701.9111/537

The Secretary of State to the Chargé in Iran (Merriam)

No. 255

Sir: The Department acknowledges the receipt of your despatch No. 860 of July 25, 1936, reporting your conversation with the Iranian Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs with reference to an item which appeared in the Brooklyn Eagle of June 13, 1936, concerning the Shah. Your observations to Mr. Soheily, as reported in your despatch under reference, meet with the Department’s approval.

With reference to the request of Mr. Soheily that the Department “make an investigation with a view to determining what lay behind the publication of such derogatory remarks in the American press”, it is clear from the Department’s inquiries and from its general knowledge of the subject that no agencies are working in this country with a view to weakening the long established ties of friendship between Iran and the United States. As you explained to the Under Secretary at the time of your interview, statements regarding the Shah such as that which appeared in the Brooklyn Eagle, even when they are erroneous, are in no wise intended to be derogatory to His Imperial Majesty. On the contrary, the people of this country from the earliest days have cherished the highest admiration for persons who have risen to positions of eminence as a result of their own ability and force of character. In this connection it is perhaps needless to recall that President Lincoln, who is admittedly an outstanding American statesman and an international figure, is even to this day commonly referred to as “The Rail-splitter” from the fact that in his youth he earned his [Page 375] living by splitting trees for fence rails. That President Lincoln started life in such humble labors only adds to the admiration in which he is held by the people of this country.

Therefore, when the American press refers to the vigorous and manly background of the Shah, such references, even though historically inaccurate in certain instances, can be interpreted only as an effort, possibly misguided but nevertheless sincere, to honor His Imperial Majesty and raise him even higher in the estimation of the American people. Moreover, that the American press and the American people are animated by the most friendly sentiments towards Iran and towards its eminent ruler are clearly indicated by the numerous articles which appear in the daily papers and in periodicals commenting upon the rapid progress which Iran has made under the guidance of His Imperial Majesty.

The Department is therefore entirely persuaded that no agencies are working in this country with a view to beclouding American-Iranian relations. Indeed, even if inimical agencies should attempt to promote unfriendly feelings between the United States and Iran, it is difficult to understand how they could hope to succeed in the face of the obvious fact that the two countries have no conflicting interests.

You may bring the foregoing orally to the attention of Mr. Soheily and assure him in the most express terms that not only is this Government convinced that there are no factors seeking to weaken the ties of friendship between the two countries, but also that in the view of the Department no real basis exists upon which such a movement could be founded.

Very truly yours,

Cordell Hull