723.2515/810: Telegram
The Chargé in Peru (Sterling) to the Secretary of State
[Received 11 p.m.]
96. Your telegram January 18, 11 a.m.92 The note as quoted in your January 13, 4 p.m. was presented yesterday afternoon to the Minister for Foreign Affairs. The following is a translation of his reply:
“The Peruvian Government has [learned] with the greatest satisfaction of the cabled despatch wherein the Government of the United States, referring to the recent cabled negotiations with the Chilean Government for the settlement of the controversies arising from the non-fulfillment of several of the stipulations of the Treaty of Ancon and the principle accepted by both parties regarding the arbitration [Page 450] of pending difficulties, is pleased to express the gratification with which the President of the United States would view a meeting at Washington, in accordance with the suggestion of the Peruvian Government, of the representatives which Peru and Chile might see fit to appoint to settle, [if] happily it may be, the present difficulties or agree to fix them by means of arbitration. The Peruvian Government takes pleasure in expressing the full sympathy and decided approval of the noble and friendly desires of President Harding, inspired by a clear vision of the interests of peace and concord in America, and consequently is disposed to appoint the suggested representative in Washington on the understanding that, if necessary, there shall be an arbitration adjusted by the Government of the United States which shall, ultimately, decide all differences arising from the Treaty of Ancon”.
[Paraphrase.] Both the Minister for Foreign Affairs and the President feel that a reply mentioning arbitration under the United States was obligatory because of the position already taken by the Government of Peru, particularly in the recent exchange of notes with Chile93 which was unanimously endorsed by the country. In order to make assurances as innocuous as possible so that public opinion here may be satisfied and at the same time negotiations may not be impeded, the reply has been carefully worded and revised. Please note the phrase “if necessary” in the reply.
The Minister and the President are both hopeful of results. The Minister assured me confidentially that his Government would not insist at the meeting in Washington that the whole treaty be revised, but that its claims would be confined to the violations of the provisions of the treaty, the consequence of these violations, and indemnities. [End paraphrase.]
- See telegram to the Ambassador in Chile, supra.↩
- See Foreign Relations, 1921, vol. i, pp. 249 ff.↩