812.52/2391
The Ambassador in Mexico (
Daniels
) to
the Secretary of State
No. 5617
Mexico
, November 4, 1937.
[Received
November 6.]
Sir: I have the honor to refer to my despatch
5616 of November 2, 1937, enclosing a copy of a note from the Foreign
Office regarding [Page 627] the Yaqui
Valley agrarian situation, and to enclose a copy of a note left with
Licenciado Beteta yesterday evening by Mr. Boal in reply to that
communication.
In the course of the conversation on the subject Licenciado Beteta
explained that while he had been under the impression that the President
intended to have the Agrarian Department endeavor to have arrangements
made between the American landowners and the agrarians for renting back
the lands dotated to them until the June wheat harvest, he realized now
that the President had merely referred to arrangements and he had drawn
his own deductions as to the rental system.
Mr. Boal urged him to endeavor to have the arrangements made on a rental
basis, pointing out that this was the current basis used in the Valley
and that the crop-sharing arrangements under that system were all
provided for by law in Sonora. He pointed out that the system provided
that the renter pay the taxes, water charges, and other expenses
connected with the land, so that the owner receives 12½% of the crop,
net. He informed Licenciado Beteta that the representative of the
American landowners had yesterday suggested that if rental arrangements
were made under the auspices of the Agrarian Department, the American
landowners would need to keep the greater part of their equipment until
the harvest had been gotten in. The 12½% share could then be taken up by
the Banco Ejidal and the proceeds used for the purchase of this
equipment after the harvest. This would make it unnecessary for the
Government to put out cash both to purchase equipment at the present
time and to finance the ejidatarios for the
preparation of the land and other work connected with the crop.
Presumably those of the ejidatarios who now work
for a wage on the land would thus continue to have employment, so that
the question of tiding them over until the harvest might not arise in
many cases. All this, it seemed, would be financially helpful to the
Government, while the landowners would have an opportunity to make their
usual crop before the lands were taken out of their hands.
In this connection, Mr. Boal pointed out that according to the
representative of the American landowners many of these would prefer to
have their pequeña propiedad, as offered in the
Mexican Government’s note under reference, as non-irrigated land, thus
keeping two or three hundred hectares, instead of one hundred. In that
event it would be necessary to work out a rental adjustment which would
not constitute recognition by the American landowners of lands to be
dotated, since the amount and location of these lands would remain
uncertain until the pequeñas propiedades of
non-irrigated land had been delimited. Obviously, the Government would
not wish to postpone the making of the rental arrangement until all [Page 628] the pequeñas
propiedades had been measured, since that would involve a
disastrous delay in the planting of the crop, to the disadvantage of all
parties concerned. He also pointed out that there were few people in the
Valley who made a business of planting and tending crops as contractors;
that the regular farmers did not and probably would not do this; that
those who did were not sufficient in number and had not enough equipment
to take care of any appreciable amount of the land in the Valley planned
for dotation. Under these circumstances the ejidatarios, if no rental arrangement were reached, would have
to prepare the land, and it seemed likely that in the limited time
remaining for planting a great deal of land would either remain
un-planted or would be improperly planted and tended, so that the crops
would be unsatisfactory, to the detriment of everybody concerned.
Licenciado Beteta said that he would discuss these points with the
President with a view to trying to work out some arrangement.
Respectfully yours,
[Enclosure]
The American Ambassador (
Daniels
) to the Mexican Minister for Foreign Affairs
(
Hay
)
No. 2492
Mexico
, November 3, 1937.
Excellency: I have the honor to acknowledge
the receipt of the Foreign Office’s note 312243 of October 29,
1937,34 which reached me
yesterday afternoon.
In this note are set forth the Mexican Government’s reasons for
making a classification of the American-owned lands in the Yaqui
Valley as irrigated for the purposes of determining the pequeñas propiedades, and as unirrigated with
respect to the dotations to the agrarians. In the paragraph marked
“Second” of that note you say:
As a result of the foregoing, if the owners prefer that they
be left the small property which the Agrarian Code specifies
for non-irrigated land (up to 300 hectares), there will be
no difficulty in doing this—but they will not have water
rights.
The representative of the American landowners in the Yaqui Valley
informs me that some, and possibly all, of the American landowners
wish to accept this offer and will file with such authorities as
Your Excellency may indicate applications for their small properties
as non-irrigated land, to receive up to three hundred hectares as
provided in the Agrarian Code. My understanding is that under this
arrangement the distribution of water to the American landowners [Page 629] will be governed by the
existing contract for the delivery of water, but that the ejidatarios will be entitled to water rights
for themselves as set forth in the Agrarian Code.
The note under reference does not take up the question of the
eligibility of the persons on the census of ejidatarios. Am I correct in believing that the American
landowners in the Yaqui Valley will be permitted to challenge the
eligibility of persons on this list, under the Agrarian Code, not
only in general but particularly if it is claimed that there are a
sufficient number of applicants unsatisfied with land to cause the
American landowners to receive, under the provisions of the Agrarian
Code, less than the three hundred hectares for small properties of
non-irrigated land?
As regards indemnification, it is my understanding from the note
under reference that American landowners will receive new land, now
unirrigated but irrigable by gravity, in amounts adequately
compensating them for any of their lands dotated, to be improved
with canals and other irrigation works at the expense of the Mexican
Government, at least to the same extent as the lands to be dotated
now carry such improvements. Am I correct in believing that such
improvement will include the clearing of the new land, so that, when
irrigated, it will be similar in character to the land dotated? Am I
correct in my understanding that the irrigation system for this new
land will not only be installed on the land but will be brought to
it at the expense of the Mexican Government, and that this new land
will be the first to be opened to irrigation when the Angostura Dam
is completed? Am I correct in my understanding that the evaluation
of the lands to be dotated and of the new lands to be given in
compensation will be made by a commission composed of a
representative of the landowners, a representative of the Governor
of Sonora, with such technical assistants as may be necessary?
The note under reference does not deal with the question of
improvements, such as buildings, fences, drainage systems, bridges,
etc. Am I correct in believing that such improvements are to be paid
for?
The note under reference makes it clear that the animals and tools
belonging to the American landowners which they may wish to sell are
to be valued and will be paid for by the Government in cash, at the
time they are delivered by their present owners to the ejidatarios. I should appreciate receiving
from Your Excellency information as to how the valuation is to be
carried out.
The note under reference does not indicate what compensation will be
made to American landowners for higher hauling costs in the event
that new lands to be given them in exchange for lands dotated are
farther removed from mills and railroads than their present
holdings.[Page 630]I should
appreciate receiving information from Your Excellency on this
point.
The note under reference indicates that these new lands are to
receive free water as soon as the Angostura Dam can provide them
with this water. Am I correct in understanding that there will be no
cost whatever to the American landowners for this water: that is to
say, that they will not be called upon to contribute to the
maintenance of the general irrigation system or to pay any kind of
tax providing funds for such purposes?—and that this free water will
go with the land in perpetuity, thus increasing its sales value?
The note under reference does not deal specifically with any
compensation to the American landowners for the loss of crop
production during the years intervening from the present time until
water is brought on to their new lands and they can begin to farm
them. Am I correct in understanding that the American landowners
will be given permission to hold those lands for an extensive period
beyond the date of their receiving the water, so that the additional
value of the free water during the years when they can farm the new
lands will compensate them for the years during which they have been
unable to produce crops owing to lack of water?—further, that such
permission will be renewable, so that the American landowners will
not find themselves faced with a fixed date by which they must sell,
which would presumably adversely affect the possibility of selling
the land for its fair value? Am I correct in understanding that
during the period to which I refer above these lands will not be
subject to agrarian affectation? I should appreciate information on
these points from Your Excellency.
The note under reference informs me:
Your Excellency is right in thinking that the crops obtained
on these lands which have been sown with wheat up to October
30th of this year will belong to the present owners, and
that crops sown later than that date should be the property
of the ejidatarios. This is in fact
provided for in the President’s decree, already known to
that Embassy. Nevertheless, the owners will be indemnified
for the work of preparing and irrigating the lands. To
prevent the danger of lowered production of wheat, an effort
will be made in each case to secure an arrangement between
the owners and the workers whereby the planting will not be
delayed and the owners not suffer losses.
I should appreciate learning from Your Excellency
how the American landowners are to be indemnified for the work of
preparing and irrigating the lands, and what arrangements between
the owners and the workers are contemplated by your Government.
Please accept [etc.]
