Contains a letter written by L.B.Grafftey Smith (High Commissioner in Pakistan) to Sir Percivale Liesching at the Com. Relations Office dated 26th Jan 1951. Notes the dubious role played by Mountbatten in influencing Radcliffe to revise his original decision concerning the partition of the West Punjab and Bengal - clear Muslim majority areas, however acted against the interests of Pakistan:

"There is no hope of dispelling local criticism of the Radcliffe Award by reasoned argument...our only line here must be to refuse to accept any Pakistani suggestion of bias on part of Lord Radcliffe and of influence on part of Lord Mountbatten and to deny any allegations of concessions clandestinely agreed between the viceroy or the UK government and Congress. We must unfortunately face the fact that History, as written in Pakistan, will spotlight the 'when' and 'where' as much as the 'why' of Lord Radcliffes (action)...as evidence of British prejudice against Pakistan'

*Clear suggestions as given by Vallabhai Patel - deputy PM 'He made a veritable confession that, on the eve of partition, he was intriguing - negotiation is not the word - with the British authorities, with the knowledge perhaps of only the most select of the Congress junta...(and demanding that partition) be accepted on its on terms in order to turn Quaid-e-Azam Jinnah's victory into defeat.

What were his terms? Punjab and Bengal...be divided...power be transferred within two months. Thirdly that the British government should renounce their paramountcy and Congress should be left to deal with the states. Mr Patel expressed malignant satisfaction over the success of his diplomacy by declaring that "Mr Jinnah did not want a truncated Pakistan, but he had to swallow it.' Extract from Dawn Newspaper 18th January 1950.

'Historical Background'
By this award about 400,000 Muslims were cut off in the Gurdaspur district and about 800,000 in the Feroze Pore District (55.2% Muslims) Hence Muslim League claimed these areas: Fact that when Radcliffe decided this 'speculation seizes, unfortunately on the fact, that he was Lord Mountbatten's guest in New Delhi at the time'