stating that he is connected with the United Fruit Company in some capacity. Zuniga's telegram further states as a fact that Mr. Davis was, before going to Costa Rica, a small commercial employee and of education inferior to Morales, former American Minister to Honduras. It is stated also that it is well known that Mr. Davis protected the interests of the United Fruit Company in the recent conference, which was called a Guatemalan triumph. I have protested vigorously to the President against the publication of such an outrageous lie. I venture to suggest that Zuniga might be liable to prosecution under the law of Costa Rica. Repeated to Mr. Davis at Tela and to San Jose and Guatemala City. SUMMERLIN 714.1515/649: Telegram The Minister in Honduras (Summerlin) to the Secretary of State TEGUCIGALPA, May 2, 1928-2 p. m. [Received 7:05 p. m.] 58. My telegram number 57, April 29, noon. It is reported that the Government has directed immediate judicial action against El Cronista on charge of calumny under article 464, Penal Code. Repeated to San Jose and Guatemala. SUMMERLIN 714.1515/657: Telegram The Minister in Costa Rica (Davis) to the Secretary of State SAN JOSE, May 8, 1928-11 a. m. 27. Referring to Minister Summerlin's telegram of April 29, noon. The Costa Rican Minister for Foreign Affairs on May 5th voluntarily sent the following telegram to the Honduran Minister for Foreign Affairs: "The Government of Costa Rica has learned with profound displeasure of a telegram sent from Costa Rica to Tegucigalpa by Senor Angel Zuniga Huete and published in the newspapers of that capital, in which statements absolutely at variance with the truth are made with regard to the personality of His Excellency, Mr. Roy Tasco Davis, Minister of the United States in Costa Rica, and I consider it my duty to deny them in order that the silence of my Government in this respect could in no way be interpreted by Your Excellency's most illustrious Government as a mute confirmation of the assertion of Senor Zuniga Huete. I wish to inform Your Excellency that my Government has had pending the resolution of matters of vital importance with the United Fruit Company and never has Mr. Davis 'Conference of the Mixed Boundary Commission of Guatemala and Honduras at Cuyamel, Honduras, April 7, 1928; see vol. 1, pp. 712 ff. approached the President of the Republic or me in order to make suggestions or efforts of any kind in connection with such matters. During the six years that Mr. Davis has been Minister in Costa Rica the Government and people have been able to appreciate his brilliant intellect and his gentlemanliness, his discretion and proper demeanor as a diplomat, and his earnest desire that the relations between the United States and Costa Rica should each day become closer upon a basis of justice and mutual respect. The fear that an erroneous opinion of the personality of the mediator in the boundary controversy between Honduras and Guatemala might disturb the development of the conciliatory purpose which today animates these two sister republics and the desire to do honor to justice and to truth have impelled me to send Your Excellency this telegram." Repeated to Honduras and Guatemala. DAVIS 714.1515/657: Telegram The Secretary of State to the Minister in Costa Rica (Davis) WASHINGTON, May 9, 1928-8 p. m. 17. Your 27, May 8, 11 a. m. You may inform the Minister for Foreign Affairs that the Department deeply appreciates his courteous action in making this statement. KELLOGG 714.1515/687 The Minister in Honduras (Summerlin) to the Secretary of State No. 604 TEGUCIGALPA, May 17, 1928. SIR: I have the honor to refer to my telegram No. 57 of April 29, 1928, noon, to my despatch No. 595 of May 5, 1928 and to the last paragraph of my despatch No. 599 of May 11, 1928,10 all relative to the libellous telegram against Mr. Davis published in El Cronista. According to yesterday's press the courts have quashed the proceedings instituted by the Executive against the editor of this paper on the ground that no basis for action existed under Honduran law. It appears that there have been several precedents to uphold this decision. As the Department has doubtless already been informed, the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Costa Rica on May 4 [5], addressed a telegram to the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Honduras denying the allegations against Mr. Davis made in the Zúñiga telegram and speaking of him in the highest terms. Dr. Dávila claims not to have re "Despatches not printed. ceived this telegram until May 11. A copy is enclosed," together with a copy of Dr. Dávila's reply of May 12, and a copy in translation of the latter.12 I have [etc.] GEORGE T. SUMMERLIN BOUNDARY DISPUTE WITH GUATEMALA (See volume I, pages 712 ff.) 11 See telegram No. 27, May 8, from the Minister in Costa Rica, p. 80. 13 Not printed. IRISH FREE STATE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE IRISH FREE STATE FOR THE SO-CALLED REPUBLIC OF IRELAND BONDS SOLD IN THE UNITED STATES 841D.51/135 Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State (Castle) [WASHINGTON,] October 26, 1927. I The Minister of the Irish Free State1 came to see me at my request to talk about the Irish bond situation. I told the Minister that what I wanted to see him about was to ask whether he knew what progress was being made toward the eventual repayment by the Irish Free State of the balance of the money due on the 1921 bonds. pointed out to him that, of course, the Free State had repeatedly made the statement that it intended to repay this money and that as three years had gone by without its having taken action, that there were many people in the United States, holders of these bonds, who were beginning to think that they were not going to do it. The Minister seemed somewhat embarrassed. He insisted that the Free State was going to make the payment even though he felt that the decision of the court in New York 2 legally let them out. He said the court kept the money in this country on the ground that the Free State did not legally inherit the money from the defunct republic and, if this was so, it had no legal obligation to pay. He said, however, that the attitude of his Government was that after all this money had been given to free Ireland, that Ireland had gotten a part of this money and that the Government ought to and intended to repay the money. He said, however, that he had no information that any plans at the moment were being made. I pointed out to him that if the Free State should repay the money now rather than in two years, the advantage to it would obviously be very much greater. He said that the bondholders would get comparatively little money from the amount awarded by the court in New York since the expenses of the committees were enormous. He said that one of the committees, which had only been at work for a year, asked for $650,000 and had only been allowed $90,000, that the bondholders would 1 Timothy A. Smiddy. 'Decision by Mr. Justice Peters, of New York Supreme Court, on May 11, 1927; 129 Miscellaneous Report 551; 222 N. Y. S. 182 (1927). Judgment on June 17, 1927, with appointment of receivers. 83 find, after all the expenses had been paid, that the people who really gained by the transaction were Messrs. Walsh and the rest who had brought the action in the court. I said this might well be so, that I knew nothing about it, but that obviously if the bondholders got very little from the money in America and were paid the balance by the Free State, it was quite clear that sentiment would be in favor of the Irish Free State. The Minister showed me an article which had just come out in the Irish World, in which the suggestion was made that the bondholders pay over to the committee or else allow the committee to retain this money which was due the bondholders. The argument was made that they had subscribed for the sake of creating an Irish Republic, that this had not yet been successful and that what they ought to do was to turn over the money now held in New York for Valera to carry on his campaign against the Free State. The Minister said that very large amounts of money had been subscribed in the United States for the last election and that this had affected the Free State people very seriously. It was obvious that Mr. Walsh was back of this proposal and if he had any interest in the bondholders themselves he would realize that this kind of thing would not make the Free State eager to return the rest of the money. 841D.51/140 5 W. R. C[ASTLE,] Jr. Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State (Castle) Yesterday afternoon I had a conference with Mr. Cosgrave on the subject. He said that the Free State was in an exceedingly difficult position in the matter. He said that many Irishmen whom he had met in America, Irishmen who sympathized with the Free State, had remarked with vigor that the duty of the Free State now was to get its finances in order and forget all about these Republican bonds, especially since the court in New York had ruled that the Free State was not the successor of the Republic. He stated, however, that, in spite of any of these arguments, his Government fully intended to stand back of the declaration of the Dail that the Free State would assume responsibility for this money. Mr. Cosgrave said that the Free State wanted to return to the original subscribers all the money they had subscribed, plus interest, be 4 Frank P. Walsh and John T. Ryan, counsel for the Irish Republic Bondholders' Committee, New York City. 5 Eamon De Valera, agent for the so-called Irish Republic. 6 President of the Executive Council of the Irish Free State. |