If forecast in your 144¹ is correct, and we believe it is, there is a marked contrast in attitude of Washington and London. London recently informed us in advance of special security measures proposed such as suspension telephone service, sailings to Iberian peninsula and air service to Liverpool and certain extraordinary precautions here, and self and Leydon went to London last week at British invitation to discuss mutual convenient arrangements for putting measures into force.² British are thus proceeding on principle of friendly cooperation. This may be bluff but attitude of British officials is to deplore suggestion of sanctions or reduction of supplies for other than shortage reasons, and they are in effect giving us supplies lost by their suspension of our Iberian shipping service.

Use this information discreetly as you judge best. Position seems to be that British, advised by Maffey are satisfied there is no real danger of espionage and that more can be achieved towards guarding against the one risk in a million by cooperation than by duress; whereas State Department, advised by Gray, is wrong not only in their estimate of the extent of the danger but in thinking anything could be gained by their getting tough. To us Hickerson's remark in your telegram 127³ about disturbance of relations by security people is ironical and ridiculous. We have found the American security most satisfactory to deal with.⁴ I saw some of them in London and they were very forthcoming and friendly. On the contrary all harm to our relations has been done by preoccupation of diplomatic representative here with security matters he knows nothing about. Maffey leaves such matters to British and Irish security experts. Gray sends home rumours and stories without making an attempt to get in touch with anybody here although he knows we should only be too glad to have any matter investigated at once. If new note was to be based on Gray's stories he may be getting cold feet at the last moment. Hesitation of State Department in sending note may be due to his failure to substantiate them sufficiently for purpose of formal note.