File No. 812.00/23446.
The Special Commissioners to the Secretary of State.
Niagara Falls, N.Y., May 28, 1914.
We had not received your telegram of the 27th when we had a conference in Toronto yesterday. We then called attention to the [Page 511] many and serious objections to the appointment of a provisional government the majority of whose names are neutral, urging that the Huertista approval of such a plan would be purchased at the expense of the hostility of the Constitutionalists who claimed that their success entitled them to the sole power and who in justice were certainly entitled to the preponderance of authority.
They stated that we had misunderstood their proposals 2 and 324 as would be demonstrated by analyzing the political complexion of the names they had previously proposed, one of whom, Lascurain, was a Constitutionalist and by virtue of his position as Foreign Relations Minister was now in law entitled to be provisional president; General Angeles was now in the Constitutionalist Army; Rivero was an appointee of Madero as Minister to Argentina, resigned when Huerta came into power and ought to be acceptable to the Constitutionalists; Carbajal, appointed President of the Supreme Court by Diaz, they understood was in sentiment a neutral and they thought ought to be acceptable to all parties; they had been informed that Delama, the only Huertista, was a moderate who earnestly favored settlement of the present problems. They argued that it was not necessary in making the appointment to designate the names of the factions to which the men had belonged if they were of a character that would tend to secure the desired end and were otherwise satisfactory to the parties to the mediation.
We incline to think that the men to constitute the provisional government might be agreed upon if we disregarded classification and division among various elements and undertook to select individuals to constitute it. Would any of the five names suggested be satisfactory? What names could we suggest?
The discussion on the subject above indicated continued until we were obliged to adjourn in order to attend the official reception which had carried us to Toronto.
In view of previous conversations with the Mediators individually and in conference, we hope to be able to substitute “pledged “for “requested.”
When the Mediators suggested evacuation at the end of 15 days we at once urged that this would leave only a paper plan with nothing to guarantee its enforcement and exposing the country to the turmoils attendant upon the transfer to the provisional government whose ability to preserve peace and conduct the election safely depended solely upon the willingness of the Mexican people to have the plan of pacification carried into effect. The interest of all concerned therefore demanded that the evacuation should not be made until after the election has been held and the regular government was in operation. They thought this objection was answered by the provision that the withdrawal should be within the 45 days unless the provisional government consented to an extension of time and that extension definite or indefinite might be left to the decision of the provisional government which they assume to be in sympathy with the fundamental idea and disposed to act in accordance with the best interests of the Mexican people. That feature not having been discussed by us with you in Washington and not knowing the President’s wishes in the matter we were not in a position to do more [Page 512] than to suggest general considerations of international difficulties having regard to the desire of the United States to, secure the interest of the people of Mexico without intervention. In our next discussion on that point, shall we suggest that this feature be eliminated altogether from the plan or that it be left for settlement by the United States and the provisional government or by the United States and the government established after the election?
While this telegram is being put in code we have a visit from the Ambassador of Brazil, who suggests that as it has not been decided whether the provisional board should consist of three or four or any other definite number, it might be advisable to request both the Huertistas and Carrancistas to designate names fitted in character and ability to appointment on such a board, the Mediators to select the third, or third and fourth man, as the case might be, so as to give the preponderance to the provisional government.
- See the Commissioners’ telegram of May 26.↩