IMHHIfe JUL i 10th May, 1939. Memorandum to chancery* ¦ . \ WOT' I do not quite see why pan American -want to use Noumea instead of Suva, but I could sound the company*s Resident if you think this worth doing* In view of their rather "difficult" attitude, however, I would not do this unless you think it would help* In any event, it is really immaterial whether Noumea or Suva is used, and the fact remains that P«A*A. cannot fly to New Zealand (or Australia) without the permission of the New Zealand (or Australian) Governments to land there, and we cannot fly "between New Zealand (or Australia) and I Vancouver without landing rights from the U»s. Government in Hawaii. The idea ventilated in 91/69/59 that P*A*A« might i * 111* « i i run a service between San Francisco and Noumea, and rely on the New. Zealand (or Australian) Governments operating* a local service to Noumea to connect is, I think, a little far fetched and tye remedy is in the hands of the> two latter Governments. I don'tvthink the state ,Depa¥tmenik$as such oppose our desire for landing rights in Hawaii (although the Division of international communications, (headed by ;Burke ^ always seems rather "nationalistic"), and pan American are fully aware o^the desirability of reciprocity. It is really the Navy,^. supported by the Army, who are going to be troublesome. They naturally don't want any foreigner to overlook or "spy out" their defences. But in the last resort, could not all air liners approach the last twenty-five miles at say one hundred feet or even lower* crews and passengers (with all cameras sealed) could then see no more than the man in the crow's nest of a Japanese vessel. I think we should not overlook (the possible expediency of having a frank talk with the Navy D©partaient on the subject at a suitable opportunity. At present we do not seem to know definitely why they object to our landing in Hawaii* Group Captain Air Attache1 0 & jCa^^c ^—£U ^-w^> j T^t^- J%*2^. f*+*<4&^ /lA^ic^ li