I was disappointed (on reading your Secret telegram No. 92 received on the 28th September)¹ to see that a change had been made at the last moment. I was not excessively surprised. The concession was almost unhoped for, and I felt that either Monsignore Montini would get a scruple about the capitals or somebody else would (perhaps the Holy Father himself!).

I have not now any reason to believe that the British Representative would have been asked for his views. I was not so sure in July. Monsignores Montini and Tardini are now so well aware of the actual position that they would never have taken the risk. They are aware that, if I discovered such a consultation had taken place, I would advise the Taoiseach to withdraw the head of the mission, and that is the last thing they want; though I am not under any illusion that their motives would have any relation to me personally.

There is also another reason, which I have already mentioned to you, that the British are by no means any longer in the position of influence at the Holy See which they held until fairly recently. Apart from the growing ascendancy of the United States in the Vatican mind, there are present reasons common to all Italians which make the Vatican officials, to say the least, very cold in their feelings for Britain. The usual expressions one hears from Italians who count are very familiar to our ears: 'treachery', 'perfidy', 'trickiness', and the rest. The strange thing about it is that the Americans, who seem to the onlooker to be just as faithless to their promises to Italy as the British, are not being blamed. And the reason assigned is the interesting one that the British are so clever they can fool the Americans all the time and persuade them that British interests are identical with theirs. It would be difficult for us, with our experience, not to agree with that view.

When I started to read your telegram, I was afraid the news was going to be much worse, and I was highly relieved to find that only the capitals were involved.² I advised against going back because there is always the danger of getting a worse document, and, knowing well how much I was served by the particular time and circumstances (as already explained) and especially the circumstances of the Taoiseach's gift to Bobbio, I knew I should not find an equally favourable atmosphere.

After all, the 'res publica' is a real advance even with the small letter, and I should not be surprised if the Dominions Office got almost (to use a vulgar expression) the same pain in the neck as if it were written with a capital. Apart from that modification, the instrument seems to be in exact conformity with our position, and I think the Taoiseach would not wish me to run the risk of their making further, even small, modifications, as well as refusing to put back the capitals. If I were here another six months, I should, perhaps, think differently, but now my whole instinct is against going back, and I repeat my advice that it would be better to let the reply go. I hope you will get it back from the 'Instrument'. The very modifications, visibly and crudely made, make it a most important historical document for us. I shall do my best, in due course, to discover how the change came to be made. A few more Irishmen in the Secretariat, especially if they were very near to Monsignore Montini, would be the real protection against such accidents, and I hope we are well on the way to securing that position. A better protection still, perhaps, would be much closer relations between Monsignore Montini and myself, and that end I am doing my best to achieve. The 'Spada' will be a tremendous help.