations to free American frozen commercial credits in Argentina.
755
[Page LXXXI]Aug. 17 Memorandum by the Chief of the Division of Latin American Affairs
Conversation with General Pierce, Chairman of the Council on Inter-American Relations, and Mr. Thomas of the National Foreign Trade Council, who reported a discussion with the Argentine Ambassador concerning possibility of negotiating an agreement with Argentina for the liberation of frozen American credits similar to the agreement recently concluded with Brazil.
755
Sept. 8 Memorandum by Mr. Willard L. Beaulac, of the Division of Latin American Affairs
Commerce official’s explanation of a newspaper report that the American Manufacturers Export Association, with the cooperation of the Department of Commerce, had arranged with the Argentine Exchange Control Commission for the release of $12,000,000 to $15,000,000 of blocked funds; his observation that no large amount of blocked funds could be released by this system, which involved the investment of new capital in Argentina.
756
Sept. 18 Memorandum by the Chief of the Division of Latin American Affairs
Discussion with General Pierce, Mr. Thomas, and Mr. Carson, who have been authorized by a group of 18 American firms doing business in Argentina to act as a committee to enter into an arrangement with the Argentine Government for the release of American frozen credits.
758
Sept. 22 (88) From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Telegram (excerpt printed) drafted at meeting of 30 American firms and forwarded to home offices and Council of Inter-American Relations, reporting a proposal by Finance Minister for conversion of American blocked funds into 20–year dollar bonds with terms identical to arrangement recently concluded with Great Britain for sterling loan.
759
Oct. 5 (93) From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Information that a plan of the American Manufacturers Export Association for liquidation of frozen funds was shown unofficially to the Finance Minister, who expressed opinion that the plan did not appear to be feasible.
760
Oct. 7 (75) To the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Instructions to avoid impression that U. S. Government favors any particular group or is in any way involved in the negotiations of private groups with the Argentine Government.
760
Oct. 17 From Mr. Francis T. Cole, Vice President and General Manager, American Manufacturers Export Association
Advice that some members of the Association desire to leave funds as they are rather than be forced into proposed 20–year bond plan; inquiry as to whether this question could be negotiated with the Argentine Government.
761
[Page LXXXII]Oct. 25 Memorandum by the Chief of the Division of Latin American Affairs
Discussion with General Pierce of banking difficulties involved in arrangements for unblocking American credits in Argentina.
761
Nov. 2 (15) From the Consul at Buenos Aires (tel.)
From Commercial Attaché for Commerce Department: Information that Commercial Attaché has been requested to act as unofficial adviser to an Argentine subcommittee on Argentine blocked balances.
762
Nov. 4 (84) To the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Department’s preference that Commercial Attaché not be given any designation in connection with subcommittee.
763
Nov. 9 (104) From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
From Commercial Attaché for Commerce Department: Information that Argentine Government has concluded a loan agreement with French, Swiss, Belgian, and Netherlands holders of blocked pesos on terms similar to the Roca Agreement.
763
Nov. 15 To the American Manufacturers Export Association
Reply to letter of October 17, indicating that Department has not been advised that the Argentine Government intends to force owners of blocked funds to convert funds into bonds.
764
Nov. 16 (7) From the Acting Secretary of State to the Secretary of State
Information concerning terms of agreement to be concluded between American holders of blocked funds and the Argentine Government.
(Footnotes: (1) Secretary of State was on board ship at sea; (2) execution of agreement December 1.)
764
Dec. 8 Memorandum by Mr. Willard L. Beaulac, of the Division of Latin American Affairs
Telegram (excerpt printed) from the committee of American business firms which negotiated agreement of December 1 with Argentine Government to the Secretary of State upon his departure for the Seventh International Conference of American States at Montevideo, expressing view that provision for an adequate dollar exchange should be an essential part of any future reciprocal trade agreement concluded with Argentina or any other Latin American country.
765

Representations Against the Discriminatory Features of the New Debt Plan of the Province of Buenos Aires

Date and number Subject Page
1932 Dec. 13 (1895) From the Ambassador in Argentina
Discussion with Finance Minister of the Province of Buenos Aires concerning proposed plan for the payment of Provincial debts, which appears to discriminate against American bondholders in favor of French and British holders.
766
Dec. 13 (81) To the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Instructions to investigate the proposed plan and report recommendations.
769
[Page LXXXIII]Dec. 14 (107) From the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Informal discussion with Finance Minister of the Province of Buenos Aires, who was advised of the discrimination against American bondholders involved in his plan for Provincial debt payments.
770
Dec. 30 (1914) From the Ambassador in Argentina
Memorandum of a conversation with the Foreign Minister, December 27 (text printed), who agreed to take up with Finance Minister of Buenos Aires the matter of the proposed debt payment plan; information that plan has been submitted to Provincial Legislature; intention to continue informal efforts to prevent discriminatory actions against American interests.
770
1933 Jan. 13 (5) To the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Approval of proposed course of action.
773
Jan. 19 (1940) From the Ambassador in Argentina
Memoranda of conversations (1) with Foreign Minister, January 18, and (2) with Provincial Finance Minister, January 19 (texts printed), in endeavor to prevent discrimination against American bondholders; regret that efforts were unsuccessful.
773
Jan. 27 (1950) From the Ambassador in Argentina
Information that authorization has been granted by the Legislature of the Province of Buenos Aires for the proposed debt plan.
778
Feb. 8 (10) To the Ambassador in Argentina (tel.)
Instructions to express to Foreign Office U. S. Government’s regret and disapproval of the discriminatory features of the debt plan of the Province of Buenos Aires, which it believes could have been avoided.
779

Representations by Argentina Against Sanitary Restrictions on Importation Into the United States of Argentine Meats From Area Not Subject to Specified Animal Diseases

Date and number Subject Page
1933 June 22 Memorandum by the Acting Secretary of State of a Conversation With the Argentine Ambassador
Ambassador’s reference to previous representations of his Government on the subject of the export to the United States of Argentine beef; suggestion that the Ambassador again raise the question with the Department.
780
June 22 From the Argentine Ambassador
Renewal of request that United States authorize the entry of mutton from Argentine Patagonia, with reference to promises made during the previous Administration for a satisfactory solution of the problem.
780
June 28 Memorandum by the Chief of the Division of Latin American Affairs
Comment with respect to Argentine Ambassador’s note of June 22 that there is no record of any promises having been made with regard to the question of the importation of Argentine meat.
781
[Page LXXXIV]July 27 To the Attorney General
Expression of opinion, at Attorney General’s request in connection with interpretation of Section 306 (a) of Tariff Act of 1930, that the Argentine view concerning the geographical isolation of Patagonia from the rest of Argentina appears to be correct.
782
Aug. 11 From the Acting Attorney General to the Secretary of Agriculture
Opinion that Patagonia is a part of Argentina and may not be considered a separate country, and that, therefore, the importation of the commodities described in Section 306 (a) of the Tariff Act of 1930 from any part of Argentina is prohibited as long as rinderpest or foot-and-mouth disease is determined by the Secretary of Agriculture to exist in that country.
784

Representations Against the Imposition by the Government of Argentina of a Tax on Marine Insurance Written Abroad

Date and number Subject Page
1933 July 21 (57) To the Chargé in Argentina (tel.)
Instructions for representations to the appropriate authorities concerning an Argentine law enacted in June 1932 and about to be enforced, imposing a tax on marine insurance written abroad.
785
July 28 (2172) From the Chargé in Argentina
Advice that on July 25 a memorandum was presented to the Foreign Minister with regard to the question of the marine insurance law, which he agreed to transmit to the Interim Finance Minister.
786
Aug. 11 (2190) From the Chargé in Argentina
Memorandum for Interim Finance Minister (text printed), outlining difficulties which the proposed marine tax would raise, and expressing hope that means may be found to prevent the application of pertinent portions of the law under reference.
786
Sept. 7 (2222) From the Chargé in Argentina
Foreign Office note of September 4 (text printed) quoting reply of Finance Minister to U. S. note of July 25, advising that U. S. recommendations will be taken into consideration in deciding upon regulations to put law into effect. Account of interview with the new Finance Minister.
791