845.515/545
Memorandum of Telephone Conversation, by Mr. Calvin H. Oakes of the Division of Middle Eastern Affairs
I telephoned Mr. K. C. Mahindra, Chief of the India Supply Mission, at his request to inform him when the Department’s views regarding the lend-lease of 100 million ounces of silver for use by the Government of India would be conveyed to FEA46 I told Mr. [Page 256] Mahindra that a letter on the subject had been drafted for the Secretary’s signature and that accordingly it could be expected that FEA would receive the requested advice in the immediate future.
Mr. Mahindra then asked me if I could inform him of the Policy Committee’s decision, in so far as was concerned the question of responsibility by the Government of India for return of the silver. I stated that it had been decided that the Government of India and the Government of Great Britain should have joint responsibility. Mr. Mahindra was much distressed at this news and stated that this decision was much worse than would have been a decision that Great Britain should bear the responsibility alone. (It will be recalled that the proposal submitted by OEA [NEA?]47 to the Policy Committee expressed the opinion that assumption of responsibility by Great Britain on behalf of the Government of India would in this instance be especially objectionable in India, and that hence responsibility to the United States should be borne by the Government of Great Britain alone.) Mr. Mahindra continued that insistence that Great Britain assume the responsibility for the return of the silver could be explained on the technical ground that as there was no direct lend-lease agreement with the Government of India responsibility by Great Britain was logical, but that to allow the Government of India to assume responsibility and then to ask the Government of Great Britain to underwrite that responsibility would be accepted as a definite indication of lack of faith in his Government’s integrity. He asked whether he and the Agent General might be permitted to present their views before the Policy Committee, prior to word being sent to FEA. He asked further if I would do what I could in the matter, phoning him again in the morning.
I telephoned Mr. Mahindra this morning and stated that the Department would be glad to withhold its communication to FEA, pending such further representations as he and the Agent General might wish to make; that those representations should, however, be made before one of the executive officers of the Department rather than before the Policy Committee.
Mr. Mahindra replied that the Agent General was at present in New York but that he would communicate with him by telephone to request that he seek an appointment with the Secretary or the Under Secretary in order that the matter might be discussed further. Mr. Mahindra expressed appreciation of the Department’s action in withholding temporarily its letter to FEA on the subject.
I have asked Mr. Rostow to see that FEA is advised that reply to its letter is being delayed at the specific request of Mr. Mahindra.