and telegraph circuits which were badly needed for the Indian railroads and regarded as indispensable to the war effort. As regards the proposed wireless circuits he said that the Government of India felt that were such equipment available it should be used for official purposes. Elaborating as regards the security aspects of this question, Mr. Patrick begged us to believe that the Government of India was perfectly sincere in saying that the proposed use of radio circuits was quite out of the question. He pointed out that much foreign news even though passed by British or American censorship was not necessarily suitable for publication in India; and that such news, as well as the domestic news transmitted by this method, would be heard by the Japs. He added that there was, of course, always danger of the improper use of wireless equipment or of its use by unauthorized persons, and that the Government of India was simply unable to provide enough control personnel to assure safety. Mr. Murray said that he appreciated the reasoning of the Government of India but that frankly he could not say that we were satisfied with it. He emphasized that there was no discrimination whatsoever against Reuters 22 in the United States and that that company had absolutely equal access to all available American facilities for the transmission of its news service both within the country and abroad. He continued that it was difficult to understand why, if the Government of India was so short on communications facilities desperately needed for war purposes, it had not long since taken over for its own use the land line system now leased to Reuters and placed all news services, both Reuters and others, on the same basis as regards the use of any facilities which might still be available after official needs have been met. He said that the matter would certainly have been handled this way in the United States, if a similar situation existed. He continued that he was concerned over the possible effect of this matter of apparent discrimination on the good relations which must prevail between the British and ourselves, pointing out that the United Press could have a widespread influence on public opinion in the United States if it felt that it had been deliberately discriminated against by the Government of India. He went on to say that the attitude of the Government of India had been completely negative in this matter being limited to a flat refusal, with unconvincing explanations, of the proposals which had been made to it by the United Press and supported by the American Government. He suggested that it would be quite possible for the Government of India to take a positive rather than a negative approach: that if it were absolutely necessary for them to say "no" to the specific proposals which had been advanced they might "British news agency. say what they could offer instead in the way of facilities for the United Press. In reply to this exposition Mr. Patrick and Mr. Joyce claimed that Reuters facilities were in fact placed at the disposition of the Government of India and used rather generously by the latter; that Reuters had simply been in the field first and made the contracts, both with the Government of India and with the newspapers it serves under which it is now operating; that under normal circumstances any competing company would have full opportunity to secure the same facilities; and that the cancellation of the Reuters contract by the Government, aside from being legally impracticable, would result in a complete disruption of news service facilities in India, since no agency would then be in a position adequately to serve the Indian press. The British representatives agreed, however, that they were anxious to avoid any disturbance of Anglo-American relations because of this matter and that they would examine the question carefully again with a view to recommending to the Government of India that it make every effort to make existing facilities available to the United Press to the fullest extent compatible with war needs. 811.91245/45 Memorandum of Conversation, by Mr. Calvin H. Oakes of the Division of Middle Eastern Affairs [WASHINGTON,] May 24, 1944. Participants: Mr. Harry Flory 23 United Press Mr. John Morris 24 Mr. DeWolf-TD 25 Messrs. Murray Allen 26 [Here follows lengthy discussion of problems involved in the desire of the United Press to secure facilities in India.] Summary. The foregoing discussion clarified the following points: (1) The United Press is opposed to retaliation against Reuters; (2) The United Press is opposed to any action designed to compel Reuters to share its present facilities in India with the United Press; (3) The 23 Vice President of the United Press. Far Eastern representative of the United Press. 25 Francis C. DeWolf, Chief of the Telecommunications Division. 20 George V. Allen, Chief of the Division of Middle Eastern Affairs. Government of India maintains, and the United Press appears to accept, that even with an enlargement of telegraph facilities generally in India, military needs will preclude during the war the exclusive use of any of those facilities by the United Press; (4) Unless military demands on the Indian 1elegraph system decrease or the Government of India can be persuaded that its calculations regarding military needs have been incorrect, the only possible solution during the war appears to be one permitting the use of radio facilities by the United Press. 811.91245/45 The Secretary of State to the Ambassador in the United Kingdom (Winant) No. 4142 WASHINGTON, June 3, 1944. The Secretary of State refers to a conversation which took place at the India Office on April 22, 1944 between officials of the United States and British Governments, on the subject of facilities in India requested by the United Press. Among those participating in the conversation was Mr. Robert D. Coe of the Embassy, and it is understood that a copy of the memorandum of conversation is in the Embassy's files. There is now enclosed for the Embassy's information a copy of a memorandum of conversation of May 24, 1944 28 which took place at the Department between officials of the Department and of the United Press. It is requested that the Embassy inform the Department whether there have been any developments in London since the conversation of April 22, 1944 which would indicate in what manner further representations on behalf of the United Press might be useful at this time. 811.91245/7-844 The Ambassador in the United Kingdom (Winant) to the Secretary of State No. 16,738 LONDON, July 8, 1944. [Received July 19.] SIR: I have the honor to refer to the Department's instruction No. 4142 of June 3, 1944, concerning the facilities in India requested by the United Press. Inquiry of the Foreign Office has been made re 28 Supra. garding any further developments on this matter, and the Embassy has been informed that although the India Office has asked the Government of India to examine the question afresh with a view to assisting the United Press no reply from the Government of India as yet has been received in London. The Foreign Office will ask the India Office to press the Government of India for an early statement of its reactions to the re-examination of the problem, and the Embassy will be informed as soon as a reply is received. Respectfully yours, For the Ambassador: HOWARD BUCKNELL, Jr. Minister-Counselor 811.91245/9-2244: Airgram The Ambassador in the United Kingdom (Winant) to the Secretary of State LONDON, September 22, 1944. [Received September 28-5 p. m.] A-1166. With reference to the subject of United States facilities in India (see the Embassy's despatch No. 16,738 of July 8, 1944), we have now received a letter dated September 20 from the Foreign Office in the following sense: "Would you kindly refer to the correspondence ending with my letter (7082/118/801) of the 6th July to Bucknell about facilities for the United Press in India? 2. You will recollect that at his meeting with Mr. Wallace Murray on the 22nd April, Sir David Monteath undertook that the India Office would apprise the Government of India of Mr. Wallace Murray's representations and ask them to consider whether, for example, transmission over the India Posts and Telegraphs system of messages of the United Press could in any way be facilitated with a view to reducing to the absolute minimum, subject to Government requirements, the disadvantages now felt by the Agency. 3. The Government of India have re-examined the question, but while fully appreciating the position of the State Department, regret that it is impossible for them to grant the United Press any special facilities for the transmission of their messages in India. They repeat that their inability to accord special facilities is based on no ground of principle but on purely practical considerations. They have no wish to discriminate between one news-agency and another, or to interfere with legitimate commercial competition. As explained in the third paragraph of Le Rougetel's 29 letter to you of the 26th August, 1943, such facilities cannot be given solely because of the insufficient number of lines available at present. A number of new 29 John H. Le Rougetel, Counsellor, British Foreign Office. lines have been under construction for some time, and the hope had been entertained that it would become possible to afford certain facilities to the United Press of America and other Agencies operating in India when these were completed. Recently, however, the widening scale of operations in India occasioned by the creation of the South East Asia Command has again greatly increased the heavy burden on the telegraphic lines available in India, with the consequence that the new lines coming into operation will only suffice to absorb the extra traffic resulting from the increasing scale of operations in and near India. The Government of India, however, expect that these lines will bring some relief to the existing lines used for civil traffic, and in this expected relief the United Press will share, in the shape of a reduction of delays, along with the other news agencies concerned." WINANT |