The Secretary of State to the Minister in Haiti (Mayer)
4. Your 6, January 8, 5 p.m. In drafting the proposed accord the Department was guided by a desire to disturb the existing financial structure as little as possible and hence wished to limit to a minimum any changes in the stipulations of the accord of August 7, 1933, which might have to be suspended only for the balance of the current fiscal year.[Page 582]
More specifically the Department has the following observations with respect to the points now raised by de la Rue.
- First and Third: Comparison of the language of Article I of the proposed accord with the first sentence of Article XI of the Accord of August 7, should show that the second and third sentences of this last named article remain in force and are not suspended. If in your opinion, you deem it advisable, you are authorized to insert for the purposes of clarity, the words “the first sentence of Article XI and the first and last sentences of Article XVI” instead of the words “Articles XI and XVI” in the first line of Article II of the proposed accord.
- Second: The Department does not believe that it could properly suspend the second sentence of Article XVI since such a suspension would seem to take away from the Haitian Government the right to draw up its own budget. The Department would be gratified however, if the Haitian Government in its note should along with its undertakings state it will so apportion the balance between the budgets of the various departments as to assure the maintenance of the essential services of government.
In the opinion of the Department, it will be sufficient if the other undertakings by the Haitian Government mentioned in the second paragraph on page 5 of RA’s memorandum of December 30, 1937, are set forth in the proposed Haitian note.