838.51/2772
The Minister in Haiti (Armour) to the Acting Secretary of State
[Received December 18.]
Sir: With reference to my telegram No. 135 of December 7, 10 [1] p.m. and to the Department’s reply thereto No. 81 [88] of December 8, 3 p.m. with reference to “an exchange of notes” with the American delegation mentioned in telegrams of M. Barau, President of the Haitian delegation to the Pan-American Conference, I have the honor to transmit herewith a copy of a document which was handed to me yesterday by the President.
The Department will note that it consists of an “oral statement” which President Vincent assures me was handed to the Haitian delegation by a member of the American delegation on board the SS American Legion under date of November 27 last.
While it is true that the document bears the title, “Oral Statement,” it seems probable that this document, together with the Haitian memorandum of November 15, 1933, to which it is apparently in reply, constitute the exchange of notes referred to by M. Barau in his telegrams.
A comparison of this statement with the Department’s telegram No. 83 of December 1, 4 p.m. shows that it follows in general the suggestions contained in the Secretary’s radio message to the Department of November 26 last. I cannot find, however, in the Department’s telegram No. 83 any indication of agreement with the Secretary’s suggestion that I be instructed to inform the Haitian Government in accordance with the first paragraph of the “oral statement.” On the contrary, in the Department’s radio message of November 27 sent in reply to the Secretary’s recommendations of November 26 it is stated that, “in the draft reply which we are submitting to President Roosevelt we are embodying the suggestions made in your telegram under acknowledgement.” I interpret this language as meaning that the Department had decided, rather than to issue instructions to me in accordance with the Secretary’s suggestion, to include such recommendations as the Secretary had made in President Roosevelt’s reply to President Vincent.
I mention this as the publicity given to the Secretary’s statement that he “has requested the Department of State to instruct the American Minister at Port-au-Prince, et cetera,” has placed me in a somewhat awkward position as I have been forced to explain to the Haitian Government that no such instructions have been received. This has, apparently, given rise to an impression that Washington and the delegation are not in entire agreement, although I have explained [Page 776] the matter as I understand it, namely that the Department feels that the President’s reply to President Vincent, containing the Secretary’s suggestions, obviates the need of any further instructions to me.
Without in any way wishing to criticise the action of our delegation or of any member of it, I must confess that I cannot see that any useful purpose was served in informing the Haitian delegation of what the Secretary of State had requested the Department of State to do. If the “oral statement” was communicated, as it presumably was, prior to the receipt of the Department’s message to the Secretary of State of November 27, then it would seem that, upon receipt of the latter message, a further “oral statement” should have been handed the Haitian delegation explaining that instead of having the Legation at Port-au-Prince instructed to make the requested communication to the Haitian Government this matter was being dealt with in the President’s reply to President Vincent. It may well be that such a supplementary “oral statement” was later made. In this case I hope that the Department will be good enough to communicate it to me as soon as it is received from our delegation at Montevideo.
Respectfully yours,