710.1012 Washington/66
The Ambassador in Chile (Collier) to the Secretary of State
[Received June 20.]
Sir: I have the honor to inform you that yesterday I arranged for a special meeting with the Minister of Foreign Affairs and discussed quite fully many pending matters including Chile’s views with regard to conciliation and arbitration and the probable action of its delegates at the conference to be held at Washington in December next. The Minister said that in determining the reservations that it would have to make as to arbitration, Chile was influenced by the Tacna-Arica question; that if that matter were out of the way he would be disposed to agree to accept “the most ample arbitration”; that it was somewhat difficult to find a formula that would exclude Tacna-Arica without mentioning it, and that to mention it might be embarrassing. I asked if he thought it possible to except it by a provision that the future treaty should not bind one to accept a new arbitration of any question already submitted to arbitration. He thought that was possible. He told me that in Chile’s recent treaty with Italy,91 copy of which he promised to send me … there were very [Page 634] ample provisions for the settlement of disputed questions by arbitration or conciliation; that, in fact, there was a provision that if either country believed that justice in a certain matter was not being administered in the local tribunals, the question could be carried before an international tribunal. The Minister said that he felt that he had perhaps gone too far in accepting this provision; that it was too much of a limitation of sovereignty; that he doubted if Chile would consent to such provisions in treaties with other countries. As soon as a copy of this treaty can be obtained by me I will send it to you.
Incidentally, the Minister referred to the improved temperament of the Peruvian Government towards Chile, mentioning the fact that, in a recent address, Leguia, for the first time, had refrained from making remarks offensive to Chile. The Minister assured me that no formal conversations between Peru and Chile were yet under way and that there had been so far no negotiations towards a commercial treaty. Nevertheless, he admitted that he and the Minister of the Treasury had had a long talk with Señor Maurtua during his recent visit and that naturally there was some reference to the economic interests of the two countries.
I have [etc.]
- Treaty of Feb. 24, 1927; League of Nations Treaty Series, vol. lxix, p. 277.↩