838.51/2677½

Memorandum Prepared by the Division of Latin American Affairs

General Principles Underlying the Administration’s Policy Towards Haiti

This Government desires to put an end to the special relations between Haiti and the United States at the earliest possible moment consistent with carrying out the obligations which both Governments have assumed towards third parties.

These special relations in general come under two heads:

  • First, the training of a Haitian police force (Garde) by American marine officers. In order to give moral support to these American officers a Brigade of 850 marines is stationed in Haiti. It has been the policy of the Navy Department that this force could not be withdrawn or reduced so long as American officers remained in the Garde;
  • Second, third parties purchased bonds of the Haitian Government in reliance on the treaty obligation assumed by both Haiti and the United States to provide efficient financial control in Haiti during the life of the bonds. In good faith neither Government would be warranted in weakening or setting aside these treaty obligations.

Under the first point we intend to withdraw all American forces from Haiti six months after the entrance into force of the new treaty. This includes American officers serving with the Haitian police force as well as the entire Marine Brigade. Under point two we wish to reach an agreement with the Haitians, as required by the Protocol of 1919 which was signed by both Governments, in order to provide satisfactory measures of financial control after the expiration of the present treaty, so that adequate provision be made for the servicing of the bonds. This control will automatically come to an end when the bonds have been redeemed, about 1944.

A memorandum is attached entitled “Policy in Haiti” which gives in more detail the manner in which the foregoing principles would be applied in connection with the treaty now under negotiation with Haiti revising in certain respects the Treaty of September 3, 1932, which failed of ratification by the Haitian Legislature last September.

[Page 736]
[Annex]

Memorandum by the Chief of the Division of Latin American Affairs (Wilson)46

Policy in Haiti

After conversations with Minister Armour, the following has been agreed upon as an outline of policy in Haiti:

1)
We will continue on the general lines of policy laid down in the unratified treaty of September 3, 1932, for the orderly liquidation of our commitments in Haiti. This Government does not desire to extend in any way the period of its financial stewardship. This principle must be borne in mind in connection with any attempts on Haiti’s part to obtain further foreign financing. Any proposed increase in the Haitian public debt will, in accordance with Article 8 of the Treaty of 1915, be referred to the Department for consideration.
2)
Various modifications can be made in the terms of the treaty of September 3 which might make it more acceptable to the Haitian legislature and would not disturb questions regarded as of fundamental importance from our point of view. A detailed memorandum regarding such modifications is being prepared. The general principles to cover such modifications are noted hereinafter:
(a)
Regarding the covering treaty itself the Haitians have proposed certain clauses covering such matters as the exercise of professions, et cetera. These clauses could in general follow the provisions in the treaties of commerce negotiated by this Government in recent years. No objection is perceived to this being done.
(b)
Regarding Protocol A, it is felt that total Haitianization of the Garde and withdrawal of the Marine Brigade could be effected six months after the entrance into force of the treaty. Mr. Armour believes that advancing the date, as this would presumably do by some months, would be feasible and that it would not materially weaken the Garde. The proposal for a military mission was originally made by the Haitian Government. There was, however, criticism of this subsequently in Haiti. We should be willing to omit this provision if the Haitian Government now desires to do so. If, however, Haiti still wants the mission, it should be made clear that it is at the request of the Haitian Government that the mission is provided.
(c)
As regards Protocol B, which provides for financial administration, it is not seen how this could be modified in any substantial way. The obligations of both Governments as set forth in existing agreements and which furnish the basis on which people bought the bonds would seem not to warrant this Government in relaxing the measures of financial control. One modification which might be made, however, [Page 737] in case the Haitians wanted it, would be to provide that Protocol B would enter into effect six months after the entrance into force of the treaty. This would turn over the administration of the internal revenues to Haiti at this earlier date rather than in December, 1934, as provided in the September 3 treaty.
3)
Reports from the Financial Adviser indicate a probable surplus of about $400,000 over expenditures for this fiscal year. With approval of the Department, the use of $100,000 from the surplus has been authorized to begin the irrigation of the Artibonite plain. The question of the use to be made of the surplus funds is one which should be decided in Haiti and we should leave with the Minister power to determine this. It seems likely that in addition to work on the Artibonite President Vincent will want some $50,000 for drainage work and road building, and also about $25,000 for development of the growing of cotton, $5,000 of which has already been authorized. Such expenditures would seem advisable in Haiti’s own interests, they would be made from surplus Haitian funds, and, as stated above, control over the use to be made of the surplus revenues should; be left to the Minister to determine after getting the advice of the Financial Adviser. This has been the policy followed in the past in our relations with Haiti. Of course, if revenues indicate a failure to come up to estimates at any time, authorization for use of surplus may have to be revised by the Minister.
4)
The Legation has been informed indirectly by members of the Government that President Vincent is very much agitated as to what may be the attitude of the legislature during the present session which opens April 3 next. He considers it possible that if the legislature proceeds to vote a budget which is unacceptable to the Haitian Government or to American officials, his veto may be overridden by the legislature and he may then be faced with the necessity of either allowing the legislature to assume control and pass various bills of an unsatisfactory nature, or resort to the dissolution of the legislature. The President has indicated that he would like to know what would be the American Government’s attitude were he forced into a position of taking such action. He feels it essential to know what our attitude would be in advance as he does not wish to make a threat to the legislature and later be unable to back it up. The position that has hitherto been taken by both Dr. Munro and Mr. Armour has been that the American Government cannot commit itself in advance as to what would be its attitude in such cases. In other words, that it cannot deal with hypothetical cases but must wait until confronted with all the facts in a situation. The Department feels that this policy is the correct one and should be continued. It should be the aim of the Legation to induce the President to keep within constitutional [Page 738] limits. It is felt that the beginning of construction of public works, which in the President’s opinion are needed in the country, will alleviate distress and perhaps have the ultimate effect of smoothing over the President’s difficulties with the legislature, but in any case the Department would be reluctant to envisage the necessity of having to support the President in resort to unconstitutional methods of dealing with the matter.

Edwin C. Wilson
  1. Filed separately under 838.51/2614½.