Eleanor Roosevelt – My Day (1945)

201

August 18, 1945

NEW YORK, Friday – The last two days of holiday I have been privileged to spend in New York City. I use the word privileged advisedly, for it has been a privilege to see joy on so many faces.

I don’t think I have ever seen so many young people walking hand in hand up and down our city streets. Many of the men are still in uniform, but as I sat in a bus the other afternoon a young couple got in, both looking radiant. The man was in a new civilian suit, wearing his honorable discharge button, and they were laughing and chatting together in the way that indicates, not the forced gaiety that accompanies a man on leave when war is on, but the complete, natural abandon of happy children. It was good to see. And on the same day I saw a mother greet her son who, for the first time in nearly five years, was dressed in civilian clothes. I knew she felt a great thankfulness, since during that time he had flown almost continuously on dangerous missions.

During a taxi ride, however, my driver seemed to be rather short of temper for such happy days. When a chance came I said: “This is a wonderful day; all of us must be happy!” He turned around and said: “It sure is. But I’ve still got a boy, a lieutenant in the air force, and I don’t know yet if he is safe. I’ve got a son-in-law in the army and many nephews, so that there have been plenty of worries with us.” The worries were evidently still uppermost, as they must remain for many, many people until we hear from the far ends of the world that V-J Day has really come on the islands in the Pacific and in the jungles of Burma.

Nevertheless, the atmosphere of our city has changed, and I am sure that is so of cities and villages all over the United States. The old troubles that accompany the daily round of living will be back with us all too soon. We will have to be reminding ourselves that the big trouble, the weight that has clamped on our hearts and kept our spirits down, has really been removed. We are not free from the accidents of death and disease and misfortune, and sorrow will be with us often, since that is the lot of man. But the war is over. We will not be engaged in the business of killing each other. Mass murder is ended, and we can rejoice.

On Sunday we will go to our respective churches, or sit at home and listen to our radio services, or perhaps just read our prayer books and speak with our hearts our thanksgiving to God that this terrible period in the history of mankind is past.

Now, we turn to the ways of peace, and coupled with our prayer of thanksgiving I hope there will be a prayer that each one of us may do his full share to bring about the change in mankind and the world that must come in this new atomic era if we are not to destroy humanity. We cannot say any more, “if” we have peace, or “will it be possible to keep peace,” since we know that unless we have peace there is no future possible for mankind.

202

August 20, 1945

NEW YORK, Sunday – I hope that everyone in this country read with extreme care the full text of former Prime Minister Churchill’s speech in the House of Commons on August 16. He told us things that we need to remember. He and President Truman learned of the success of the atomic bomb in Potsdam. They made the necessary military decisions and communicated to Marshal Stalin the news that this new explosive could be used to bring about peace. Full knowledge remains with us in the United States alone, and, added Mr. Churchill in words I hope we will remember: “I rejoice that this is so. Let them (the United States) act up to the level of their power and responsibility, not for themselves but for all men in all lands, and then a brighter day may dawn in human history.”

That is a pretty heavy burden, and one placed upon us not alone by the former Prime Minister. It was placed with us when the scientists working in our country, as well as the availability of our great resources, made my husband decide that we should carry on this research to its ultimate conclusion.

We must note and remember, also, Mr. Churchill’s forthright statement that Marshal Stalin had made it clear a long time ago that three months after the close of the war in Europe he would be able to throw the might of the Soviet Republics into the war in the Pacific. Anyone knowing transportation conditions on the Trans-Siberian Railroad knew, without being told, that this three-month period would be a necessity. But the point is that Marshal Stalin gave his word and kept it. I have been told that it was given as far back as the conference in Teheran. That is a fact we must remember.

One cannot help but be glad that we will have the strong voice and courage of Mr. Churchill as leader of the Opposition in Great Britain. It will be a loyal and straightforward opposition, and that is healthy and good for any country. This is especially so where one party is advocating new ideas and new methods, for clear-thinking opposition will force better thinking on the government in power. The situation in Great Britain is a very clear-cut situation, and many of us understand well why the British people – in spite of their undiminished devotion, affection and never-ending gratitude to former Prime Minister Churchill – still felt that the peacetime problems would be more effectively met by the Labor government.

We, here, have the same fundamental problems to meet, but our political situation is different. The forces in opposition to each other here are not as clearly visible to the average citizen. In the coming months we will have to devote more time to knowing our representatives as individuals, regardless of their party labels. We will have to make up our minds which are the men who are leading us in the way that we feel will be most effective for our peacetime life as the greatest and most powerful nation in the world.

203

August 21, 1945

NEW YORK, Monday – Above everything else, today, I want to thank the many thoughtful and kind people who since the end of the war have sent me telegrams and letters expressing their joy and their regret that my husband is not here to share this joy with them. I am deeply grateful for the many kind things they say about his work in the past, which helped to bring about this longed-for day.

During the war, he always reminded me of the fact that first things come first, and that the war must be won before we could put our major effort on anything else. Now, however, our major effort must be placed on building peace, and for that reason I am sorry to see so much pressure brought on our government officials to do away quickly with all wartime controls.

Take the question of food, for instance. We are a well-fed nation. We have not liked dealing with ration points and not being able to buy whatever we could pay for, as in the past. But, with very little ingenuity, we have managed to keep our children and ourselves well nourished. The Army is now able to release food which in the past they stored up for future shipment, and that food, I believe, should go immediately to UNRRA.

There will probably be protests from certain selfish people, whose shortsightedness prevents them from seeing that a few months more of discomfort (not hardship) for us may mean a far quicker recovery in other countries – and in the end, therefore, greater benefit for us. It is impossible, of course, to cover here the many ways in which we might help the people of Europe and Asia to a more rapid recovery. If we as a nation, however, ask our Congress to allow us to make the rather small sacrifice of continuing certain discomforts for ourselves for another year or two, it will mean much to people in many parts of the world. Congress will not dare to impose restrictions on us unless we make known our willingness to accept them.

In this direction, the Girl Scouts, with a number of other youth service organizations, are sponsoring a rally in the near future for the purpose of bringing home to young people and their parents what the food allowance for an adult or a child actually is in Europe and Asia today. The difference between what they consider necessary to life and what we actually have is something which should give us pause. UNRRA has lately raised its standards and hopes to provide 2000 calories per person. That amount is considered essential because heating facilities next winter will probably be very much curtailed, and the people of many foreign countries will need a higher calorie level than we do here, where we have warm houses and warm places in which to work. Yet our calorie level is 3300 per capita.

204

August 22, 1945

NEW YORK, Tuesday – In last Sunday’s papers I saw a picture which rang a bell in my mind. It was the picture of a woman somewhere in France poking around the ruins of her home.

In January after the last World War, I drove with my husband over the northern part of the line which had been held by the British and the Americans between Paris and the Channel. I remember the heaps of stones along the roadside with sticks set in and rudely painted boards, nailed to the sticks, giving the name of what once had been the village.

I remember St. Quentin and many other small towns that were more or less in ruins, with no sign of life except some black-clad women with shawls over their heads, flitting like ghosts from cellar to cellar. Now and then, at the end of a vista, were a few children playing. They would run into a cellar and hide when the cars with soldiers came driving down the streets.

Those ghostlike women were raking over the debris of their homes, and here they are doing it again – in France, in the Soviet Union, in innumerable countries of Europe. Indeed, for some of these women it is twice in one generation. Almost more than the human heart can bear!

I wonder how many people read Raymond Daniell’s article about the conditions confronting these women and children. If it were just for this winter, that wouldn’t be so bad. But it is this winter on top of all the other winters of the war, and it is children growing up with one year of cold and malnutrition piled on another year, over and over again. It must mean a warping of body and mind. Even in Great Britain, which never was actually conquered, the food level has been only a subsistence level.

To be sure, the sad commentary on our civilization is the fact that many people in the British Isles were actually better off in health during these years of restrictions, because poor and rich shared alike. The government saw to it that every child and every prospective mother had a quota of milk daily. Even with the end of the war, I see that the British government is going to continue this and other similar measures which have meant better health for the whole population.

At best, however, there will be in Great Britain results from these years of strain and hardship which we in the United States can hardly understand, because we have not experienced them. Yet help for all the countries that need help must come through our leadership. There are many other countries which can contribute largely, but unless we make them see their opportunity and lead the way, who will take the leadership? Are the women of this country going to speak to the women of the other fortunate countries and, with them, are they going to speak through practical aid in the language of goodwill which must guide our future peace?

205

August 23, 1945

NEW YORK, Wednesday – I would like to report to you today on two books which I have recently read. One of them, Zelda Popkin’s “A Journey Home,” should be read, I think, by both servicemen and civilians. It is a good picture of the tension within a man when he first returns after long service abroad. It shows the unreasonableness of both civilians and returned servicemen. The final discovery in the course of a train wreck – that it is our joint participation in living which makes us one again, whether we have understood what the boys have gone through in the war or not – gives point to the whole book.

The following paragraph in particular is one that neither servicemen nor civilians can afford to forget in these months after the war:

That was the torment. Not fear of death. Not guilt of killing. But that he hadn’t crossed over, out of himself into life. Now, in the chaos of a wrecked passenger train, he had come unexpectedly, stumbled, through three little words, on his answer: “I’m in this.” Suffering was life. Struggle was life. Destruction was life. Even death was. You’re alive. You’re in it. You take what it gives. You do the best that you can.

I like the end of the book because it leaves you with hope, the hope that tenderness and love will bridge the gaps and find the answers to the problems which will give many of us sleepless nights in the next few months.

The other book is a novel by Martha Dodd, called “Sowing the Wind.” As the daughter of President Dodd of Princeton University, who was our ambassador in Berlin in the days just before the war, she had a good opportunity to observe the people about whom she writes. I kept thinking of another book which I read not long ago, called “The Arrow and the Cross,” which is a stronger book than “Sowing the Wind.” They deal with different types of German people, but “The Arrow and the Cross” leaves you with some hope in the future, horrible as it is. “Sowing the Wind” depicts in its main character a man of charm, ability and grace who belonged to the freest fraternity in the world – the fraternity of airmen. Then you see what the doctrines of Nazism can do to this type of human being. But what you really watch is how a man degrades himself in body and soul. Only a man himself can accomplish the horrible end which came to Eric Landt – no external things such as ideologies, pressures, friendships or hates can do it.

The book holds your interest, for its characters are alive and vivid. But it left me with a sense of emptiness and hopelessness. There is little to hope for, evidently, from the group of educated, charming, sophisticated, one-time men of the world in Germany. If there is to be regeneration in Germany, it must come apparently from the plain people.

206

August 24, 1945

NEW YORK, Thursday – How very appropriate is the change made by President Truman from the model gun on his desk to the model plow! Many newspapers have commented editorially upon this change, pointing out that a plow may mean not just an agricultural implement for farm use, but also be the symbol of a new type of work undertaken which eventually should lead to a harvest.

Nowhere have I seen mentioned the fact that many years ago, at the time of the last war, Secretary of State William Jennings Bryan beat some swords into plowshares, the symbolism receiving wide acclaim at the time. He was just as sincere in his love of peace as our President and his advisers are today – but symbols, sincerity and desire won’t keep peace! We must actually do tangible things, not once or twice, but over and over again. Otherwise, we may wake up someday and find that a future President has a model gun again on his desk.

Sometimes I wish that we could translate some of the rules which govern friendly intercourse among individuals into the way things are done among nations. Diplomacy had its roots, I imagine, in something known as the art of diplomatic procedure – which very often meant, in centuries past, that while a courtier kissed his sovereign’s hand he stealthily caused a knife to be run into his back. Such little tricks and habits went by the board many, many years ago, and now we put a very much higher premium on being honest and truthful with each other both as individuals and as diplomats.

There are always some people, however, who think that you cannot say an honest thing and make it sound agreeable. In other words, a disagreeable statement is usually more truthful than an agreeable one. If you must do something which everyone agrees has to be done, but have a choice between two ways, one of which is more considerate than the other, the chances are that we will do it the inconsiderate way.

Yet the art of diplomacy was meant to teach us to do what has to be done truthfully, in straightforward fashion, but with courtesy and consideration for those with whom we deal. This requires a certain amount of imagination and the ability to put oneself in the other fellow’s place – something which of late we have not always found it easy to do.

Military victories are heady wine, but there was a saying once which an uncle of mine made famous. It went something like this: “Speak softly, but carry a big stick.” We carry the big stick today and the whole world knows we carry it, but don’t let’s forget the other part of President Theodore Roosevelt’s injunction: “Speak softly.” Many people may be so grateful to us, if we remember this injunction, that some of the knottiest problems of peace may unravel themselves with greater ease.

207

August 25, 1945

NEW YORK, Friday – Next Sunday, August 26, is the 25th anniversary of the day on which Secretary of State Bainbridge Colby announced, for President Woodrow Wilson, that the 19th amendment to the Constitution of the United States was now the law of the land. This amendment is sometimes called the “Susan B. Anthony” amendment, because she was one of the pioneer workers for women’s suffrage, and for 37 consecutive years presented her bill to Congress. The final bill passed in 1920 was identical with the one which she first presented in 1868.

Many women today take for granted their right to vote, and some years ago I remember a very young newspaper girl in upstate New York who asked me who Susan B. Anthony was. It is so easy for us to forget those who made the fight for the things today we feel we have always had by right. On this anniversary, therefore, I should like to mention not only Miss Anthony, but Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Lucretia Mott, Lucy Stone, Anna Howard Shaw and Mrs. Carrie Chapman Catt.

Mrs. Catt not only fought for suffrage, but after we had gained it devoted years of her life to bringing about better understanding among women of different nationalities. Her work – which not only gave the women of this country finally the right to vote, but which has made them conscious of the responsibility which accompanies that vote – will never be forgotten by any of us who are aware of the latent power which has not yet been used by women. This power is going to be more important in the next few years than it has ever been. Mrs. Catt’s work in organizing women in different countries, and making them work together, must be carried on, since I believe it is going to depend more than ever on women to build a peaceful world.

I am told by the president of the Rochester, N.Y. Federation of Women’s Clubs that they have formed a Susan B. Anthony memorial fund for the purpose of raising $10,000 to buy the house in which Miss Anthony lived. It will be possible for women in the future to draw courage and inspiration by renewing their memories of this courageous and self-sacrificing woman.

When we look back over the achievements of women in the past and realize what handicaps they worked under, and think how very free we are today, it should give us a sense of confidence in our own possible achievements. Merely think of the dresses these women wore – then let’s rejoice in our own ability to move freely, and let’s go out and work harder.

208

August 27, 1945

HYDE PARK, Sunday – I wonder if anyone noticed a little editorial item in one of the papers, not long ago, praising a former President of the United States for having the courage to allot two billion dollars to our scientists for the research which produced the atomic bomb. What ridicule this President would have had to face had the research been unsuccessful! Super-boondoggling would have been the least of the accusations leveled against him, stated the article. And so he was praised for being willing to gamble with the taxpayers’ money, since there was the possibility of failure!

It struck me, as I read the item, that some people have very little conception of the responsibilities that any President of the United States, or any head of a government, must assume. In this particular case, it seems to me, the decision was an inevitable one, since it was well known that a race was on with Germany for this new discovery. If we had not taken the gamble of discovery, we would have taken the greater gamble of destruction in the event that Germany won in the race.

What struck me especially is that the courage to gamble with money should come as such a surprise when so many greater gambles must be faced constantly. The man at the head of a great nation has to accept final responsibility. He takes the advice of scientists in a scientific project, and he gets the best advice he can. Every time some new move in a war is mapped out, it involves not only the expenditure of money but the expenditure of human lives. Here, again, the head of the government takes the best advice that he can get from his military advisers. Nevertheless, for good or ill, the ultimate decision and responsibility, when that military plan is made, remains with him.

Do you think any president or any head of a government – like Mr. Churchill, for instance – thought more seriously about the gamble of two billion dollars on a scientific experiment than he did about the gamble of the human lives involved in landing in Africa or on D-Day in Europe?

Too few of us ever think about the responsibility which rests in times of crises on the shoulders of the men who are heads of states. It is gracious to acknowledge the courage of a man when you recognize it. But in the present case the very acknowledgment showed how little we really understand the greater responsibilities and more important decisions which required greater courage almost daily.

209

August 28, 1945

NEW YORK, Monday – Ever since General Omar Bradley took over the Veterans’ Administration, I have wanted to wish him well. I gather from the little which I see that he is not only taking over the Veterans’ Administration, in itself a tremendous job, but that he is also to administer the GI Bill of Rights. The provisions of this bill require much thinking through and additional experience in actual administration. Some revision on the part of Congress may be necessary when the administrator has had an opportunity to observe how its provisions actually meet the needs of the discharged servicemen.

From countless men overseas, I have heard great praise not only of General Bradley’s ability as an administrator, but of his real understanding and sympathy for the men and their problems. This will be a great advantage to him, because the best tonic any man, well or ill, can have is the knowledge that the people to whom he has to look for help in his return to civilian life are deeply concerned and sympathetically attuned to his particular problems.

One of the first difficulties facing the new head of the Veterans’ Administration is the fact that much clerical work has to be done with inadequate personnel. The war has naturally brought a great increase in records and work that has to be done in connection with them. General Hines was a very able business administrator, but Congress was probably not aware of the difficulties which the Veterans’ Bureau of necessity would face shortly after the war began. Any administrator of a government bureau who is asking Congress for an increased appropriation is apt to have some trouble in remaining popular with the committee before which he has to appear.

Congressional committees are made up of gentlemen who are acutely conscious of their particular problems. Congressman “A” does not want the widow “B,” who is his constituent, to wait a year after her husband died on Anzio Beach before she gets a pension. Nevertheless, it is very hard for any of us as individuals, whether we are Congressmen or not, to think of the particular problems which touch us as being multiplied 130,000,000 times. So we tend to be appalled when some administrator tells us that his job, to be well done, will cost almost 100 percent more than it required last year or the year before. That is probably what will happen in the case of the Veterans’ Bureau.

210

August 29, 1945

NEW YORK, Tuesday – It is becoming increasingly apparent each day that more assistance is needed for veterans – especially disabled veterans – in job placement and the development of business opportunities. The educational reconditioning program which functions in convalescent hospitals is already much curtailed because of lack of funds. It will apparently be even more curtailed, since the agency authorized by Congress to handle this important function, I am told, has not been voted the necessary appropriation to carry on their work.

No alternate service in any other agency has been appointed to do this work. As a result, more than 600 offices to which the veterans should have access for consultation on job finding and adjustment problems may be scheduled to close unless by Executive order, or prompt Congressional approval, they are given the power to function.

The servicemen themselves, as long as they remain in the service, cannot write to their Senators and Congressmen, for that is against Army regulations. But friends or relatives who know that the men need advice and help can write to their own Congressmen and Senators, pointing out that the sudden end of war is going to make this situation extremely critical, especially for the disabled veterans.

There are going to be many civilians, out of jobs in war plants, seeking new jobs. There will be many discharged veterans, with new skills acquired during the war, looking for new jobs or trying to fit into their old ones again. The disabled veteran, at best, will have education for some special type of job; but he must find out where that job exists, and it is not going to be as easy for him to move from place to place. Even if he stays in one city, moving from factory to factory or employment agency to employment agency will be difficult. Therefore, if you have an interest in getting increased services made available to the men as they leave our military branches, write immediately to your Senators and Congressmen.

In New York State certain private agencies, like the New York State Masonic Grand Lodge, are providing funds to supply this deficiency, and the state itself is doing something to help. But in some other states, comparable assistance is not provided either by state or private agencies.

Many a woman who did not work before the war may be forced to do so if the men returning from the war do not find jobs which they are capable of doing and which are suited to their physical and emotional needs.

211

August 30, 1945

HYDE PARK, Wednesday – The committee in Washington has been holding hearings on what is known as the Full Employment Bill, and in reading the papers I gather that there was a great volume of support for the passage of this bill. However, I have also read a considerable number of articles where the authors seem to feel that while full employment is a desirable objective, this bill will do no good. In fact, they say, it is pernicious, because all that we need is to remove all restrictions on private industry and private industry will do the job.

These people, it seems to me, are unrealistic and have short memories. There were no restrictions on private industry during the depression; and we cannot afford another depression. It therefore seems to me that we should back and fight for a bill which faces the realities of the situation.

Private industry should do all that it possibly can, and it should be given every opportunity to do it. One little practice which existed in the past, however, should not be revived. An over-supply of labor, ready to accept low wages in preference to starvation, should never again be allowed to exist to increase the profits of employers and investors. To prevent this, the government has to see that the conditions under which men work and the returns which they receive for their work are adequate, and that all men who want to work have an opportunity to work, so that they are not held in a forced pool of unemployment for the benefit of employers.

This may mean that investors and the management side of business can claim only a reasonable return on their investments and on their part of the work of industry. That is one of the things which we have to accept if the world is to be a better world for the average man and woman in the future.

If, with these restrictions, industry can do the whole job, then let us be grateful and let them do it. If at any time they can not do it, however, then the government must have in reserve new things to develop for the good of the whole country – things that will provide more opportunities in the future for industry to use more labor.

Some people seem to feel that of necessity this must constantly increase our national debt. But that is not a necessity. Many government investments have paid out in the past, and will pay out many times over in the future. The thing for us to remember is that the men who fought this war on the various fronts throughout the world, and in the shops at home, have fought it to obtain a better way of life. They want more security, less fear, greater happiness. This is not communism. This is what democracy must make possible. Otherwise, it will not survive this period of world change.

212

August 31, 1945

HYDE PARK, Thursday – Now that the first heat of the controversy over lend-lease is at an end, I wonder if it might not be good for us as a nation to think over what the real situation is.

We, in the United States, have at the present time a preeminent world position. We have it, first, because we were the fortunate nation whose homeland was never touched by any enemy. None of our factories were destroyed, none of our homes were bombed, and none of our children and civilian men and women died from enemy action. This was partly due to the fact that our men defended us far from our own shores. But it was also due to the fact that other nations – China in the Far East, Great Britain, Russia, France and many of the smaller nations in the European area – took the first brunt of the war on their shoulders.

In the second place, we had the resources, the wealth and the skills among our people to develop the greatest production area the world has ever seen. Our resources would have availed us little if our people had not been able to use them. The basic wealth of any nation is the skill and ability of the people.

We therefore have today a position of great responsibility and with it, of course, the opportunity to gain friends for ourselves and make it possible for other nations to live in friendship together. Through lack of forethought and realization of our responsibility we may, however, create discord and dislike for ourselves.

In the case of lend-lease, it is obvious that our responsible officials felt they were obligated at the close of the war to bring it to an end, and undoubtedly the other nations were acquainted with this fact. Certain heads of departments, however, should remember that human nature is similar everywhere. A disagreeable fact is not acknowledged until it is necessary to do so. We allowed ourselves, it seems to me, to be put in a position where we could be blamed for what other nations could claim to be hurried readjustments.

Our international manners, perhaps, need reconsidering. Might it have been possible to invite the officials who are now coming to Washington to have come before the announcement of the end of lend-lease was made? Might it have been possible to get all of the foreign representatives together and avail ourselves of the opportunity to point out what had been accomplished by joint cooperation, how grateful we were for what had been done for us, and how we hoped that what we had done for others would create a greater desire to work cooperatively in the future? It would have been difficult, then, to claim surprise in any official circles.

The responsibility for forethought and preparation now rests on us, and the peace of the world depends upon our accepting the new position which we now hold.

213

September 1, 1945

HYDE PARK, Friday – I have just been reading the Army and Navy reports on Pearl Harbor, as well as the innumerable newspaper comments. It all seems to me rather futile. Perhaps the simplest thing for us all to do would be to say that, in varying degrees, every one of us has been to blame. Our joint feelings, beliefs and actions had an effect on some of those in places of authority, and the division of blame is an extremely difficult thing to assess.

How often, for instance, was Congress asked for more appropriations to fortify Wake and Guam? Do we blame Congress for not listening to these requests? They were deaf because they did not think their constituents would consider that money wisely spent.

Are we going to censure General Marshall today even if he didn’t send explicit enough directions to General Short in Pearl Harbor in 1941, and forget the magnificent record which he has made during the past four years? Are we going to take away the credit for the achievements of General Gerow and Admiral Stark even if they did fall short in some specific way in the Pearl Harbor situation?

If we had been clamoring for preparedness as a nation, we would not have allowed certain writers and papers and radio speakers to hurl the epithet of “warmonger” at the many people who warned us in the years before Pearl Harbor that war might be coming. Secretary Stimson’s diary shows that President Roosevelt warned that the Japanese might attack on a certain day. Yet that wasn’t the first warning he had given that we should prepare for war – and some of you may remember what certain newspapers in this country said about those warnings.

Is Secretary Hull, after his years of patient, wise leadership, now to be censured because he decided the time had come to take certain diplomatic steps as regards Japan? He was exercising his best judgment, and it would be well if we remembered how easy it is to be wise when you look back after events have occurred and how extremely difficult it sometimes is to gauge what those events will be.

It is very human to do little straight thinking about our own shortcomings. We want to accuse and punish our good and loyal public servants who have worked themselves to the point of ill health, and some of them even to death. Instead of marveling at the few mistakes they made, we harp upon those mistakes and give scant praise for all the years where they worked successfully and well. Yet we do not turn on our real enemies – the propagandists, writers and speakers who kept us unaware of danger, who tried to divide us and weaken us, and who are in our midst today, untouched and as dangerous to our peace efforts as they were to our war efforts.

Recriminations will not bring back our dead. Instead of recriminations, it would be safer and wiser if we determined in the future never again to be a flabby and ill-prepared people.

214

September 3, 1945

NEW YORK, Sunday – I do not think Labor Day has ever been as important as it is this year. Ordinarily we think of this day as merely a pleasant holiday which gives us a long weekend in which to enjoy our last bit of country air before going back to work in the city.

It is a pleasant holiday, but its significance is far greater than that. Today labor in every country is facing greater responsibilities than it ever has faced before. During the years when the nations were learning to cooperate, they naturally concentrated largely on their own particular interests. Their own working conditions and wages were their main objects of concern.

Today, in Great Britain, labor controls the government, which in turn controls great areas of land and great aggregations of natural resources, as well as vast industrial and economic resources. In this country, labor is no longer a weak group. It is a partner in a joint undertaking in which all citizens have a share. No one group can think exclusively any longer of its own interests. It must think of those interests in connection with the interests of all the people, since even our great country functions fully only when it is unified. There has long been a traditional division of interest between agricultural and urban workers. On this Labor Day there is one thing we must remember, and that is that the interest of all workers are tied together, whether they work on farms, in industries, in offices, in homes, or even as top executives in banking establishments.

We are entering an era, I think, when there will be increasingly less room in the world for those who do not wish to work. There is so much to be done now, and any civilization or form of government which does not find a way to put the work that needs to be done within the reach of those who want to do it is no longer going to be tolerated.

That, it seems to me, is why Labor Day this year has a special significance. Labor has grown up. It is a powerful section of the community, and it must share the responsibility of shaping the future. It must sit down at the same table with the heads of industries and plan for the acceptance of legislation which will make full employment possible and for the ways in which such legislation shall be implemented by the joint effort of labor and capital.

The ends that must be achieved to give the people of our nation work and health and happiness grow out of the acceptance of the right to work, and the obligation of all governments to so organize a civilized economy that this right shall not be denied to anyone anywhere.

215

September 4, 1945

HYDE PARK, Monday – I have had several letters of late from mothers who feel that, now the war is over, their young sons 18 or 19 years old should not be drafted.

President Truman told us that in order to relieve the men who fought this war we will have to continue the draft. Certainly, no one feels that the men who have been away from home and borne the brunt of battle should be kept away from home one day longer than is absolutely necessary.

One of my correspondents, who is typical of others, tells me that she does not feel it right to take a boy of 19 out of his home, for he is still a baby and should not be exposed to the dangers of army life. I understand a mother’s feeling and I understand how hard it is, when you have planned certain things for your boy, to have him taken away from home. I question very much, however, whether a boy who has not learned by the time he is 19 how to look after himself and decide for himself between right and wrong is going to be any safer away from home at 20 or 21.

I hope very much that the day will come when all over the world no boy will have to prepare for war. But that is not the situation today. We are going to need trained men to occupy certain countries and see to it that the people of other countries do not again build up war machines. Since this is a necessity, we can only hope that out of this necessary military draft some goodwill come.

I notice, for instance, that after six months many a boy in training has gained weight and developed physically. At least we know that though a boy may be going far from home, he is not going to be a target for enemy bullets. Possibly the chance to see the world may bring him back with a greater appreciation of his own home and his own land, and a greater understanding of the needs of other human beings in other parts of the world. This will be valuable in making him a better citizen of his own country.

Another correspondent has a rather different problem. Her boy is studying to be a doctor. If he is drafted into the military service, he will perhaps be too old on his return to finish his studies and start on his career. It seems to me that with certain professions where a thorough preparation requires a very long period of time, and where we know that we are in need of many recruits, exemptions should be allowed. We are in need of scientists, chemists, doctors, dentists and so on, and if they enter the service their training should go on within the service.

216

September 5, 1945

HYDE PARK, Tuesday – I found it very hard during the war to have much patience with the young men who were conscientious objectors. I knew that in those cases where they belonged to religions which did not permit them to take part in war, it often required more courage on their part to live up to their convictions than it would have taken to go into the services and serve with the majority of their friends. In spite of that, it was hard to keep down the feeling that they were exercising this freedom to live up to their religious beliefs at the expense of some other boy’s sacrifice.

Now we face the fact that scientists have made it possible for us to do such a successful job of exterminating other human beings that, unless we stop doing it in the mass way we call war, the human race will commit suicide. I hope we are going to have the courage to give up war and find ways of living peacefully together. It is not going to be easy, and the amount of self-discipline it is going to require is quite appalling. It is also going to require more thinking on our part and some real convictions—two things that most of us don’t find easy.

For this reason, I want to speak today of two stories which I read lately.

One is the story of the death of a 27-year-old conscientious objector, Warren G. Dugan, who was fatally stricken while working as a laboratory technician at the Yale School of Medicine, where experiments in poliomyelitis were being carried on. Two other conscientious objectors were working with him. They aided the scientists in inoculating monkeys with the disease germs and studying their reactions. There is always a risk in this type of work, though it is considered slight.

This young man was living up to the highest call of duty, as he saw it. He had previously volunteered for work in a state hospital for mental diseases in Norwich, Conn. Many other conscientious objectors have worked in various state hospitals; and though some of the civil service employees object to the statement, I think it is truthful to say that these volunteers have raised the standards of care for the mentally ill. They did their work with devotion and often with religious fervor such as is rarely contributed by the usual paid attendant.

The second story was about a young veteran, recently out of a hospital, who undertook to picket Senator Bilbo’s office because of some of the Senator’s letters which have recently been published in the papers. I take my hat off to Mr. Edward Bykowski. He has convictions, and he lives up to them.

Both young men thought and lived up to their convictions. May their example inspire many of us.

217

September 6, 1945

HYDE PARK, Wednesday – Congress, which reconvenes today, will come back to its labors after only a short holiday in a very long period of service. One reads a great deal of criticism of the accomplishments of Congress, and that is very natural, for Congress is made up of all kinds of human beings, representing great masses of people throughout this country who have vastly opposing views.

But all the criticism must not blind us to the fact that these men and women have worked for longer periods, in desperately difficult times, than have any of their predecessors since the Civil War. The strain has been great; and I think while constructive criticism is good for us all, since it keeps us constantly spurred on, we also need praise and understanding of the work which we do.

I, for one, am deeply grateful for some of the things which have been accomplished in the past few years with the aid of Congress. In addition, I appreciate their initiation of important measures. There are many things pending now which, if they are successfully passed, should bring this coming Congress the gratitude of the nation.

I have already spoken of the Full Employment Bill, which seems to me fundamental to keeping good faith with the people of our nation. There is a second bill which I think is equally important, Senate Bill 1050, which is a bill to provide “national security, health and public welfare.” The part of it especially interesting to me is that which deals with public health. Again and again, our leaders have said to us that the lessons of the draft showed that the health of our nation was not taken care of adequately. This bill proposes to do something to remedy this situation.

The amendments which have been made, since a previous bill was introduced, seem to me to make this a far better bill. There are people who feel that the principle of health insurance, which is part of the bill, will never be adequate and that health, like education, should be paid for out of the taxes of the people. Someday, we as a nation may come to this conviction. In the meantime, this bill is certainly a step forward and, I believe, deserves the support of all of us who really want to see this nation—rich and poor alike – have a chance at good health.

There will probably be an outcry on the part of some doctors who think that the words “socialized medicine” will frighten people to such an extent that they will take no new steps to insure better general health. In another column, I should like to discuss this question from a number of different aspects.

218

September 7, 1945

HYDE PARK, Thursday – I happen to be one of the fortunate people of the world on whom any health insurance, carried by any company, would have certainly paid dividends to the company. However, I have enough friends and neighbors to know that one of the things which brings distress and completely unbalanced budgets into many homes is the illness which was not expected.

Most people who have even moderate incomes prepare for the advent of a baby and lay the money aside. If there are no great complications, that does not cause a complete dislocation of the family budget. It has meant a great deal to many young wives of men in the service to be taken care of under the EMIC plan, and I have had a number of them say rather wistfully that they wished such a plan could continue functioning in peace time.

Of course, something similar should function. Above everything else, under whatever plan is undertaken, I think two things should not suffer. One is research, which we know should go on at all times and should be completely free. I was shocked some time ago to be told that years ago we might have had many of the things which have saved lives during the war, if the cost had not seemed too high for development from the commercial point of view.

Secondly, no matter what we do, the training of doctors and our schools of medicine must be properly financed and kept to the highest standards of efficiency. Young men who seem good material and are willing to put in the time for this arduous training should receive every assistance during their training years, regardless of what they themselves can pay toward their education. Research and training are two things which are essential to the health of the nation. They should not depend upon private funds alone.

It seems to me the government might well guarantee that these two phases of the health of the nation shall go forward unhampered and properly financed.

The Senate health bill, as proposed, puts much responsibility on the states. But it does leave supervision in the hands of the Surgeon General, and I think the advisory committee gives the kind of safeguard which should make sure that there will be no hampering of either research or education in the future.

Federal assistance should be available for the building of hospitals and clinics. This, of course, is essential, since many communities can meet the running expenses but are unable to make the first capital investment for buildings and equipment.

On the whole, the Wagner-Murray-Dingle health bill seems to me to give us more hope than we have ever had for health in our communities throughout the nation.

219

September 8, 1945

HYDE PARK, Friday – The closing of child care centers throughout the country certainly is bringing to light the fact that these centers were a real need. Many thought they were purely a war emergency measure. A few of us had an inkling that perhaps they were a need which was constantly with us, but one that we had neglected to face in the past. Now mothers have had the opportunity of going to work and leaving their children in a center where they felt secure. They knew that the children would be properly fed, given supervised recreation and occupation, and medical care if necessary. They were able to work better and they were less exhausted physically.

I have just received a letter, among many others, from a woman in Philadelphia which typifies the kind of thing a great many people are feeling. To my surprise, also, it seems that a great many women are actually organizing to express their feelings on this subject. This is what my correspondent says:

"I appeal to you to keep the child care centers open. We need them because:

This is probably tied up with the whole question of married women, with young children, who have to work. None of us will question the fact that it is preferable for mothers with young children to stay home and take care of them, where they cannot afford expert outside help. But we have to face the fact that there are married women with young children who have to go to work. In such cases, it would seem to be in the interests of the community to organize child care centers and see that they are properly run.

These children are future citizens, and if they are neglected in these early years it will hurt not only the children themselves, but the community as a whole. Many communities can carry the expense of such organization for children’s centers without any state or federal help. But where state help is needed, it should be given; and when states are incapable of giving sufficient help, it should be forthcoming on a national scale as it has been in the war years.

220

September 10, 1945

HYDE PARK, Sunday – In the last few weeks I have been much in and out of New York City, and I found myself rather frequently on the subways. It has warmed my heart to discover how many people would stop and speak to me as they left the train, often murmuring only: “We loved your husband.”

I always like that because, like the elephant’s child in Kipling’s story, I have an insatiable curiosity about people in general. The glimpses one gets into people’s lives from casual conversations are often very valuable in helping one to understand the general ideas and feelings of the country as a whole.

One very nice letter came to me the other day from a gentleman who thought he had sat opposite me on a subway train, but evidently was not quite sure. So he wrote to find out. He is himself a Republican and says so, but he puts in this sentence: “Since my grandsons and my daughter are great admirers of our late President, I am inclined to believe that the knowledge that I sat for about a quarter of an hour opposite you would give them a sense of great satisfaction.”

I certainly appreciated his magnanimity and wrote him that I had more than likely been on that subway train, since I was travelling quite frequently the route he mentioned.

Taxi drivers very often tell me of their experiences with “Roosevelt haters,” but it never seems to have changed their own feelings in any way and they are, many of them, “pro-Roosevelt.”

Over the Labor Day weekend, the library at Hyde Park was visited by thousands of people and since the grave and the house are not yet open to the public, I could see little groups of people standing by the fence just looking at the hedge which surrounds the rose garden where my husband is buried.

In driving back from the Post Road through the woods to my cottage, one of those days, I picked up a man and his wife and little girls. They had come up from the station by taxi and been told that a bus would take them back to Poughkeepsie if they walked just a little way through the woods to route 9-G. It proved to be rather farther than they had expected and the little girl was being carried when I picked them up. I gathered, nevertheless, that in spite of weariness they were glad they had made the trip. I don’t think they knew who I was, so they were not saying anything for my benefit. At least, that was the impression the friend with me got from the conversation.

I am convinced that the library here is going to fulfill a two-fold purpose. In time, when the books and papers are gathered and catalogued, it will be a Mecca for students of this period of history. But many, many people are going to get interest and pleasure and broaden their horizons generally by spending an hour or so just looking at the general collections.