Eleanor Roosevelt: My Day (1947)

81

April 4, 1947

NEW YORK, Thursday – I am delighted to see that the Palestine question is to be taken up by the United Nations. If the work of the special session of the Assembly is restricted to that one subject, and if they follow the proposed course of appointing a committee to sift the facts so that the Assembly in September can act upon a full knowledge of the situation, we can hope for a solution which will be just to all those concerned.

I cannot understand the Senate’s delay in voting on the Lilienthal appointment, nor can I understand the attack made by Sen. Robert A. Taft on our plan for control of atomic energy. As Sen. Brien McMahon said, that plan has been carefully considered, and under it inspection and safeguards would be set up to prevent any nation from having an advantage over any other nation.

There emerges from all this a feeling that we want more than any other nation. We have this secret which we have told the world that we do not intend to use—that we intend to share it, under proper restrictions, with the rest of the world. But now some of our men in high places seem to feel that the longer we can hold onto it, the safer we will feel.

All very true – but how about the rest of the world? We do not like uncertainty and I doubt if the other people in the world like uncertainty. We feel sure that we would never be guilty of misusing a weapon of this kind, but from speeches made in Congress and from reports of testimony by witnesses before Congressional committees, I am afraid that some people in the rest of the world must wonder about our good intentions. We seem to forget that other people can read as well as the citizens of the United States.

As I was walking along MacDougal Alley last Sunday morning, I passed a little shop where one can get tea and prepared food to take home. The most interesting part of the shop to me has always been the lady who runs it, so Fala and I went in to have a chat with her. She told me an interesting story which seems to me to have a good Sunday lesson in it.

It appears that her tiger cat had a litter of kittens not long ago. The other cat in the household was upset by their arrival. She took one look at the tiger cat, who had been her friend and companion but who now had these strange, squirming creatures, and then turned away, refusing to have anything whatsoever to do with her. The tiger cat was hurt, but her duties kept her busy.

A few weeks later, the other cat had a litter of kittens. However, her first one was born dead. The tiger cat, seeing her concern and alarm, went over and tried to help revive the kitten. Finally, she gave it up and, putting both paws around the other cat’s neck, tried to console her. And as each new kitten arrived, she took it and washed it and treated it as though it were her own. Now the two cats are friends again and care for each other’s children. Harmony is restored.

This seemed to me a charming story, and one that we people might take to heart. Sometimes animals seem to have instincts that are more Christian than those of us who reason things out and are supposed to have the special gift of high intelligence.

82

April 5, 1947

HYDE PARK, Friday – I want to congratulate Sen. Arthur H. Vandenberg for the fight which he has made to get his amendment included in the Greek-Turkish aid bill. I think that amendment should dispel many of the fears that people have had that unilateral action taken by us might be only the first step, to be followed by other nations. If we propose the careful safeguarding which is in this amendment, I think any criticism which has been made will be withdrawn.

The language of the amendment makes cooperation and consultation essential between ourselves and the United Nations. We do not insist that we act only according to our own lights, and we submit to the will of the United Nations, which is a reassuring attitude.

The U.N. approval given to our trusteeship plan in the Pacific islands must have been a satisfaction to our representative, former Sen. Warren Austin, and to the Administration.

I hear that some people who have never been particularly enthusiastic about the United Nations are patting themselves on the back and saying that the first step has been taken to reduce the U.N. power. Sen. Robert A. Taft’s desire to do away with civilians on our Atomic Energy Commission and put it under the Army would look as though there really was a group in this country planning for World War III, and hoping to bring it about before anyone else discovers how to use the atom bomb.

If you are developing atomic energy for the good of humanity in civilian affairs, you certainly do not want the commission controlling it to be a military one. If there are people so misguided as to believe that there can be a World War III which would not lead eventually to extinction of our present civilization, I hope they will talk as soon as possible to the best of our nuclear scientists. That is the best cure I know for talking about another war.

While I was in Quebec, I was given a charming little volume called “Orpheus in Quebec,” by J. G. Sime. Anyone who has travelled in the Province of Quebec will realize how different it seems from the rest of Canada, and what great charm it has. Somehow the flavor of French ancestry and the use of the French language gives Quebec a feeling all its own. I recommend this little book to anyone who is going to travel through the province and enjoy its cities and its countryside.

We have learned today that drawing and painting is one of the things that a child needs in order to release something that perhaps he can release in no other way. Years ago in Washington, an artist, Van D. Perrine, N.A., brought to the White House an exhibition of drawings, and now he has written a book called “Let the Child Draw,” with the subtitle “An Experiment in Culture Building.” Those who are interested in children and in developing their latent talents will find this book, I think, an interesting little volume.

83

April 7, 1947

HYDE PARK, Sunday – A letter has just come from the French missionary priest in Bukoba, Tanganika, East Africa, to J. Austin Smith, president of Liberty Carillons, Inc., who had written him that an effort would be made to get him a bell for his mission. The response is so warm-hearted that I want to share it with those of my readers who will someday hear that the bell and their money have reached him. Father Jean Delemer enclosed a photograph of three little African boys, which he must have taken himself; and they appear so cheerful that it makes one feel certain he is looked upon as a friend.

“I have been very moved by your so kind letter,” writes the priest, “and I don’t know – chiefly my poor English – how I can make you feel my deep gratitude. You are giving such a wonderful disinterested mark of sympathy to an unknown poor missionary lost in the African bush! How much God must be good if sometimes here below we can find such magnificent souls – You did not make that good action for poor Pere Jean, dear sir, but for our Lord, and He will thank you and bless you for me. You see He said He will acknowledge even the glass of water given in His name. All I can do myself is to keep your souvenir in my prayers and in the holy sacrifice. May He bless you and all who are dear to you.

“I will write you afterwards. Once more poor Pere Jean thanks you ‘de tout coeur.’”

This is Easter Sunday, a day of hope and rejoicing, the day on which our Lord, Jesus Christ, took away some of the fear in the hearts of His followers. We will go to church today all over the United States and listen to the Easter services, and I, for one, will hope that in countries less fortunate than ours there are people who at this season will gather spiritual strength and hope. As the earth comes to life again, we hope people who have suffered will feel renewed vigor both of body and soul. In this country, our problems are the problems of confidence. We need to realize that we are strong and can afford to trust other people. After every war there seems to be a kind of hysteria which comes from a fear that sweeps over us. We are very lucky that we have some leaders among us whose voices can be heard, reassuringly calling us back to trust in God and in ourselves and go forward without fear.

84

April 8, 1947

NEW YORK, Monday – I was deeply grateful for that test vote in favor of David E. Lilienthal last week in the Senate, and I hope that the final vote will take place today or tomorrow with equal success. I was proud, indeed, that both Sen. Arthur H. Vandenberg and Sen. Alben Barkley made such good speeches in favor of civilian control of atomic energy and in defense of Mr. Lilienthal himself.

The few Democrats who voted in favor of further delay and investigation were the ones that one usually expects to find on the side which is opposed to the good of the majority of the people. They are all more interested in certain special interests and more apt to represent these interests in what they stand for.

I saw in the press that Sen. Kenneth McKellar has served notice that he intends to continue his fight when the appropriation for the Atomic Energy Commission comes up. He remarked that he had been beaten before, and I sincerely hope, as I am sure many other people do, that he will be beaten again.

This commission has the possibilities of making life infinitely pleasanter for men and women all over the world. And somehow it seems that, since atomic energy had to be used first to destroy human beings, there should be some compensation in the future. The scientists who developed the atomic bomb grieved much over the destruction which their discovery brought about. They recognized, of course, that it was only used so that in the long run fewer lives would be lost, but nevertheless they will be happier to think that, in the future, the world will be benefitted by their work on atomic energy.

Our countryside at Hyde Park shows very few signs of spring. Not even my willows along the brook look as though spring had come. Only the bulbs are pushing up shoots of green out of the earth. The snow and ice remain under the evergreens here and there. However, the other morning I woke on my porch to the sound of soft rain and of birds singing as the dawn came.

We were all very glad to be in the country again over the weekend, but the member of the family who was the most delighted was “my little dog Fala.” As we walked in the woods in spite of the rain, he dashed off in every direction. He smelled the most wonderful things to chase, and then came back to run along the path and look with interest, just as I did, at the first little orange lizard we had seen this year. It wasn’t sunny, so our lizard wasn’t quite as brilliant in color as he is when the sun shines, but the little creature likes wet places so he seemed quite cheerful, and Fala did him no harm.

85

April 9, 1947

WASHINGTON, Tuesday – Now that we have embarked on relief for Greece and Turkey, not only for food and rehabilitation purposes, but for a number of other areas of activity which might be considered political and military, rumors are abroad – and fairly well substantiated – that we are not going to give relief to Poland and to Yugoslavia.

The relief they ask for is food. They are in dire need of food. People cannot live on a diet which falls below a certain caloric content. Even in Germany I do not think we are letting people receive less than 1000 calories a day. The Germans were our enemies; the Poles and the Yugoslavs fought with us and, by their fight, helped our final victory.

I do not ignore the fact that Yugoslavia and Poland both are under Russian influence in their governments, but the people who are going to suffer from starvation probably know very little about the political complexion of their government. Where are these countries going to turn for aid in the next critical months, before their harvest, which has been damaged by a bad winter, comes to fruition? If we refuse to help them, there is nowhere for them to turn except to Russia. Now is when help is needed, not later.

I would far prefer to see us give to Greece only what she must have to keep from starvation and to begin her economic rehabilitation, and give the balance to Poland and Yugoslavia. I cannot believe that we have reached a point where we have forgotten that we originally chose this policy of unilateral relief because we wished our relief to be given only on a basis of need. We did not wish it to be used for political purposes. But if you withhold food from a people, you sometimes achieve political results quite as much as if you give them food and allow them to use it for political purposes.

Poland has been cutting her export of coal to Russia and sending more coal to Germany, Italy and France. That will help us, for it will help the rehabilitation in those countries which we are hoping for.

We cannot be of the opinion in our Congress that starving people are going to be better democrats. What we are doing is building up enemies. Once upon a time we had friends – people who looked to us for liberation, who thought we had courage and freedom and charity in our souls. They trusted us, but today, little by little, the opinion of the world and the feeling of the world is changing.

We cannot carry the world on our backs forever. We need the best financial and scientific minds to work on the problem of quickly rehabilitating Europe as a whole, but one cannot rehabilitate when people are starving. I beg the gentlemen who are our responsible representatives, and on whom the blessings or the curses of these people will lie, to think well before they misrepresent the spirit of the people of the United States.

86

April 10, 1947

NEW YORK, Wednesday – I was in Washington Monday afternoon and Tuesday to attend a meeting of the Howard University Board of Trustees. Congress has realized, in spite of its program of economy, that Freedman’s Hospital in Washington is one of the very important centers for the improvement of the health of the Negro people. There are so few places where Negro doctors can get adequate training that it is very important that those which do exist should give the best possible opportunity, since there is a great shortage of Negro doctors throughout the country. Tying more closely together the Howard Medical School and Freedman’s Hospital makes it increasingly possible to give good graduate training, and I am deeply grateful for the foresight shown by Congress in this matter.

As at every other university, the Howard enrollment has gone up to such tremendous proportions that, with the 20-year plan of development only about one-quarter accomplished, the enrollment is higher than had been contemplated at the very peak. As I went from building to building, I realized what it meant to teachers and students alike to live in a beehive where every inch of space has to be utilized.

The faculty of the Liberal Arts College has felt it an obligation to accept the burden of increased enrollment, due in great measure to returning GI’s. These boys have given years of their lives to their country and deserve a chance at education, but the physical space here, as everywhere else, is sadly lacking.

The university has two schools which are only conditionally accredited because of the lack of proper facilities – the engineering school and the dental school. Their faculties were given high rating and their students were found to be very earnest, but the physical plant was so poor that full accrediting must wait until that is remedied.

The money has been granted for a new building of engineering. There are many institutions for the training of engineers in the South, but not one of them accepts Negro students, so the few Negroes who have had engineering training have had to obtain it in Northern universities. There is no engineering school established by Great Britain or any other country in their territories in Africa. There is no engineering school even in India. So this one at Howard University will be the world’s first one built for colored people.

I attended a meeting of the university’s division of social sciences. The subject they were interested in was human rights in the trusteeship territories, and they are making a careful study of the world situation.

87

April 11, 1947

HYDE PARK, Thursday – Henry Ford’s death brings to an end a very colorful career which was peculiarly an American achievement. Measured by standards of material success, he certainly accomplished a great deal. And I think he did a great deal for the people of this country, because his first automobiles opened up to vast numbers of people a broader vision of their country and a conception of what machinery could do to make life easier. Many people are grateful to him, and that must have been the real satisfaction of his declining years.

At a meeting in Washington the other evening, the District of Columbia Alumni Association of Howard University presented to the university a scholarship which they were kind enough to name for me, and they allowed me to receive the check and to pass it on to Dr. Mordecai Johnson, president of the university. A $1000 scholarship means real work for the District alumni group, and I felt it showed how much appreciation there is of the opportunities which Howard University opens to young colored people of the District and of the nation.

As we were passing through the university’s chapel one afternoon, we heard someone playing the piano beautifully, and I found it was a blind student whose home is in Mechanicville, N.Y. He is to play for the students on some important occasion soon, and he was rehearsing while his professor listened and gave him constructive criticism. I could see little to criticize. I had rarely heard the piano respond to a player more beautifully, and I could not help hoping that here was a blind man who would have not only deep personal satisfaction from his music, but an opportunity to earn a living and to give pleasure to hundreds of people.

They told me that this boy knows every foot of the campus, walks with a student beside him not even touching him, and can even get about by himself. What wonderful things people learn to do in overcoming physical handicaps!

Tuesday evening, when I walked into the Washington airport to fly back to New York, I met one acquaintance after another. First I saw the son of Mrs. Nesbitt, who was our housekeeper in the White House for so long and, before that, our neighbor in Hyde Park. I was glad of a chance to send a message to her. Then I was greeted by Franklin K. Lane, Jr., who was flying to Sante Fe, N.M., because he had heard his mother was not well. We had a chat and I was able to send messages to her. And finally, Sen. and Mrs. Olin Johnston, who were meeting their niece, chatted with me and then the senator put me on my plane, so I found myself well cared for.

88

April 12, 1947

HYDE PARK, Friday – In the name of economy, strange things are happening in Congress these days, but nothing stranger than what is being done to the Labor Department budget.

The Department of Labor is small, and a good part of its budget goes to the states for grants to their employment services. No one, I think, will claim that the employment services have been over-financed. They have never had enough money to do more than register people seeking work and try to bring them together with people wanting workers. There has never been any attempt to investigate the records of workers or employers, but at least these services have provided a place where you could seek work and where those who wanted workers could register their needs.

In addition, through this agency, some knowledge of the possibilities for work in different parts of the country, or of the oversupply of labor anywhere, could be made available and statistics could be kept on employment or the lack of it. This, however, seems to mean little or nothing when an era of economy is on, even though one of the freedoms we are hoping for is freedom from want – a freedom which certainly cannot exist if men are allowed to do without jobs.

Also, at a time when the tension between labor and management is apt to flare up at any moment, Congress reduces the appropriation for the Labor Department’s Conciliation Service! It has seemed to me that, through the Conciliation Service, certain suggestions might eventually come which might lead to a rapid increase in the establishment of labor-management committees. And the government might help these committees to function in a way that would minimize the need for strikes. But if we weaken the Conciliation Service, its staff will certainly not be doing any research or fresh thinking or new kinds of work. They will hardly be able to carry on any work at all.

The suggestion that the Bureau of Labor Statistics should be cut because “it has grown beyond its original size under the law which established it,” seems to me a rather strange suggestion. We haven’t decreed that our population should remain the same year after year, nor have we decreed that we should take no steps to increase our production and our general business activity. Unless we did this, we could hardly expect the Bureau of Labor Statistics to be able to do its work today with the same number of people it employed when it was organized.

One wonders really whether the gentlemen in Congress want our system of private enterprise to be a success. Do they want democracy to provide full employment for the people of our nation, and do they want an economy which benefits the people as a whole? Perhaps they hope to establish an economy which will keep up large incomes for certain great business corporations but cut down on small business, gradually reducing the living standard for the average individual while keeping it high for the few favored people. This is not a democratic theory, but it seems to be what some of our members of Congress are advocating and trying to achieve at the present time.

89

April 14, 1947

HYDE PARK, Sunday – Yesterday was the second anniversary of my husband’s death, and so today I want to thank the numerous people who sent me messages both by mail and by telegram, showing that they remember this day also.

The Franklin D. Roosevelt Memorial Foundation held its first memorial service at the house at Hyde Park, and the members of the board and a few other guests were invited to lunch at the Nelson House in Poughkeepsie, and to hear some discussion of the plans which the Foundation is considering. During the broadcast later on, a statement was made on these plans and I think many people who have already begun to work out plans of their own for a memorial, will now want to get in touch with the Foundation and at least talk over their plans, so there may be one place where there is a record of everything which is being done, not only in our country but in the world.

There has just been published a very interesting book of correspondence between my husband and Pope Pius XII, beginning December of 1939 and ending with the messages received from His Holiness at the time of my husband’s death. Mr. Myron C. Taylor who was chosen as my husband’s representative at the Vatican with the rank of Ambassador, has written the interesting notes which explain the circumstances under which these letters were exchanged. They seem to me a very fine record of the way in which these two men were thinking and striving for alleviation of suffering during the war, and a genuine opportunity for peace after the war was won.

The following quotations from the first letter written by President Roosevelt to His Holiness, I think we should keep in mind now.

“Because, at this Christmas time, the world is in sorrow, it is especially fitting that I send you a message of greeting and of faith. …I take heart in remembering that in a similar time, Isaiah first prophesied the birth of Christ. Then, several centuries before His coming, the condition of the world was not unlike that which we see today. Then, as now, a conflagration had been set; and nations walked dangerously in the light of the fires they had themselves kindled. But in that very moment a spiritual rebirth was foreseen, a new day which was to loose the captives and then consume the conquerors in the fire of their own kindling; and those who had taken the sword were to perish by the sword. There was promised a new age wherein through renewed faith the upward progress of the human race would become more secure.”

And these words from a letter written by His Holiness to the late President should be particularly thought of: “We pray that soon in God’s providence peace with justice will come to our heart-broken world, the Christian civilization will be preserved as the basis and incentive of world-order, and that love of God and neighbor will be the governing principle both of nations and of men.”

This wish should still be in our hearts.

90

April 15, 1947

WESTBROOK, Conn., Monday – The front-page stories in one of our metropolitan newspapers the other day showed what a world of conflict we now live in.

In Moscow, Foreign Minister V. M. Molotov had refused to consider an agreement on the Saar until his proposal on four-power rule for the Ruhr was settled. In another column was an account of a speech made in London by Henry Wallace, in which he voiced his apprehension over the policy of lending money to anti-Soviet states just because they are anti-Soviet states rather than because they need money for rehabilitation. Right next to that article was an accusation by a Democratic Senator that Mr. Wallace, by voicing these sentiments abroad, was hurting his country’s prestige. At home, the phone strike continued, the coal mines were slowly beginning to reopen, and the wisdom of certain Government loans to the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad was being questioned by the Republicans in a Senate committee.

This all looks like a good deal of dissension and more dissension, and yet it is part of the freedom under which we in the United States think the world should operate. When the right to strike is curbed, our free and independent citizens strike all the more readily; and when John L. Lewis is taken to task for his behavior, he tries to find some way of getting back at those who took him to task and turns against the people in general.

To me, some of us seem to be losing sight of certain vital things. What does it matter now whether the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad got a bigger loan than it should have had? It was done to win the war and we won the war.

And Mr. Wallace is entitled to his opinion. It is good for every citizen to realize that the responsibility for helping to rehabilitate countries throughout the world is going to be heavy for us, since we are the only people who can bear the main burden. In the end, it is to our interest that these countries should be rehabilitated. The discussion of how we shall do it is a perfectly good discussion for people in this country to engage in, and will probably be helpful to the Administration in the long run.

Someone said to me the other day that it was impossible to give wheat to the starving people of Poland and Yugoslavia because not enough wheat could be found in the world. We had again underestimated the world need and therefore we had not processed potatoes last summer when they should have been processed, so we could not supplement wheat with dehydrated potatoes. There is only one alternative in that case. That is to make a plea to people in countries like our own, where they are eating better than ever before, to curtail the amount of wheat products they use and to divert this essential foodstuff to the nations that will starve between now and July if we do not do so. Nobody, as far as I know, is asking the people of the different nations to do this.

Mr. Molotov seems to me unwise in his insistence on his own method of procedure. He probably thinks he has a better chance to bargain if he works along his own lines, but he forgets that he may annoy his opponents to the point where nothing he suggests will be considered.

It is time we learned at home and abroad to think about agreement and to stop so much dissension.

91

April 16, 1947

NEW YORK, Tuesday – When I spoke the other day at an Essex, Conn., forum on the United Nations, one or two of the questions troubled me. For instance, the usual questions on what the Greek-Turkish aid program means to this country came out rather indirectly in a question on whether the Truman policy had hurt the United Nations.

Finally, one gentleman asked whether, if what was now being said was true, it would not be better just to leave the Russians out of all of our calculations, even out of the United Nations – in other words, to organize a world in which two groups would face each other. One, obviously the Russian one, might be weak at present and, therefore, for a time we would be safe. Under this theory, we wouldn’t be learning to get on together in one world – instead, we would be preparing for a two-world war.

That, of course, is basically what troubles Henry Wallace. He feels that we are pulling further and further apart, and that, without realizing it, we may be setting the stage for a two-world catastrophe.

I am rather sorry that Mr. Wallace had to go to England to make his speeches in order to get them printed in this country, because I do not like criticisms of our country made abroad. I prefer them made at home. But in all fairness we have to recognize that Mr. Wallace’s rather dramatic action has brought an amount of attention which probably nothing else would have brought.

Nobody in Great Britain jumped on Winston Churchill when he made his Fulton, Mo., speech, which certainly was not exactly in line with what his government was saying at the time. I doubt if it will hurt us seriously to have Mr. Wallace’s point of view presented abroad.

We must remember that, through the United Nations, through diplomatic channels, and through reports in our press, every country in the world can know pretty well what our country is thinking and feeling. Also, there are foreign correspondents here who can talk to any of our citizens at any time. They may come from countries where a censorship exists and where only such things are printed as their governments wish to print, but the governments get full information. To believe that the rest of the world doesn’t know anything they want to know about what is said or done over here, is to be like the proverbial ostrich and bury our heads in the sand.

I think that the New York Times editorial yesterday morning on this subject was perhaps a little more reasonable than some of the utterances in Congress have been. The real answer, of course, to all of the agitation which is troubling us today is a consistent democratic program for the whole world and such vigor in our plans that the world will really find in us the leadership it needs. That is how to promote the ideals of democracy that we cherish.

92

April 17, 1947

NEW YORK, Wednesday – It has just been drawn to my attention that the American Medical Association, in a report issued in 1940, admitted that families with incomes of less than $3000 a year could not cover all of their sickness bills without assistance if they had to pay these on the usual fee basis. Almost 70 percent of American families had incomes under $3000 in the prosperous year of 1945, when employment was at its height.

Two Congressional bills which deal with public health are coming up shortly. One is the National Health Insurance and Public Health Bill. In a future column I will go into this in detail because I think it is one of the most important bills for the health of the nation which has ever been before Congress, and the people of the country should know as much about it as possible.

The second one is the Taft-Smith-Ball-Donnell Bill, which is based on a completely different philosophy. Sponsored by Sen. Robert A. Taft, it is based on the old theory of giving charity to the needy, and I think it suffers from the drawbacks which go with nearly all public assistance.

People lose some of their self-respect when they are forced to accept assistance after investigation and proof that they are eligible because they are needy. There may always be some people in our nation who have to accept charity, but many of us hope that the number will grow less and less as the years go by and as the democratic system operates more successfully.

The National Health Insurance and Public Health Bill, on the other hand, is based on the theory that, by joint undertakings, people of moderate incomes may be enabled to have adequate health care within their ability to pay.

Yesterday morning I was taken to Nicolaus Koni’s studio to see a carving in wood which had been intended as a gift for my husband. Mr. Koni served in the war and, though he suffered a back injury, he is one of the fortunate ones who can return to his own work. Being in the armed services, however, means that over a period of time he has lost touch and must begin again to create interest in his work. I was very glad of this opportunity to see what he has in his studio. There is a completed head of Gen. Omar Bradley which seemed to me to be excellent. And I noticed a charming head of a young girl.

Mr. Koni hopes that the “Pieta” which he offered me in memory of my husband may be used in the United Nations headquarters as a reminder of the human rights of all individuals. I have, therefore, asked the Secretary-General if he will send someone to find out whether this very interesting wood carving can be accepted for the United Nations’ future home.

There is real feeling in this carving. The sufferings of humanity are emphasized in a human figure supported by a gentle and sorrowing figure which seems to symbolize all sorrowing and pitying motherhood.

93

April 18, 1947

NEW YORK, Thursday – In Bernard M. Baruch’s speech on the occasion of the unveiling of his portrait in the South Carolina Legislature, there was a sentence which should be written in large letters and put up in the office of every industrial executive and every labor leader in the country.

Mr. Baruch said: “Until we have unity, until we straighten out and solve our own problems of production, and have internal stability, there is no basis on which the world can renew itself physically and spiritually.” He advocates a 44-hour, five-and-a-half-day week, “with no strikes or layoff, to Jan. 1, 1949.”

Everybody recognizes the wisdom of his program. The problem is how to accomplish it. Labor cannot promise no strikes under present conditions. Unless prices come down and are stabilized, and unless conditions of work are fair and equitable, unrest must exist among the workers.

No individual industrial leader, without cooperation from the rest of industry, can assure labor of conditions which would make this program safe. This situation can only be solved if management agrees to certain rules. Then labor and management and government can sit down together and come to an agreement and stick to it up to a given date. When that date is reached, they can agree to meet again and discuss any necessary changes.

With prices on the necessities of life as astronomical as they are at present, it would be inviting many workers to starve if they were to agree to continue the present situation unchanged. To expect them to get along somehow until the fruits of their labors bring about a change in prices is asking more, I think, than we should ask. Of course, greater production will automatically reduce costs, but there will be a lag, and labor alone cannot be expected to make that initial sacrifice.

I have not forgotten that when the gentlemen representing labor and management met before, nothing was achieved, but I am assuming that all of them now realize they are facing a crisis such as they have never before faced. If our economy does not straighten itself out and give small business and the workers and consumers of this country a sense of security and well-being, then democracy and private enterprise are going to be faced with a major defeat.

In 1933, private enterprise had to have some pretty strong shots in the arm. If we repeat the cycle, the shots will have to be stronger next time. This crisis is not one which should be laid on government’s doorstep. It is clearly the responsibility of the industrial leaders to join with the leaders of labor and invite the government to cooperate with them in taking the necessary steps to bring about security and confidence here, without which there can be no security and confidence abroad.

94

April 19, 1947

NEW YORK, Friday – It is horrible to look at the papers these days and see pictures of one of our own towns in Texas which look like pictures taken of some badly bombed area during the war. I hope there will be a very careful investigation to ascertain the reason for the first explosion which touched off this major catastrophe.

As always, the Red Cross has come to the fore and is rushing supplies and help of every kind. In some places there has been a feeling that we do not have to support the Red Cross as we did during the war. It is well, therefore, to be reminded that there are peacetime jobs as well as wartime ones for which the Red Cross is essential.

I have been without a voice for the last few days and I find it particularly easy to get by on the telephone without being recognized! It is almost impossible for anyone to hear what I say, let alone know who is speaking.

I had four visitors yesterday afternoon and all I could think of was that it was fortunate that they did the talking because it certainly was difficult for me to talk to them! One of them came to tell me about a new conception he has for producing a more significant kind of moving picture. It certainly was most interesting and I found it fascinating to listen to him. But I always wonder whether the public will come up to expectations and really justify the confidence which some idealists have in the people’s good taste and desire for really excellent pictures.

Another visitor was a business man who was plunged into gloom. “We are headed for the worst depression in history,” said he. “Inflation will get worse. Strikes will continue. Look at the telephone strike. In the end, we will have deflation and everybody will have to go back to earning a living from scratch.”

I have heard these things before. But my first reaction to the telephone strike is that, on the whole, we manage to get on very well without the telephone working full time. While I suppose we will go back to our old dependence on it, since it is a great convenience, still it has been proved that we can, if necessary, curtail many of the conveniences which we now consider essential.

I always ask these prophets of evil what they would advise us to do, but so far I have met with no success whatsoever. They simply have no suggestions. They want to dig a little hole for themselves, crawl into it, and pull the dirt in after them. It is lucky that there are not too many of them and that we still have a few people who have faith in themselves and in their country. I am a great believer in hard work, and I shall not be surprised if we find ourselves facing a period when hard work will be glorified in much the same way as was done in the pioneer days!

95

April 21, 1947

HYDE PARK, Sunday – This is Public Health Nursing Week, and the National Organization for Public Health Nursing is cooperating with the U.S. Public Health Service and other national, state and community health groups to bring before the public the value of its work.

I think one of the most significant statements in all of the literature which has been sent out is: “Community nursing has come to be recognized not as an expense, but as an investment which pays large dividends in the saving of human life and the prevention of suffering. It has been well said that no community can afford not to spend the money for this type of health worker.”

This is the 70th anniversary of Public Health nursing in the United States. The service has grown slowly. At present more Public Health nurses are needed and so it is important that all over this country there should be an understanding of the value of the work. These nurses go into homes where private nursing is out of the question. They teach people how to perform the necessary services for the sick and how to prevent the spread of infection. Even more important, they often inform the Public Health authorities of existing conditions and thereby prevent the spread of disease which, unnoticed, might reach serious proportions.

There should be Public Health nursing services in every city, town and village in our country. The nurses should be called on by all alike, and not simply the poor. They can often help out in the homes of well-to-do people in these days when private nurses are difficult to obtain.

This nursing service is not charity. It is a community service to which everyone may turn for help on health problems and part-time nursing care in the home.

Public Health nurses are known by different names. Sometimes they are called visiting nurses, school nurses, industrial nurses, frontier nurses. As usual, the cities and towns are far better served than the country areas. There are 1,333 counties which still have no full-time Public Health nursing. Twenty-three cities and towns of over 10,000 population have no Public Health nursing. We need immediately about 8,000 more Public Health nurses. That is why this week has, as one of its objectives, the recruitment of nurses for this service. During the next 10 years, if we are to have adequate health protection, we will need 65,000 Public Health nurses.

96

April 22, 1947

HYDE PARK, Monday – There were two articles in Sunday’s New York Herald-Tribune which were of great interest to me.

One was headlined: “Solution of World Problems Seen Easy If Scientists Are Called In.” The gist of the article was that the troubles confronting the world were problems of migration, as they had been in the past. Originally, migration proceeded westward from somewhere around Afghanistan, but during the last 300 years, a push back has begun.

The group that might be described as the remnants of the Celtic and Roman world first pushed the Turkish surge back into Asia, and then destroyed German civilization. The next step, according to this article, will be the destruction of the Slavic and Tartar elements in Europe, represented by the Soviet Union, unless the scientists, who see the human race as a whole, can be allowed to work out for the world a state of equilibrium in which all can progress rapidly “to a common level of civilization.”

The writer, John J. O’Neill, seemed to consider this a possible achievement. And since it certainly is highly to be desired, I cannot understand why our politicians do not at once call upon the scientists, through the medium of the United Nations, to draw up such a plan! I cannot help wondering if the gentleman who wrote the article is not a little over-optimistic, but in any case, we should make the effort to find out what science has to contribute toward the peaceful solution of world problems.

The other article, by Robert S. Bird, was of purely regional interest, but to me it was extremely stimulating. It told how in West Virginia, in the Fairmont area of the Monongahela Valley, businessmen had finally discovered that, if they helped the farmers, the returns to business would be tangible. So a cooperative movement has developed whereby better farming is being financed jointly by businessmen and farmers, with good financial results to both.

If this works so well in West Virginia in an area which has been blighted, it might also be tried out in other areas. The great difficulty which most farmers labor under is lack of capital and the slow progress made when circumstances require waiting for each improvement until the farm itself can pay for it.

When we came up to the country Friday night, we found that during the week there had been very little progress toward spring. I hope that, at least, we will not suffer this year from what has happened in the last few years, when warm weather in March brought out the buds and then frost in April or May ruined them.

They tell me we had a frost on Saturday night, but I doubt if it did any harm, for our fruit trees are not yet in blossom. Even the lilacs are only barely showing little swollen buds. The maple tree on my lawn is just beginning to show red. A little warm weather, and, in a week, everything will burst into flower. But I would rather see it come slowly and I hope there will be no killing frosts to ruin our fruit crops.

97

April 23, 1947

NEW YORK, Tuesday – I was amused to discover the other night that one radio commentator who knows everything in the world before it happens does not seem aware of the fact that, though Presidents of the United States cannot receive gifts from foreign governments, their wives, not being officials or members of the armed services, are frequently sent gifts and may receive them.

This particular radio commentator and columnist knows the value of a gift which was given to me, and I do not even know it myself! He knows what I am going to do with it, when I do not know that, either! I wonder if it escaped his knowledge that, at the time I received from the wife of the giver a very beautiful silver tea service which is at present the property of the U.S.S. Franklin D. Roosevelt, and which was seen and admired by a great many Brazilians when that ship paid a visit to Rio not long ago.

It must be wonderful to be the soothsayer of the air. I often wish I could project the future in my column. It would be much more thrilling than talking about the past. But in this particular instance, I am afraid my commentator friend has projected a little too far, because I have no idea what I shall do with my possessions in the next few years. Life has never been very static for me and I seem to have heard a few jokes in the past about the way I move about. I still move about – in more circumscribed circles, perhaps – and I am not quite sure where I shall be moving in the course of the next few years.

If I am to believe one of my business acquaintances, we will all soon be living in grass huts and hoping to develop green thumbs, because without them we will not be eating in the course of the next few years! On reading some of the headlines on President Truman’s speech to the newspaper executives in New York, I gather that he warned them that unless they did something about it very soon, the grass huts would really be quite visible.

He spoke of a cloud in the economic skies and said that the cloud “is caused by the sharp and rapid rise in prices.” And he left it to the business people to decide whether they were going to do anything about it or were going to be content to build little grass huts, to scratch in the earth for a living, to let the rest of the world do the same and, after the collapse, to start again from scratch, hoping to get on top again someday. Incidentally, each one of us would be looking with suspicion on our neighbor, with the idea that he might have a little buried treasure hidden away with which he hoped to get the better of us in the upward climb.

I have just received some delightful records about Fala. And I think that, as they deal only with the little dog and his relation to his master, people may enjoy them without feeling that there is any social or political significance attached to them!

98

April 24, 1947

NEW YORK, Wednesday – I cannot help feeling just a little sorry for Henry Wallace in Paris. No one who has ever known him would doubt his honesty and integrity. There is an almost painful honesty about him, a soul-searching effort to find out what he believes and to say it as completely and as frankly as possible. But the subtle French “esprit,” with the addition of the Communist tinge, is something entirely unpredictable which I doubt whether our friend Mr. Wallace has ever had to handle before.

To many of us who have watched the French scene for many years, there is a cloud over it at the present time. It is hard for those of us who have known the French peasant to believe that he is really a Communist. It is, however, quite understandable that many of the peasants became Communists during the war. The Communist cooperatives had things to sell when the value of money was changing every day so that the peasant’s old habit of tucking it away in a sock was no longer a safeguard. He naturally became a member of whatever party made it possible for him to buy the things he wanted and needed.

If that meant you joined the Communist Party, then you joined the Communist Party. That, however, did not mean real adherence to the Communist ideas, so it would still be up to the party to make it worth your while to remain a member. Both in the country and in the city in France, the Communists have held important government posts. Therefore, the average person has found it well worthwhile to cater to them.

To whom is Henry Wallace talking in France? To the intellectuals? They are far more subtle than he is. To the farmers? They are a very different group of people from the farmers of Iowa. To the labor groups? They will seem more familiar, but even they are not quite like an American AFL or CIO crowd.

He will tell his story honestly. He is afraid that his government’s policies may lead the world into war and he will give his reasons. Most of his audience faced these reasons long ago, and will probably only listen out of politeness to the country from which he comes.

In England, he met people who were genuinely like himself. In Sweden, there might well have been a certain similarity of approach and a beneath-the-surface understanding. But in France, I fear for you, Don Quixote – you are indeed tilting at windmills!

We need a little clear-cut thinking here at home, perhaps. Have the people gone ultra-conservative? Was the vote in Congress on the Hartley labor bill genuinely representative of the majority of this country? If so, then the people have done a somersault in their thinking since 1944, when they elected as President a man who believed in the Wagner Act.

It would be interesting to know just where the people really stand. Was the vote last autumn a matter of confusion or a matter of conviction? If we knew that, we would know whether some of us are still right in believing that, when the Southern group is in the saddle, they can never carry the Democratic Party to victory. If the people want and like reaction, then there isn’t any use in thinking up a program to stop inflation or to help the world or to increase production or to improve housing, because the people have decided that they like the Republican Party just as it is!

99

April 25, 1947

NEW YORK, Thursday – In my mail yesterday I found a letter which the writer told me he was sending to several people in the Government, and I can’t help thinking that it makes sense, so I publish it here:

“This is John Q. Public talking – talking about the price of peace.

“Like millions of other Johns, I bought Defense Bonds because I didn’t want to see war come to us.

“And then like millions of other Johns, I bought War Bonds because I wanted to end the war as quickly as possible.

“Those billions of dollars helped doctor a sick world, but the ravages of that illness are still with us. The distress, the suffering, the famine, the fear of millions of Johns and their families in Europe and elsewhere is almost beyond the comprehension of the Johns of the still fabulously rich U.S.

“Since distress, suffering, famine, fear is the mixture that creates the Hitlers of history, obviously the ravages of World War II are the festering grounds for World War III, or the Great Holocaust. Obviously, too, the pattern will be repeated and we will have Defense Bonds and War Bonds.

“Why wait? Why wait for Defense Bond and War Bond drives for World War III? Why wait and blow our bond money into the faces of our brothers in other parts of the world? Why not have a Peace Bond drive now and blow our bond money into the mouths, the hands, the living hearts of the people in distress?

“Are the glories of war so great that we would more willingly buy bonds to win a war than buy bonds to buy a peace? They say it will take $10,000,000,000 to straighten out the economics and straighten up the backs of the distressed nations of the world. That’s only the price of a few days of World War III.

“Let’s have a Peace Bond drive now and raise that ten billion. Let the ‘arsenal of democracy’ demonstrate its love for peace as well as its strength for war. Peace Bond drive now – or War Bond drives later. Is there a John Q. Public anywhere who would hesitate in his choice?”

The suggestion made by Henry Wallace in Paris that a loan to the USSR might be made through the International Bank under given conditions does not seem to me such a foolish idea, for certainly the USSR is a much devastated country and must need a loan as much as any other country.

However, I can’t help feeling that we really ought to make a loan, not of money only but of men as well. Our best and brightest young executives in every field should be picked by their superiors who know their ability. They should be made responsible for producing results through a comprehensive loan which would really begin to rehabilitate the world.

It is a tremendous dream, but I think the time calls for more imagination and for dreaming on a vaster scale than we have ever had before. It’s men with energy and ability, backed by the resources which they know this country has, who can swing a gigantic economic program such as we face today in the world as a whole.

100

April 26, 1947

NEW YORK, Friday – In yesterday’s paper there was a dispatch from London which, to me, was very terrifying. It described a debate on Palestine in the House of Lords, in connection with the special session of the United Nations General Assembly called to discuss the problem of Palestine. The ominous part of the debate was the statement by Lord Hall, representing the British Government, that he could not “imagine that the Government would carry out a policy of which it did not approve.”

The special session of the Assembly has been called at the request of Great Britain. But I cannot really see how the United Nations can hold the session with any dignity whatsoever when a British Government representative in Parliament makes the statement that the decision of the U.N. will have no weight with Great Britain if she does not approve of it. In other words, if the U.N. agrees with whatever Great Britain wishes to do, then the U.N. plans will be carried out. But if by chance there is disagreement, then in plain English, Great Britain will use her veto.

The United States and Great Britain have complained rather bitterly about the use of the veto by the USSR, but it seems to me that this is a rather special case. The history of it does not make pleasant reading.

Great Britain, unable to handle Palestine satisfactorily, finally asked this nation to join in an inquiry – an inquiry which was not needed, since we knew everything there was to know about conditions in Palestine. But the report of that joint commission of inquiry, which Great Britain had asked for, did not meet with Great Britain’s approval, and so she refused to carry out any of the recommendations. Now she has asked for a special session of the U.N. Assembly, and she calmly announces in the House of Lords that, at this special session, the delegates will confine themselves to recommending another commission of inquiry, which Lord Hall piously hopes may come up with some better solutions which can be accepted by the time the Assembly meets again in September.

I can’t see much reason why they should find new solutions agreeable to Great Britain, and I can’t see any reason for working on Great Britain’s problems if she doesn’t intend to accept any plan which isn’t agreeable to her.

The British Government is a Labor-Socialist government, but as far as the Empire and foreign affairs are concerned, it might as well be a Tory government, because there is a similarity in the official pronouncements by every British government on these subjects. It is true that a change is coming about in India and it is true that it may lead to a “blood bath” such as Winston Churchill used to say he dreaded, but I am afraid that change is being made just because so many people are involved in India that something definite has to be done.

Comparatively few people are involved in Palestine. The horror of their situation is what makes it tragic, because those who are being kept out of Palestine are the waifs and strays of horror camps. They have suffered so much that a little more suffering can mean little to them, but those who impose that suffering must find it hard to sleep at night. I deplore terrorist tactics, but I deplore even more the attitude of self-righteous governments.

Our own Government’s position has never gone beyond pious hopes and unctuous words. A day of reckoning must come for us all. The preventable suffering of human beings brought on by other human beings cannot be overlooked from on high forever.