838.51/2643: Telegram
The Minister in Haiti (Armour) to the Secretary of State
[Received May 18—2:40 a.m.]
52. Referring to the Legation’s despatches numbers 31 of April 28; and 49 of May 12, I have just been handed a note by the Minister for Foreign Affairs, a translation of which follows:
“With reference to our recent interviews on the definitive liquidation of the Treaty of 1915, it is understood that, after the signature of the accord on the Haitianization of the Garde and the withdrawal of the Marine Brigade and the American Scientific Mission established under the Accord of August 5, 1931, the Haitian Government, by mutual agreement with Your Excellency and on the basis of the principle of the guarantees already given, will devote itself to working out the surest administrative conditions for the stabilization of the regular service of the interest and amortization charges on the loan of 1922.
The Government is anxious to give Your Excellency the assurance that in its efforts to conclude an accord on this question it will devote its sincerest good will to reaching a conclusion which will give entire satisfaction to the bondholders and the protection which they expect from the Government of the United States, without offending national susceptibilities which can harmonize perfectly with the interest which we have always had in respecting our financial engagements.”
The Minister for Foreign Affairs asked me particularly to explain that, in view of the rejection by the Legislature not only of the Treaty of September 3 but of the principle of the treaty, they had felt it impossible to include [refer?] specifically in the note to Protocols A and B of the Treaty of September 3; but that the phrase “on the basis of the principle of guarantees already given”, contained in paragraph 1 of the note, has reference not only to the Treaty of 1915 and to article 8 of the Protocol of 1919 but also to Protocol B of the Treaty of September 3 last.
[Page 745]I should appreciate an expression of the Department’s opinion as to whether it considers that the plan to reach two separate accords offers a basis for discussion, as up to the present time I have been careful to make plain that I am not authorized to discuss the question on this basis.