Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-kwt9d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-14T11:15:31.645Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

F.D.R. and Panama*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

John Major
John Major
Affiliation:
University of Hull
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Historians of United States policy towards Latin America in the first half of the twentieth century have paid remarkably little attention to Washington's dealings with the republic of Panama. The failure to explore this terra incognita is all the more surprising in the light of the fact that those dealings hinged round one of America's vital interests, the Panama Canal, which runs through the heart of the country and has given Panama an importance unique in U.S. diplomacy. Yet much of the detailed history of the relationship remains unknown.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
The Historical Journal , Volume 28 , Issue 2 , June 1985, pp. 357 - 377
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1985

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1 The completion of the statue was delayed after the sculptor first chosen to do the work absconded with the funds; see Panama American, 29 Apr. 1955. On the 1912 visit, see Roosevelt, Elliott (ed.), The Roosevelt letters, II (London, 1950), 161Google Scholar, 162. The best available account of relations between the two countries during the Roosevelt era is U.S. department of state, The United States and Panama, 1333–1949 (Washington, D.C., 1952), pp. 1–197Google Scholar.

2 The text of the 1903 convention may be found in U.S. Senate, Committee on Foreign Relations, Background documents relating to the Panama Canal (Washington, D.C., 1977), pp. 279–88Google Scholar. The text of the 1926 treaty is in ibid. pp. 822–38; hereafter cited as BD.

3 819.51/729A; 819.001 Arias, H./51: Record Group 59 (Records of the department of state), U.S. National Archives. Hereafter cited as DS.

4 DS, 711.19/175; 8IIF.244/192A, 193; 819.74/257. See also Leonard, Thomas, ‘The commissary issue in American-Panamanian relations, 1900–1936’, The Americas xxx (1973), 83–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

5 DS, 711.19/175; 819.74/257.

6 Ibid.

7 Ibid.

8 DS, 811 F.504/93, 100, 102; 711.19/175.

9 DS, 819.001 Arias, H./60; 711.19/178; 811F.244/206; 819.001 Arias, H./59.

10 Gruber memo, of 11 Oct. 1933, Record Group 107 (secretary of war classified file), U.S. National Archives; hereafter cited as SWCF. DS, 711.19/175A.

11 DS, 711.19/175, 175A. Complete press conferences of Franklin D. Roosevelt, II (New York, 1972), 319Google Scholar; hereafter cited as Press conferences. Roosevelt to Swanson, 18 Oct. 1933, Papers of the general board of the navy, file 426–1, serial 1633, Operational Archives, Navy Historical Center, Washington Navy Yard; hereafter cited as GB. DS, 819.77/403.

12 DS, 819.77/403. Swanson to Roosevelt, n Dec. 1933, GB 426–1, 1633.

13 Hull to Roosevelt, 13 Mar. 1934, papers of Franklin D. Roosevelt, official file 110 A, Franklin D. Roosevelt Library; hereafter cited as OF. DS, 811 F.504/120. Roosevelt to Hull, 16 Feb. 1934, Hull to Roosevelt, 20 Mar. 1934, OF 110.

14 DS, 811 F.812 Protection /I, 9, 3, 5, 12, 11. War plans division memo, of 31 Mar. 1934, 1766-R-22(55), Record Group 165 (military intelligence division), U.S. National Archives. For an account of the treaty discussions see Langley, Lester, ‘Negotiating new treaties with Panama: 1936’, Hispanic American Historical Review, XLVIII (1968), 220–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

15 President's naval aide to chief of naval operations, 13 July 1934, S. W. Bryant memo, of 9 Aug. 1934, P. L. Carroll memo, of 5 Oct. 1934, Strategic plans division, naval districts, Panama, series in, Operational Archives. Roosevelt to Hull, 23 July 1934, DS, 819.74/293.

16 DS, 811 F.244/242, 711.19/200. Hull to Dern, 4 Oct. 1934, DS, 711.1928/271 A.

17 Wang memo, of 8 June 1934, Schley to Feuille, 7 Dec. 1934, Schley to Dern, 19 Oct. 1935, file 94-A-3/1936, Record group 185 (records of the Panama Canal), Washington National Records Center; hereafter cited as PC.

18 Schley to Feuille, 7 Dec. 1934, Schley memo, of 26 Dec. 1934, p.2, PC. DS, 711.1928/436 1/2, minutes of meeting of 22 Oct. 1935.

19 DS, 819.74/303A; 711.1928/273; 711.1928/456 1/2, pp. 22–4. On the Montevideo conference and its immediate aftermath, see Connell-Smith, Gordon, The United States and Latin America: an historical analysis of inter-American relations (London, 1974), pp. 162–7Google Scholar.

20 Statement of 30 Oct. 1934, DS, 711.1928/285 B. Schley to Welles, 22 Nov. 1934, PC, 94-A-3/1936. Dern to Roosevelt, 27 Dec. 1934, Record Group 165 (war plans division), file 3804, U.S. National Archives; herafter cited as WPD. U.S. treaty draft of 4 Mar. 1935, pp. 3–4, PC, 94-A-3/1936, and Schley memo, of 26 Dec. 1934, p-27, ibid.

21 DS, 711.1928/436 1/2, minutes of meetings of 9, 25, 27 and 30 Mar. and 15 Apr. 1935, 6 Nov.1934 5 and 2 4 Apr. 1935. See also note 35 below.

22 Ibid., minutes of meetings of 24 Apr., 17 and 22 May 1935. The concept of joint trusteeship went well beyond what Roosevelt had said during his visit to Panama the previous July, when he spoke of the United States alone as ‘a trustee for all the world’, and made it clear that he expected Panama's full co-operation; see The New York Times, 12 July 1934.

23 DS, 711.1928/436½, minutes of meetings of 31 May and 14 Aug. 1935. Hooper to Standley, 31 Oct. 1935, Record Group 225 (records of the joint board of the army and navy), file 326–1, serial 558, U.S. National Archives; herafter cited as JB.

24 Dern to Roosevelt, 11 Jan. 1935, OF 110.

25 Hull to Summerlin, 29 Oct. 1935, DS, 711.1928/444. Schley to Summerlin, 17 Oct. 1935, PC, 94-A-3/1936. Dern and Swanson to Roosevelt, 14 Nov. 1935, JB 326–1, 558.

26 Ridley to Schley, 1 Nov. 1935, PC, 94-A-3/1936; Heimer to Schley, 3 Sept. 1935, ibid.

27 Dern and Swanson to Hull, 13 Dec. 1935, DS, 711.1928, 466½ DS, 711. 1928/436½, minutes of meetings of 21 Nov. and 17 Dec. 1935. Ibid., 819.74/333¼, 339. Schley to Dern, 17 Dec. 1935, WPD, 1652–20.

28 Welles to Roosevelt, 22 Jan. 1936, SWCF; DS, 711. 1928/544, 563½. Military manoeuvres were not in fact authorized by the treaty or any of its accompanying notes. The text of the treaty and the notes may be found in BD, pp. 871–906. The history of the treaty's aftermath is covered in Langley, Lester, ‘The world crisis and the Good Neighbor policy, 1936–1941’, The Americas, XXIV (1967), 137–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

29 Dern to Woodring, 21 March 1936, Woodring to Dern, 14 Apr. 1936, SWCF. The canal authorities contended that all Railroad land was outside the brothel area: Flint to Craig, 27 Apr. 1936, PC, 33-E-5.

30 The bill was enacted in July 1937.

31 Welles to Roosevelt, 10 June 1937, Record Group 46(records of the U.S. Senate), file 76B–B20, U.S. National Archives.

32 Ibid., Welles to George, 12 May 1938, Borah to George, 21 May 1938, Welles to Roosevelt, 14 June 1938. See also The New York Times, 26 July and 1 Nov. 1937, 15 June 1939.

33 DS, 819.154/453, 454, 455 Rosenman, A. Samuel (ed.), Public papers and addresses of Franklin D. Roosevelt, 1939 volume (New York, 1941), 72–3Google Scholar.

34 BD, pp. 902–3.

35 Stone to Adjutant General, 16 Jan. 1939, WPD, 1652–30; BD, p. 904. Almost certainly underlying Arosemena's outburst was the fear that the U.S. army was seeking authority for a military take-over of Panama during a crisis threatening the canal. If so, he had good reason: the army went on to develop a plan for the occupation of Panama, using as its justification the treaty and the explanatory note; see Army, U.S., History of the Panama canal department, II (Washington, D.C., 1947), 243–5Google Scholar.

36 Duggan to Hull, 20 Mar. 1940, DS, 811 F.504/269.

37 BD, p. 899. Dawson to Hull, 14 Aug. 1939, DS, 811 F.812/1099. Roosevelt to Woodring, 8 Feb. 1940, DS, 811F.504/208. Press conferences, XV, 170.

38 Schley to Dern, 22 Nov. 1933, DS, 811 F.504/112; Dern to Hull, 24 Oct. 1939, ibid. 811 F.504/155. Smith to Ridley, 24 Apr. 1939, SWCF. Press conferences, XV, 170.

39 Duggan to Welles, 10 Feb. 1940, DS, 711.1928/919. Johnson to Hull, 27 Dec. 1939, DS, 811 F.504/167. Van Voorhis to adjutant general, 29 Feb. 1940, Record Group 407 (adjutant general's office), file 388.1 Pan., U.S. National Archives; herafter cited as AG. Roosevelt to Hull, 19 Apr. 1940, SWCF.

40 Diary of Henry L. Stimson, 8 Oct. 1940; hereafter cited as Stimson diary. DS, 811 F.504/356.

41 DS, 811 F.504/356. Stimson diary, 8 and 12 Nov. 1940. DS, 811 F.504/356, 367, 370, 380, 374. 397.

42 DS, 819.154/512; 711.1928/919; 811 F.504/277; 819.154/580 A. Roosevelt to Hull, 25 July 1940 and Roosevelt to Bell, 15 Aug. 1940, OF 608.

43 Dern to Hull, 13 Dec. 1935, DS, 711.1928/466. Chapin to Welles, 3 Jan. 1939, DS, 711.1928/763½.

44 Schley to Embick, 30 Oct. 1935, JB 326–1, 558. DS, 711.1928/45½ pp. 12, 37–8.

45 Finley memo, of 7 Jan. 1941, DS, 819.51/1197. Welles memo, of conversation with Brin, 31 Jan. 1941, DS, 711F.1914/178. Brin to Roosevelt, 18 Feb. 1941, AG classified decimal file, 1940–2, 388.1 Pan. Bonsal memo, of 17 Mar. 1941, DS, 711 F.1914/237. A useful summary of the base negotiations is Wright, Almon, ‘Defense sites negotiations between the United States and Panama, 1936–1948’, Department of State Bulletin, XXVII (11 08 1952), 212–7Google Scholar.

46 Stimson diary, 9 Jan. 1941. War plans division to Marshall, 1 Feb. 1941, WPD, 2674–33. DS, 711F.1914/178.

47 Judge advocate general's opinion of 4 Feb. 1941, WPD, 3565–5. Dawson to Hull, 13 Feb. 1941 and Hull to Dawson, 17 Feb. 1941. DS, 711F. 1914/182. War plans division to Marshall, 10 Feb. 1941, WPD, 2674–34.

48 Welles memo, of 24 Apr. 1941, DS, 711 F. 1914/237. The U.S. note of 7 May 1941 is in ibid. 711F.1914/189. Roosevelt to Stimson, 8 Mar. 1941, WPD, 4452–4.

49 Bonsal to Wilson, 5 June 1941, DS, 711F.1914/274A. Welles to Roosevelt, 19 June 1941, ibid. 711F.1914/301½.

50 DS, 711 F.1914/304, 305, 336, 341. The text of the May 1942 agreements is in BD, 926–43 and Roosevelt's subsequent message to congress is in ibid. 945–7. DS, 819.154/676.

51 The text of the executive order setting up the F.E.P.C. is in Rosenman, Samuel (ed.), Public papers and addresses of Franklin D. Roosevelt, 1941 volume (New York, 1950), 233–5Google Scholar.

52 DS, 810.504/290. Ibid. 811 F.504/448B has the text of the memorandum.

53 DS, 811F.504/451, 448A; 819.504/55 (copy taken from OF 25-i); 811 F.504/4–2844.

54 Roosevelt to Daniels, 1 March 1944, OF 25-i. Muccio to Hull, 22 Aprol 1944, DS, 811 F.504/455. Muccio to Hull, 3 May 1944, ibid. 811 F.504/458. Ibid., 811 F. 504/5–444. Daniels to Roosevelt, 13 May 1944, OF 25-i. McGregor memo, of 10 May 1944, DS, 811 F.504/458.

55 Roosevelt to Mehaffey, 16 May 1944, OF 25-i.

56 International Labour Conference, Conventions and recommendations, 1919–1949 (Geneva, 1949), pp. 561–77Google Scholar. DS, 500.C 115/28th Conf./362.

57 Daniels to Roosevelt, 13 June 1944, OF 25-i. DS, 811 F.504/461. Stimson diary, 20 June 1944. Edgerton to Brett, 24 March 1944, Papers of Franklin D. Roosevelt, President's secretary's file, box 64. It is worth noting that Daniels furthered Roosevelt's proclaimed objectives by promoting an executive order which gave alien workers in the zone an unqualified right to lower-paid positions, an d by instigating a housing survey by the National Housing Agency; see memo, of 17 May 1944, PC, 2-P-68. Mehaffey to Whyte, 21 Oct. 1944, ibid. 2-P-70. Repor t by Jaco b Crane, 3 Oct. 1944, ibid., 28-B-44. Both these steps, however, were aimed at benefiting the West Indian, not the Panamanian employees of the canal.

58 DS, 811F.504/12–1244;819.00/12–1844. Mehaffey to Burdick, 5 Dec. 1944; PC, 80-A-3; DS, 811F.504/12–944.

59 Alfaro, Ricardo, Media siglo de relaciones entre Panamá y los Estados Unidos (Panamá;, 1959 edn), pp. 38–9Google Scholar; author's translation.

60 DS, 711.1928/436½, minutes of meeting of 22 Oct. 1935. Hull to Dern, 15 Oct. 1935, PC, 94-A-3/1936.

61 DS, 819.001 Arias, H./55, 56, 57. Ibid. 711.1928/456½, undated memo, on joint letter of 13 Dec. 1935, pp. 35–7, for comment on the convention. Ibid. 711.1928/359.

62 For the text of the Hay-Herrán convention see BD, pp. 202–13. For Smuts see Hancock, W. Keith, Smuts: the sanguine years, 1870–1919 (London, 1962), p. 499Google Scholar.

63 See Major, John, ‘Wasting asset: the U.S. re-assessment of the Panama canal, 1945–1949’, Journal of Strategic Studies, III (1980), 123–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and DS, 811 F.504–12–848.