Office of the Historian

812.404/1862: Telegram

The Ambassador in Mexico (Daniels) to the Secretary of State

Mexico, March 28, 1936—6 p.m.
[Received 8:50 p.m.]

56. Recently, it has been published that by act of State authorities some Catholic churches have been opened in Colima, Campeche, Oaxaca, Nuevo Leon, Sonora, Sinaloa, and Guerrero. See despatch 3410, March 25 [26].74 Consul at Guaymas thinks outlook in Sonora bright for the opening of churches. Today’s papers state that in Queretaro churches were turned over to boards approved by the municipal president to care for them. The report added “there was much rejoicing by the people”. These are evidences of the spirit of moderation which is indicative of the policy of President Cárdenas as I communicated to the President and to the Department in December.75

Yesterday in a conference with President Cárdenas, the first I have had since December, I told him that when I was home I told President Roosevelt that he, President Cárdenas, had stated to me that there would be no persecutions and that I had doubtless observed in my trips through the country a moderating tendency. I also told him that this information had been gratifying to the President. He was careful to say that the policy was in keeping with his purpose when he assumed office. He emphasized that there was no new policy only the carrying out of his original plans. He indicated that local situations would determine the action to be taken in each state. He has made no public statement other than his addresses which have been forwarded in despatches and I do not think he will give out any statement regarding recent developments. He emphasized the overwhelming importance of the economic question. My opinion is that his known moderate policy and opposition to persecution is responsible for the action of the states even though he may not have inspired their action. Fuller particulars by air mail.76

Daniels
  1. Not printed.↩
  2. Telegram of December 9, 1935, 8 a.m., from the Ambassador in Mexico, Foreign Relations, 1935, vol. iv, p. 806.↩
  3. Despatch No. 3416, March 28, not printed.↩