Problems face auto industry in changeover
Early action urged on surplus materials
…
U.S. says firm aided Germany
End to cartels and enemy thrusts urged
…
Paris stages first fashion show
American girl, fresh from Normandy and Brittany, sees dazzling display
By Judy Barden, North American Newspaper Alliance
…
Stokes: Reconversion
By Thomas L. Stokes
Washington –
There’s considerable speculation here as to whether Congress, in handling reconversion legislation, has played into President Roosevelt’s hands and furnished him a possible political issue.
A joint Senate-House conference committee now is struggling with the different measures, passed by each branch, in an effort to reach a compromise which Senate leaders hope will more closely approximate an adequate solution than the House bill.
The latter measure has been criticized as inadequately Bernard M. Baruch, White House consultant on reconversion programs, as well as Senator Walter George (D-GA), chairman of the Finance Committee which sponsored the Senate will. War Mobilization Director James F. Byrnes tried in vain to get the House Ways and Means Committee to provide higher nationwide unemployment compensation rates – at least a $20 per week minimum for 26 weeks. That would be higher than is allowed under some state laws.
All are conservatives
In view of the criticism of these men, all recognized conservatives, it is not likely that President Roosevelt is satisfied with what Congress has done; nor does it seem possible that the conference committee, within the latitude of the two measures, can make the ultimate bill satisfactory to him. Conferees must stay within the two bills. They cannot insert new provisions.
This raises the questions as to whether the President might veto the bill, or, if not that, sign it under protest, perhaps with a stiff message to Congress criticizing what it has done. He might also suggest that additional legislation will be necessary to provide sufficient cushions for the unemployed during the changeover from war to peace production, which is already beginning.
President Roosevelt refrained from mixing into the situation while the bills were before Congress, which disappointed some New Dealers at the Capitol, a dwindling army. Although they felt that he withheld his help at a critical time, it is also true that Mr. Roosevelt has been criticized repeatedly for interfering with Congress. Republicans used to say “rubberstamp” Congress, an epithet no longer accurate.
Congress had its opportunity
Congress wanted to write legislation, itself, and it had full opportunity in the reconversion bill.
Senator Harry S. Truman (D-MO), Democratic vice-presidential candidate, obviously reflected President Roosevelt’s dissatisfaction with reconversion legislation in his own criticism of the course it was taking.
With the backing of conservatives such as Messrs. Baruch, George and Byrnes, President Roosevelt has an opportunity to take Congress to task. This will give him, at the same time, a chance to assuage the New Deal wing of the party which did not like either the Senate or House bills, but which was unable to do anything about it.
Observers at the Capitol are also commenting on what a beautiful opportunity the Republicans missed by not presenting a constructive reconversion program of their own that might have offered a middle way between the warring extremes of the Democratic Party in Congress.
With Democrats divided as they are, Republicans might be able to sail into the widening gulf and make some political capital for themselves.
They seem, instead, to prefer to follow the leadership of the Southern Democratic conservatives – they are almost beginning to talk with a Southern accent. Governor Dewey prodded the administration recently on his Midwestern tour to St. Louis for the sluggishness of its reconversion plans, but it did not seem to stir up his own flock in Congress.
Here are Americans –
Evacuees tell heroic tales of war action
By Frederick Woltman, Scripps-Howard staff writer
…
Address by New York Governor Thomas E. Dewey
September 7, 1944, 10:00 p.m. EWT
Broadcast from Convention Hall, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Tonight, we open a campaign to decide the course of our country for many years to come. The next national administration will take office January 20, 1945, and will serve until 1949. Those years 1945 to 1949 will be largely – and we pray, wholly – peacetime years.
For nearly three years, our nation has been engaged in a world war. Today our Armed Forces are winning victory after victory. Total, smashing victory is in sight. Germany and Japan shall be given the lessons of their lives – right in Berlin and Tokyo.
America – our America which loves peace so dearly – is proving once again that it can wage war mightily… that it can crush any aggressor who threatens the freedom which we love even more than peace. The American people have risen to the challenge. The war is being won on the battlefronts. It is also being won in the factory, the office, the farm, the mine and the home.
Yes, we are proving that we can wage war. But what are the prospects of success as a nation at peace? The answer depends entirely on the outcome of this election.
At the very outset, I want to make one thing clear. This is not merely a campaign against an individual or a political party. It is not merely a campaign to displace a tired, exhausted, quarreling and bickering administration with a fresh and vigorous administration. It is a campaign against an administration which was conceived in defeatism, which failed for eight straight years to restore our domestic economy, which has been the most wasteful, extravagant and incompetent administration in the history of the nation and worst of all, one which has lost faith in itself and in the American people.
This basic issue was clearly revealed in the recent announcement by the Director of Selective Service in Washington. He said that when Germany and Japan have been defeated, it will still be necessary to demobilize the Armed Forces very gradually. And why? Because, he said, “We can keep people in the Army about as cheaply as we could create an agency for them when they are out.”
For six months we have been hearing statements from the New Deal underlings in Washington that this was the plan. Now it is out in the open. They have been working up to it. Because they are afraid of peace. They are afraid of a continuance of their own failures to get this country going again. They are afraid of America.
I do not share that fear. I believe that our members of the Armed Forces should be transported home and released at the earliest practical moment after victory. I believe that the occupation of Germany and Japan should very soon be confined to those who voluntarily choose to remain in the Army when peace comes. I am not afraid of the future of America – either immediate or distant. I am sure of our future, if we get a national administration which believes in our country.
The New Deal was founded on the philosophy that our frontiers are behind us and all we have left to do is to quarrel over the division of what we have. Mr. Roosevelt himself said in 1932: “Our industrial plant is built… our task is not… necessarily producing more goods. It is the soberer, less dramatic business of administering resources and plants already in hand.” The New Deal operated on that philosophy for seven straight peacetime years with unlimited power. At the end of that time in 1939, the New Deal gave its own official verdict on its failure by this cold admission: “The American economic machine is stalled on dead center.”
The administration knows that the war, with all its tragic toll of death, debt and destruction, is the only thing that saved it. They are deadly afraid that they will go back to resumption of their own failures. That is why they are afraid to let men out of the Army. That is why they say it is cheaper to keep men in the Army than to let them come home.
Now let us get another point straight for the records right here at the beginning. In the last hundred years we have had eleven periods during which business and employment were well below normal. During that period, the average depression lasted two years. In the entire hundred years the longest depression of all was five years and the next longest was four years – up to the last one.
When this administration took office, the depression was already over three years old. Then what happened? In 1933, when the depression was then five years old – longer than any other in a century, we still had 12 million unemployed. By 1940, the depression was almost eleven years old. This administration had been in power for seven straight years and there were still 10 million Americans unemployed.
It took a world war to get jobs for the American people.
Let’s get one thing clear and settled. Who was President during the depression that lasted from 1933 until sometime in 1940, when war orders from all over the world began to bring us full employment again? The New Deal kept this country in a continuous state of depression for seven straight years. It made a three-year depression last eleven years – over twice as long as any other depression in a whole century.
Now, Washington is getting all set for another depression. They intend to keep the young men in the Army. The New Deal spokesmen are daily announcing that reconversion will be difficult, if not impossible. They say that relief rolls will be enormous. They drearily promise us that we will need to prepare for an army of unemployed bigger than the armies we have put in the field against the Germans and the Japanese. That’s what’s wrong with the New Deal. That’s why it’s time for a change.
The reason for this long-continued failure is twofold. First, because there never was a worse job done of running our government. When one agency fails, the New Deal just piles another on and we pay for both. When men quarrel, there is no one in authority to put a stop to it. When agencies get snarled up, there is no one in authority to untangle them. Meanwhile, the people’s business goes to pot and the people are the victims.
Right in the final crisis of this war, the most critical of all war agencies – the War Production Board – fell apart before our eyes. This is also the board in charge of reconversion and jobs. Yet, we have seen quarreling, disunity and public recriminations day after day as one competent man after another resigned and the head of the board was sent to China. We have seen this happen in agency after agency. The cost to the war effort to the country can never be calculated. And it’s time the people put an end to it.
When the WPB fell apart, so did your chance under this administration for jobs after the war. For now, the New Dealers have moved in, and their handiwork, their promise for America is not jobs – but the dole.
The other reason for this long-continued failure – the reason why they are now dismally preparing for another depression – is because this administration has so little faith in the United States. They believe in the defeatist philosophy that our industrial plant is built, that our task is not to produce more goods but to fight among ourselves over what we have.
I believe that we have not even begun to build our industrial plant. We have not exhausted our inventive genius. We have not exhausted our capacity to produce more goods for our people. No living man has yet dreamed of the limit to which we can go if we have a government which believes in the American economic system and in the American people.
This administration is convinced that we can achieve social security only by surrendering a little bit of freedom for every little bit of security. That is exactly what our enemies thought. So, their people first lost their freedom and then their security. I cannot accept that course for America. I believe – I know – that we can achieve real social security only if we do keep our freedom.
There can be – there must be – jobs and opportunity for all, without discrimination on account of race, creed, color or national origin. There must be jobs in industry, in agriculture, in mines, in stores, in offices, at a high level of wages and salaries. There must be opportunity and incentive for men and women to go into business for themselves.
The war has proved that despite the New Deal, America can mightily increase its frontiers of production. With competent government America can produce mightily for peace. And the standard of living of our people is limited only by the amount of goods and services we are able to produce.
The New Deal prepares to keep men in the Army because it is afraid of a resumption of its own depression. They can’t think of anything for us to do once we stop building guns and tanks. But to those who believe in America there’s lots to do. Why, just take housing, for example. If we simply build the homes the American people need in order to be decently housed, it will keep millions of men employed for years. After twelve years of the New Deal, the housing of the American people has fallen down so badly that just to come up to the standards of 1930, we will need to build more than a million homes a year for many years to come. And this does not include the enormous need for farm housing repairs and alterations.
By the end of this year, we will have an immediate need for six million automobiles just to put the same number of cars back on the road that were there in 1941. We will need after the war 3,500,000 vacuum cleaners, seven million clocks, 23 million radio sets, five million refrigerators, 10 million electric irons, three million washing machines and millions of other household appliances. There are 600 different articles made of steel and iron which have not been manufactured since 1942. All this means production and production means jobs. But that kind of production and that kind of job are beyond the experience and vision of the New Deal.
The transportations industry – rail, air and motor – is waiting to get going.
The mighty energy we found lying dormant and unused in this country at the beginning of the war must be turned from destruction to creation. There can and must be jobs for all who want them and a free, open door for every man who wants to start out in business for himself.
We know from long experience that we will not provide jobs and restore small business by the methods of the New Deal. We cannot keep our freedom and at the same time continue experimentation with new policy every day by the national government. We cannot succeed with a controlled and regulated society under a government which destroys incentive, chokes production, fosters disunity and discourages men with vision and imagination from creating employment and opportunity.
The New Deal really believes that unemployment is bound to be with us permanently. It says so. They will change this twelve-year-old tune between now and election. They have done it every time. But they’ve always come back to it after election. The New Deal really believes that we cannot have good social legislation and also good jobs for all. I believe with all my heart and soul that we can have both.
Of course, we need security regulation. Of course, we need bank-deposit insurance. Of course, we need price support for agriculture. Of course, the farmers of this country cannot be left to the hazards of a world price while they buy their goods on an American price. Of course, we need unemployment insurance and old-age pensions and also relief whenever there are not enough jobs. Of course, the rights of labor to organize and bargain collectively are fundamental. My party blazed the trail in that field by passage of the Railway Labor Act in 1926.
But we must also have a government which believes in enterprise and government policies which encourage enterprise. We must see to it that a man who wants to start a business is encouraged to start it, that the man who wants to expand a going business is encouraged to expand it. We must see to it that the job-producing enterprises of America are stimulated to produce more jobs. We must see to it that the man who wants to produce more jobs is not throttled by the government – but knows that he has a government as eager for him to succeed as he is, himself.
We cannot have jobs and opportunity if we surrender our freedom to government control. We do not need to surrender our freedom to government control in order to have the economic security to which we are entitled as free men. We can have both opportunity and security within the framework of a free society. That is what the American people will say at the election next November.
With the winning of the war in sight, there are two overshadowing problems. First, the making and keeping of the peace of the world so that your children and my children shall not face this tragedy all over again. This great objective to which we are all so deeply devoted, I shall talk about at Louisville tomorrow night on the radio.
The other problem is whether we shall replace the tired and quarrelsome defeatism of the present administration with a fresh and vigorous government which believes in the future of the United States, and knows how to act on that belief.
Such action involves many things: Tax policies, regulatory policies, labor policies, opportunity for small business, the bureaucracies which are attempting to regulate every detail of the lives of our people – these are all of major importance. I shall discuss each of them in detail before this campaign is over. I will discuss them in plain English and say what we propose to do about them.
I am interested – desperately interested – in bringing to our country a rebirth of faith in our future. I am deeply interested in bringing a final end to the defeatism and failure of this administration in its domestic policies. I am deeply devoted to the principle that victory in this war shall mean victory for freedom and for the permanent peace of the world. Our place in a peaceful world can and will be made secure. But nothing on earth will make us secure unless we are strong, unless we are productive and unless we have faith in ourselves. We can and we will recover our future and go forward in the path of freedom and security. I have unlimited faith that the American people will choose that path next November.
Völkischer Beobachter (September 8, 1944)
Das gewonnene Jahr –
Die Leistungen der deutschen Truppen in Italien
Von Hauptmann Ritter von Schramm
…
Die Verbindung hergestellt
Kampfraum Nordfrankreich (Weltbild-Gliese)
vb. Berlin, 7. September –
Noch immer hält das Nachlassen des feindlichen Drucks im Westen an. Von wie langer Dauer der gegenwärtige Zustand ist, vermag man nur schwer vorauszuberechnen. Sie hängt davon ab, in welcher Zeit der Feind seine vordersten, sehr dünn gewordenen Spitzen mit nachrückenden Divisionen wieder auffüllen kann, wann die zu Fuß marschierende Infanterie die motorisierten und Panzerverbände erreicht hat, wann der neue Benzinaufmarsch des Gegners vollzogen ist, wann seine überanstrengten Mannschaften und Fahrzeuge wieder aufgefrischt sind, nicht zuletzt aber auch davon, was inzwischen an deutschen Gegenmaßnahmen wirksam zu werden beginnt. Auf jeden Fall ist damit zu rechnen, daß für eine gewisse Zeit bis zu einem gewissen Grade eine Stagnation im Westen eintritt.
Das bedeutet freilich keine völlige Kampfpause. So steht der äußerste rechte Flügel des deutschen Heeres gegenwärtig in schweren Nachhutgefechten. Als der Stoß der britischen zweiten Armee unter General Dempsey über Brüssel hinaus nach Antwerpen gegangen war and hier die deutschen Truppen zurückgedrückt hatte, war im äußersten Norden der Westfront eine deutsche Armee in den Kanalhäfen weit zurückgeblieben. Diese muß jetzt den Anschluss an die übrige Front wieder gewinnen. So zieht sie sich fechtend zurück, nicht ohne in den befestigten Kanalhäfen Besatzungen zurückzulassen, die dem Feind die Benutzung dieser Häfen unmöglich machen. In ständigen Kämpfen folgt ihr die kanadische erste Armee.
Ein Blick auf die Karte lehrt, wo das Ziel des Rückzuges dieser deutschen Kanalarmee liegen muß: in der Vereinigung mit den bei Antwerpen stehenden deutschen Kräften. Der Gegner behauptet allerdings, durch den britischen Vorstoß auf Antwerpen sei die deutsche Kanalarmee völlig abgeschnitten. Aber der Gegner führt gerade diesen Feldzug nicht nur mit den Waffen, sondern auch mit der Agitation, und hat zu diesem Zweck einige wilde Gerüchte in die Welt gesetzt, zu ihnen gehört auch jene Behauptung von der Verlegung des Rückzuges für die deutschen Divisionen von der Kanalküste. In Wirklichkeit bleibt nördlich von Gent und nördlich von Antwerpen noch ein genügend breiter Streifen Land zwischen der See und dem Gegner, auf dem die deutschen Divisionen marschieren und auf dem sie sich schließlich in der Nähe der Schelde mit den Kameraden vereinen können.
Eine ähnliche Vereinigung hat sich inzwischen im Süden vollzogen. Die Armeen der Heeresgruppe Blaskowitz haben ihre Stellung im südöstlichen Frankreich eingenommen und die Verbindung mit den in Ostfrankreich stehenden Truppen aufgenommen. Damit ist der mit der feindlichen Landung in Südfrankreich verfolgte Plan endgültig gescheitert. Der Generalfeldmarschall Model hat nunmehr die beiden im Westen operierenden Heeresgruppen, die noch vor vier Wochen über viele hundert Kilometer voneinander getrennt waren, zu einem einheitlichen, auch taktisch zusammenhängenden Ganzen zusammenschmelzen können.
Angriffe auf die Kanalinseln abgeschlagen
Auf Guernsey, 7. September –
Wiederholte Angriffe feindlicher Bomber und Jagdbomber auf die Häfen der Kanalinseln wurden von den Flakverbänden der Inseln für den Gegner verlustreich abgeschlagen. Die Anglo-Amerikaner verloren von den Maschinen ein Viertel bis ein Drittel, ohne die Ziele entscheidend getroffen zu haben. Die Flakbatterien haben auf der Insel Guernsey oftmals mehr als 20 Alarme an einem Tag. Die Feuerwand ihrer Geschütze legt einen dichten Sperrgürtel vor den Hafen.
Führer HQ (September 8, 1944)
Kommuniqué des Oberkommandos der Wehrmacht
Im Raum von Ypern sicherten unsere Nachtruppen in schweren Kämpfen gegen feindliche Panzerkolonnen das Absetzen unserer Divisionen nach Norden. 34 feindliche Panzer wurden dabei vernichtet. Beiderseits Lüttich hält der starke feindliche Druck nach Osten an. Angriffe des Gegners im Raum von Toul, bei Besançon und östlich davon wurden zerschlagen.
An der französisch-italienischen Grenze dauern die Kämpfe auf den Passstraßen an, ohne daß der Feind Erfolge erzielen konnte.
Im Westteil der Italienischen Front brachen örtliche Angriffe des Gegners zusammen. Die mit größter Erbitterung an der adriatischen Küste geführten Kämpfe hielten auch gestern den ganzen Tag über an. Unsere Truppen brachten erneut alle feindlichen Durchbruchsversuche zum Scheitern. Der Gegner erlitt besonders schwere, blutige Verluste. 27 feindliche Panzer wurden abgeschossen.
Im Südostteil Siebenbürgens und in den Ostkarpaten wurden zahlreiche feindliche Angriffe abgewiesen und Einbrüche in sofortigen Gegenstößen bereinigt. Deutsche Schlachtflieger führten hier erfolgreiche Angriffe gegen den feindlichen Nachschubverkehr.
Am unteren Narew vereitelten unsere Truppen in harten Kämpfen die Durchbruchsversuche der Bolschewisten.
An der übrigen Ostfront fanden keine wesentlichen Kampfhandlungen statt.
In der vergangenen Nacht warfen einzelne britische Flugzeuge Bomben auf Karlsruhe.
In Rumänien haben sich die Kampfgruppen des Generalleutnants von Scotti und des Generalmajors Wink1er, hervorragend unterstützt durch Verbände der 15. Flakdivision unter Führung von Oberst Simon, besonders bewährt.
Supreme HQ Allied Expeditionary Force (September 8, 1944)
Communiqué No. 153
Allied forces pressing northeast from LOUVAIN crossed the ALBERT Canal in the vicinity of BERINGEN and advanced elements reached the area of BOURG-LÉOPOLD yesterday evening.
YPRES has been captured and our forces have advanced to the vicinity of ROULERS. Another armored column has reached a point 10 miles northwest of the town.
We have continued to close in on BOULOGNE and CALAIS. The area of these ports was further sealed off yesterday by an advance of our troops from the area of FORÊT DE GUÎNES to GRAVELIEN.
Troops operating further south in BELGIUM have taken WAVRE, southeast of BRUSSELS. Other forces moving along the MEUSE from NAMUR have freed HUY and elements are in the area immediately west of LIÈGE.
East of Dinant, gains have been made and troops advancing through the Forest of ARDENNES have taken LOUETTE-SAINT-PIERRE and BIÈVRE.
Our forces are near the MOSELLE River a few miles north of METZ. Further south, we have crossed the MOSELLE north of PONT-À-MOUSSON against stiff enemy resistance.
Adverse weather yesterday restricted air operations.
U.S. State Department (September 8, 1944)
Lot 60–D 224, Box 55: DO/PR/16
Memorandum by the Under Secretary of State to the Secretary of State
Washington, September 8, 1944
Subject: PROGRESS REPORT ON DUMBARTON OAKS CONVERSATIONS – SEVENTEENTH DAY
On the initiative of Ambassador Gromyko, he, Sir Alexander Cadogan, and I met this morning for the express purpose of eliminating so far as possible points as to which we had as yet been unable to reach agreement. Thereupon we reached agreement on the following items:
a) Economic and Social Council
It was agreed that provision for an Economic and Social Council, along the lines of the American proposals, will be included in the joint recommendations. All that remains is perfecting the drafting.
b) Suspension and expulsion
Sir Alexander and I agreed to reinstate the expulsion provisions, in order to facilitate agreement. It is, therefore, now agreed that powers both of suspension and of expulsion will be expressly stated in the joint recommendations.
c) Voting in the Council
I stated that the American group is prepared, though with reluctance, to agree that the normal vote of the Council shall be by majority vote, if the adoption of such a provision proves to be necessary in order to reach agreement on the joint recommendations as a whole. Sir Alexander reserved his position for consultation with his Government.
d) Continuous session of the Council
Agreement was reached on the provisions stipulating that the Council should be in continuous session.
e) Specific reference to disarmament
Sir Alexander and I agreed that in addition to empowering the organization to consider the regulation of armaments there should be an express provision for the power to consider also the question of disarmament. The phrasing of the provisions relating to regulation of armaments and to disarmament remains under discussion.
Points still open
As a result of the decisions recorded above there now remain unsettled only the following items of significance:
a) Whether the initial members should include, in addition to the United Nations, the associated nations. We do not anticipate difficulty on this point.
b) The vital question of whether parties to a dispute should be prohibited from voting. You are aware of the special efforts being made to achieve agreement on this point so that further reference to the matter in this memorandum is unnecessary.
c) Sites for bases. This topic appears to have somewhat diminished in importance in the opinion of the Soviet group. However, the matter has not been finally disposed of, as yet, in a manner agreeable to all concerned.
d) International air force. Here also the prospect for agreement seems brighter although final agreement has not yet been reached.
e) Assistance to states suffering loss as a result of carrying out decisions of the council. The Soviet group still maintains, though without rigidity, its reservation to this point.
Lot 60–D 224, Box 59: Stettinius Diary
Extracts from the Personal Diary of the Under Secretary of State
Seventeenth Day, Friday, September 8, 1944
Meeting with Ambassador Gromyko in the President’s Bedroom.
As arranged yesterday, I met Ambassador Gromyko promptly at 9:30 at the main entrance of the White House, and took him to the President’s bedroom immediately. We talked for thirty-five minutes and I felt it was most constructive. At the beginning the President warmed the atmosphere by telling Gromyko some of his plans for his trip to Quebec to meet Churchill. In this connection, he spoke of the desirability of having another conference of the three Chiefs of State as early as possible. The President also spoke briefly of the war, that our forces in the west as well as the Soviets in the east had gone beyond their respective supply lines and that this was a period of pause for consolidation on the part of both. The President told Gromyko how delighted he was with the way things have gone on both fronts. He then read to him a wire from General Pat Hurley in which Hurley had said that Molotov had told him that the Soviets were not interested in the Chinese Communists, that they were not really Communists anyway. The President commented that they were agrarians.
After this preliminary friendly exchange of comments on the several subjects mentioned, the President finally came around to Dumbarton Oaks and said that he understood there was only one fundamental point remaining open. Gromyko said that there were others and I then nailed him down on the others and it turned out that only the one point is really difficult. Gromyko indicated pretty clearly that he would be able to yield on everything else except the voting question, specifically mentioning that he could approve our economic and social council proposal. He also seemed perfectly open minded on the question of the international air force, indicating that to his mind it had now reached the point of merely being a question of saying the thing in the right language. Gromyko told the President he was sure we were all talking about the same thing and said that if we seriously objected to the term international air force, or the proposal as originally submitted by the Soviets, they would be perfectly willing to drop it. I said I was confident we could write a provision in simple language which would accomplish the aim which all of us sought on this aspect of the problem.
The President then told Gromyko that we would be prepared to accept a majority rather than a two-third vote in the Council if that would help him at home. He then went on into the major issue, opening this part of the discussion by saying that traditionally in this country, husbands and wives when in trouble never have the opportunity to vote on their own case, although they always have an opportunity to state their case. The President told a beautiful story tracing the development of this American concept of fair play back to the days of our founding fathers. He then stressed the difficulty which we would have in our Senate with the Soviet proposal, saying at the same time that he felt the issue of the quick and immediate use of force could be met successfully in the Senate.
Gromyko did not seem at all depressed by what the President said. He accepted the remarks gracefully, asked a number of questions about it, and discussed the way in which he could explain our position clearly to his people at home.
At this point I asked him if it would be helpful to him if we sent a message on the matter to Marshal Stalin. The President added that we did not desire to send such a message unless it would be helpful to him. Gromyko said he would leave that to our judgment. I then lianded to the President the draft cable which Chip Bohlen had prepared, which referred to the President’s talk with the Ambassador, outlined the difficulty we faced on the voting question, referred to the traditional American concept that parties to a dispute never vote on their own case, and we said that American public opinion would neither understand nor support a plan of international organization in which this principle was violated. It also indicated that we felt that other nations, particularly the smaller nations would feel as we did. It ended with an expression of hope that Stalin would be able to instruct his delegation to meet our point on this issue. The President thought the cable was excellent but wanted us to add a reference to his husband and wife simile which he had made earlier in the conversation, and stress more the probably adverse reaction of the Soviet proposal on the smaller nations and the difficulty we would have in getting their plan through our Senate. The President asked that the cable be redrafted to incorporate his suggestions and be sent to Miss Tully for transmission immediately.
The President then said we should start with the Chinese on Monday. I did not comment. The President inquired if Mr. Kung would be around for these Conversations and I said “Yes,” but only as an observer. I told him he had asked to go on the Sunday trip to Virginia. The President asked what kind of arrangements we were making for the Chinese phase of the Conversations and I said the Chinese would expect the same ceremony which we had had for the opening phase. I told him we would expect to have Mr. Hull speak at the opening meeting with the movie and still photographers present, have a diplomatic dinner and give them, say a week for the actual discussions. The President said he thought that was too long, that we should do it in four or five days, adding that he wanted to have this whole matter finished up by the end of next week when he would be returning to Washington. He said, “I want at that time the document signed and a report from you that great success was achieved. This is an order to you.” During this conversation, Gromyko squirmed a bit in his chair as I did in mine. I could not, however, let it all go by without comment and I said that I had not yet had a chance to sound out the Ambassador on this idea and asked him, if we were delayed in the Conversations with them if it would be all right if we recessed, and in order to save time, hold the Chinese Conversations in the interim, resuming and completing the Soviet phase after finishing with the Chinese. Gromyko at first said he thought this would be all right but later came back to the matter and said he hoped that we would not make these plans definite yet. He indicated that he felt the general principle should be established before we talked with the Chinese. I then asked him how long he thought that would take and he expressed the opinion that we should be able to cover everything in another two days, and certainly finish up not later than Monday. The President then suggested that we start with the Chinese on Tuesday, to which Gromyko agreed. We had considerable discussion about the question as to whether all four powers should sign the same document and I argued strongly for that course of action, following the Moscow pattern. Gromyko commented that I had mentioned this to him yesterday. I inquired of the President if he wished the signing to take place at the White House. As he would be away from Washington and would not be there to witness it, he said he felt we should have a formal ceremony at the signing and that it should take place at Dumbarton Oaks. He said we must be certain it will feature full agreement, full understanding, and complete unanimity of the four great powers of the world.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Meeting with Sir Alexander Cadogan and Ambassador Gromyko
I met privately with Ambassador Gromyko and Sir Alexander at the invitation of the former for the express purpose of eliminating as many brackets as possible. We reached agreement that provision should be made for an economic and social council along the general lines of our proposal. Sir Alexander and I agreed to the reinstatement of the expulsion provision so that now both suspension and expulsion will be covered in the document. I announced that we are prepared reluctantly to agree that the normal vote of the Council could be but a simple majority, if it should prove necessary in order to reach agreement on the joint recommendations as a whole. Sir Alexander reserved in order to consult his Government on this specific point. We reached agreement that the Council should be in continuous session. Sir Alexander and I agreed that in addition to considering the regulation of armaments, the organization should be empowered to consider the question of disarmament. The phrasing of these provisions remains to be worked out. (As does the language of the economic and social council.) This results in bringing the list of open items to the following.
A. Initial membership (the question of whether the Associated Nations should be included as well as the United Nations).
B. The vital question of voting when a great power is involved in a dispute.
C. Sites for bases, although we gathered that the Soviet group is not pressing this as hard as they had been.
D. International air force. We seemed to be getting nearer together on this although final agreement has not yet been reached.
E. Assistance to states suffering loss as a result of carrying out decisions of the Council. The Soviet group still reserves, but not very strongly, on this issue.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
President Roosevelt to the Ambassador in the Soviet Union
Washington, 8 September, 1944
58
Please deliver the following message from the President to Marshal Stalin:
I have just had a pleasant and interesting talk with your Ambassador in regard to the progress of the Dumbarton Oaks talks, There is apparently only one issue of importance on which we have not yet reached agreement and that is the question of voting in the Council. The British and ourselves both feel strongly that parties to a dispute should not vote in the decisions of the Council even if one of the parties is a permanent member of the Council, whereas I gather from your Ambassador that your Government holds the opposite view. Traditionally since the founding of the United States parties to a dispute have never voted in their own case and I know that public opinion in the United States would neither understand nor support a plan of international organization in which this principle was violated. Furthermore I know that this same view is held by many nations of the world and I am entirely convinced that the smaller nations would find it difficult to accept an international organization in which the great powers insisted upon the right to vote in the Council in disputes in which they themselves were involved. They would most certainly see in that an attempt on the part of the great powers to set themselves up above the law. Finally, I would have real trouble with the Senate. For these reasons I hope you will find it possible to instruct your delegation to agree with our suggestion on voting. If this can be done the talks at Dumbarton Oaks can be speedily concluded with complete and outstanding success. ROOSEVELT.
ROOSEVELT
U.S. Navy Department (September 8, 1944)
CINCPAC Press Release No. 551
For Immediate Release
September 8, 1944
Carrier aircraft bombed and strafed Yap and Ulithi in the western Caroline Islands on September 5‑6 and 7 (West Longitude Dates). Our aircraft dropped 110 tons of bombs and fired numerous rockets, destroying the radio cable station, anti-aircraft positions, buildings and storage dumps. No airborne enemy aircraft were encountered and anti-aircraft fire was meager. Our personnel casualties were three pilots and one aircrewman. There was no damage to any of our ships.
Pagan and Aguijan in the Marianas were attacked by our aircraft on September 6. Both islands were strafed. Rockets were launched against gun emplacements and other installations at Pagan, where moderate anti-aircraft fire was encountered.
Liberators of the 7th AAF bombed Marcus Island on September 6 experiencing moderate anti-aircraft fire. Explosions were observed and several fires were started.
On the same day, further neutralization raids were carried out against enemy bases in the Marshalls. Corsair and Dauntless planes of the 4th Marine Aircraft Wing bombed radio facilities and gun positions at Mille. No anti-aircraft fire was encountered. Corsairs also bombed Wotje. Numerous fires were started. There was no anti-aircraft fire.
The Pittsburgh Press (September 8, 1944)
Yanks storm two strongholds; four armies nearing Reich
Patton hurls attack from across Moselle in Metz-Nancy sector
By Virgil Pinkley, United Press staff writer
All-out offensive by U.S. forces was cracking German resistance in front of the German border, as the U.S. 3rd Army (1) smashed ahead across the Moselle River. The U.S. 1st Army (2) advanced beyond the Meuse and reached the gates of Liège. British forces (3) smashed across the Albert Canal at Beringen, while along the coast (4) British troops drove to within 10 miles of Ostend and Canadian troops battled for the Channel ports.
SHAEF, London, England –
Lt. Gen. George S. Patton’s 3rd Army closed against Metz and Nancy today in a Moselle Valley drive carrying within 20 miles of Germany, and a spokesman predicted the fortress cities guarding the approaches to the Reich would fall or be neutralized within two days.
Four Allied armies – the U.S. 1st, 3rd and 7th Armies and the British 2nd Army – were driving the final miles up to the German border preparatory to a final offensive into the Reich, soon to be opened somewhere along the 500-mile border stretch between Switzerland and northern Holland.
The British Mediterranean radio reported that the U.S. 3rd and 7th Armies had joined in the area of Belfort, establishing an unbroken Allied front from the North Sea to the Mediterranean, but there was no immediate confirmation.
A security blackout obscured most of the current operations. Front dispatches from the Moselle Valley, revealed that the 3rd Army was waging a general offensive from its bridgehead across the river. the predicted capture of Metz and Nancy would collapse the Nazi defense line and open the way to Germany.
Blast Le Havre
A powerful force of Royal Air Force Lancasters again attacked Le Havre by daylight while aground the Canadians advanced steadily in the cleanup of the Channel ports. They were in the outskirts of Boulogne and Calais. A front dispatch said troops drawing an arc around Dunkerque reached Dixmude, 15 miles from Ostend, and Thielt to the east.
British troops driving northeastward through Belgium broke across the Albert Canal, primary German defense line before the Netherlands border in that sector, and a late front dispatch said the Nazis had begun to blow up the sluice gates of the canal “with the obvious intention of flooding part of the country.”
The canal breakthrough was made at Beringen, 25 miles northeast of Louvain, and the British drove on another five miles to the northeast of Bourg-Léopold.
Enlarge bridgehead
The dispatch filed today from the British front by Edward Gilling of the Exchange Telegraph said:
After withstanding fierce counterattacks, the bridgehead across the Albert Canal at Beringen has been further enlarged, and fresh troops are now pouring across. Enemy tanks and infantry attacked the bridgehead without pause for 24 hours, but our troops have thrown back all these attacks and inflicted heavy losses. This morning, our forces were fanning out from the bridgehead along the roads.
The firm British footing five miles across the canal was about 26 miles from the nearest point in Germany, with the appendix of Holland lying directly within reach.
Close on Liège
Simultaneously, U.S. 1st Army tanks and motorized infantry swept 16 miles down the valley of the Meuse from Huy to the outskirts of Liège, 25 miles from the Reich.
The right wing of the 1st Army overran Sedan, where the Germans broke through for their sweep to the Channel coast in 1940, and pushed on into the Ardennes Forest.
Opposition was reported relatively light on the Belgian fronts, but United Press writer Robert Richards reported that Gen. Patton’s army was locked in a thundering battle of tanks and infantrymen along more than 30 miles of the Moselle from above Metz to Nancy.
Guns blast Nazis
Giant U.S. field guns hurled salvo after salvo into the makeshift German defenses in the hills overlooking the river, and Mr. Richards reported that foot soldiers were slugging their way forward under cover of the barrage and slowly pushing back the enemy lines.
For the past 48 hours, Mr. Richards reported, U.S. armor and heavy artillery have been pouring up to the Moselle from the west in an endless parade to add their weight to the attack.
Some U.S. armor was already across the four or more bridgeheads in the Nancy–Metz sector, and Mr. Richards said the Germans would probably be forced to abandoned both fortress cities and fall back on their Siegfried Line within the next 48 hours.
Raid Siegfried Line
Allied warplanes worked over the German lines with bombs and gunfire in support of the ground troops, despite low-hanging clouds and intermittent rain in the Moselle sector. Late yesterday, a force of fighter-bombers raked enemy columns in the path of Gen. Patton’s troops and swooped down on the Siegfried Line itself to shoot up undisclosed targets there.
Mr. Richards reported that the 3rd Army’s bag of prisoners, now up to 77,000 men since Aug. 1, included many members of famous Nazi fighting divisions recently shifted from the Russian front to man Germany’s West Wall.
One U.S. bridgehead was identified as being six miles west of Nancy and another several miles below Metz, but other units were understood to be operating north of Metz within 20 miles of the German border.
Rely on roadblocks
On the 3rd Army’s left flank, Lt. Gen. Courtney H. Hodges sent his 1st Army tanks racing eastward through the Ardennes Forest to capture Bièvre, 15 miles beyond the Meuse, and Louette and Pierre, 11 miles east of the river.
Front dispatches said the Germans were on the run in the Ardennes sector, relying on small rearguards and roadblocks to slow the American pursuit. Some U.S. flying columns were reported probing into the German rear 20 miles or more beyond their main forces in a thrust that threatened to cut across Luxembourg and roll up the flank of the Nazi divisions on the Moselle.
Farther to the north, 1st Army units captured Huy, 17 miles east of Namur, and sent armored spearheads south across the Meuse and eastward to the gates of Liège.
United Press writer Richard D. McMillan reported that the Germans in that area were badly demoralized and offering only spasmodic opposition. Thousands of Nazis are wandering through the woods near Namur, he reported trying to escape through the Allied lines. Many of them surrendered eagerly to the Americans to escape vengeful Belgian Partisans.
Blast trucks
So swift was the 1st Army advance on Liège that one U.S. armored column overran a convoy of troop-packed German trucks racing eastward on the Huy–Liège road. U.S. tanks zigzagged through the enemy convoy with their guns blazing in all directions and cut it to shreds in a matter of minutes.
The battle of annihilation against bypassed German forces pinned against the Channel coast in northern France and Belgium continued at top speed. British troops captured Ypres, the famous battle site of the last war, and Roulers, 12 miles to the northeast, and pushed on 10 miles northwest of the latter town to within about 10 miles of Ostend.