1. At a meeting on December 4 at the Commonwealth Relations Office, at which the United Kingdom was represented by Lord Salisbury and Lord Swinton, the other Commonwealth countries by the heads of their delegations, and India by its High Commissioner in London, it was quickly clear that South Africa would not accept a royal style different from that which it had proposed in the 1949 discussions, while Australia would find it extremely difficult to agree to a royal style that did not include a reference to the United Kingdom in it.

2. Lord Salisbury and Mr. St. Laurent indicated that for the sake of uniformity, their governments would probably be prepared to accept a style based either on the South African formula or on the second Australian suggestion which would incorporate "The United Kingdom" in the titles to be used by overseas members of the Commonwealth. New Zealand much preferred the Australian suggestions. Ceylon, which had originally wished no territorial description in the royal title, rallied to the South African view. Pakistan indicated that it would use exactly the royal style adopted by the United Kingdom, less "By the Grace of God" and "Defender of the Faith", i.e. without any reference to Pakistan by name. The High Commissioner for India explained that as India was a republic, it had no observations to offer on the royal style used by the other members of the Commonwealth, but was concerned only that no change was made in the description of the Queen as "Head of the Commonwealth".

3. After a very brief discussion, it was recognized by the meeting that neither exact identity nor a uniform formula for local variations was likely to be attainable. Mr. Menzies and Mr. St. Laurent felt there were valid historical and constitutional reasons for associating the United Kingdom in the royal style and titles to be used by other members of the Commonwealth; notably, the United Kingdom was the custodian of the Royal Succession both in statutory senses and otherwise.

4. Accordingly it was agreed that the representatives of the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and New Zealand would recommend to their parliaments the adoption of a royal style, which in the case of Canada would read: "Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom, Canada, and of All Other Her Realms and Territories, Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, and Defender of the Faith". The United Kingdom title will probably refer to "The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland". The representatives of Canada, Australia and New Zealand thought there were advantages in referring to "The United Kingdom" tout court in their several styles for the Queen.

5. It was similarly agreed that South Africa and Ceylon would give the Queen the style of "Elizabeth the Second, Queen of South Africa (or Ceylon) and of Her Other Realms and Territories, Head of the Commonwealth". Pakistan will follow the precise form used in the United Kingdom, minus, as I have said "Grace of God" and "Defender of the Faith".

6. It is hoped to prepare an agreed communique indicating the concurrence of the governments concerned to the others seeking the modifications they severely feel to be required in the Queen's title. Since the Commonwealth parliaments are seldom simultaneously in session, an agreed legislative timetable appeared to be impracticable, but it was thought that the countries concerned might proceed with their respective domestic legislation with a proviso that the new royal styles and titles should be brought into force by proclamation on an agreed date, preferably before the Coronation.