701.60C11/431: Telegram

The Chargé to the Polish Government in Exile ( Schoenfeld ) to the Secretary of State

Polish Series No. 3. Your 3, November 4, 6 p.m.47 In a note dated November 9, Polish Foreign Minister, after acknowledging my note of November 6 regarding the agrément for Mr. Ciechanowski, states:

“I have the honor to request you to convey to the President of the United States the thanks of the President of the Republic of Poland for his granting of the agrément.

[Page 224]

The Polish Government have noted the suggestion of the Government of the United States, that prior to the change of their diplomatic representation in Washington they should withdraw Dr. Ludwik Rajchman and any of their delegates at present in the United States and that they should vest full authority to deal with all matters which may arise in the relations between the United (States) and Poland in their accredited diplomatic representative.

I have the honor to say that the Polish Government agree to this suggestion. At the same time, I would ask you kindly to convey the following considerations to the Government of the United States:

While continuing to grant their confidence to the present Ambassador of Poland in Washington, the Polish Government considered it desirable that Poland be represented in the United States by an Ambassador more closely familiar with Poland’s present policies and especially one who has actively followed European developments since the outbreak of war and who has been in close personal touch with the policies of Poland’s allies.

For these reasons the Polish Government had been contemplating the change of their Ambassador in Washington already in the spring of the current year. In deference to the desire expressed by Mr. Sumner Welles,48 to the Polish Prime Minister and myself on March 13 in Paris, that Count George Potocki should continue to represent Poland in Washington, the Polish Government decided temporarily to postpone the change.

Only a restricted number of persons have been sent by the Polish Government to the United States in the course of this year on temporary and clearly defined missions, mostly in order to establish thereby a closer personal contact between the Polish Government and the Ambassador and to assist him in his work by supplying him with a clearer picture of war developments in Europe and especially in Poland. In each separate case, such delegates were instructed to act in close understanding and under the guidance of the Ambassador. The Polish Government are not aware that any of their delegates has failed to comply with these instructions. In appointing Dr. Rajchman to be their permanent representative in all matters connected with war relief in Poland and among Polish refugees abroad, the Polish Government selected him as one of the greatest and most generally recognized authorities in this field of activity. One of the reasons which guided the Polish Government in their choice was the knowledge of his wide personal connections in the United States as well as his expert knowledge of all the intricate problems relating to war reaction, child welfare and public hygiene.

Dr. Rajchman was appointed representative at large for Polish relief and he travelled extensively between England, France and the United States in connection with its organization in the course of this last year. After the collapse of France,49 he was asked to establish himself permanently in New York in order to be in close contact with the Committee for Polish Relief and other like organizations.

[Page 225]

It was considered logical by the Polish Government that their representative on war relief should have his headquarters in the United States, whose people have always generously contributed to the cause of European war relief in general and of Poland in particular.

The Polish Government regard it as their foremost duty to leave nothing undone in the vital problem of the relief of the oppressed and famished population of Poland. The efficient organization of this vast and intricate problem in war time, in all its complicated aspects, undoubtedly calls for the vast knowledge and experience of an expert. In all fairness it appears doubtful that a diplomatic representative should be capable effectively to deal with this specific problem without the assistance of expert advice.”

  1. Not printed.
  2. Under Secretary of State.
  3. For correspondence concerning the invasion and collapse of France, see Foreign Relations, 1940, Vol. i, pp. 217 ff.