814.00/1213
The Minister in Guatemala (Hanna) to the Secretary of State
[Received May 15.]
Sir: I have the honor to report that immediately after the receipt on May 8 of the Department’s telegram No. 15, May 7, 2 p.m., I requested a conference with President Ubico which was arranged for May 10, the President being absent from the capital on May 9. In making my request of the Minister for Foreign Affairs, I told him that the purpose of my call on the President was to inform him of the attitude of the Government of the United States with respect to the effort now being made to amend the articles of the Guatemalan Constitution concerning succession to the Presidency, and to continue President Ubico in power.
When I called on the President on the tenth instant he received me in his customary cordial manner and maintained a very friendly attitude throughout our brief conference. I opened the conversation by saying that I had requested the conference with him to lay before him, by instruction of the Department of State, the attitude of the Government of the United States with respect to the movement being made here to amend the articles of the Constitution which relate to succession to the Presidency. I added that, in order to express faithfully the attitude of my Government as it had been transmitted to me, I had translated the statement of its attitude and, with his permission, would read it to him. I then read him a Spanish translation of the following statement:
In view of the peculiarly close and friendly relations between the United States and Guatemala, and considering that the Government of the United States has of course the highest esteem and regard for the present President of Guatemala, the Government of the United States deems it particularly desirable that President Ubico should not misunderstand the attitude of the Government of the United [Page 625] States with respect to the effort now being made to alter the Guatemalan Constitution and to continue President Ubico in office.
The Department of State does not of course wish to convey the impression that it is endeavoring to advise President Ubico concerning the course he should follow, which, naturally, is a matter for his own decision, but the Department nevertheless believes that it should make very clear to President Ubico that the Government of the United States is not in sympathy with any effort to alter the Guatemalan Constitution illegally or to continue President Ubico in office contrary to the provisions of that Constitution.
When I had completed reading the President immediately remarked that the clear meaning of the statement was that the Department of State did not desire him to continue in the Presidency, and then he added that he wanted to assure me that it was not his wish either and that he would not continue in power if it was not the unanimous wish of the people of Guatemala. He said that, as I would see when the Assembly convenes, he would make these points very clear in his message to it.
He reminded me that his recommendations to the Legislative Assembly for amendments to the Constitution did not embrace the articles relating to the succession in the Presidency, but that the movement to change these articles was a spontaneous manifestation of the desire of the Guatemalan people, in fomenting which he had had no participation whatsoever.
He said that, in spite of the disclaimer of any desire to continue in office which he proposed to make to the Constituent Assembly, he was satisfied that the Assembly nevertheless would insist on his continuing in the Presidency and that it would be supported by the Guatemalan people.
He then described the method by which the matter is to be presented to the Guatemalan people for their decision. He was careful to say that he had been informed by those directing the movement that this was to be the method. He said that the Assembly would make no amendment whatsoever to the articles in question but would formulate a resolution to the effect that he should be continued in office and that this would then be submitted to popular vote in a general election at which women and foreign residents of Guatemala would be permitted to vote. He seemed to take it for granted that such elections would be held, because he said that I could be assured that the elections would be honestly, fairly, and impartially conducted and would give a correct expression of the wish of the people of Guatemala. He added that if even a small percentage of the electorate should vote against his remaining in power he would not even consider continuing in office.
In the course of our conversation he entered upon a discussion of the benefits which would result from the amendments to the Constitution proposed by him, but he appeared to realize that this discussion [Page 626] was extraneous to the issue I had presented and speedily terminated it.
I expressed no opinion nor made any substantive comment during the conversation which followed my presentation of the Department’s attitude. In order that there might be no doubt as to whether I had understood him correctly, I did remark that I had understood him to say that, in spite of his desire not to continue in power, he believed that the Constituent Assembly and the Guatemalan people would insist upon his doing so, and he confirmed my understanding of what he had said.
Immediately on leaving the President, I called on the Minister for Foreign Affairs and read to him also the statement I had read to the President. I told him nothing of the subsequent conversation I had with the President.
The Minister apparently attached particular significance to the word “illegally” in the statement and immediately inquired concerning what tribunal or person was to decide whether or not the procedure is legal. Of course, I made no response. He said it could not certainly be submitted to the Hague, or to the Jurists of Chile, or to the Supreme Court of the United States, in spite of the high reputation of all of them. He said it would seem to be a question for Guatemala to decide and that the only tribunal qualified to give a decision was the Guatemalan people.
The Minister continued by saying that the question had a practical as well as a legal or technical phase and that both must be considered. He said that from the practical view-point it appeared to be imperative that President Ubico should continue in power. He said there was no one who could carry out the program initiated by President Ubico and insure honest and efficient Government. He said there is no opposition of any importance and that there are no aspirants for the Presidency. He said that if those who have been mentioned as possible aspirants should be consulted they would be the first to disclaim any desire for the office at this time and to insist on the continuance of President Ubico in the office. He mentioned himself and General Anzueto28 and Mr. Recinos29 in this connection. He recalled that the latter recently made a visit to Guatemala and did nothing during that visit to indicate any desire to be a candidate but had, on the contrary, publicly stated since his return to Washington that he was a partisan of President Ubico’s remaining in the Presidency. He said that all of these factors must be considered in view of their great importance and that it is universally agreed in Guatemala that the good of the nation demands that there should be no change in [Page 627] the Presidency. He said that Guatemala, after many years of corrupt and inefficient government, had at last found an honest and able President, and desired to keep him in the office.
In this connection and by way of illustration, the Minister mentioned recent political events in Uruguay and Santo Domingo and the effect they had on Presidential succession in those countries. He also mentioned the recent decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in the gold case and seemed to think that it was a case in which the practical questions involved had much weight in determining the final decision.
He then discussed the legal side, or, as he termed it, the technical side of the question. He said many difficult questions were presented as for example to what extent and over what period of time can a Constituent Assembly bind a nation? Cannot the people at any time give a mandate to a Constituent Assembly to change the decisions of a former Assembly? Could the people, through their Constituent Assembly in 1927, fix a rule which could not be altered except by a procedure extending over a period of twelve years, and make it impossible for that rule to be changed in a less period of time if the people so willed? Are the people to be denied the right to change what is discovered to be a mistake as soon as the discovery is made? If the period fixed by the Constituent Assembly of 1927 had been for fifty years instead of twelve, will anyone maintain that the people of that generation could impose their will in this manner upon the people of two succeeding generations? He terminated this part of his conversation by saying that the people are supreme and it is for them to decide.
He said there were ways by which President Ubico could continue to exercise a controlling influence in Guatemalan affairs without remaining in the Presidency but that they involved deception and subterfuge completely foreign to the President’s character and to which he would not be a party. He mentioned in this connection the role which General Calles has played in Mexican affairs since he left the Presidency of that country, and condemned it as a procedure which neither President Ubico nor the Guatemalan people would subject themselves to. He said there was even a Constitutional method by which President Ubico could continue in the Presidency, and showed me Clauses 7 & 8 of Article 52 of the Constitution which specify as attributes of the Legislative Power the right to grant permission to the President of the Republic to absent himself from national territory, and to appoint, with the approval of the President of the Republic, the person who should act in place of the President during such absence. He implied that it would be simple to find a candidate who would lend himself to this method for continuing President [Page 628] Ubico in office but that it was unthinkable that the President would be a party to such an arrangement or that the Guatemalan people would submit to it.
The Minister seemed to be considerably disturbed by the Department’s message to President Ubico and was even quite specific in expressing a wish to know if it had a meaning broader than its literal implication, but his conversation indicated that he was quite convinced that the situation demanded the continuance of President Ubico in office and that a failure to do so might involve the country in serious difficulties.
Throughout our conversation, I studiously took the attitude of an interested listener and expressed no opinion concerning the Minister’s views.
Respectfully yours,