The Australian Prime Minister came to see me on Tuesday afternoon after he had left you, and we had a pleasant and interesting discussion for almost an hour.

He said that he had been worrying about the lack of contact between our two countries and the fact that most Australians feel Canada is so remote from them and vice versa. I agreed with him that this was the case, but told him that I felt a good deal of progress had been made in recent years. Our High Commissioners and their staffs were doing a good job in each country to increase the knowledge of and interest in the other country. We had increasingly close contact though it was not always without disputation with Australian delegations at United Nations meetings. I remarked, incidentally, that Dr. Evatt, while he was performing on the U.N. stage, had been responsible for a good many headlines in Canadian papers, which brought Australia to Canada's attention. Mr. Menzies agreed, but was not sure that these headlines were always the best from the Australian point of view. I did not attempt to argue with him on this! I stated also that Canadians were becoming more aware of Pacific problems, and the importance of that area to themselves and the world. With that awareness went an increasing interest in Australia. The attention given here to the Colombo and Sydney Conferences was a reflection of this. While it remained true that Canada, apart from British Columbia, tended, for obvious reasons, to look eastward and across the Atlantic, this situation was changing and we in the Government welcomed that change. Most Canadians, I thought, were now quite aware of the fact that there was a Pacific as well as an Atlantic ocean. If they had not been aware of this previously, Korea had certainly driven the point home.

I asked Mr. Menzies directly what he thought we could do to increase our friendly contacts. I thought he might reply by referring to some form of permanent Commonwealth consultative machinery, but he did not bring this up at all. He contented himself by saying that they were going to have important Jubilee celebrations in his country next year, and he hoped that Canadian .representatives, headed by the Prime Minister, would be able to attend. He felt that the more visits to Australia by Canadians, and by Australians to Canada, the better.

He thought that probably we knew more about Australia than Australians knew about us, because they tended to lump Canada with the United States. I told him that we are aware of this disadvantage which could also, on occasions, be an advantage and that it would be a good thing if Australians realized that while we could never escape from the overpowering shadow of our great neighbour, we had no intention of being lost sight of completely in that shadow. Mr. Menzies then added that while he was in Washington, he came to the conclusion that Canada and Australia stood higher in the regard of people there than any other two countries.

We had also some discussion of Korean developments during which Mr. Menzies took a far more cautious line regarding Australian participation and United States leadership than he took in his public speeches in Washington. He was worried about the Americans expecting too much too quickly from countries like Australia, and he indicated that he had talked pretty frankly to them in that regard. He was also worried about the implications of the intervention in Korea of the United Nations led by the United States. Was there any limit to our obligations under the Charter when we found ourselves involved so quickly and so completely in a place like Korea, which the Americans themselves had written off strategically many months ago, but to which they were now so heavily committed? I told him that we certainly shared this worry and we agreed that possibly in the next year or so, while the democracies were gaining in strength, it might not be a bad idea to go to some length in keeping the Russians in the Security Council and, indeed, getting the Chinese Communists there. That would certainly limit our obligations, as they would veto any future action of the Korean type! I was interested to discover that Mr. Menzies appreciated the arguments for recognizing Communist China and giving her representation in the United Nations. I gather that if he had a free hand from public opinion, he would support this step at once, and that his position in this regard was far closer to London than to Washington. This attitude, however, does not seem to harmonize with some of his public statements in recent weeks.

I asked the Australian Prime Minister what his views were about a Pacific Pact, and explained to him our doubts whether this would be a practicable or desirable development at the present time. He surprised me by agreeing in forthright terms with these doubts. He even referred to the folly of attempting to bring about a Pacific Pact organization at this time along the lines of the North Atlantic organization. He said this would be attempting to erect a structure on a foundation of jelly. I then ventured to remind him that his Minister of External Affairs seemed to have somewhat different views, to which he replied, "Oh, the Pacific Pact is Percy [Spender]'s baby and, of course, I have to let him talk about it occasionally".

Mr. Menzies then talked very frankly and very interestingly indeed of some of his domestic political problems in Australia, which I need not deal with in this memorandum.

Mr. Menzies ended by expressing great appreciation for all the kindness that had been shown him since his arrival in Ottawa.

L.B. PEARSON