https://declassified.library.utoronto.ca/files/original/b5ca77a9852917271b01ab75cfc15dfc.pdf 3143f5412d81d22b91f3393c26a8e85c PDF Text Text '\ I _,.;· •• ,. .··'4.uJ <)·~I . rti WAsHJc .MAY24/57..!.0PSEC TO EXTERNAL 1226 OPIMMEDIATE FOR MINISTER A ND UNDER'SECRETARY REF OUR TEL 1216 MAY24 REPLY TO NOTE CONCERNING EXCHANGE OF PERSONNEL SECURITY INFO ------------..'"""'"';.~~ ............... --~ ........ ~-II·--- ... WE HAVE NOW BEEN SHOWNWVATELY A ND CONFIDENTA ILLY OF THE DRAFT USA REPLY.THIS • , - _,. .... THE PRESENT TEXT TE'.XT HAS BEEN PRETTY THOROUGHLY CLEARED AND WAS THIS MORNING APPROVED BY UNDERSECRETARY HERTER. IT CERTAIN WHETHER SECRETARY DULLES' FORMAL APPROVAL WILL IS NOT BE CONSIDERED NECESSARY AS THE SUBSTANCE OF IT HAS BEEN DISCUSSED FULLY WITH HIM BY THE UNDERSECRE.TARYALREADY.THE ONLY' OTHER STEP WHICH.APPARENTLY IS PLANNED WITHIN THE USA GOVT IS TO INFORM CERTAIN CONGRESSIONAL LEADER.S OF THE PROPOSED LINES THE LIKELIHOOD OF THE FINAL REPLY IN ORDER TO LESSEN OF THEIR TAKING UMBRAGEWHEN THE TEXT IS PUBLISHED. 2.ALTHOUGH WE WERE NOT GIVEN A. COPY OF THE NOTE,OUR EXAMINATION OF IT ENABLES US TO REPORT MORE EXACTLY ON ITS CONTENTS THAN WE WERE ABLE TO DO THIS MORNING ON THE BASIS OJ: THE RATHER IMPRECISE HINTS BY MURPHY AND LISTER, 3,THE OPENING PARA OF THE NOTE,WHICH DEALS WITH OUR REPRESENTATIONS CONCERNING THE PUBLICATION OF CANADIAN NAMES BY THE SUBCOMMITTEE, REFRAINS FROM [)ELIVERING OF THI LEGISLATIVE ------- THE EXPECTED LECTURE ON THE INDEPENDENCE BRANCH. IT MERELY REFERS TO OUR REQUEST AND INDICA- -· -~- ---·--'---- ---- TES THAT OUR VIEWS HAVE BEEN COMMUNICATED TO AND DISCUSSED WITH THOSE , ·-,. - ... CONCERNED IN THE CONGRESS.IT ADDS THAT IN DOING SO THE STATE DEPT EMPHASIZED THE IM 0 0RTANCE WHICH IT ATTACHES TO THE FRIENDLIEST ::.:o~s_ RELA• . ' WITH CANADA,THE PARA CONCLUDES WITH THE STATEMENT THAT THIS APPRECIATION OF THE IMPORTANCE OF RELATIONS WITH CANADA IS ALSO "ENTERTA !NED BY THE CONGRESS", 4 .THE NEXT PARA REFERS TO OUR REQUEST CONCERNING THE HANDLING OF INFO ABOUT CANADIANS COMMUNICATED TO THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH BY THE CANADIAN AUTHORITIES.IT - INDICATES "-----,---- ,_..__- .THAT THE ASSURANCES SOUGHT BY US ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE PRESENT PRACTICE.IT --- ----- •.-· ----· ----- -~ -~- ---- OBSERVES Tcioosso·---··- �_, ,-- PAGE TWO 1226 THE SECURITY AGENCIES OF THE USA GOVT THE PRINCIPLE IS ACCEPTED THAT AN AGENCYRECEIVING INFO IS NOT FREE TO COMMUNICATEIT TO OTHERS _______ ____ ----- ____ - ---~------- --- WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE"ORIGINATING AGENCY".IT THEN REMARKSTHAT , . ---- --- -- --- THE STATE DEPT"UNDERSTANDS"Tl:!ATTHE SAME PtUNC!PLE APPLIES TO THE - ......,..._,,___.,._ -- ~ EXCHANGEOF INFO BETWEENCANADIANAND USA AGENCIES. ' ....... --~ ---~ - 5 .THE-NOTE CONCLUDESWITH A PARA ON THE IMPORTANCEWHICH THE CONTINUED EXCHANGEOF THIS KIND OF INFO HAS HAD AND WILL HAVE FOR THE ___ ------ ... ..... - ..... ------ ~· SECURITY OF BOTH COUNTRIES. ...... ,,. IT OBSERVES FINALLY THAT THIS. IS ONE OF THE MANYFIELDS IN WHICH FRIENDLY COOPERATION BETWEENC/1.NADAAND-THE USA IS OF GREAT VALUE. 6.WHEN WE WERE SHOWNTHIS.TEXT,WE WERE INVITED TO LET THE STATE DEPT H/1.VEVERY INFORMALLYTHIS AFTERNOONOR TOMORROWMORNINGANY COMMENTS WHICH WE MIGHT WISH TO MAKE ON: (AlCONTENTS OF THE NOTE(ON WHICH WE DOUBT THAT· THE STATE DEPT WOULD BE VERY RECEPTIVE TO SUGGESTIONS AT THIS STAGE IN VIEW OF THE PROCESS THROUGHWHICH THIS TEXT HAS GONE>; ·(B)THE TIMING OF THE REPLY(ON WHICH THE STATE DEPT OFFICIALS CONCERNED RECOGNIZE THAT WE MIGHT OR MIGHT NOT THINK IT APPROPRIATE FOR US TO OFFER VERY DEFINITE ADVICE IN VIEW OF THEIR OWNFAMILIARITY WITH THE SITUATION BOTH HERE AND IN CANADAAND IN VIEW OF THE INTER• PRETATION WHICH MIGHT BE GIVEN TO SUCH ADVICE FROM US) ;AND (C>THE PUBLICITY TO BE GIVEN TO THE NOTE(BY EITHER THE USA OR CANADIAN GOVTS OR BY BOTH>• 7.THE OFFICIAL WITH WHOM·WETALKED INDICATED THAT IN THE ORDINARY COURSECANDESPECIALLY IN THE ABSENCE OF CONTRARYADVICE FROM US), HE PRESONALLYWOULDEXPECT THE STATE DEPT TO SEND ITS REPLY TO US. NOT LATER THAN.THE FIRST HALF OF NEXT WEEK ROBERTSON 000551 �·, l. ,, ~.: . • F -.. ' ,( '· '. , \ -..,,,i· -~ Ja3-\ .__ _ . ,i I 5-v FM WASHDC MAY24/57 TOPSEC TO EXTERNAL ·1216 OJ'IMMEDIATE FOR MINISTER .AND UNDERSECRETARY _,......,_.~ ... REF YOUR TEL DS14 8 MAY23 . ' BENTLEY TESTIMONY AND REPLY TO OUR NOTE OF APR10 ___ ..,.., ---- :·~ ........ 9 .... CONCERNING PERSONNEL SECURITY INFO · DURING MY CALL ON MR MURPHY.,THE DEPUTY UNDERSECRETARYFOR POLITICAL 2.IN AFFAIRS 7THIS MORNING7WE DISCUSSED BOTH OF THESE SU~JECTS. CONNECTION WITH THE BENTLEY TESTIMONY ,THE'.iE "WAS A GOOD DEAL , . . • OF UNCERTAINTY. CONCERNING THE NUMBER OF OCCASIONS ON WHICH SHE . ' TESTIFIED AND THE DATES OF HER SESSIONS WITH THE FBI AND WITH THE SlJBCOMMITTEE RESPECTIVELY .MURPH,\'7AND MORE PARTICULARLY LISTER, . " ' . WHO HAS BEEN FOLLOWING THESE MATTERS RATHER CLOSELYjWERE NOT AWARE THAT SHE HAD GIVEN AS MANY AS THREE"CLARIFICATIONS"TO FBI,AND FBI THE THEY HAD THE IMPRESSION THAT HER INTERROGATION BY THE HAD PRECEDED HER APPEARANCE BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE.IT WAS ' NOT ENTIRELY CLEJ;R,THERE:~ORE,WHETHEREITHER-YOU OR STATE DEPT HAD ALL OF THE RECORDS INVOLVED ,AND THE STATE DEPT OFFICIALS WERE NOT CERTAIN EXACTLY WHICH TRANSCRIPTS YOU WERE ANXIOUS TO HAVE ,CLEARANCE TO RELEASE IF. THAT SHOULD PROVE NECESSARY.MURPHY INDICATED THAT Tl;!EY WOULD GO INTO THE MA!TER WITH THE FBI .. AND •· DISCUSS WITH THEM.WHY THE REQUEST MADE THROUGH THE RCMP CHANNEL ' HAD BEEN REFUSED.HE REALI.ZED THAT IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES.YOU MIGHT,HOWEVER RELUCTANTLY,CONSIDER SOME DISCLOSURE OF BENTLE.Y'S • TESTIMONY 'To BE UNAVOIDABLE,AND HE APPRECIATED T.HE SERIOUS CON-- , SEQUEN_CES WHICH COULD FOLLOW IF SAID THAT IN THAT SITUATION IT . HAD TO BE THE USA GOVT HAD REFUSED TO ALLOW YOU TO USE AT LEAST THE REPORTS WHICH WERE UNDER THE CONTROL OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH. ' . 3 .c ONCERNING OUR NOTE OF A PR10 ON. THE TREATMENT OF' PERSONNEL SECURITY INF0 7 MURPHY WAS UNABLE TO SAY PRECISELY WHEN THEIR REPLY MIGHT BE GIVEN.WITHOUT SAYING DEFINITELY REPLY SHOULD BE HASTENED,I THAT WE THOUGHT A. MENTIONED THAT SUN WOULD BE THE LATEST DATE DURING THE NEXT TWO OR THREE WEEKS WHEN THE MINISTER ,COULD BE BROUGHT BACK TO OTTAWA TO DEAL WI H THEIR ' RE.pL'Y.MJJFoooss2 . ' , l �,. !GE TWO 1216 OBVIOUSLY WAS HOPING THAT FURTHER. PUBLIC CONTROVERSYOV~R THIS ---- -- ~-- SUBJECT COULD BE AVOIDED,AND HE WAS ANXIOUS THAT THE CONTENTS .-.... __,. - ...... -- -~ AND TIMING OF THEIR REPLY MIGHT BE SUCH AS TO LESSEN THE LIKE;. - ----- --·-- -----·----- -- -- ---------- - . LIHOOD OF ANY STRONG REACTION IN CANADAOR HERE,PART.ICJJ~Rl:J_ ..,....._. FROM THE SENATE SUBCOMMITTEE.MURPHY D-!D NOT SHOWUS TflE TEXT OF THEIR DRAFT,WHICH HE.INTIMATED THAT HE HAD SEEN SOME DAYS AGO• . FROM THE REMARKSWHICH·HE AND LISTER MADE,HOWEVER,WE WOULDGATHER THAT THE DRAFT ATTEMPTS TO DEAL WITH BOTH OF THE.MATTERS RAISED IN' OUR NOTE.IN CONNECTION WITH THE PUBLICATION BY THE. SUBCOMMITTEE OF CANADIAN NAMES,THE REPLY WILL .ALMOSTCERTAINLY EMPHASIZE AGAIN. - -- ,____ -·-.!.. -.-..-- _,......... - '""T'""- ....... '"' -:--- ~ - - s••--- THE INDEPENDENCE.OF THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCHAND THE INABILITY ~OF • ...~ - -. -· ....-~ . -· -· ---~. .--· - ~...... THE EXECUT~VE TO CONTROL HOW INVESTIGATING COMMITTEES OF CONGRESS -----:--· _:_.... . . ···- .. . CONDUCTTHEIR AFFAIRS,IT WILL PROBABLY,HOWEVER,ATTEMPT TO BE ·- . ·- -~---~._- ~- ... SOMEWHATMORE HELPFUL BY. POINTING TO RECENT EVIDENCE OF A RESPONSIBLE ATTITUDE ON THE PART OF CONGRESS AND TO .THE RECOGNITION BY CONGRESSIONALLEADERS OF THE IMPORTANCEOF PRESERVING THE BEST POSSIBLE RELATIONS WITH CANADA. / 4 .CONCERNING THE HANDLING BY EXECUTIVE AGENCIES OF INFO SUPPLIED ~------------_ -- ---- - -~ BY CANADIAN SECURITY AUTHORITIES,THE NOTE WILL NO DOUBT CONFIRM' .... ,. THAT THE USA GOVT PLACES A HIGH VALUE ON THE CONTINUED EXCHANGE w --- _ _.. --"".. ·~-.c- . ,~,. • - - . - - --- _. - . • __ :,__ ..-- _.. --· ... '··- - .,._.,,.._- .. -~DESIRE OF THE USA AUTHORJ.TIES TO HAVE THIS - ..._ ___ r ,_ OF SECURITY INFO WITH CANADA.IT WILL APPA.RENTLYREAFFIRM THE --- . . --~---- EXCHANGEPROCEED'ON ... ..... . A ,BASIS SATISFACTORY TO BOTH GOVTS.IT WILL MAKE A GOOD PEAL OF THE FACT THAT THE ARRANGEMENTSWHICH HAVE BEEN OPERATING FOR SOME TIME ARE DESIGNED TO ENSURE THAT EA-CHSIDE WILL BE SATIS- · . . FIED THAT. ITS SECURITY MATERIAL IS BEING TREATED PROPERLY.IT ---------~..--.~-..,,..___ --- ···-- ·----___ ______ _ WILL f'.ROBABLYSTATE IN SOME MANNER• THAT THE PRESENT ARRANGEMENTS ... ___ __,, WOULDSEEM TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS STATED IN -------·---- -·-~ -- -•- ·• ,h -- --""" .... ---•~-• .., \_ OUR NOTE. ""--~---- . 5.WE APPRECIATE THAT THIS SORT. OF REPLYCWHICHI WOULDREPEAT IS PARTLY BASED ON SURMISE,s INCE WE HAVE NOT SEEN THE DRAFT)WILL NOT' BE COMPLETELYSATISFACTORY,ESPECIALLY SINCE IT LEANS·RATHER HEAVILY ON THE ARGUMENTTHAT THE ARRANGEMENTSWHICH WERE I.N .• EFFECT AT THE. TIME OF THE NORMANCASE ARE CONSIDERED ••• .3 000553 ., �-· • • , PAGE·THREE 1216 ADEQUATEAND,BY IMPLICATION,NEED NO IMPROVEMENT.IN THIS CONNEC..,. TION,LISTER SAID THAT ALL OF THE SECURITY AGENCIES HAVE BEEN l 0 VERY SENSITIVE OR-TENDER AEOUT ANY SUGGESTION THAT THEY HAD BEEN AT FAULT AT ANY TIME IN THE. PAST IN HANDLINGCANADIAN INFO.IT IS NOT TOB EXPECTED,THEREFORE,Tl{AT,WHATEVERTHE LANGUAGEUSED I,N THE USA REPLY,THERE WILL BE ANY ADMISSION THAT THE CURRENT ARRANGEMENTS OR UNDERSTANDINGSREQUIRE ANY MODIFICATIONS TO ACCOMPLISH THE .PURPOSE ' ' WHICH LAY BEHIND OUR NOTE•. 6.0N A QUITE PERSONAL BASIS,I ENQUIRED WHETHERTHE USA REPLY, AFTER STATING THE GENERAL POSITION,MIGHT NOT SUGGEST THAT THE PRESENT ARRANGEMENTSBE REVIEWED IN CONFIDENTIAL DISCUSSIONS BETWEEN THE USA AND CANADIANAUTHORITIES.MURPHY AND LISTER APPEARED TO FEEL QUITE STRONGLYTHAT ANY PUBLIC MENTION OF SUCH AN EXAMINATION WOULDBE REGARDEDBY THE SECURITY AGENCIES HERE AS. REFLEC- . TING ON THEM AND WOULDPROBABLYBE INTERPRETED BY THE SENATE SUBCOMMITTEEAS SOMEWHATPROVOCATIVE.IT WOULI)BE ALLEGED THAT SOME-· i THING WAS BEING CONCEALEDAND THAT,CONTRARYTO THE PUBLIC PROTESTATIONS,EXISTING ARRANGEMENTSMUST BE DEFICIENT IN· SOME . RESPECT OR OTHER. ' 7.BOTH MURPHYAND LISTER RECOGNIZED THAT ONE OF THE MAIN OBJEC• ' TWO GOVTS T!VES IN THE FURTHER D.I PLOMATIC EXCHANGESBETWEENOUR MUST BE TO RESTORE CONFIDENCE AND ENSURE THAT OUR SECURITY AUTHORITIES 8.I WILL BE ABLE TO WORKTOGETHER EFFECTIV£LY. AM NOT ABL£ TO SAY YET WHENTHE USA REPLY MAY EMERGE.SINCE ACCORDINGTO MURPHYIT STILL HAS TO BE CLEARED WITH"ONE OR TWO PEOPLE",I WOULDDOUBT THAT IT WILL )3E AVAILABLE BY SUN.IF ON FURTHER REFLECTION IN THE LIGHT OF THIS REPORT YOU HAVE DEFINITE VIEWS ON THE QUESTION OF TIMING ,I SHOULD BE GRATEF-ULIF YOU WOULDLET ME KNOW ,AND I AM CONFIDENT ,THAT THE STATE DEPT WOULD"BE (\NXIOUS TO ,TAKE THEM INTO ACCOUNT ' ROBERTSON .. 000554 , � Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Espionage Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource US Investigation of Canadians / 24 MAY 1957, WASHINGTON TO MINISTER Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1957-05-24 Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource PDF Language A language of the resource en Type The nature or genre of the resource Text Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context CDTT00132 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Washington to External Affairs, ‘‘Reply to Note Concerning Exchange of Personnel Security Info,’’ 24 May 1957, LAC, RG 25, vol. 8561, file no. 50303-40, part 1.1.