721.2315/180: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Ambassador in Peru (Poindexter)
10. Your 12, March 3, noon. Señor Velarde has received instructions as set forth in your telegram. The words “in the sense that” are objected to on behalf of Colombia as conducive to misunderstanding and cannot be accepted without specific instructions. There is thus serious risk of breakdown of negotiations at critical moment without compensating results to Peru. There will be an opportunity to sign through tomorrow afternoon and it is earnestly hoped Peruvian Government will agree to delete the words objected to. The statement in the third paragraph of your undated telegram No. 10,16 would be acceptable as would any of the following three alternatives:
1.
“Doctor Velarde then stated that he also was authorized by his Government to express its acceptance of the friendly suggestion which the Secretary of State had just made and that as a consequence his Government would immediately advise the Peruvian Congress thereof, repeating at the same time its recommendation that it approve the boundary treaty with Colombia.”
2. Same as No. 1 through words “had just made” and then the, following words “and that his Government would immediately advise [Page 460] the Peruvian Congress thereof, repeating at the same time its recommendation that it approve the boundary treaty with Colombia.”
3. Same as No. 1 through words “had just made” then following “and that his Government would repeat to the Peruvian Congress its recommendation that it approve the boundary treaty with Colombia.”
Department unable to understand this multitude of changes. If the Peruvian Government does not desire to enter into the Procès Verbal Department would prefer to have it say so frankly. If it does desire to do so Department hopes it will send instructions this evening if possible to the Peruvian Ambassador to accept one of the formulae above proposed.