715.1715/708: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Chargé in Nicaragua (Castleman)
68. The Department has received a telegram dated October 13 from the Minister for Foreign Affairs with regard to the boundary dispute, the text of which is presumably available to you. In reply thereto you are instructed to make the following oral statement to the Minister for Foreign Affairs:
“Pursuant to instructions of my Government, I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt by the Secretary of State of Your Excellency’s telegram of October 13. My Government is deeply gratified with Your Excellency’s declaration of Nicaragua’s policy of adherence to peace and respect for treaties and your Government’s firm intention to prevent the outbreak of hostilities between two peoples so closely linked by historical ties and common aims and interests. My Government has received with real pleasure the confirmation of Nicaragua’s acceptance of the friendly tender of good offices of third governments in connection with pending questions with Honduras.
Careful note has been taken of the Nicaraguan Government’s attitude toward statements with regard to the validity of the arbitral award by the King of Spain as handed down on the question of the boundary of Honduras. This Government believes, however, that the question of the validity of the award does not arise in the contemplated preliminary discussions which have as their object the proposal of measures designed to allay the existing tension in the relations of the two countries, thereafter proceeding to the examination of the bases of a permanent settlement of the fundamental issue.
[Page 87]My Government believes that the Nicaraguan Government will agree that in advance of the preliminary discussions it will not be desirable for either of the parties to seek to insist upon consideration of their views as to the bases of a settlement of the fundamental issue. It would seem that the basic issue cannot be satisfactorily discussed until the present obstructive tension has been cleared away. The suggested procedure can in no way be construed as impairing the position or rights of either party in later discussions directed toward a permanent settlement of the basic issue.”