In February 1951, the State Department informally approved the procedure we suggested for the exchange of diplomatic notes called for by the PJBD Recommendation. There has been a long delay in carrying out this procedure because of the necessity of waiting for the enactment of the Canadian legislation called for by the Recommendation. As stated in our letter No. Dof January 3, 1952,^? all the legislation has now been enacted and it is, therefore, possible to give effect to the agreed procedure.

2. The exchange of letters between the Minister of Justice and the Attorney General of Newfoundland called for by the "Jurisdiction" part of the Recommendation has just taken place. You are, therefore, authorized to give a note to the State Department in the terms of Appendix A to this letter.^? The note conveys the assurances called for by paragraph (b) (2) of the "Jurisdiction" section of the Recommendation; the draft of this note was approved by the State Department in February 195 1. It is understood that this note, and the letters exchanged between the Minister of Justice and the Attorney General, are not intended for publication.

3. When you give the State Department the note containing the assurances, will you please enquire whether there is any reason, from the U.S. point of view, against the immediate extension to Newfoundland of the Visiting Forces (USA) Act as contemplated by the Recommendation.

4. The next step will be an Exchange of Notes with the State Department for the purpose of recording the modification of the Leased Bases Agreement. Enclosed, marked Appendix B, is a draft note for this purpose.^? It is identical in substance with the draft which the State Department approved in February 195 1. This Exchange of Notes is intended for eventual publication but it is understood that it will not be published until a time to be mutually agreed. (The text of the Recommendation itself was made public on May 1, 1951.) Tentatively, I would think that it would be desirable to make public this Exchange of Notes at the same time as we make public the pending Exchange of Notes regarding the application of the NATO Forces Agreement to the Leased Bases.

5. The relationship between these two exchanges of notes may be rather difficult for the public to understand. The Exchange of Notes confirming the PJBD Recommendation will purport to state the jurisdiction position at the Leased Bases, and the Visiting Forces (USA) Act will be extended to Newfoundland in this context. On the other hand, the second Exchange of Notes referred to (effective on the date on which the NATO Forces Agreement comes into force for both countries) will have the effect of putting into cold storage the jurisdiction regime formally confirmed by the first Exchange of Notes. I am afraid that this somewhat confusing succession of notes is unavoidable. After all, the PJBD Recommendation deals with important matters other than jurisdiction. Furthermore, the Leased Bases Agreement has a longer life than the NATO Forces Agreement. For these reasons, it seems to us legally essential to complete the diplomatic and legal actions called for by the PJBD Recommendation.

A.D.P. HEENEY