The Minister in Haiti (Bailly-Blanchard) to the Acting Secretary of State
[Received February 15, 1.41 a.m.]
Department’s February 6, 1  p.m. At the [conference] of the treaty officials February 12 under my chairmanship the Acting Financial [Page 359] Adviser brought up question involved in the present discussion between himself and the Minister of Finance and the director of the bank consequent upon the Department’s above cable in answer to Legation’s January 30, 5 p.m. The Acting Financial Adviser stated that during his conferences with the Minister of Finance, the Minister of Finance stated that while the Haitian Government had a very high opinion of Mr. McIlhenny it was probable that Mr. McIlhenny was not in full knowledge of the circumstances surrounding the question of the dual signature. The Minister of Finance also stated to the Acting Financial Adviser that he would not sign the note as presented as it was not in proper form and not such a document as the Government could legally sign (it being in the nature of a promissory note) and further that it was not in accordance with the agreement entered into at the conference whereby the settlement of the account between the Haitian Government and the bank were temporarily adjusted and the plan of monetary reform agreed upon, which agreement provided that both documents should be signed simultaneously and that he would not sign one without the other. After discussion it was the consensus of opinion in which I concur that the plan agreed upon should be adhere[d] to. The recognition of the debt to the bank by the Haitian Government, being a concession made in consideration that the monetary reform agreed upon at the conference should go into effect at once, makes [necessary] simultaneous signing of both documents shortly after further concessions. The various cables show that it has been clearly understood that the concessions agreed to by the Haitian Government and Financial Adviser were consequent upon a monetary reform and the authority requested by the director of the bank to sign on behalf of the bank was all that was necessary to complete the transaction.