Thank you for comments in your telegram No.75. Have discussed this
general line of policy informally with certain members of the
Commission and feel hopeful it can be followed through with
success. It is certainly the best, if not the only chance of an
agreed report.

2. Most of us are convinced on the urgency of submission of report
and present time table represents maximum speed compatible with
the need to finish all relevant evidence here and follow up
certain points in Sofia and Belgrade. Have just returned to
Salonika from strenuous two weeks journey in charge of an
investigation team along Albanian and Yugoslav frontier into
Albania itself and in Epirus. The party collected much useful
evidence on frontier transgressions and also examined on the spot
all minor questions of [1] Slavs, Macedonians [2] of Chanouriets
[3] which have been alleged by Yugoslavia and Albania respectively
as contributory cause of friction with Greece. As soon as travel
time permits I hope to forward report on various aspects of
general interest encountered on this journey. I am now about to
leave Salonika with main commission for Sofia. Thereafter we spend
three days in Belgrade and plan to reach Geneva by April 6th. It
is generally expected that preparation of report will take from
two to three weeks. Final chairmanship will possibly therefore be
held by Australia. Meanwhile a municipal party in which Australian
representative is Atyeo will examine the Bulgarian frontier
incidents and join the main commission in Geneva.

3. The chief purpose of Sofia and Belgrade visits is to make
contact if possible with the leading political personalities and
in particular to elucidate Bulgarian and Yugoslav attitude
question of Macedonian union which had figured much in evidence
here. Yugoslavs and Bulgarians also desire to present long list of
counter witnesses to Greek charges but these will have to be
restricted to reasonable limit.

4. Reference paragraph 4 and 5 of your telegram, my impression is
that Working Commission (U.S.S.R. is one exception) now definitely
have in mind recommendation to Security Council for establishment
of border commission representing United Nations to supervise the
execution of agreements or disputes arising from commission work.

Long discussion took place last week on proposal from United
Kingdom that, pending at least presentation of report to Security
Council and possibly until a later day to be determined, the
Commission should leave behind a small party of its members based
on Salonika to serve as channel for continuous information to
Commission and for the collection of any new evidence that might
arise. At the final meeting of March 22nd I supported the proposal
in view of suggestion in your telegram. The proposal was however
withdrawn in the face of flat opposition from the Soviet delegate
who maintained that such a step would prejudice conclusions of the
Security Council and was beyond the competence of the Commission.

There was no possibility of unanimity and the only compromise
suggested but not very warmly supported was reference to the
Security Council for advice.

5. Reference final paragraph of your telegram, I am glad to state
that Australian participation in the Commission so far has been
recognised as most effective and useful and in this services of
the two officers mentioned often under trying conditions have been
invaluable.