793.94 Advisory Committee/9: Telegram
The Minister in Switzerland (Wilson) to the Secretary of State
[Received March 1—9:25 a.m.]
134. Your 82, February 28, 6 p.m. I have delivered the message to Drummond.
In view of the acute interest among the press correspondents in this question and of the fact that Drummond must report this information to members of the Advisory Committee we first discussed what should be said in this connection and decided that we would state that I informed Drummond informally under instructions that due to the imminent change of administration it seemed unadvisable to attempt to make a reply at this time. If you think it advisable to make any statement in Washington further than this will you please telegraph me text thereof.
Concerning the word “cooperate” used in the invitation Drummond explained that the idea of the Committee of Nineteen had been to make the invitation as acceptable as possible to the United States. They had had in mind the fact that we had authorized Nelson Johnson to “cooperate” with the round-table discussions in Shanghai relative to the withdrawal of the Japanese troops. It had been felt that it might be possible for the Government of the United States to “cooperate” with the Advisory Committee by naming a member under such conditions as we might choose to set forth.
[Page 220]Drummond pointed out that the Advisory Committee had its mandate under paragraph 3 of article 3 of the Covenant and that the mandate had been so drawn—and deliberately so drawn by the Secretariat—as to exclude from the functions of the Advisory Committee deliberations arising under article 16 of the Covenant.
Drummond says that he does not desire to convene the Advisory Committee until the attitude of the United States towards the invitation has been made clear.