Below are notes of conversations I had at a Reception given for Mr. Peter Fraser last evening.

I asked Mr. Gordon Walker why last Sunday's Press conference was held simultaneously with the informal conference at Chequers and before the latter ended. He said that on Saturday rumours were current about the Sunday meeting and the Commonwealth Relations Office thought it would be wise to give the Press an outline of the position and thus avoid inaccurate or wild reports. Accordingly they convened a meeting at 4 o'clock of the Parliamentary Correspondents of the principal newspapers. It was thought that the conference at Chequers would probably go on until very late on Sunday night and one of the reasons for the afternoon meeting was that if and when the Lobby journalists asked questions he, Mr. Gordon Walker, would be able to say no answer could be given because the whole matter was at that moment under discussion at Chequers. He was much dismayed at Monday morning's press. Possibly it was his fault owing to inexperience in dealing with journalists but he assured me that after describing the position as the British saw it including the difficulties about trade and citizenship, he had emphasised that every effort was then being made at Chequers to find a solution. The meeting was a last minute affair and owing to different officials being unavailable on a Sunday, the arrangements had to be made in a great rush. The question was probably new and unfamiliar to most of the journalists and they reported only one side of it. The Tuesday morning Press had put the position as it should have been put.

Mr. Gordon Walker appeared to be much impressed by the difficulties which, though probably not unsurmountable, were he felt, more serious than Dublin appreciated. He was speaking for himself only when he expressed the view that it would be a good thing to get our legal and Treaty experts to sit round the table with their experts. In this way he thought a solution might be evolved and submitted to the Governments. It would be a pity if before we presented our Bill to the Dáil an exhaustive study by experts from both sides had not been undertaken.

Mr. Noel-Baker also expressed his regret about the Monday Press, but said he thought, the Tuesday morning papers had made clear the real situation. He made the astonishing statement that if they had realised that we were not members of the Commonwealth they would not have secured the passing of the Nationality Act and he thought also that the recent trade agreement could not have been reached. When I pointed out as long ago as September 1947 Mr. de Valera had said that we were not members of the Commonwealth, he asked me to let him have a copy of the official report. He thought that a conference of experts would undoubtedly be valuable if, he said, 'your people could work out a line and discuss it with our experts'. He also said that he thought we underrated the difficulties which would face them in dealing with foreign countries.

Dr. Evatt told me that he and Mr. Fraser approached Mr. Attlee and expressed their indignation at the line taken by the British newspapers on the Monday morning and told him that unless something was done to correct the wrong impression he and Mr. Fraser would issue a statement of their own. Mr. Attlee said he would see that something was done immediately, adding, surprisingly, that he himself had been more concerned about the possibility of any mention of Partition in the newspapers. Dr. Evatt then said that he thought something should be done before he and Mr. Fraser left England. 'Unless your Government do something while we are here' he said with characteristic emphasis 'they will be sunk'. Their Prime Minister's Conference would probably finish this week but he would be here and in Paris for the next two months.

Mr. Fraser thought the British were genuinely anxious to find a way out of their difficulty vis à vis foreign countries and he would gladly do anything he could after the Prime Minister's Conference had ended.