MINUTE SHEET. November 28bh, 1941 When I saw Mr, Horribeck this morning he himself raised the question of "blame for the "breakdown of the modus Vivendi proposal.- He said that the State Department did not accept that the Chinese were chiefly responsible for the "breakdown any more than they accepted that the Dutch, Australians, British or themselves were chiefly responsible. The decision not to present the modus Vivendi proposal was a joint responsibility to which all had contributed. He based these remarks on the fact that according to him it was being said that v/e had been extremely keen on the modus vivendi but that the Chinese had killed it - in fact that we were sheltering behind the Chinese. He made it clear that it was being suggested that we were responsible for these rumours. I said that we were nothing of the sort; that I heard also that we were credited with having hoped for a breakdown of the conversations and it seemed to me that somebody, probably the Japanese, were being pretty busy in spreading rumours and doubts. We agreed that any blame-casting or post morterns, especially in public, were highly undesirable and said that we should certainly have nothing to do with it unless we were ourselves erroneously accused in public. I reminded him that Lord Halifax had been told by Mr. Welles that Mr. Hull felt that it had been useless to go on v/ith the idea of the modus vivendi because of our attitude. We parted v/ith the reiterated agreement/ MINUTE SHEET. Reference "OUT o*l^4 a 'ecorc ./ere to "be avoided ¦ e. 7 The conversation was a long one but -y. i It occurs may date from a period "before the decision not to present it when if we had been a sited we should have said that we supported 'c we detect arcv impts to fi: . >res8 or from u abandonment of the modus vivendi. If we detect any disposition to blame ua then I think we should bring it to <.D. before we react. e will no doubt J - anese and perhaps other A; ts to use this matt $t and irrita between • 1$ //! H.E. Mr. Childs ,4