838.00/2985: Telegram
The Minister in Haiti (Munro) to the Secretary of State
[Received (June 19?) 3:40 a.m.]
61. The Minister for Foreign Affairs said yesterday that he was authorized to accept a general arrangement along the following lines:
- 1.
- The Haitian Government would give us the assurances requested regarding the commissioning of American officers and the promotion of Haitian officers provided however that we did not insist upon the commissioning of Captain Aarons. The Government would reserve however the right to discuss further the plan of Haitianization.
- 2.
- The Colvin case would be settled as already indicated. Colvin would leave October 1st receiving his back pay from July 1, 1930 plus 9 months additional pay at the rate of ten thousand per annum.
- 3.
- The public works, sanitary and agricultural services would be turned over to the Haitian Government on October 1st and American civilians in these services would receive 9 months pay as an indemnity.
I did not express any opinion on the plan as a whole. I pointed out that we must retain sanitary control in Port au Prince and Cape Haitien and promised to give the Minister later a definite statement as to what this would imply. I also said that I was not disposed to drop the Aarons case but that any definite action on this case must await the decision of the board of investigation which General Williams would now reconvene without waiting further for the President’s cooperation. The Minister said that the President would prefer to break off negotiations entirely rather than to give in in this case.
With reference to turning over the Treaty Services I see no material difference between October 1st and January 1st. Neither the public works nor the agricultural services can do anything very useful under present conditions because of the systematic obstruction of the Government and the continued presence of Americans in them only leads to difficulties and controversies. I think that we should make it clear that the decision to turn over the services at once instead of adopting a rational plan of Haitianization which would have made possible [Page 482] their continued efficiency, was taken simply because of the insistence of the Haitian Government and against our better judgment.
I do not feel however that we should give in on the Aarons case. If the board of investigation clears Aarons of the charges against him I think that we should insist upon the commission even if this leads to a final break in the Haitianization negotiations. Any other action will seriously affect the morale of the Garde and our own control over it and any assurances which we might receive for the future would be of little value if we gave in on this important question of principle. I have tried to disassociate this case from the general negotiations by suggesting that we postpone a final decision until the report of the Board has been received and proceed meanwhile with a general agreement on other points including assurances regarding the Garde but the Haitian Government insists that it must have assurances that we will not attempt to compel the President to commission Aarons before it gives the general assurances which we request.
Please inform me whether the Department is disposed to accept the general arrangement outlined above with the exception of the stipulation regarding Aarons and also whether the Department will authorize me to make a proper solution of the Aarons case an absolute condition to the acceptance of an agreement regarding Haitianization even though this causes a final break in the negotiations.