Confidential report from Seán Murphy to Joseph P. Walshe (Dublin)
(P. 19/34) (Copy)

The most common opinion here is that Lord Halifax's speech, followed by M. Bonnet's message on Saturday afternoon to the German Ambassador prevented any decisive step being taken by Germany in regard to Danzig over the week-end. A Council of Ministers had met on Saturday morning and had heard M. Daladier describe the situation as still 'very grave'. That evening M. Bonnet who had already seen the British representatives summoned the German Ambassador to the Quai d'Orsay and informed him, apparently on the basis of the mutual consultation provision of the Franco-German declaration of December last and on the ground that France regarded the events at Danzig as being of a nature 'to lead to international difficulties' that France intended fully to observe her undertaking to Poland if the latter should move in resistance to a threat to her independence. It is not believed however that Germany has given up her design on Danzig but that she will continue to play a game consisting of alternate periods of lull and pressure especially concentrated around the last week of August when the visit of the Koenigsberg to Danzig takes place. French opinion is, therefore, being counselled to be prepared for a recurrence of the atmosphere of last week-end.

There have been some reports here that Herr Hitler may send a message to France - on the basis of the Franco-German declaration of December and in reply to the message delivered to his Ambassador on Saturday. There are also suggestions that Germany is endeavouring to detach France from Great Britain in the matter of the Danzig question, reference being made in this regard to the advice given to France in a speech on Sunday by Herr Buerkel¹ to beware of England which would be sure to betray her. This advice has been rejected specifically in some organs.

Considerable disappointment is felt here at the refusal of the U.S. Congress to modify the neutrality law. This step is regarded as a definite set-back for the Franco-British cause as it was at least hoped here that while possibly preserving the 'cash and carry' provision in the event of war the U.S. Government would have permitted the export of all classes of material and thus directly favour the western powers who would control the Atlantic. Public opinion is now warned that it does not do to take the statement of the President and the administration as quite accurately representing U.S. feeling. Many commentators now admit that the majority of Americans would object strongly to being involved in a European war. Some hope is, however, entertained that the President who is regarded as wholeheartedly on the side of the democracies may succeed in getting matters altered although it is admitted that if the House of Representatives has refused to modify the law it is now unlikely that the Senate will consent to do so.

Today's report that the Russian reply to the Franco-British proposals still contains certain objections and in particular insists that full publicity should be given to the list of states guaranteed and also that it is anomalous to have countries like Holland and Switzerland who have not yet recognised the Soviet Union included in that list. There has been a rumour that Mr. von Papen has been sent to Russia on a secret mission in the hope of preventing the signature of a tripartite agreement.