867N.01/11–2545

The Secretary of State to the British Ambassador (Halifax)

My Dear Mr. Ambassador: Referring to your note of the twenty-fourth with reference to the Palestine Committee, although it is our [Page 832] desire that the Committee be required to report within 120 days, we will agree to the formula suggested by Mr. Bevin that the Committee be requested to furnish the report within 120 days of the inception of the inquiry.

However, I cannot agree to the statement if Mr. Bevin insists upon the understanding contained in the paragraph of your note reading as follows:

“Mr. Bevin adds that he consents to the above on the understanding that if the Committee has not finished its work within the time stated, the period will of course be extended.”

Such an understanding would nullify the request for a report within 120 days. If members of the Committee are told that if they do not finish their work within four months that the time will “of course” be extended, there is no reason why they should make any effort to complete the inquiry within the time stated. Though no reference is made to this suggestion in the proposed release, experience causes me to believe that such an understanding would be known and relied upon by any persons who did not wish to speed the work.

Of course the two Governments would have the right to extend the time in which the Committee could report if there were good and sufficient reasons why it should be done but the time should not be extended unless there were strong reasons why it should be extended. Any request for an extension would have to be considered upon its merits. If there were good reasons, I have no doubt our Government would agree to it. If, however, it appeared that inquiry was being unnecessarily delayed and the members appointed by the United States wished to complete the inquiry and file a report, we certainly would not want to be in the position of having to agree to an extension of time as a matter of course. Therefore I could not agree if at the end of four months the Committee had not finished its work the period would of course be extended.

I regret that this has been proposed as a part of the agreement because it will prevent me from advising the Senate Committee on Monday that a time limit had been agreed upon. However, it is more important that there should be no misunderstanding about our position.

Sincerely yours,

[
James F. Byrnes
]

Secretary’s note added in pen: If we can agree on a time limit the release of that fact should be made immediately. It will take us some days to make appointments. We have done nothing along that line awaiting settlement as to time limit.