723.2515/3281: Telegram
The Ambassador in Chile (Culbertson) to the Secretary of State
[Received March 10—11:05 a.m.]
31. Minister for Foreign Affairs after a conference with the President has just sent a cable to the Peruvian [Chilean?] Ambassador in Lima in the following words: [Page 735]
“I reply to despatch No. 45. I am aware of interview with President Leguia. You will request an immediate audience with President Leguia and express regret in the first place and with much feeling at the absolute impossibility for us of accepting his (President Leguia’s) idea of constructing a port on the northern side of the mouth of the River San José for the following reasons:
It would be situated 20 meters from the Arica-La Paz railway line at the foot of the Chinchorro yard of the same company, almost in front of the barracks of the Velazquez regiment, 1500 meters from the first pier of the bay, and finally would limit the future development of the city to the north. All these circumstances and the almost immediate vicinity to places of so much activity would give rise to constant conflicts and would create friction in a nascent friendship which we are seeking sincerely and in a definite form. For these reasons, always inspired by the hope of reaching an agreement advantageous to both, I propose to you the following ideas which you will submit to President Leguia.
1. There would be conceded to Peru anywhere within 1575 meters north of the Bay of Arica a pier, a building for her customs, and a modern station for the railway from Arica to Tacna. All constructed at our cost, and moreover there would be handed over to her $2,000,000.
The dividing line between Tacna and Arica would leave from the point on the coast known as Escritos, 16 kilometers from Arica and would continue therefrom in the form now agreed on, or that is, 10 kilometers to the north and in a line parallel in its entirety with the line of the Arica-La Paz railway. This formula is in my judgment the only one which would bring us to an effective friendship and union with Peru.
2. We would accept the port which President Leguia wishes to construct to the north of the mouth of the River Lluta or, that is, 10 kilometers from the Bay of Arica. We would give for that the sum of $3,500,000. It would be set forth in the treaty that the port could not be ceded to a third party and that no railway would be constructed to Bolivia. In accordance with our national sentiment this is the limit of our sacrifices and in no case can we go further.”
[Paraphrase.] I understand from this telegram that Chile rejects the proposal of a port under the sovereignty of Peru as near as 1500 meters to Arica and proposes alternatives: (1) To give new railroad and customhouse facilities to Peru at any place between where the station now is and 1575 meters north, and to commence the international boundary on the coast about 16 kilometers north of Arica and to run it parallel to and 10 kilometers north of the railroad; (2) to give the port to Peru under Peruvian sovereignty which President Leguia asks, but to locate it 10 kilometers north of Arica at a place stated by Chilean engineers to be suitable. In this case the international boundary line would necessarily run south of the new port. The stipulation that the port could not be ceded to a third party might, I suggest, be softened by a proviso that neither Chile nor Peru shall cede all or any portion of their respective parts of the provinces without the consent of the other. With reference to my telegram No. 28, March [Page 736] 6, noon, I have been reliably informed that the President of Peru will agree never to extend the Tacna railroad to Bolivia. This stipulation might also have been put in general terms; for example, Chile and Peru agree not to extend or change the course of existing railroads in their respective parts of the provinces. Attention is also invited to the fact that the second proposal of Chile is to construct at Chile’s expense the port that Peru asks, locating it not at the place selected by President Leguia but nevertheless within the limits of Arica so that it can be called Arica. I am convinced that the foregoing objections to a port under the sovereignty of Peru near Arica are made in good faith. There is real fear that the proximity will breed conflict.
A copy is being sent to the Embassy in Peru. [End paraphrase.]