838.516/313
The Chargé in Haiti (Woodward) to the Secretary of State
[Received September 21.]
Sir: I have the honor to report that in a conversation yesterday with M. Laleau, Minister of Foreign Affairs, I asked whether there was any news concerning an extra session of the legislature for the consideration of the bank sale contract, to which he replied in the negative. He added that the Government was waiting until hearing more from Washington and New York before taking a decision, and that [Page 370] in his opinion the best thing to do would be to let the whole question drop until next April, the date of the opening of the regular session of Parliament.
I told him that in my personal opinion such a long delay seemed unnecessary, although I agreed with him that judging by the recent turn of events a rest seemed to be needed for awhile. We discussed the article which appeared in the Matin of September 17th, reading in part as follows:
“Information from private sources which has come to us leads us to believe that the American Government during the first half of October will take a decision concerning its financial control in Haiti, in a sense favorable to our dignity and interest,”
and the answer in an editorial of the Nouvelliste of the same afternoon, refuting the Matin and referring to President Roosevelt’s message read during the celebration on August 21st by his special Ambassador,84 the American Minister to Haiti, in which it is specifically stated that,
“Finally, it is my earnest hope that the plan now under consideration by the Haitian Government providing for the complete withdrawal of the Government of the United States from all participation in the administration of Haitian finance, which I feel represents the limit to which my Government can properly go, and yet remain faithful to its obligations, may prove acceptable, and that following the conclusion of a new treaty putting an end to those now in existence, we may in the future be bound only by those ties of friendship and mutual beneficial economic intercourse which should unite friendly and neighboring republics.”
It seems difficult to believe that after all that has been said and done, the attitude reflected in the Matin could still exist, but such is unfortunately the case.
M. Laleau touched upon a condition which undoubtedly has some bearing on the matter, namely, that politicians and others who oppose the President are too often credited with a “corner” on honesty, while those who are friendly are generally looked upon with suspicion, as it is thought that they adopt this friendly attitude for favors received. This is perhaps the inevitable boomerang when money plays such an important part in forming public opinion.
If the termination of American financial control is to be pursued on present lines, I believe that our Government could not do better than to encourage the Haitian legislature to take a breathing spell, at least until the return of Minister Armour and Mr. de la Rue, to give time for those who still hold the opinion reflected in the article of the Matin quoted above, to see that no “coup de théâtre” is in prospect. If the Minister and the Fiscal Representative could, on their return, [Page 371] give assurances along the lines of those already laid down by President Roosevelt, and if a special session of the legislature were then to be called, the bank contract, would, I believe, stand its best chance of passage.
Respectfully yours,