1. Your telegram dealing with Japanese Constitution [1] was
relayed from Canberra and Minister (Dr. Evatt) has instructed me
to cable you as follows:-

Minister spoke to Acheson of State Department shortly after
receipt of your message. Acheson said he would act immediately and
try to stop any pressure to force the Constitution through while
the matter was before the Far Eastern Commission.

Minister desires you to see MacArthur personally and inform him
that Dr. Evatt agrees that it is a matter of some urgency to
obtain the adoption of a new Constitution but that he also feels
that it is important not to make the new Constitution final at
present. Dr. Evatt agrees with the views expressed by General
MacArthur to the Far Eastern Commission [2] that the fluid
situation in Japan should be stabilized and that it is undesirable
that the old Constitution should continue in effect. If in
adopting the new Constitution there were provisions for its
revision in from eighteen months to two years time, with popular
approval, this might remove much difficulty. In such revision the
people should have a chance to vote on the Constitution and on any
amendments thought desirable by the Diet or a Constituent
Assembly.

Minister stresses the importance of conveying this in an
absolutely informal and very friendly manner.

2. For your information, at meeting of Far Eastern Commission 20th
June, before receipt of your telegram, Dr. Evatt suggested that
the new Constitution should be subject to revision as above and
the suggestion was referred to the Constitutional Committee of
F.E.C. for early report. Plimsoll tabled a motion this morning
21st June in the Constitutional Committee, to this effect. A
majority of the Committee, including Russian member, adopted the
motion-U.S. and U.K. reserving their position. The question will
probably be considered by the Commission at next meeting, 27th
June. Our feeling is that the proposal should meet both the
legitimate desire of SCAP for as early a replacement of the old
Constitution as possible, and the obligation of the Far Eastern
Commission to satisfy itself that the new Constitution is
acceptable and adopted in accordance with Potsdam. It would give
the Japanese people an opportunity to judge the Constitution in
the light of their experience of its working. [3]