882.51/1226
The Chargé in Liberia (Bundy) to
the Secretary of State
Monrovia, December 1,
1920.
[Received January 3, 1921.]
No. 137
Sir: I have the honor to report that
immediately upon the receipt of the Department’s cable No. 57, dated
November 17, 4 p.m., the Legation addressed a note to the Secretary of
State of Liberia pointing out the apparent failure of the Liberian
Government to comply with certain provisions of the Reform Program of
1917 in the steps it had taken to make a loan of the Bank of British
West Africa, Ltd., without consultation with the Financial Adviser. It
was also suggested that the Department did not doubt that the Liberian
Government would regularize this situation without delay, (enclosure No.
I.).33
The reply of the Secretary of State attempts to justify the course taken
by the Liberian Government in this matter. To the Legation his arguments
do not seem convincing and as the Financial Adviser has pointed out
quite clearly the discrepancies in the position of the Secretary of
State it appears unnecessary that anything further should be added on
this point. A copy of Secretary Barclay’s reply was furnished the
Financial Adviser by the Legation in order that he might give his
version of the matter, (enclosures 2, 3, 4.).34
The Legation understands that the Liberian Government regards itself as
having asked the approval of the loan by the Financial Adviser. Even if
this may now be conceded it is to be noted that such approval was not
asked until all the arrangements for the loan were completed.
[Page 107]
However, in view of the suggestion of the Department in its cable No. 51,
of Nov. 1, 3 p.m., which was duly communicated to the Financial Adviser,
that he should approve the loan if the Department agreed to receive the
proposed commission, the Financial Adviser states that he will not
further oppose the loan being made.
I have [etc.]
[Enclosure]
The Liberian Secretary of State (Barclay) to the American Chargé (Bundy)
Monrovia, November 24,
1920.
565/D
Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge
receipt of your Note of November 19th, 1920, by which I am advised
in connection with the Commission which the Government of Liberia
desires to send to Washington that it appears to the Washington
State Department that the Liberian Government in this connection
have failed to comply with certain provisions of the Reform Program
of 1917, which require communication and consultation with the
Financial Adviser on all matters affecting the Finances of the
Republic.
In reply I beg to say that it appears to the Liberian Government that
the State Department has been misinformed as to the facts of the
case.
It is submitted most respectfully that the appointment of a
commission such as that which the Government of Liberia desire to
send to Washington, is an act political in character to which the
Program of Reforms of 1917 has no pertinency. The Liberian
Government therefore did not conceive and do not now admit that
political acts of this kind should be subject to the approval or
disapproval of an official whose functions are purely financial.
When, however, the law authorizing the appointment of such a
commission was passed by the Legislature, the Government recognized
that the question of finding means for meeting the expenses of such
a Commission, was one which properly should be submitted to the
Financial Adviser for his advice and suggestion as to the manner in
which this money could be raised without disturbing the existing
financial situation. Accordingly, on the 30th of September 1920, the
Secretary of the Treasury addressed a letter to the Financial
Adviser by which this latter official was informed of the action
taken by the Legislature with respect to the Loan Plan and their
authorization of a Commission to confer with Washington thereon, and
asking Mr. Worley to confirm a provisional arrangement which had
been made by the Treasury Department for the purpose of raising
funds to meet the expenses of the said Commission.
[Page 108]
To this request, the Financial Adviser
gave a categorical refusal without stating any reasons.
Subsequently, the Financial Adviser was asked to attend a Cabinet
meeting held on the 19th of October at which the whole question was
gone into. At this conference the Financial Adviser admitted that
“up to a certain point” he had been made cognisant of what action
the Liberian Government had taken on the Loan Plan, but refused to
give his sanction to the proposed loan based upon the internal
revenues unless he received authority from the United States
Government.
The Financial Adviser then it would appear from these facts was made
fully conversant with every action of the Government taken in
connection with the Loan. He would however seem to have demanded
that he should decide upon the question of the propriety of sending
a Commission to America and to have felt that he had a right to veto
any act of the Government taken in this connection if his
authorization had not previously been requested. This was a view
which the Liberian Government could not admit and which it is
submitted was not contemplated in the Program of Reforms.
I may however add that the Financial Adviser has already been
furnished with copies of the Acts passed by the Special Session of
the Legislature convened in July 1920 for the consideration of the
Loan proposals. From these acts it can be readily seen that no law
directly or indirectly affecting the finances of the Republic,
except in so far as was related to furnishing means for the expenses
of the Commission, were passed and that this latter question was
submitted to the Financial Adviser, in compliance with the terms of
the Program of Reforms.
I have [etc.]
