APPLICATION TO AUSTRALIAN MANDATED TERRITORIES OF PRINCIPLES OF
TRUSTEESHIP

With reference to your memorandum of 4th May [1] concerning press
reports and statements on the above subject by the Right
Honourable F. M. Forde and the Right Honourable H. V. Evatt at the
United Nations Conference at San Francisco, the full text of the
statement by the former to the Plenary session of the Conference
is awaited. A summary of this statement has been received. [2]

2. The section of this statement dealing with trusteeship (see
Annex attached [3]) indicates that Australian representatives at
San Francisco, have been following the lines of policy approved by
the Government and publicly announced in Australia over the past
three years. His statement stressed that the main purpose of the
administration of dependent or undeveloped territories is the
welfare and advancement of the native peoples. The view was
expressed that the Mandate System established after the last war
had, on the whole, worked reasonably well, embodying the principle
of trusteeship which in modern times appears to have been
frequently recognised in relation to their colonial possessions by
the positive unilateral declarations of colonial Powers.

Australian representatives accordingly were stated to favour
(a) continuance of the Mandate system;

(b) the establishment of new Mandates;

(c) the recognition of the principle that the purpose of the
administration of dependent territories is the welfare and
advancement of the peoples of such territories;

(d) the setting up of an expert organ of the United Nations, the
function of which will be to inform the world organisation of the
welfare and progress of the peoples of the mandated territories or
such other dependent territories as may be determined upon by
appropriate action.

3. The principles put forward by Australian representatives at San
Francisco do not affect the authority and responsibility of
Australia existing under the present mandate for Nauru. The powers
of supervision which may be provided for a special organ of the
United Nations organisation would, in accordance with agreed
Australian - New Zealand policy, be essentially similar to those
of the Permanent Mandates Commission, namely the reception and
publication of reports from the Mandatory Power as to the manner
in which its mandate has been administered. All mandatory powers
would of course be subject to this review of their administrative
record.

4. There has been no suggestion that any mandates for which
Australia is now responsible should be removed from our
administration and control. There will be no discussion, however,
of particular mandates at San Francisco. Any decision will be in
the form of a recommendation to the United Nations as to the
general terms on which mandates should be held. One important
amendment sponsored by the Australian delegation, provides that a
mandatory power may in future undertake defence measures in the
mandated territory. Apart from the effect of this and any other
principles advocated for consideration at San Francisco, the
existing position of the Commonwealth as the administering agent
for the three Powers (United Kingdom, New Zealand and Australia)
entrusted with the mandate for Nauru, could only be altered by
agreement between Australia and the other two Powers concerned.

[4]

J. D. L. H.

Acting Secretary