Skip to main content

Historical documents

103 Mr S. M. Bruce, High Commissioner in the United Kingdom, to Mr John Curtin, Prime Minister

Cablegram 87 LONDON, 5 November 1941, 8.45 p.m.


Your cable 6652. [1]

In a private conversation with Van Kleffens [2] and the Dutch
Minister [3] I told them that I had now been advised that the
Commonwealth Government was desirous of finalising exchange of
representatives, and asked them whether the Dutch Government would
be agreeable to this being done on the basis of a Netherlands
Minister in Australia and appointment of an Australian Consul
General at Batavia'
Their reaction was very definitive [sic] against this course. They
put it that it would be a very unusual and, from their point of
view, undesirable procedure for a Minister to be accredited by one
Government when the other Government was only appointing a Consul
General. They further stressed that, even if such an unusual
arrangement were entered into, the Consul General would have to be
appointed to the seat of Government and not to a dependency of the
Country in which he was to represent his Government.

They also indicated to me that they had been under the impression
from our previous conversations that the question of an exchange
of diplomatic representatives had been informally agreed to, the
only point left for settlement being the action to be taken in
regard to the Netherlands East Indies.

This contention I was in some difficulty to contest (see telegrams
3887 [4] and 4157 [5]). In view of this position they said that
the Dutch Government had been under the impression, and the Queen
had been so informed, that finalisation of arrangements for an
exchange of diplomatic representatives only awaited agreement with
regard to the Australian representative at Batavia.

While in the conversation the above points were put forward, the
real basis of the Dutch Government's objection to the proposed
arrangement is that they are very sensitive of any action which in
any way suggests that the Netherlands East Indies is anything but
a dependency of Holland, and this feeling is accentuated at
present by the fact no doubt that the Netherlands Government is an
exile of its own country.

In view of the trend of conversations, I said that I had only been
discussing the matter with them informally, and now that I had
their views, I would communicate further with my Government.

At the close of the interview they asked me if there would be any
objection to their instructing their Consul General [6] to see the
Minister for External Affairs [7] and explain their point of view
to him. I said that I was sure that the Minister would welcome
such action.


1 See Document 83, note 3.

2 Netherlands Foreign Minister.

3 Jonkheer E. Michiels van Verduynen.

4 Dispatched 21 July. On file AA : A981, Netherlands 20, i. It
advised Bruce that the Commonwealth Govt was prepared to receive a
Netherlands Minister in Australia immediately; in return Bruce
would be accredited as Minister to the Netherlands, resident in
London with a Counsellor or First Secretary resident in Batavia.

If the Netherlands Govt would not accept a formal diplomatic
appointment to Batavia Bruce was to suggest (a) the appointment of
a Diplomatic Agent accredited to the N.E.I. Administration or, if
this was also rejected, (b) the appointment of a Charge d'Affaires
resident in Batavia and accredited to the Netherland Foreign

5 Dispatched 31 July. On the file cited in note 4. See also
Document 83, paragraph 2.

6 Tom Elink Schuurman.

7 Dr H. V. Evatt.

[AA : A981, NETHERLANDS 20, i]
Last Updated: 11 September 2013
Back to top