Table Of ContentCopyright by
louie Aldo D#Santi
w'\: WITH ITALY UNDER MUSS CL IN I
1922 1941
-
A stuiy baaed on the records of the Department
of State and documents from the captured
files of Mussolini.
by
Louis Aldo DeSanti
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the decree of Doctor of Thilosophy, in
the faculty of Political Science,
Columbia University.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like firs t of a ll to express my appreciation
ana thanks to the State Department for permission to use its
files for this 3tudy. In particular 1 would like to thank
Dr. E. Taylor Parks, Historical Advisor, Division of Historical
Policy Research, Department of otate, for the cooperation and
assistance he most generously gave me.
It is also a pleasure to express my gratitude to
nrofessor Nathaniel ieffer of Columbia University for his
wise counsel in the preparation of this manuscript.
ii
EXPLANATORY NOTE
For the sake of brevity and clarity, in citing documents
from the decimal files of the Depart cent of Itate I have adopted
the fell n’vinf forms to refer to oonjrunicati ons between the he par t-
nent cf Jtate, American Embassies abroad and foreign Embassies in
Washington, D.C.
Department - Embassy From the State Department
to the American Embassy in
Rome.
Embassy - department From the American Embassy
in Rome to the itate
Department.
apartment - Italian Embassy From the itate Department
to the Italian Embassy in
Washington, D.C.
Italian Embassy - Department From the Italian Embassy
in Washington, D.C. to the
Ctate Department.
Department - Embassy or Legation - From the State Department
(Paris, London,etc.) to the American Embassy or
Legation whose location is
indicated in parenthesis
by the capital city.
i i i
TABLE OF CONTENT8
Page
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS........................................................ ii
EXPLANATORY NOTE........................................................ i l l
TABLE OF CONTENTS..................................................... iv
CHAPTER
I. LEGACIES OF THE PAST.............................. 1
II. OFFICIAL AMERICAN OPINION TOWARD
MUSSOLINI ANDF ASCISM, 1922-1935 .. 30
III. FROM OPINION TO POLICY............... 79
IV. IN THE 8PHERE OF WORLD POLITICB . 146
V. ETHIOPIA — TURNING POINT . . . . 217
VI. NEW POLICIES VERSUS OLD OBJECTIVES 260
VII. DRIFTING TOWARD WAR................................ 300
BIBLIOGRAPHY .............................................. 334
It
CHAPTER I
LEGACIES OF THE PAST
1
Of two striking facts about Italy one is generally known,
the other ordinarily overlooked. Familiar to a ll is her geographi
cal shape of a twisted boot with a stepping stone, but often not
realized is that modern Italy is only one half as old as the United
States.
It is admittedly d iffic u lt to think of Italy as a "young
nation", having been the seat of power of ancient Rome two thousand
years ago. With the collapse of the Roman Empire national unity
and centralized government disappeared, and for centuries the
peninsula remained a mosaic of petty kingdoms, p rin cip alities and
city -states. This division formed a constant temptation and in
v itation to invasion by foreign neighbors, with the result that many
of these miniature states were ruled over by foreign princes. Not
until the middle of the 19th century did any unification movement
prove effective, justifying the proclamation of the "Kingdom of
Italy" only in 1861,
With some of the larger predecessor States of the modern
Italian Kingdom, however, the United States had entered into
diplomatic relations long before. One of these was the Papal State.
In December, 1784, only a year after American independence had been
recognized by B ritain, the Papal Government took diplomatic cognizance
2
of th is fact by announcing that its two chief ports would hence-
1
forth be opened to the vessels of the new-born republio.
The United States responded to this friendly gesture in
1797 by commissioning an enterprising Homan as its firs t consular
officer in the Papal dominions.
It was again on Papal in itiativ e that diplomatio relations
between the two countries were established. John Adams, later to
become seoond President of the United States, had said in 1779 that
"Congress w ill probably never send a Minister to His Holiness who
2
can do them no service". This decision held until 1848. Aoting
on the basis of a report from the American Consul at Home that the
Pope desired the opening of diplomatio relations with the United
States, President Polk recommended such action to Congress in his
3
message of December 7» 1847* After a b itter debate Congress over
whelmingly approved the recommendation by votes of 137 to 15 and
36 to 7 in the House and Senate, respectively, and provided for "an
4
o u tfit and the salary of a charge" at the court of Rome. Jacob L.
Martin, the f irs t American diplomat appointed to the post, assumed
charge in August 1848. Six years later his successor was raised to
the rank of M inister. But the Papal Government, while i t had had
^-Leo F. Stock. Consular Relations between the United States
and the Papal States (Washington: 1945), p. x x lll.
^Idem. (Works of John Adams, VII, 109-110, Boston, 185?).
^Leo F. Stock, U.S. Ministers to the Papal States (Washington:
1939), P. x x ii.
4Ibid, p. 1.
3
oonsular representatives in the United States since 1826, never
did send a diplomatic mission to Washington.
One event in the relations between the two states is
worthy of speoial note. After 1861 the aim of Cavour’s diplo
macy and the Italian unification movement was to include the
Papal State in the United Kingdom. A process of accretion rapid
ly whittled away the te rrito ria l domain of the Papal Government
until by 1866 it was restricted to the city of Rome. And even the
Eternal City appeared threatened, with the rumored withdrawal of
the protecting French troops.
"From several offioials of the Papal Government" the
American Minister Rufus King reoelved intimations that the Pope
would flee Rome if this should come to pass, and that the presenoe
of an American warship at nearby Civite Veoohia was "highly
desirable", because " if the Pope fe lt compelled to abandon Rome
♦
he might seek refuge in the United S tates". King was approached
by the Papal Minister of War with the query as to how the Pope
would be received in the United States. To Washington he reported
having given this reply:
"I contented myself with replying, in general terms,
that our country was the home of civ il and religious
lib erty , as well as the refuge of a ll who fled from
p o litical and other troubles in the old world; that
Eis Holiness, should he see f i t to go to the United
States, would no doubt meet with a kind welcome and
be le ft to pursue unquestioned and unmolested, his
great work as Head of the Catholic Church".^
About the project of transferring the Holy See from Rome
to the United States, Minister King reported: "I know that His
^ Italics in original dispateh.
1Ib ld .„ p. 39A.
4
Holiness has spoken of it more than once in terms that seemed to
1
Imply approval." In such circumstances the enterprising King
did more than report the facts. In conjunction with Assistant
Secretary of the Navy Gustavus Fox, who chanced to be in Rome, he
telegraphed the American Minister at Lisbon to inform Admiral
Goldsborough, Commander of the U.S. Mediterranean fle e t, that
"important matters" required the "immediate presence" of one of his
2
warships at Clvita Vecchia. The Swatara was promptly dispatohed.
Secretary of State Seward approved the M inister’s conduct,
replying on December 10, 1866: "What you report that you have said
upon the subject is approved, and it does not seem necessary to say
3
any more." But Seward added that he did not find in King’s dispatch
"sufficient grounds for assuming that His Holiness entertains any
idea of oomlng to the United States in the event of apprehended
revolutionary movements in Rome", labelling such assumptions
"indiscreet and disrespectful to the Pope". To these one may safely
add a third adjective, "embarrassing" — to the United States.
The anticipated happened in 1870, as Italian troops seized
Rome. But the Pope, the same Pius IX, decided to stay, i f only as
a "prisoner". The wisdom of this decision not to abandon the Eternal
City, especially for America, must appear obvious today. One may
easily Imagine the complications of an Amerioan "oaptivity" -- both
for the Church and the land of sanctuary.
O fficial relations between the United States and the Papal
State had already come to an end in 1867. They were not o fficially
1Ibid. 2lbid. ^Ib id ,, p# 404.
5
terminated, but were ended merely by the refusal of Congress to
continue the appropriation for maintenance of the mission.
The f ir s t diplomatic mission by the United States to one
of the Italian states was accredited in 1816 to the Kingdom of the
Two S icilies. During the Napoleonic Wars this Kingdom had been
ruled by Murat, put on the throne by his brother-in-law, Napoleon
Bonaparte. Several American vessels and cargoes became victims
of the spoliations at Naples during those wars. For the confisca
tion of such property — the war over — the American Government
made haste to put forth an indemnity claim. But the victory over
Napoleon also overthrew Murat and the King of the Two S io ilies was
restored to his throne. I t was from his Government that the United
States now sought reparations.
In May, 1816, William Pinkney, American Minister to Russia,
was named a special Minister for this mission. On arriving at
Naples in August, 1816, enroute to Russia, he presented the claim
in w riting, For nearly two months he waited in vain for a reply.
On September 28 Pinkney wrote to Seoretary of State Monroe:
"My exertions have not yet been sufficient (although they
have been unremitting) to obtain an answer — and the
season is so far advanced that I fear I have only another
week for further exertions. If I do not set out for
Russia without delay, I shall subject myself to the hazard
of being confined to Italy by rains and bad roads a great
part of winter. It is my determination, therefore, to
press immediately for a categorical reply to my hote
although I am persuaded that the Marquis is in no position
to give i t . He must either reply at once, or show why he
cannot."1
In spite of his blunt words, Pinkney was obliged to leave
Naples unanswered. When the answer did come, it rejected in toto
American State Papers, Vol. IV, p. 164.
