501.AD/10–2445

Memorandum of Conversation

[Uncorrected Notes]

Subject: Site of United Nations Organization. …

Participants: Secretary of State
The British Ambassador, The Right Honorable the Earl of Halifax
The British Minister of State, The Right Honorable Philip John Noel-Baker

The three exchange greetings.

Halifax : He (Noel-Baker) has just come down from Quebec and one of the things he has got on his mind, if he may develop it, would be the thing they have been discussing in London, where the site of the United Nations is to be.

Byrnes : I can’t help you very much with that because our position about it is that it should be left entirely to the governments represented on the committee to determine it. The President’s view was when Stettinius first went to London that this government would not seek its location here and would not extend any invitation, and if the nations expressed the desire to come here that we would of course say that we would be glad to welcome them. Those were our instructions to Mr. Stettinius and the committee voted in our position. As to the cities in this country, neither the President nor I would express an opinion as to where it should be located, that it would be left entirely to the committee and I have a form letter which states that the State Department has no interest in it, in the location of one site as against another, and will not express any opinion toward the committee nor will it express any view to Mr. Stettinius, and I have told him since he returned a few days ago that that was our position.

This morning I declined to see a delegation which was led by two senators on that ground that I just have so many things that I am called upon to decide that I would not give time to a city of Philadelphia or Chicago or San Francisco or Miami when no matter what the representation would be my answer must be the same at the end [Page 1460] of the representation. I had to go to see the President and they were over there seeing him. I told him it was enough for him to have to waste time to talk about it because he was going to make the same statement.

Noel-Baker : Mr. Secretary, our original position was in favor of Europe and we still think that the case for having the seat in Europe is a very strong one, but the vote went the other way. We want to do what is going to be the best long term plan. We do feel it is the best long term plan to get the decision confirmed by the Preparatory Commission on having the site in the United States and have a subsidiary center in Europe. We can do that I think where we would have some European mutual things. There are many things that are purely European interest.

Byrnes : Our position on it was just as I have told you. In the State Department it is, I think, the dominant opinion that it should be located in Europe. It was a matter, however, that we were advised that many governments wished to have it located here and we were not in position to tell them that we would not receive them here. We could not do that and the committee has voted upon it. As to confirming it, we really do not intend to take any position about it. I have been asked whether we would be interested in having a review of it, our position being as I described it that we did not seek it, that we are not in position to say to other governments who have voted to come here that we would not welcome them. Therefore, we could not participate in any efforts to reconsider.

Halifax : It won’t break your heart if other influences lead to a reconsideration?

Byrnes : No. We believe it is entirely for the governments to determine, having in mind the fact that we did not start it.

Noel-Baker : Mr. Stettinius never said a word about it at the meetings.

Byrnes : He talked to me in London and I reiterated our position.

Noel-Baker : Oh, yes, he was very good all the way through.

Byrnes : I can see both the advantages and the disadvantages in having it here.

Noel-Baker : In the beginning we thought it would not be a good plan to have it in the country of any great power.

Byrnes : I knew your position. I could see lots of arguments toward it. As I have said, the majority of the people in the State Department who are charged with the duty of considering it were of the opinion that it might be better for the organization should it be established in Europe, but the United States was not then in the position to say it did not want it here and the United States could not now say it. Therefore, I have told some of my people in the Department that they might as well forget it when they have so many things that [Page 1461] have got to be decided they can’t spend time bothering with things that have already been decided. That is the answer to our question as to whether we would cry about it.

Noel-Baker : May I speak only for myself—my own personal opinion? Because I haven’t had time to talk to Bevin. As soon as he disposed of the House of Commons he went away for a week. He only came back the day after I left. So I have not really had a chance to talk properly with him—to talk about this, so what I say now is personal to me.

We have felt that such discussions as we have had, that on the Secretary-General, that the British had it after the last war for fourteen years, the Secretary-General of the League of Nations. We were followed by the French. It didn’t end up very happily. We don’t feel very strongly now that it ought to be British or French and quite honestly, we want to do our best thinking in our delegation work. We are very very short of the right people now. You can’t have a Russian or a Chinese and we don’t find any outstanding small power people, which leaves us with the prospect of having an American as Secretary-General. But supposing it were an American and everyone agreed, would the Americans feel we were putting one over on them, first, by having the seat here, and then putting an American in as Secretary-General?

Byrnes : Somewhere in the world there should be found a capable, competent person and if the organization is located here, my common sense would tell me you should not have an American, but I do not know anything about it. I have not had time to make a selection. I would just say on general principles it does not sound reasonable to me and those who are charged with the duty I think should be able to find someone. I do not think it should be an organization of the United States. It ought to be the United Nations.

Noel-Baker : Yes. That is really the difficulty about it.

Byrnes : When Stettinius came to see me I told him what I told you about the site and I told him the same thing about the official.

[Here follows discussion of other matters.]