Editorial Note
At the Department’s press conference held the afternoon of April 6, Mr. Lincoln White, Executive Assistant to the Special Assistant for Press Relations, read this statement:
“The Honorable Richard C. Patterson, Jr., United States Ambassador to Guatemala, has returned to the United States for medical treatment, based upon his request to the Department of approximately six weeks ago for permission to return to this country for this purpose.
“On the eve of Ambasador Patterson’s departure from Guatemala oral charges were made to the Department by the Guatemalan Government that Ambassador Patterson had intervened in Guatemala’s internal affairs. The United States Government categorically rejects these charges. There has been no written request for Ambassador Patterson’s recall from his official station in Guatemala. During the Ambassador’s absence and until medical treatments have been concluded, the Embassy in Guatemala City will be under the direction of Mr. Milton K. Wells, Chargé d’Affaires ad interim.”
(Documents in file 123 Patterson, Richard C., for 1950, indicate that the Ambassador on February 13 requested four days leave in Los Angeles during the latter part of that month, that this request was granted, and that the Ambassador was absent from Guatemala from February 19 to 25. For a later request by the Ambassador, see footnote 4 to the Department’s telegram 75 of March 25, page 870.)
In response to questioning Mr. White said, as “background,” that in a conversation held March 25 with Willard F. Barber, Acting Assistant Secretary of State, and Thomas C. Mann, Director of the Office of Middle American Affairs, Ambassador Goubaud had “… made the informal suggestion that Ambassador Patterson be recalled.” The [Page 878] Americans had not asked for a “… bill of particulars …” nor had Guatemala volunteered any charge more specific than that of intervention in Guatemalan internal affairs.
According to Mr. White, the United States had not received a formal written request for Ambassador Patterson’s recall, nor had he been declared persona non grata. Ambassador Patterson had denied interfering in Guatemalan affairs. He had arrived back in Washington March 30. Presumably he would return to Guatemala when again in health.
During the conference, reporters repeatedly asserted that it seemed the State Department had denied the charges against Mr. Patterson without conducting any investigation. Apparently in response to these assertions, Mr. Mann joined the conference.
He said the United States was anxious in what was an election year in Guatemala to avoid polemics which could be used against the United States in the campaign. He continued (as “background”):
“While there have been no official statements as to the specific acts which were alleged to constitute intervention, we know pretty well what sort of thing they have in mind.
“The CAP, which translated means Committee for Political Action [organized in 1948 by labor leaders who had in common their support of the Arévalo government], has issued some bulletins which attack Ambassador Patterson, and attacking the State Department and the United States. It considers that we are imperialistic, that Mr. Patterson is constantly very imperialistic, and that we are seeking to overthrow the Government of Guatemala—you stop me if you wish, please,—and are seeking to create differences between Guatemala and its neighbors in order to weaken the Guatemalan regime.”
The charges had appeared in Diario de la Mañana, described by Mr. Mann as a semiofficial organ and had been broadcast over the Government radio. (Partial texts of the CAP charges are included with documents in file 611.14 for March and April 1950.) Mr. Mann said that representations made by Ambassador Patterson from time to time had been in support of legitimate interests of American-owned firms. He then went “off the record” to say:
“We know from very personal and unofficial conversations with people in the Guatemalan Embassy here that charges parallel these general allegations. They are informed too what CAP has said—so that we are pretty sure in our own minds what the Government has in mind.”
Mr. Mann read a number of passages from the CAP charges to illustrate his contention that they were general rather than specific and that those directed against Mr. Patterson were largely innuendo. In response to questions, he said Ambassador Patterson had not officially protested activities of the CAP. The United States did not [Page 879] believe the Guatemalan Government to be Communist but he, Mr. Mann, thought “… a few clever Communists [had] been able to capitalize on a number of local situations.” He had seen the Guatemalan Ambassador that same afternoon:
“I gave him a copy of this release and told him that we were going to release it.
“That is all.”
The final portion of the interview with Mr. Mann follows:
Q. What is being done to straighten this out?
A. We are very calm and collected about it and we hope the thing will work out. We obviously don’t control all of the elements that are going to have to be taken into account.
Q. When is Mr. Patterson due to return?
A. I don’t know.
Q. Where is he now?
A. I understand that he is down in Florida or on one of the islands off Florida somewhere.
Q. Is he seeing the President?
A. I don’t know.
Q. In these charges which are published, couldn’t they just ignore them and forget about it?
A. It is legally possible to withdraw a charge, so far as I know, but I don’t think it is probable.
Q. They were told through a press release that there has been no other request?
A. That is right.
Q. Assuming, therefore, in the absence of a formal request, they could if they elected to do so?
A. They could do that, yes,—either verbally or in writing, they could withdraw their statement, had there been one. I think that is possible.
Q. I was thinking in terms of the conversation with the Ambassador this afternoon. You possibly might have included that and just decided to drop the thing.
A. We didn’t discuss that.
Q. Does the opposition party or parties down there agree in any way with the American people—but the President is a labor supporter. I mean are both sides mad at the Yankees or not?
A. Still not for attribution, I think the situation there is very similar to what it is in most Latin American countries. But at election time it is just political suicide to try to defend the United States. People just don’t do it. So you don’t give any evidence of public support. I think on the whole people in the other American Republics understand and support us, but it isn’t good politics to say so at election time. We are a sort of punching bag during elections. Everybody likes to take a swing at us, and makes sure he does every time you say something.
We don’t want to embarrass anybody.
Q. Has anybody in Guatemala ever asked for Mr. Patterson’s recall?
A. No one in Guatemala.
Q. And there hasn’t been any announcement or any statement?
[Page 880]A. Not if you mean an official statement by the Guatemalan Government.
I think there likely will be after this one today.
Thank you very much.”
A complete transcript of this press conference is included in Department of State, “Daily Press and Radio News Conferences”, volume: V, 1950, under date.