AF files, lot 58 D 459, “Dakar, Correspondence With”
The Consul General at Dakar (Ferguson) to Jerome R. Lavallee of the Office of African Affairs
official–informal
Dear Jerry: I have received your letter of October 18 [11] concerning Mr. Lamm’s reporting on events in French Togo from the vantage point of Accra.1
I am somewhat surprised at this since it was my understanding that this arrangement already existed and that staff shortages at Accra in recent months were all that had prevented the continuation of the work in this field that Cole was doing. I have pointed out repeatedly the difficulties involved in getting news of Togo here and I certainly have no objection to the Department’s obtaining the information where it can.2
A word of caution is, I think, advisable. I have this morning reread all of Cole’s reports on French Togo and, while they unquestionably contained a great deal of valuable information, I think you will agree that they represented, by and large, only the nationalist point of view. I hold no particular brief, as you are aware, for the administration of French Togo under its late unlamented Governor, M. Péchoux, but there are two sides to every fight and the information that has come out of Accra in the past has reflected only one side. Secondly, you do not mention whether it is intended that Mr. Lamm visit Lomé from time to time. You will recall the Cole—Moore correspondence of two [Page 256] years ago which certainly pointed out the extreme sensitivity of the French where consular visits to Togo are concerned.3 I do not think, however, that this should stop us from similar visits in the future and if Mr. Lamm finds it advisable to visit Lomé, I see no reason why he should not do so although his trips had probably better be cleared with the Embassy in Paris in advance and the authorities in Lomé formally notified by me.
We have not yet received our budget for FY 1955 and I have no way of knowing whether there will be sufficient funds to permit me to visit Lomé which I definitely hope to be able to do. In the final analysis, however, trips by Lamm and myself in addition to reporting from Accra and Dakar will all be inadequate to give a true, current, and analytical picture of what is going on in French Togo. It seems to me that there are other courses of action which have been tried in the past but which might be tried again.
I understand that the French have consistently refused to allow a consular officer accredited to non-French areas in Africa to be similarly accredited to Togo, but there is no harm that I can see in asking again, pointing out to the French that they have from time [to time] asked our support in the UN vis-à-vis the Togo question and that we would be in a much better position to make our decision if we had first hand information from the area from our own official sources. They can be shown the geographic absurdity of distant Dakar being responsible for an area where two full fledged American Consulates General are immediately across the borders. Tactically, it might be better to ask the French to permit Lagos rather than Accra to be responsible for French Togo.
The more logical solution would be to open a Consulate in either Lomé or Abidjan. This would admittedly cost money but if French Togo is of sufficient importance to the Department to require full political reporting, the Department simply will have to pay for it. Sooner or later the growing economic and political importance of all of the French territories along the Gulf of Guinea coast will require American representation of some sort even at the cost, if necessary, of cutting down other operations elsewhere.
I shall, needless to say, be delighted to discuss this with Mr. Lamm when he puts in here but I would like, if possible, to have your reactions to my rather rambling thoughts first. I am taking the liberty of sending a copy of this letter to Bob Moore in Paris and hope that he can, in his turn, “react”.
Sincerely yours,