Election 1944: Republican National Convention

top.banner.rep.conv

Willkie aides seek unity

Urge him to endorse promptly, cordially the Republican nominee and platform
By Arthur Krock

Chicago, Illinois – (June 25)
In the drive for unity which is in progress here by Republican leaders who feel it will be necessary in the campaign to make up for a certain lack of enthusiasm over the prospective presidential candidate, members of the late movement on behalf of the renomination of Wendell L. Willkie are conspicuous.

Among these are men and women who concentrated their energies for months, after Mr. Willkie decided to seek the Presidency once more, in advancing his prospects. They formed what organization they could, arranged for widespread publicity and, in the face of growing apathy toward Mr. Willkie in the national financial and business communities, raised as much as they could of the modest sum which was spent for him before the Wisconsin primaries ended Mr. Willkie’s renomination effort.

With some exceptions, most of these cheerfully accepted what they some time ago conceived to be the inevitable selection of Governor Thomas E. Dewey to head the 1944 Republican ticket and have since urged Mr. Willkie to do the same unless he finds in the platform some major position which he cannot in conscience espouse. They expect to find no such positive bar in the platform as it was outlined to them today.

They have reminded Mr. Willkie of what he said at St. Louis in the speech with which he formally opened his renomination attempt. He said that, even if he had generally agreed with President Roosevelt’s politics and actions, which he emphasized he did not, he would hold that a change of government was vital to the progress of the country and the world. The only way to bring about this change, they have argued, is to elect the nominees of this convention, and therefore they are urging Mr. Willkie to endorse them promptly and cordially after he has had a full opportunity to examine the proceedings.

It is accepted here that Mr. Willkie’s chief anxiety is over the international plank, which has now been drafted in secret by a subcommittee headed by Senator Warren Austin (R-VT) and has the unanimous support of that subcommittee. Mr. Willkie’s friends on the ground here are inclined to think that it will authorize this convention’s presidential candidate to adopt the foreign policies for which Mr. Willkie has long contended.

Mr. Austin has expressed himself as finding it “acceptable” to him, and this has encouraged the workers for Willkie-Dewey unity because the Vermont Senator was in many respects the most outspoken Republican advocate of intervention and has been in favor of the broadest form of post-war cooperation for security by the United States. They reason that if Mr. Austin, “who risked his political neck,” can accept the plank, Mr. Willkie should be able to do the same. The Vermont Senator, it is recalled, candidly accepted Lend-Lease, which he supported, as an act of war and said he favored it despite the clear risks of war involvement, almost a unique Republican attitude at that time.

Efforts today to discover the details of what has passed between these missionaries of unity and the candidate for whom they labored so diligently were unsuccessful. Nor could it be learned whether they have gathered from their former leader whether he is likely to be persuaded by their arguments if he finds in the platform no retrogression toward what is newly called “nationalism.”

It seems certain, however, that if Mr. Willkie withholds his support of the platform and the nominees for any length of time, this group will not wait to announce theirs.

Among those who worked with Mr. Willkie to the end of his renomination campaign, and are now urging unity, it is understood that the following are included: John W. Hanes, his financial chairman and general economic adviser, and John Cowles and Gardner Cowles Jr., his close personal friends, who were also associated in the management of his interests at Philadelphia in 1940.

top.banner.rep.conv

OWI state’s group endorses Dewey

Directs delegation chairman, after tactical delay, so to cast all 93 votes
By Warren Moscow

Chicago, Illinois – (June 25)
New York took officially tonight its long-delayed action in endorsing Governor Dewey for President, instructing the chairman of its delegation to the Republican National Convention to cast its solid bloc of 93 votes for him on the first ballot.

The delay had been only for tactical reasons, and the unanimity was far different from 1940, when Mr. Dewey’s weakness in his home state delegation was a factor in his loss of strength from the time the balloting began in Philadelphia.

Tonight, it was different. With no rollcall and with state chairman Edwin F. Jaeckle standing on a chair in a ballroom recently used for a buffet supper, the vote was unanimous on a resolution presented by Troy Mayor John J. Ahearn.

Text of the resolution

The resolution read as follows:

In 1942, Thomas E. Dewey was nominated for Governor by the duly elected delegates of the Republican Party in New York State and was thereupon elected. He has devoted himself wholeheartedly and exclusively to the responsibilities of that office.

Today, we, the duly elected delegates from New York State to this convention, join with delegates of other states in the draft of Governor Dewey for the service of the nation.

We take this action because we recognize that the interests of the people of New York, like those of all of our people, will best be served by electing Governor Dewey to be President of the United States.

Therefore, be it resolved, that the chairman of the delegation from New York State to the Republican National Convention be and hereby is instructed to cast the votes of the delegates of New York State for Thomas E. Dewey for President.

Organizing is completed

Just before adopting the resolution, the delegation completed, equally informally, its organization for the convention. J. Russel Sprague and Jessica McCullough Weis were reelected national committee members, Mr. Jaeckle was picked as chairman of the delegation, Mrs. Weis became vice chairman, and Harold Turk of Brooklyn, secretary.

William H. Hill, long-time leader of the Southern Tier counties, was named to the committee on permanent organization; Mrs. Harriet Mack of Westchester to the Committee on Rules, and Livingstone Platt of Westchester, to the Committee on Credentials.

Meanwhile, it became known that the problem of providing a Governor for New York during the period that Mr. Dewey will be out of the state to attend the convention here has been solved.

All three statutory successors, Lieutenant Governor Joe R. Hanley. Senator Majority Leader Benjamin F. Feinberg and Speaker Oswald D. Heck of the Assembly are delegates, and one should return to the state before Mr. Dewey leaves it on Wednesday.

It became known tonight that Mr. Feinberg had been selected, and he will leave here about the time Mr. Dewey leaves Albany.

Enthusiasm at headquarters

With the New York delegates’ arrival on a special train this morning, Dewey banners and buttons sprang into sight.

Their first act was to set up Dewey headquarters in a large ballroom on the third floor of the Stevens Hotel, to put on a reception which outdrew the Bricker headquarters, on the same floor, by a wide margin.

Delegates and distinguished guests from other states were greeted throughout the day. In a corner, on the same floor, are separate county headquarters established by New York, Kings and Westchester counties, where open house is held, and tickets are distributed.

The dominant note in the Dewey headquarters is a blue banner about 20 by 10 feet bearing the slogan “Thomas E. Dewey” on one line; “For President” on a center line, and “Vote Republican” on the third line. Close inspection by reporters showed that the words “For President” had been neatly stitched over the previous exhortation, “For Governor.” It was the same banner which was used at the Saratoga convention in 1942, at which Mr. Dewey was nominated for Governor. Pat Gogerty, owner of the banner, explained that its history actually went back eight years, to 1936, and that the upper line, “Thomas E. Dewey,” if peeled off, would reveal the name of William F. Bleakley, who ran for Governor in 1936.

Among the visitors at the Dewey headquarters today were Nebraska Governor Dwight Griswold, U.S. Senator John G. Townsend Jr. (R-DE), former Governor Samuel R. McKelvie of Nebraska, National Committeeman R. B. Creager of Texas, U.S. Senator Chapman Revercomb (R-WV) and U.S. Senator George Wilson (R-IA).

The Dewey headquarters was placarded with signs carrying the picture of the New York Governor and such slogans as “Dewey Will Win,” “The People’s Choice” and “America Wants Dewey.” They appeared to have been brought on from New York by his backers, despite his not having made any formal statement that he is willing to accept the nomination.

top.banner.rep.conv

No speech written, Dewey aides say

Governor returns to Albany from his farm – gives no hint of his plans

Albany, New York – (June 25)
Governor Dewey returned here tonight from a weekend visit to his farm at Pawling avowedly still not a candidate for the Presidency, despite the fact that he is an odds-on favorite to win the Republican nomination on the first ballot.

Members of the Governor’s official family reported that no work had been done on an acceptance speech.

A corps of reporters representing many of the country’s leading newspapers are on hand here, waiting for a “slip” or intimation that the Governor is relinquishing his role as a “non-candidate.”

The reporters are convinced that Mr. Dewey intends to go to Chicago immediately following his nomination to make a speech of acceptance. All are prepared to make the trip, yet the Governor had denied all stories that reservations for such a journey have been made.

Meanwhile, the question still remains unanswered as to who will become Acting Governor in the event Mr. Dewey should go to Chicago. Lieutenant Governor Joe R. Hanley. Benjamin F. Feinberg, President pro tempore of the Senate, and Speaker Oswald D. Heck of the Assembly, who would be in line to take over the office in the absence of the Governor, are in Chicago.

Before his departure last night, Mr. Hanley said he would certainly not return because his 93-year-old mother is gravely ill in Iowa and he intended to visit her. Since it is imperative that an acting Governor be on hand because three men are sentenced to die in the electric chair Thursday for a slaying in New York City, it must then be either Mr. Feinberg or Mr. Heck who must return.

The condemned men are Alex Bellamo, Peter de Lutro and Frank di Maria, who were convicted in the slaying of Francis Servidio on May 18, 1942, in a poolroom. In all executions, the Governor is the person to whom last pleas for clemency are made.

Nothing of political significance occurred during the Governor’s stay on his farm, where his wife and two boys have been living. Rain kept him indoors a good part of Saturday, though he did inspect some farm improvements being made. Today, he shot a round of golf, then returned to entertain two neighbors, Carl T. Hogan and his wife.

top.banner.rep.conv

War overshadows GOP deliberations

Lincoln’s prophetic words on strain of a war election recalled at Chicago

Chicago, Illinois – (June 25)
Chicago has tried hard to whoop up the Republican National Convention, but the race between Governor Thomas E. Dewey and Governor John W. Bricker seems so one-sided and the big guns at Cherbourg make so much noise that it just won’t whoop.

The trappings may be pretty frivolous, the bands are as brassy, the lights as bright, but the war is not somebody else’s this time; there are soldiers and sailors on Michigan Boulevard and anti-aircraft balloons over the lake front, and while delegates are endangered only by their own indulgences, most of them have sons who are in danger, and that takes priority even over politics.

The talk, of course, is little different. The delegates are here to “kick the rascals out,” and most of the speeches and meetings in the Loop are looking to that end, but just as the Republicans are, for the moment, dominating Chicago, the war is dominating the Republicans. Even in the first editions, they cannot get the big headlines over Cherbourg and Vitebsk, and Saipan.

Difference in atmosphere

The atmosphere of the convention is different in more ways than one. The wind is blowing the wrong way from the stockyards and the amount of excitement that can be created over whether Mr. Dewey is nominated on the first or third ballot is not unlimited, but the essential difference is that America is having its first war political convention since the War Between the States, and the delegates are aware of it, even if they say very little about it.

Eighty years ago, near the end of the Civil War, it was the Democrats who held their convention in Chicago, and then, as now, the election was overwhelmed by the war. The great difference then was that the opposition party declared the war a mistake and called in its platform, for a negotiated peace. The opposition this time is not making that mistake.

In the course of that presidential campaign 80 years ago, however, President Lincoln made a statement which foresaw the campaign that starts tomorrow and defined its purpose.

Lincoln statement quoted

As the results of the election of 1864 were coming in, he addressed a group of his supporters who came to see him at the White House.

He said:

It has long been a grave question whether any government, not too strong for the liberties of the people, can be strong enough to maintain its existence in great emergencies. On this point the present war brought our government to a severe test and a presidential election, occurring in regular course during the Rebellion, added not a little to the strain.

The election, along with its incidental and undesirable strife, has done good. It has demonstrated that a people’s government can sustain a national election in the midst of a great civil war.

top.banner.rep.conv

Mrs. Farley ready to bolt her party

Won’t vote for Roosevelt, but shares Chicago suite with Mrs. Mesta, new Democrat
By Kathleen McLaughlin

Chicago, Illinois – (June 25)
Mrs. James A. Farley issued a political declaration of independence today, confirming a report that she will vote Republican unless the Democratic nominee is other than the present occupant of the White House.

Characteristic of the current state of things here, Mrs. Farley is happily sharing a suite with her longtime friend, Mrs. Pearl Mesta, widow of a wealthy Oklahoma oil man, now operating a ranch which she has bought near Prescott, Arizona. Mrs. Mesta, a lifelong Republican, will not only vote Democratic in November but will also be an Arizona delegate to the party’s convention.

Mrs. Mesta’s friends are as stunned at her conversion to the Democratic as Mrs. Farley’s are dumbfounded at her desertion of it. But, since they avoid argument by mutual consent, they are having a gay time of it.

Asked why she was here now if she was a Democrat, Mrs. Mesta smilingly replied, “Oh, I’m just snooping.”

Mrs. Farley said she and her husband had long seen eye to eye politically and that although she had registered as a Democrat, she had voted “independently” for some time.

She went on:

I believe in democracy, and we haven’t got democracy now. I have a couple of children growing up, and if it’s a case of voting for a fourth term, I simply won’t do it. That isn’t democracy.

Her favorite candidate is Governor Warren of California, who, she thinks, should be on the ticket.

She said that her husband, now in Mexico, knew she was here and added that she would be at the Democratic sessions next month.

Mrs. Robert Lincoln Hoyal of Douglas was elected head of the Arizona delegation today, the first woman to hold such a post in the history of the party. She was head of the Women’s Division of the National Committee, 1935-36 and later served as assistant to the national chairman.

Among the “regulars” is Mrs. Alice Roosevelt Longworth, who explains that she attends more out of habit than because of political connection, this being her ninth Republican convention in succession.

Women are in more favorable position in the convention than at any time since 1924, the session that followed their enfranchisement, when they had 121 full delegates and 285 alternates. This year, they had 102 full delegates and 270 alternates.

States which have noticeably increased their feminine groups are Colorado, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Utah, Vermont, Washington and Wyoming.

top.banner.rep.conv

New Jersey delegates 34–1 for Dewey

Only Senator Hawkes opposes New Yorker as Edge champions latter as nominee

Chicago, Illinois – (June 25)
With Senator Albert W. Hawkes of Montclair, New Jersey, the lone dissenter, the New Jersey delegation to the Republican National Convention recorded itself as 34–1 for Governor Dewey for President at a caucus held this noon at the Hotel Blackstone. Senator Hawks voted for Governor Bricker of Ohio.

There was almost another Bricker vote in the New Jersey delegation. On the first rollcall, Thomas A. Mathis of Toms River cast his vote for Governor Edge of New Jersey, who was presiding.

Governor Edge rose and said, “Look, we’ve been through all that and I’m not a candidate.”

“Is Dewey?” asked Mr. Mathis. Then he added, “Make it Bricker for me.”

When the rollcall was completed and no other Bricker votes had appeared, Mr. Mathis again rose and asked permission to make one more change in his vote. He voted for Mr. Dewey, amid applause.

Governor Edge, after organization of the delegation had been completed, made a short speech in which he noted that he was expressing only his own opinion, and that he did not expect anyone to be bound by it, but that he thought the delegation ought to be for Governor Dewey.

Governor Edge said:

I feel, as a result of the preliminary actions thus far, that it is pretty well settled that the distinguished Governor of New York, Thomas Dewey, will be the nominee of this convention. I expect to vote for him on the first ballot. If things develop beyond that, we can then further consider our viewpoint.

It is not a question of getting on the bandwagon. It is a question of showing to the electorate around the country the confidence and the unanimity of the party’s mood. I feel that New Jersey should not straddle, but should take a definite position. It is the best thing to do, and I do it with confidence.

The group voted to send a telegram of good cheer to Mrs. Edna B. Conklin, one of the delegates-at-large, who has been unable to attend the convention because of illness.

New Jersey’s delegation ran into room trouble, with no one apparently getting what had been ordered. Governor Edge had received the suite and an extra room, and tonight only had the extra room. His suite had been appropriated by a woman delegate from a Western state, who refused to move out. Others experienced similar difficulties.

top.banner.rep.conv

Gerald Smith ‘seizes’ ballroom for speech

America First crusader invades Republican quarters

Chicago, Illinois – (June 25)
Gerald L. K. Smith, leader of the America First Crusade, caused a minor diversion today by “seizing” the ballroom of the Stevens Hotel, Republican convention headquarters, and holding a rump meeting in the face of disapproval by the convention management.

Mr. Smith, followed by several hundred of those who favor nationalistic views, took over the ballroom to harangue these persons and numerous others, who were drawn in by curiosity, foe about two hours. His speech was marked by equal denunciation of Harrison M. Spangler, chairman of the Republican National Committee; Governor Dewey of New York, and President Roosevelt.

He led his followers in cheers for Col. Robert R. McCormick, publisher of The Chicago Tribune, and Senator Robert Reynolds (D-SC), who is retiring from the Senate and has intimated an intention to form a new national party.

Mr. Smith issued a typewritten statement in which he said that a group of “Independent Republicans,” had reserved the ballroom for his meeting today, but that “pressure” by the Republican leaders caused the hotel to cancel the reservation. This statement was ignored.

No other meeting was scheduled for the time during which Mr. Smith held the ballroom, as he said, “by force.”

top.banner.rep.conv

Editorial: The Republican opportunity

The Republicans meeting in Chicago today are facing a national situation more critical than that which existed when they met in the same city in 1860 and again when they met at Baltimore in 1864. As on both those historic occasions, they believe they have a chance for victory. If they are right in this belief, they have a great opportunity. If they are wrong, they may still give their party a significance and cohesion it has lost since 1932 and restore the vitality of the two-party system.

This system demand compromise. Each of our major parties is the equivalent of half a dozen or more groups and factions such as have bedeviled many European parliaments in times gone by. If we are to avoid a similar confusion here, the right wing and the left wing must somehow find middle ground. The extreme policy is not practicable and cannot be expected. But this need not mean that the party as a whole cannot stand firmly and unequivocally for a few easily understood principles.

This is the first wartime presidential year since 1864. In that year, the Democrats, as the opposition party, declared that the war to restore the Union had failed and demanded “that immediate efforts be made for a cessation of hostilities.” They paid for that error by 20 years out of office. Today there is no question of Republican support for all-out victory. There is some question as to how fast the party will go in committing the country to all-out participation in a worldwide organization to keep the peace. Just eight years ago, it took its stand against the League of Nations and the World Court. It has certainly learned much since that time, as have the Democratic Party and the voters to whom both must appeal. The old cry of “entangling alliances” cannot successfully be raised again. Our only choice is between limited ties in a precarious balance-of-power system and full membership in a world organization for peace. If the Republicans will accept this necessity, as their wiser leaders urge them to do, they will redeem past errors.

In the domestic field, there are real issues on which the Republicans can seize. Perhaps the most vital of these is the relationship between the federal government and the states and between the federal government and private enterprise. Neither of these issues is likely to be stated now in the terms that would have seemed most appropriate in 1932. But they can be stated. The country has the right to expect a statement that shall e honest and explicit, so that voters this fall may know exactly what they are voting for or against.

Viewed with perfect impartiality, the Republican Party has a great history. It has now reached a turning point. We may hope that this week it will rise to its destiny, suppressing within its own ranks the forces of isolationism and reaction.

top.banner.rep.conv

Harold Stassen

As Republicans convene, they and their country can be proud to have a candidate like this ex-governor – even though they will probably not nominate him
By Robert Coughlan

This week, 1,059 Republican delegates will meet in Chicago to nominate a candidate for the Presidency of the United States. It is generally assumed that they will choose Thomas E. Dewey. Three weeks later, 1,176 Democratic delegates will meet at the same place in the same city for the same purpose; and with even greater unanimity they will choose Franklin D. Roosevelt. Thomas E. Dewey and Franklin D. Roosevelt will then have a campaign, and next November the voters will choose one or the other of them. This act will generate a good deal of excitement around the country. The Dewey partisans will be hot, and the Roosevelt partisans will be hot, and there will be occasional fistfights, broken heads and bad feelings. To a considerable number of voters, however, it will all seem a little tiresome.

These unexcited voters will feel that way because it is not exciting to be forced to choose between two inadequacies. They would prefer not to vote for Roosevelt for reasons too familiar to mention yet, when faced with the alternative of Dewey, they are not inspired. Many of them, in fact, are dispirited. What they finally will decide, nobody knows. What they do decide, however, may swing the election. For these voters are very numerous. They include several million orphaned Willkieites and many others, both Republican and Democratic, who are of a liberal but anti-New Deal disposition. The polls suggest that there may be as many as five million of them. The present writer is one of them, and this article is written and published on their behalf.

There is nothing the Democratic delegates at Chicago can do about these voters, since their convention will be about as free as a Siberian salt mine. The Republican delegates, however, are ostensibly going to have an “open convention” where supposedly anything can happen. Nobody believes this for a moment; but before the almost inevitable happens and the Dewey nomination is sealed, many delegates will be taking a metaphorical last look over their shoulders at the five million or so pivotal voters. These delegates will be asking themselves, “Is this being smart? Is there any other good Republican candidate who could carry the party and the mugwumps?” And they may remember the name, “Harold Stassen.”

Granting that no one man encompasses the humanity of Lincoln, the good sense of McKinley, the vigor of Theodore Roosevelt, the geniality of Taft, the pulchritude of Harding, the economy of Coolidge and the solemnity of Hoover, and in short, that nobody is humanly perfect, it is nevertheless plain to a lot of people that Stassen is the perfect Republican candidate for the election of 1944. His perfection is whole and unassailable, like a billiard ball. He is, for one thing, a lifelong and party-conscious Republican, with only enough urgency in his record to bless him with the honorable tradition of Theodore Roosevelt. Yet there is no trace of doubt about his liberalism. Long before Tom Dewey came out for Cordell Hull, Stassen was speaking and writing in favor of a foreign policy of enlightened self-interest. He wants a world government – “a definite, continuing organization of the United Nations of the World.” However: “This does not mean that the new level of government will take the place of the national level of government. It will not fundamentally disturb domestic sovereignty. Nations will continue to have their own flags, their own constitutions, their own heritage and their own citizens. The new level should be added to carry out relations among nations” – to keep the peace, enforce international law, stimulate trade, promote health and literacy, administer Axis, backward or disputed territories, and supervised international sea- and airways.

Stassen is equally enlightened on domestic policies. He is for minimum wages, unemployment insurance and old-age pensions; for collective bargaining and strong labor unions; for guaranteed minimum crop prices to farmers; for public works during periods of economic slack. Yet he has so many basic objections to the New Deal that they compound quite a different philosophy of government. He would democratize the labor unions, reform their internal practices, and outlaw jurisdictional strikes altogether. He would liberalize securities regulations, lower taxes on business, tighten up Social Security and government relief in general, and revise the monopoly laws to make them really work.

Stassen’s program for the country is implicit in his program for the Republican Party:

The people want a rebirth of forthrightness, and the world needs a forthright America. The Republican Party can prove itself a match for the times only by being forthright, direct and constructive.

To a practical politician, such sentiments are interesting but not wholly relevant. In an election, principles, while fine to have, are often not as important as a candidate’s oomph or political sex appeal. In the case of Franklin D. Roosevelt, this is summed up in the word “charm.” This is very powerful; and yet, as the five million floating voters look across the span of the next four years, they may decide that they want not merely a charming piece and charming post-war world. They have in mind something solid. And as a symbol of solidity, Stassen is practically epochal. He stands 6’3” tall and weighs over 200 pounds, mostly muscle. His face is pleasant and the firm set of his features, capped by thinning sandy red hair, gives him an appearance of competence and maturity despite his age, which is 37. He looks enough like Gen. Eisenhower to be a younger brother. It has been said unkindly of Dewey that his lack of interest in foreign affairs is due to the poor mental picture he has of himself seated between Churchill and Stalin. It has also been suggested that he use Stassen as a stand-in for such occasions. The idea may or may not be funny, but the political implications for the Republicans in November are not funny at all. Stassen’s nomination would take care of that.

He has diversified support

Regarded from any other angle of practical politics, Stassen’s qualifications are almost poetically complete. His personality is warm, but with the quiet restraint that becomes a statesman. He has an engaging family: A pleasant young wife and two photogenic children, Glen, 8, and Kathleen, 2½. He is a churchgoing Baptist whose favorite drink is milk, but who doesn’t feel self-conscious in the presence of a Scotch and soda. He is a good speaker with a firm, calm, baritone voice, lacking any particular accent; and he was practically suckled on a microphone. He appeals to all groups; he was born and raised a farmer, he wooed and won labor in his own state, he looks and talks like a successful businessman; and since he is now in uniform on duty in an active war theater, he has obvious pulling power among servicemen. Perhaps most important of all, he knows politics. After its lamentable experience four years ago, it will be some time before the GOP forgets that courage and energy are not enough in a campaign.

Stassen even has an impeccable history. He was poor but honest. He stayed honest.

No newspaper in Minnesota or anywhere else recorded the fact that on April 13, 1907, Harold Stassen was born. A week after his birth, on April 22, there appeared in the birth-statistics column the calm statement: “Mrs. W. Stasen [sic], boy.” More momentous happenings occupied the papers at the time. The day before his birth, the legislature passed a bill providing a penalty for anyone inducing a mother not to nurse her child. On the day of his birth, the legislature heard a report on automobiles: “Automobiles must not pass teams, animals, or persons on foot at a greater rate of speed than eight miles an hour… Chauffeurs running over people must stop and give their number.” Also on the same day appeared a timely editorial note in a Minnesota paper: “President Roosevelt hoped that the Southern Democrats may force his renomination for a third term received a jolt yesterday…”

The important event of the day occurred in a modest, unpainted farmhouse in Dakota County, which takes place in West St. Paul, a stockyard and packing district surrounded by farm and dairy country. The citizens of West St. Paul, while not swept away, were pleased to hear the news, for William Stassen was and is a well-liked member of the community. He has been its mayor three times, has served on the school board and for more than 40 years has been treasurer of his growers’ association. He operates a small truck farm whose produce he hauls across the river each morning to St. Paul, where he sells it from his stall in the public market. He is Norwegian, German and Czech, and his wife is German; they blend into the blonde, rugged, solid, ethnographic landscape of Minnesota.

He was an Alger boy

Harold, the third of four sons, was marked at an early age by ambition, resourcefulness, energy, a thirst for learning and other good campaign material. He attended a one-room country school to which he had to walk two miles twice a day, sometimes through waist-high snowdrifts. His brothers and sister did the same, but with less pluck and luck, and ended up, respectively, a milk wagon driver, a sheet-metal worker and proprietor of a small grocery store. The sister, who is married, has been a statehouse stenographer. Since the Stassens were poor, the children worked to help buy their books and clothing. Harold sold newspapers and also raised and sold skunks, a distinction he shares with few men and no other presidential candidate. At an early age, he became a crack shot with a rifle, producing an anecdote of value to campaign biographers. It was the custom in his neighborhood to hold turkey shoots each year just before Thanksgiving. Each contestant put up a dime to enter, and the winner got a turkey. Harold would take orders around the countryside for a dozen or so turkeys, then go to all the shoots, win all the turkeys, kill and clean them and deliver them to his customers. Later on, he became a national champion marksman.

Harold finished high school at 14, meantime operating a rabbit and pigeon business and a roadside vegetable stand. For a year and a half, while his father was ill, he stayed at home to run the farm. Nevertheless, he managed to graduate from the University of Minnesota at 19. While at the university, he worked part-time as a grocery clerk, an adding-machine operator, a pan greaser in a bakery, and finally as a Pullman conductor on the St. Paul-Chicago run. In his spare time, he became an intercollegiate debater, a champion orator, captain of the school’s national rifle team, an honor student, leader of sundry campus causes and all-university class president. He was so involved in campus affairs that he had to hire a fraternity brother as his secretary. At 21, still working every other day for the Pullman Company and still immersed in campus affairs, he graduated from the university’s School of Law. Without losing a stroke, he opened a law office with Elmer J. Ryan, a fellow graduate, in St. Paul.

There have been various fashions in presidential candidates during the course of U.S. history, beginning of the soldier, succeeded by the social philosopher, who was replaced by the practical politician, who gave way to the soldier again, who was replaced by the idealist, and so on, in an erratic but discernible cycle. It may be a commentary on the present state of civilization that the current fashion is for champions of law and order. Among the Republican candidates this year, nearly all got their starts as watchdogs of the law: Dewey, most famously; but also Warren, as a district attorney; Bricker, as an assistant state attorney general; Saltonstall, an assistant district attorney and even such a token candidate as Green of Illinois, who was a gangbuster in Chicago. It is both a good omen and a tribute to his sense of destiny that Stassen entered public life in the same way. Little more than a year after getting his law degree, he filed for and won the Republican nomination for a county attorney of Dakota County. Almost immediately he collapsed and had to go to a hospital. His strenuous life in college had caught up with him; he had tuberculosis. While he lay ill, his friend and partner Elmer Ryan, though a Democrat, carried on his campaign. And by the time Stassen had recovered, minus one lung, he was the new county attorney.

How to handle labor problems

Opportunities for spectacular crime are fairly limited in Dakota County. Hence, Stassen did not become a national hero overnight. What he lacked in glamor, however, he more than made up in physical and political courage and in his handling of important social antagonisms, as compared to the antagonism of one gangster for another. He showed his character, as well as mere skill and vigor, in such incidents as the threatened milk strike of 1932. Milk prices to the farmer then were so low that in neighboring Iowa, only a few weeks before, dairy farmers had gone on strike, not only refusing to send their own milk to market, but waylaying dairy trucks and dumping their contents on the road. An agitator showed up in Dakota County and at a meeting of local farmers, tried to stir up similar violence. “Block the highways! Spill the milk!” he shouted. “If the county attorney gets in your way, run him out!”

Stassen’s voice came from the back of the room, “The county attorney is here.” He took the platform and told the farmers that if there were any sort of disorder, he would prosecute – but that if they would submit the issues to negotiation, he would act as their counsel without fee. They agreed; Stassen did; the price was raised (without any increase to the consumers) and the peace was kept.

Almost as melodramatically, he prevented bloodshed during a strike of packing-house workers in South St. Paul. Both sides were ready to take to the barricades when he persuaded them to get together and talk their difficulties out. With Stassen in the middle, they did, and within five days, the strike was over. When the company refused to rehire members of the strike committee, Stassen served without pay as their counsel before the NRA Compliance Board, and won their reinstatement. In another case, involving a tax suit, he had a chance to show his legal scholarship. The case wound up in the U.S. Supreme Court, where Stassen, though only 26, had the job of presenting the main argument for the state of Minnesota. He was questioned for an hour on points of law by Chief Justice Hughes, who later wrote the decision. It was unanimously in his favor and set a precedent that was cited 16 times in the next five years in federal court decisions involving related issues.

Stassen served two terms as county attorney. By the end of the second one, he, as well as some millions of Minnesotans, had decided that something had to be done about the fantastic regime of Elmer Benson, the Farmer-Labor governor. Stassen was only 31. Although he had achieved a certain fame in the state because of his record in Dakota County, it was considered quite a good joke among Republican leaders when he filed in the primary for the governorship. He won the nomination and then proceeded to drive 55,000 miles around the state to wage a personal, curbstone campaign. He won the election and surprised his seniors again by doing it with a 225,000 plurality over the combined Farmer-Labor and Democratic candidates. It was the biggest landslide in Minnesota history.

The present fashion in Republican presidential candidates inclines not only toward gangbusters but also toward governors. No other campaign within memory has failed to turn out at least a few Senators, Congressmen, Supreme Court Justices or Cabinet members: Everyone seriously in the race this time is a governor. The reason may be that what the party and country yearn for is a Good Executive – a man who has shown that he can run a state government in a sound, efficient, calm, orderly, orthodox way, and who consequently might run the federal government in the same way. By this criterion, Tom Dewey would be a good candidate. So would Bricker, Saltonstall, Warren, Hickenlooper, Griswold, Baldwin, et al. They each have done a sound, efficient, calm, orderly, orthodox job.

Additional criteria might be suggested, however. One would be: What was the condition of the state government when the sound, efficient, etc., man took over? Another would be: How much of his success does he owe to the war, which has suspended nearly all problems of unemployment, relief, labor relations, public works, patronage, finances? Another would be: What did he do to make these chronic problems easier to handle when they reappear, as they will? By these standards, Stassen’s record in Minnesota is something quite distinct from those of most good Republican (or Democratic) governors.

He reformed the state government

Stassen took office in 1938, two years before the United States began to arm. The preceding regime had been one of the weirdest in American history, marked by every offense from payroll padding to political assassination. The labor war was not a figure of speech; it was a real war, with strong overtones of class revolution. The high point came in April 1937 when a mob took over the state capitol (with Governor Benson’s blessing), broke into a committee room, bulldozed legislators, dispossessed the senators from the chamber and spent the night there, picnicking off the desks and having a riotous good time. Nothing much is lacking but Mme. Defarge and the tumbrils.

The difference between Stassen and his predecessor was shown not many months after his inauguration. Again, an organized mob marched on the capitol to demonstrate against relief methods. Stassen invited its leaders into his office, gave them a polite, attentive hearing, and then escorted them out to the statehouse steps. The crowd booed when he appeared. Stassen looked them over and said: “There’s one nice thing about this country. You can boo your officials without getting pushed up against the wall and shot.” Then he talked about relief, explaining the problems, admitting some faults and promising to do his best to remedy them. When he finished, the mob cheered him and dispersed peacefully.

Stassen not only got along with labor, but so identified himself with its just demands that when he ran for reelection, he won the endorsement of the state CIO. When he first took office, the farm bloc in the legislature pushed a punitive anti-labor bill through the Senate. Stassen persuaded the farmers to drop it in favor of his own temperate program. The chief feature of this is the “Count Ten Law,” requiring a 10-day cooling off period between the time a strike is declared and the time it becomes effective. With Stassen himself and his labor conciliator, who had been the head of a typographical union, as mediators, 10 days usually produced a fair and mutually acceptable solution. When a strike or lockout endangered the public interest, the law also provided that the governor could appoint a special arbitration commission and order a further 30-day wait. During Stassen’s first year, he appointed five such commissions, and each time the threatened strike was prevented.

Fairness and sweet reason were Stassen’s tools in dealing with the labor situation; he applied old-fashioned honesty and efficiency to others. The highway department has a $3 million deficit, incurred in the interest of graft and political pork. Stassen packed 10 members of the old regime off to jail, revamped the department and within a year had converted the deficit into a $3 million surplus. The Farmer-Laborites had loaded the state payroll. Stassen axed 7,000 employees and put through a new civil-service law that covered every department and employee and left him only with the power to appoint the department heads. The Farmer-Laborites had built up an oppressive deficit; Stassen put through a bill that tied expenditures to income. Relief had been an administrative burden of the state; Stassen decentralized it and turned it back to county and local control.

By the time he was ready to leave office, Stassen had fewer statutory powers, by his own request, than any recent Minnesota governor. With his fewer powers, he accomplished more than any other Minnesota governor in history. He had cut the state debt by nearly $40 million, cut yearly expenditures by more than $13 million, reduce the payroll from 17,000 to 10,000, reduce strikes by 70% and lowered property taxes by 46%. At the same time, he increased aid to schools by some $1,600,000, increased old-age benefits by $1,850,000 and improved the functions and increased the budgets of the various social institutions of the state. He set up a $2,500,000 fund for disabled veterans and a $15 million fund for post-war problems.

At the end of his second term, Stassen had a difficult choice to make. His record in Minnesota had made him well known around the country. He had twice been chairman of the National Governors’ Conference. As keynoter at the 1940 Republican Convention, he had impressed his party with his eloquence and manifest ability. As floor manager for Willkie during the convention, he had shown himself to be a shrewd political professional. He was an obvious possibility for the Presidency. If he had stayed on in Minnesota and used his time to proper advantage, his chances for it seemed excellent.

He stepped out of presidential campaign

Stassen ran for a third term, but notified the voters that he was doing so only because his program for the state was not complete. He would resign after the first legislative session, he warned, and then intended to go into the Navy. “This war,” he said, “will be fought by young men of my age, and I want to be with them.” From anyone less obviously sincere than Stassen, this might have sounded precious. But he meant it, and in April 1943, he resigned as governor and was sworn in as a reserve officer. After boot training in the East, he was sent out to the Pacific as a lieutenant commander attached to Adm. Halsey’s staff. When Halsey last week gave over his command of the South Pacific, Stassen continued his duties under Halsey’s successor, VAdm. John H. Newton.

If anyone suspected that Stassen was being politically adroit by putting on a uniform, his subsequent behavior has done nothing to confirm it. He has said nothing, done nothing, nor allowed anyone else to say or do anything for him that would relate his Navy job to politics. Pacific correspondents find him clam-like on the campaign. Not long ago, H. V. Kaltenborn had dinner with Adm. Halsey and the staff at Nouméa, and inevitably, talk turned to the 1944 elections. Finally, after an hour of it, Halsey turned to Stassen, banged his fist on the table and said: “Dammit! Stassen, what’s wrong with you? You haven’t said a word all evening.” Stassen smiled amiably and went on saying nothing.

As flag secretary, Stassen is a sort of general office manager at headquarters, handling routine affairs. He manages to blend into the official landscape and, as one admiral says, be “just another lieutenant commander.” He is well-liked among the staff. He has lived with Halsey and the admiral’s chief of staff and planning officer in a big house near Nouméa, about midway between the beach and the made-over warehouse where Halsey had his offices. Sometimes he accompanied Halsey at sea, sometimes not. He has seen some action, particularly doing a “familiarization cruise” he took with a task force under RAdm. Merrill. A good-sized Japanese force jumped the Merrill ships one night off Empress Augusta Bay. In the battle, the Japanese lost a cruiser and five destroyers and were chased back to within 100 miles of Rabaul, where Japanese planes came in for a dive-bombing attack. The only hits were on Merrill’s flagship where Stassen stayed with the admiral on the open bridge throughout the battle. He made a good target but suffered nothing more than some near misses. Stassen’s evident high safety factor so impressed his colleagues that some of them began to rub him for luck. Superstitious Republicans might note this, and also that, like every other presidential candidate during the century, he has a double letter in his name. E.g.: Franklin Roosevelt, Herbert Hoover, Calvin Coolidge, Warren G Harding, Woodrow Wilson, William Howard Taft, Theodore Roosevelt. On the other hand, of course, there was Wendell Willkie.

While Stassen has been tending to his new business in the Pacific, his friends back in Minnesota and Washington have been conducting a campaign for him that makes up in fervor what it lacks in size and finesse. Having very little money, and no political contact with or aid and advice from their candidate, they are obviously working at a disadvantage. They have certain principles to go by, informally laid down by Stassen before he went into the service; don’t try to smear any other Republican candidate; don’t trade on the Navy uniform; emphasize the post-war plan; enter the primaries in the states bordering Minnesota in order to get a nucleus of pledged delegates. They have followed these rules, but only with middling success. Stassen picked up some delegates in Wisconsin and Nebraska; these, with his Minnesota delegation, will assure him of 35 votes at the convention and his supporters expect to pick up another 25 or so among unpledged delegates. For a campaign lacking the presence of the candidate, this wasn’t bad, but might have been better. Stassen has run best where it doesn’t count – in university “mock conventions” such as Northwestern’s, where he wins more often than any other candidate. Whatever happens in the convention and election of 1944, there is encouragement in this for both Stassen’s and the country’s future.

But Stassen’s supporters are not thinking about the future now. They are sure that their man is the best man and the only man who can beat Roosevelt, and they refuse to admit that he had already been counted out. Nor do they entertain for a minute the idea that he should settle for the Vice Presidency, giving liberal window-dressing to a Dewey ticket. They are well advised in this since, as a matter of fact, Stassen would refuse the Vice Presidency, as he would almost as certainly refuse a Cabinet job in a Dewey administration. They want him to be President, now, this year. And in their hallucinations, they have the picture of him, nominated by some freak of political luck, notified at Nouméa by wireless, flying back in a great gray Navy flying boat to Chicago, cheered by an excited convention, making a dramatic and successful campaign, riding in an open car down Pennsylvania Avenue… But subconsciously they know it can’t be. As one of them said recently in a conversation, “Golly, he would have been a wonderful candidate.”

The Free Lance-Star (June 26, 1944)

top.banner.rep.conv

Dewey ahead at GOP convention

Action of individual states rolls up strong lead

Chicago Stadium, Chicago, Illinois (AP) –
Thomas E. Dewey’s harvest of pledged votes swelled beyond the total needed for a first ballot nomination as the Republicans held their first session of the 23rd national convention in the steaming amphitheater today.

With state after state jumping on a Dewey bandwagon, the New York Governor had a total of 539 pledged votes, when the opening session ended after a one-hour-and-15-minute meeting. In addition, his supporters said 159 others were assured.


By Paul Miller

Chicago Stadium, Chicago, Illinois (AP) –
Governor Thomas E. Dewey took an apparently insurmountable lead for the Republican presidential nomination today as the party’s 1944 convention opened to the main business of the conclave thus all but settled in advance.

Rapid-fire action by individual states raised the New Yorker’s total of pledged and claimed votes to 650 with 529 needed to nominate.

So far had Governor John W. Bricker of Ohio dropped in the pre-convention determination of state votes that speculation of the delegates switched from the Presidency to talk of vice-presidential prospects headed by Governor Earl Warren of California.

Governor Dwight Griswold of Nebraska, it was announced, will place Governor Dewey’s name in nomination Wednesday morning. Previously, Griswold had been mentioned for the Vice Presidency.

His designation to nominate, said unconfirmed reports on the convention floor, was part of a piece of high strategy that was discussed as shaping up like this:

Griswold (a Midwesterner) nominating Dewey (an Easterner) for President – with Warren (a far Westerner) as the possible vice-presidential choice.

The forces of Governor John W. Bricker continued their fight nonetheless. The Bricker supporters said: “It won’t be decided until the roll call actually starts on the floor Wednesday.”

Governor Dwight H. Green of Illinois had the job of officially welcoming delegates to the Windy City in a speech that accused the Roosevelt administration of “political meddling” with the Armed Forces in running the war.

Green declared that Republicans would give the professional fighting men a free hand.

A new flurry of speculation over the possibility of some Republican action towards Senator Harry F. Byrd (D-VA) was started by Senator Owen Brewster (R-ME), who declared in a radio interview that a “responsible leader” of the Republican Party had approached Byrd with the suggestion that he make himself available for the GOP vice-presidential nomination.

The subject was raised in Washington by a group of Republican Congressmen last week, but Byrd said he was not interested.

top.banner.rep.conv

GOP criticizes conduct of war

New Deal is accused of political meddling

Chicago, Illinois (AP) –
Governor Dwight H. Green of Illinois today accused the Roosevelt administration of “political meddling” with Army and Navy heads in the conduct of the war and pledged that the Republicans, if victorious in November, will give the professional fighting men a free hand.

Welcoming the delegates to the Republican National Convention, Governor Green denounced “New Dealers” as seeking to remain in power on a “Win the War” slogan and asserted:

The winning of the war is uppermost in the mind of every American… There is no “Win the War” Party in America and public opinion has so properly rebuked the attempts of the New Dealers to grab that slogan that they have almost completely abandoned it.

He said a Republican triumph this year would “strike dread into the hearts of the enemy.”

Green said:

They will know that the government of this nation has passed into the hands of men determined to cut all the red tape and bureaucratic inference with the trained leaders of the United States Army and Navy. Those officers will have in the conduct of the war the unstinted support of the Republican administration, free from political meddling of second-string bureaucrats.

He praised the delegates as “unswayed by the weird pretense that an ‘indispensable man’ exists,” and said they were dedicated to work not only for “the heralded objectives of the ‘Four Freedoms,’ but resolved to reestablish here in America the 33 freedoms guaranteed to all citizens under the Constitution.”

top.banner.rep.conv

State delegation likely to split

Virginia Republicans will divide vote in Chicago

Chicago, Illinois (AP) –
Virginia’s position near the bottom of the roll call may have an important psychological bearing on the Old Dominion’s first ballot vote Wednesday at the Republican National Convention.

Some members, Dewey partisans by inclination, said today “as of now” the Virginia’s vote probably will divide about 50-50 between Dewey and Bricker. Bricker advocates claimed substantial Virginia strength.

Officially, Virginia has two votes pledged to Dewey, two to Bricker, 15 remaining unpledged.

Virginia will have “plenty of time to watch the trend,” some members said, and if it appears to be Dewey on the first ballot, the New York Governor will draw at least a substantial vote.

If, however, many small delegations choose to “pass” vote to watch the tide, leaving the issue far from settled, Virginia may itself choose to pass.

The Old Dominion’s delegation had nearly all arrived, but no call had been issued for a formal caucus.

National Committeeman Henry A. Wise said a meeting probably would be called late Monday. Members of an anti-Wise faction, headed by new state chairman Randolph Dovel, also arrived in Chicago today.

Still smarting under the Convention Committee’s rejections of their claim to the state’s four delegates-at-large, the anti-Wise group promised to renew its claim possibly Monday before the convention’s Credentials Committee.

top.banner.rep.conv

Keynote Address of California Governor Warren
June 26, 1944, 9:00 p.m. ET

We are here to do a job for the American people. And we mean business.

What is our job? Ask any American. Ask the anxious American mother and father. Ask the anxious wives and sweethearts of our fighting men. Ask our fighting men themselves. They will tell you what our job is.

They will give you the keynote for this convention. They will tell you out of their hearts, and what they say will be the same – East and West, North and South, it will be the same.

For now the same anxieties are on every American heart – the same hour-to-hour concern for what the day may bring forth, the same steadfast courage to sustain them, the same dreams, the same hope that they will have a chance to make their dreams come true.

This is what is on their hearts. This is our job:

To get our boys back home again – victorious and with all speed.

To open the door for all Americans – to open it, not just to jobs, but to opportunity!

To make and guard the peace so wisely and so well that this time will be the last time that American homes are called to give their sons and daughters to the agony and tragedy of war.

Isn’t that a plain and homely story? But is there any other story which any American would put in place of it? Is there any other thing which, in his heart, any American wants more than these? Is there any American who would not give everything he has to bring these things to pass?

We know there is only one answer to these questions. We know, also, that that answer makes our job. To get that job done is why we are here.

This convention and this election are not time out from the job of winning the war and the peace. This convention and this election are part of that job.

We are here to speed the cause – to help America to speed the cause – for which our fighting men are giving their lives. We are here to make the road on which America can march toward victory, toward opportunity, toward peace.

That is the biggest job Americans have ever undertaken together. It is too big a job for little Americans – it is too big a job for a quarreling America. There is room for honest differences among us. There is no room for disunity. We can be of differing minds. But we must be of one heart.

That singleness of heart is not something we can wait for. Our boys in Normandy, in Italy, in India and China, in the far reaches of the South Pacific – they are not waiting for it. They are of one heart. What a highly courageous, steadfast heart it is!

What they ask of us – what they have the right to expect of us – is singleness of heart here at home. Freedom is in the balances. We dare not be found wanting.

For so great a venture together we must be together. Here and now we can begin to get together. That is our purpose.

It is the purpose of this convention to put the public welfare above private self-interest; to put the nation above the party; to put the progress of the whole American community above special privilege for any part of it; to put indispensable principles – once and for all – above indispensable men.

The choice of me as a keynote speaker was not made because of any personal attribute of mine. There were others far abler who could have been chosen.

The only good reason I was chosen was because I come from the great, hopeful, energetic West. Ours is the youngest part of America. My own state of California was a child of four years when the Republican Party was born.

Growth and change and adventure are still a part of our daily life.

In the West, there is little fear of failure and no fear of trying. That spirit of youth is the spirit of this convention.

Certainly, we are not here to look for a road back to some status quo. There is no status to which we could or should return. The future cannot be overtaken in reverse.

Neither are we here to work out some easy-sounding scheme whereby America can stand still. We believe that America wants to get going and keep going. A forward-going America is what we are here for.

In that spirit we can be confident of the future. It will not be easy. We have nothing easy to offer. Dark days lie ahead. We have no tricks to escape them. We expect tough going and we are ready for it. There is no pessimism, no defeatism, no bitterness, no jauntiness among us. Too much that we love and cherish is at stake.

And of one thing we are sure: America can come through these trying, desperate times a finer, happier, better-spirited America. It is our purpose to see to it that America does come through that way.

That is what the American people expect the Republican Party to accomplish. They are already turning to us for its accomplishment. That is why, in so many streams of late, they have been changing so many horses. That is why – in city halls, courthouses and state capitols, where government is closest to the people – the people have returned to Republican government. That is why, in election after election, they are restoring Republican leadership to Congress.

The people did this, not just because they wanted a change. They did it because they wanted a chance. As times became more critical, as their problems became more complex as strange policies and questionable practices added to their difficulties and increased their confusions, they instinctively returned to the Republican Party.

In Congress, from 16 Republicans in the Senate in 1937, the people have now elected 37; from 88 Republicans in the House of Representatives, the people have now elected 212. From eight Republican governors in 1938, the people have now elected 26. Three out of every four Americans now live under Republican state administrations. In Washington, where the bureaucrats live, there is still a Democrat in the White House. But out where the people live the country is predominantly Republican.

In those 26 Republican states, the people have already elected the kind of government which the job ahead of us requires.

They are determined this year to have more of that kind of government. They are determined to have more of it in the states. They are determined to have more of it in Congress. They are determined to have more of it – a great deal more of it – in the White House.

In those states where the people have returned to the Republican Party, government is not only for the people but of and by the people. That means not some of the people, but all of the people. Their kind of representative government reaches from ocean to ocean and from border to border. It extends to both sides of the tracks. It includes every citizen. That is why the platform of this convention will be one on which all of us can stand together – not divided by race or creed, not as minorities or majorities but as fellow Americans.

No party that stands for less than that can unite America. A better world for others must begin with us. That is where in 26 of our states it has already begun.

In those states which are already Republican you will find the record of public administration is progressive, enlightened and in the public interest. In those states you will find increased emphasis upon the public health, upon free education, upon care for orphaned and neglected children, upon support for the aged, for the victims of industrial accidents, for those handicapped by physical disabilities and for the victims of economic misfortune.

Those are the states of this Union where labor has achieved its highest dignity; where labor and management have come to their best understanding; where they have learned to work together most effectively; where, together, they are doing the best job.

What is the result of that kind of government? I can tell you. I can tell you in terms that every American with a son fighting overseas will understand. To win the war in the air, those Republican states have been called on to produce more than 81 percent of all our airplanes. To win the war at sea, those states have been called on to produce more than 76 percent of all our ships. To win the war on land, those states have been called on to produce more than 87 percent of all our ordnance – and more than 83 percent of all our other fighting equipment.

The American people were introduced, not long ago, to Dr. Win-the-War. From the record of these states, it is clear that Dr. Win-the-War is a Republican.

But this war cannot be fought and won as Republicans or Democrats. This is an all-American war. There is a place for every American in it. There is no place of honor for any American who is not in it.

In or out of office, Republicans and Democrats share the responsibility of winning the war. We want to share it in the same spirit in which the sons of all of us fight from the same foxholes, through the same jungles, across the same beaches, in the same ships at sea and in the air.

The generals who command our armies, the admirals who command our fleets are no more Republican or Democratic than the armies and the fleets which they command. They are not a product of politics. They are products of our non-political military establishment. Their concern is not with the party in power – whether it is Republican or Democratic, Their concern is how to get the men and the materials out where the war will be won. They know how to run the war and we will see to it that they have the opportunity to run it without political interference.

Our purpose is to see that the country is responsive to their military leadership; to stand back of them through good days and bad; to see to it that they get the materials needed for victory.

How well that victory can be won; how magnificently it can be won when government unites all the people to win it, is plainly written in the record of those 26 states whose government is now Republican. That is what needs to be done for the nation as a whole. To that we dedicate ourselves as our first objective; to keep the war out of politics and politics out of the war; to strengthen, among us, that spirit of single-mindedness, of unity, of self-forgetfulness that will hearten our military leaders, strengthen their hands and speed the day when, having bivouacked along the main streets of Germany and Japan, they will lead our boys victoriously home again.

But when the war is won, what then? We will have 11,000,000 men and women out of uniform. We will have millions of war workers whose war work has stopped. We will have tens of thousands of businessmen whose war contracts have been canceled.

What will those millions of Americans want? They will want what is the right of every American to have. They will want jobs. By jobs, they do not mean made jobs – with the government as employer. That is not what we mean, either. They mean moneymaking jobs in private industry. Those are the kind of jobs we mean.

But these young people will not be satisfied with just jobs. We will not be satisfied, either. These young people will want good jobs and a chance to get ahead. Hundreds of thousands of them will want to set up in small businesses for themselves; to be their own boss; to have their own farm; to own their own filling station; to run their own store, or operate their own little factory.

We will see to it that they get that chance. We can see to it because we know what it is that makes jobs and opportunity. We know that the government does not make them – not the kind of jobs the people want and which we aim to help the people to get. Government-made jobs can be a crisis necessity. But such jobs are not good enough for the long pull. For the long pull, the American people want a highway, not a dead-end street.

The belief that we have come to the end of the road, that a dead-end street is all that we have ahead of us – that will not produce jobs and opportunity, either. That belief is defeatism. The fruit of defeatism is an economy of scarcity. We know what scarcity produces. It produces scarcity: of jobs, of opportunity, of the good things of life.

We know what it is that makes jobs and opportunity. We know that private production makes them. We know that our productive system going full blast can make enough of them. It is the Republican Party that has kept that knowledge alive in America. We have kept it alive against great odds. And now the country knows how important it is that the Republicans kept that knowledge alive. For that confidence in our productive system and the know-how to get that system into full-blast production made the difference, when war came, between life and death. The same knowledge and the same knowhow will make the difference when the war is won.

But we Republicans also know that full-blast production – and the jobs and opportunity which it makes – can only come in a climate that is friendly to production. A climate that is friendly to production requires a government that is friendly to production.

It requires a government which believes that our economic soil, far from being worn out, is still life-giving; a government which believes that those who work honorably and well to make that soil produce, far from being a threat to our wellbeing, are the hope of it; a government which, far from penalizing production, encourages it; a government which believes in an economy of plenty because its aim for all the people is abundance.

In such a climate, labor and management will not be set off – one against the other. They will realize – government can help them to realize – that they do not represent two different systems; that they are, rather, part of the same system. They will understand that they are partners in that system. If, for any reason, one partner fails, both will be destroyed. They will, understand, also, that such a partnership system exists for more than profit; that it’s even more important reason for existence is the increasing security and wellbeing of all the people.

With such an understanding of their relationship to each other and their responsibility to the community, labor and management can reconcile their day-to-day differences in order, together, to make full production possible. It is a Republican responsibility to foster that climate and speed that understanding. That we will do.

In such a climate, also, the farm will no longer be set off against the city; the city against the farm. Farmer and city dweller will come to see that they do not represent two rival economic communities; that, in fact, they are partners in the same community. They will understand that bad times for one mean bad times for the other; that good times for one must include good times for the other. It is a Republican responsibility to speed that understanding and foster a climate in which prosperity is possible for both. That also we will do.

We know that this can be done. We know that the people expect us to do it. They have turned to us because – under the threat of war – they wanted to get along. When the war is won, they want to keep going – toward full, peacetime production that will insure, not jobs alone, but opportunity and a fair and increasing share of life’s good things. To that we dedicate ourselves as our second objective.

But to insure such a future, this war must end in something better than an armistice. This war must end in peace. For our homes, our sons and our daughters, this time must be the last time.

In their hearts the American people know what kind of peace they want. They may differ upon details, but they are agreed upon the things that are really important. What is needed is effective leadership, honestly and vigorously to carry into realization the aspirations upon which our people are united.

We want a peace that will be lasting. That means a peace that will be just. That means not only justice for the few and powerful, but justice also for the many and less powerful.

We want a peace that is based upon realities and not upon the insecure foundation of mere words or promises. That means a peace which, being mindful of the interest of other nations, does not neglect or sacrifice the interests of our own nation.

None of these aspirations can be realized under a leadership that plays power politics on a worldwide stage. They cannot be achieved under a leadership which neglects the interests of America. No such leadership can hope to keep the world’s respect or to unite America in helping to solve the world’s problems. Nor can they ever be achieved by a leadership which holds itself superior to the wisdom of the people.

As Republicans, we are united in uncompromising opposition to aggression. We are prepared to take a definite stand against aggression, not merely to denounce it but to resist it and restrain it. That calls for effective cooperation with all the peace-loving nations of the world; for the establishment of a tribunal for the settlement of international disputes which otherwise might lead to war. We are agreed, too, that, if such a program is to be effective, the friendly cooperation of the war’s principal Allied combatants – the United States, Great Britain, Russia and China – is as essential as the keystone of an arch. But beyond that is the task of establishing order, maintaining peace and extending prosperity. We stand ready to welcome every nation that is prepared in honesty and goodwill to join with us in the accomplishment of that purpose. And we know that if we are to maintain respect among the nations of the world, if we are to be able to keep our own commitments and to compel recalcitrants to keep theirs, we must keep America ever strong and self-reliant.

The Republican Party has not waited to declare these principles. At the Mackinac Conference, we blazed the way for them. The future of America and the happiness of our children depend on their establishment.

Whatever the exact procedures, on these principles the American people, in their hearts, agree. I do not believe that any sound American political party should say more. I am sure that in good conscience, no such political party can say less.

This is the job we are here to do. These are the things about which we mean business: To get the boys victoriously back home; to open the door to jobs and opportunity; to make a peace that this time will be lasting. This is too great an undertaking for petty politics, for name-calling or for hate-making. There is no place among us for malcontents. We are in no mood for torchlight jubilation. Whether we win as a party is of less importance to us than whether we win as a people.

There has been progress in every decade of American history. Progress is an American habit. We do not propose to deny the progress that has been made during the last decade. Neither do we aim to repeal it. Whatever its source, if it is good, we will acknowledge it. If it is sound, we will build on it. If it is forward looking, we will make use of it as we go forward from here.

Neither do we aim to turn the clock back and make an issue of every administration mistake in the last eleven years. We are less concerned about these past errors than about the direction in which for the future we are going.

We believe the New Deal is leading us away from representative government. We believe that its centralization of power in the numerous bureaus at Washington will eventually destroy freedom as Americans have always understood it – freedom in the home, freedom of individual opportunity in business and employment, freedom to govern ourselves locally.

We believed the New Deal is destroying the two-party system. The New Deal is no longer the Democratic Party. It is an incongruous clique within that party. It retains its power by patronizing and holding together incompatible groups. It talks of idealism and seeks its votes from the moat corrupt political machines in the country. The leaders of its inner circle are not representatives of the people. They are the personal agents of one man. Their appointments to public office are not made on the basis of efficiency or public approval, but on the basis of loyalty to the clique. Under this rule, the Constitution has been short circuited. The Cabinet has ceased to be a voice and has become an echo. Congress, wherever possible, has been circumvented by executive decree. Both Congress and the judiciary have been intimidated and bludgeoned to make them servile.

Over all of this – and over all of us – is the ominous, gargantuan figure of an arrogant, power-intoxicated bureaucracy. Nowhere in its vast domain has it been satisfied with merely one bureaucrat, if by hook or crook desks could be found for two. These bureaucrats of the New Deal tell the farmer what to sow and when to reap – sometimes without regard for either the seeds or the season. They require him to work in the fields all day and keep books for the government all night. These same bureaucrats tell the worker what union he shall join, what dues he shall pay, and to whom he must pay them. They soon will tell the worker where he can work and where he cannot work. Then the workers of America will be a long way down the road toward the kind of government which our nation is now resisting with all its power.

These bureaucrats encumber the small businessman with a multiplicity of rules, regulations, orders and decrees which entangle him, stifle his business and darken his future. They move in – like political commissars – to watch over the shoulders of our industrialists – to say what, where and how industry can produce.

They have threatened our free press. They have intimidated our free radio. They are using every device and excuse to insinuate themselves into control over the public schools of our states. They have injected a low grade of politics into the administration of relief and social welfare.

They have bypassed the governments of the states in an effort to destroy state effectiveness and compel the people to rely solely upon the New Deal clique at Washington for the solution of all their problems.

For years they have deprived entire regions of representation in the policy-making agencies of the federal government.

To perpetuate themselves in power the New Deal clique has always capitalized upon some crisis. It has always had the indispensable man – the same man – for each succeeding crisis. The first time it was the depression. The second time it was the recession. Last time it was to keep us out of war. This time it will be to achieve peace. The next time – who knows what crisis it will be? That there will be one and that the indispensable man will still be indispensable, we can rely upon the New Deal clique to assert. The New Deal came to power with a song on its lips: “Happy days are here again.” That song is ended. Even the melody does not linger on. Now we are being conditioned for a new song: “Don’t change horses in the middle of a stream.” That melody isn’t likely to linger either. For eleven long years we have been in the middle of the stream. We are not amphibious. We want to get across. We want to feel dry and solid ground under our feet again.

The life of a nation is a succession of crises. War and peace and economic and social adjustments have always followed each other in endless succession. No party, clique or individual can rightfully claim priority in government because a crisis occurs during its administration.

The Republican Party was born in a great crisis. The American people turned to it because they wanted to get safely, speedily through that crisis and get on their way again. Then, as now, the Republican Party was called by the people to displace a regime of men, who had grown tired, complacent and cynical in the business of government. Then, as now, the Republican Party was called upon to replace a party that was torn with dissension and in revolt against itself. Then, as now, the Republican Party was called by the people to furnish youth and vigor and vision.

Now, as then, the Republican Party will respond to that call. It will represent the nation, the whole nation and nothing but the nation. It will devote itself fervently to the problems of the people and in everything it does the Constitution of the United States of America will be its guiding star. It will function through established law and not through the caprice of bureaucratic regulation. There shall be one law for all men.

Its greatest concern will always be for those who have the greatest need. It will conduct government openly where the people can see, discuss and decide. It will operate less from the government down and more from the people up. It will make wise and careful use of the people’s money. It will keep the public’s books in such a way as to allow the people to see how their money is used. It will see that taxes are just, visible and designed to stimulate rather than punish. It will strengthen our great public school system, keep it under the control of state and local government, where it is responsive to the people, and prepare it to play a stronger part in the life of the Republic. It will promote peace in industry by stimulating goodwill between labor and management. It will free the agencies of public information from the domination of government. It will make fully effective the immeasurable strength of the nation by promoting goodwill and unity at home. It will not be cocksure in good times or depressed and cynical in bad times. It will direct our combined material and spiritual resources against the enemies of our country. It will make any sacrifice to achieve victory even one day sooner so our boys can come home. It will see to it that they are cared for when they do come home. It and we will honor them the rest of our lives.

But we will start building right now that finer America which during their night vigils they dream of as they look at the stars from their foxholes on land and from their gun turrets at sea and in the air; the America that to them spells happy homes and freedom of opportunity for all; the America that represents unity at home and peace with the countries of the world.

It takes faith to build such an America – a strong faith, the same faith that now sustains our fighting men; a faith that is truly “the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.”

With such a faith – which is our faith – we shall march under God toward victory, toward opportunity, toward peace.

top.banner.rep.conv

Tuesday, June 27
Convention called to order at 10:15 a.m. CT by temporary chairman Governor Warren of California
National anthem: Miss Mildred Maule of East St. Louis, Illinois
Prayer: The Rev, Joseph Simonson, pastor of Christ Lutheran Church, St. Paul
Report of Committee on Credentials
Report of Committee on Permanent Organization
Election of permanent chairman and permanent officers
Address by permanent chairman
Report of Committee on Rules and Order of Business
Election of National Committee
Report of Resolutions Committee
Recess until 8:15 p.m.
Convention called to order at 8:15 p.m. by permanent chairman Rep. Joseph W. Martin Jr. (R-MA)
National anthem: Miss Mona Bradford of the Chicago Civic Opera Company
Prayer: Rabbi Abba Hillel Silver of The Temple, Cleveland
Music
Address by Herbert Hoover
Address by Rep. Clare Boothe Luce (R-CT)
Adjourn until 10:15 a.m. Wednesday

Völkischer Beobachter (June 27, 1944)

Dewey kandidiert für die Republikaner –
Vor der Präsidentenwahl in USA

Stockholm, 26. Juni –
Wie Reuters aus Chicago meldet, wurde die Ernennung des Neuyorker Gouverneurs Thomas Dewey zum republikanischen Präsidentschaftskandidaten nunmehr zur Sicherheit. Vertretungen der größten Staaten im republikanischen Konvent haben am Sonntag nach Ablauf von Wahlversammlungen, die den ganzen Tag überdauerten, die Entschließung gefasst, Dewey zu unterstützen.

Die unabhängige republikanische Zeitung New York Herald Tribune erklärt, was die Organisation und Verwaltung anbelange, so würde sich Dewey als einer der fähigsten Präsidenten erweisen. Die Zeitung meint abschließend, es gebe allerdings auch noch andere fähige Republikaner. Wenn man aber an Washington denke und an die erforderliche Säuberungsaktion im Weißen Haus, sowie an das Durcheinander in außenpolitischen Angelegenheiten, so denke man an Dewey, für den die Amerikaner auch Sympathie empfänden.

Protest gegen britische Einmischung

Lissabon, 26. Juni –
Die britische Regierung versucht unter den in England befindlichen US-Soldaten Stimmung für eine Wiederwahl Roosevelts zu machen. So wurden kürzlich amerikanischen Truppen, die in England eintrafen, Willkommensflugblätter übergeben, die vom britischen Informationsministerium herausgegeben worden waren, und in denen behauptet wurde, daß die Gegner Roosevelts 70 Millionen Dollar eingesetzt hätten, um seine Wiederwahl für die Präsidentenschaft zu verhindern.

Diese Einmischung der britischen Regierung in die amerikanische Innenpolitik hat in den USA stürmische Empörung hervorgerufen. Die Neuyorker Zeitung Journal American erklärt: Die Briten sollten endlich einmal den Verstand aufbringen, zu begreifen, daß sich die amerikanische Bevölkerung eine Einmischung in ihre Politik nicht gefallen lasse.

Auch Senator Bridges, der Vertreter des Staates New Hampshire, der als englandfreundlich bekannt ist, verurteilt in schärfster Form den britischen Eingriff in die amerikanische Wahlpolitik. Senator Bird, der Vertreter Virginias, wies die Londoner Regierung darauf hin, daß ähnliche Anmaßungen britischer Behörden und weitere Versuche, die Meinung Amerikas zu beeinflussen, zu „unberechenbaren“ Störungen der Beziehungen zwischen den beiden Ländern führen müssen.

The New York Times (June 27, 1944)

top.banner.rep.conv

REPUBLICANS MAKE QUICK END TO WAR THEIR BATTLE CRY
Keynoter Warren says party will bring victorious boys home with all speed

Disputes over platform; Dewey avalanche piles up, with Californian unchallenged as his running mate
By Turner Catledge

Chicago, Illinois –
A triple pledge to bring the boys back home quickly and “victorious,” to reopen the doors of opportunity to “all Americans,” and to guard the peace in the future, was sounded yesterday as the Republican battle cry at the opening of the party’s 23rd national convention.

While it was being uttered by Governor Earl Warren of California, temporary chairman, in his keynote address to a cheering throng in the Chicago Stadium, The New York Times gained access to a plank which policy writers had evolved Saturday, pledging the party to a post-war cooperative organization “among sovereign nations,” to prevent military aggression and attain permanent peace in the future.

Meanwhile, word had come from Wendell L. Willkie, the nominee of 1940, that he considered the foreign policy plank, as he understood it, ambiguous, and therefore was disappointed in it.

Willkie’s backer upset

This note of controversy came as a distinct shock to a group of former backers of Mr. Willkie who have been attempting these last few days to bring him in line with the platform, and with a ticker of Thomas E. Dewey of New York for President and Governor Warren for Vice President, which is considered certain of nomination by tomorrow night.

Meanwhile, another complication appeared in the hitherto placid convention picture when the 17 governors who are delegates demanded opportunity to examine and possibly suggest changes in the platform before it is submitted to the convention, probably tonight, for ratification.

The governors did not protest any particular item in the platform as it was agreed to in principle last night. They did protest the fact, however, that one of them put it, an “oligarchy” of Senators, members of the House and other party leaders, had assumed the prerogative of speaking for the party.

The governors feel, as Governor Warren reflected in his keynote address, that they have been the spearhead, more than members of Congress, for the resurgence of Republicanism during the last three years. What happened here when the governors demanded and obtained permission to appear before the Resolutions Committee was another chapter in a protest which first came to light at the Mackinac Island conference in September.

Led by New Englanders

The action was led, as was the move at Mackinac, largely by a New England group, in which Connecticut Governor Raymond E. Baldwin and Maine Governor Sumner Sewall were active.

These new possibilities of trouble ahead did not divert the main line of appeal upon which the party was centering – an appeal to the soldier vote, to those Americans who are weary of the New Deal, and, above all, to those wanting to avoid the tragedy of war in the future.

It was the note on which Governor Dwight Green of Illinois opened the meeting with a welcoming address yesterday morning. It was also the basic tone which members of the Resolutions Committee were attempting to write into the platform. Their troubles were inherent in the task of trying to retain the tone, while using phraseology to appeal to the greatest number, and offend the fewest voters.

The prospect of a Dewey-Warren ticket reached the virtually-certain stage during the day. These are the men who the assembled Republicans are determined will carry to the country a demand for a change of administration, even in the midst of war.

Says New Deal song changes

Governor Warren told his eager audience:

The New Deal came to power with a song on its lips: “Happy Days Are Here Again.” That song is ended. Even the melody does not linger on. Now we are being conditioned for a new song: “Don’t Change Horses in the Middle of a Stream.”

For eleven long years we have been in the middle of the stream. We are not amphibious. We want to get across. We want to feel dry and solid ground under our feet again.

Governor Warren’s address gave a decided stimulus to a convention which opened to the rather listless first session and was not otherwise lifted up during the day because of the cut-and-dried nature of the proceedings.

Standing before the vast stadium audience and the merciless glare of klieg lights and speaking into microphones which transmitted his words throughout the country, Governor Warren first of all summoned his own party to its task. He pledged it to success by the substitution of “indispensable principles” or “indispensable men.” And while he delivered one epigrammatic thrust after another at the New Deal, he admonished the members of the party that their task lay in the future.

Says party looks to future

Governor Warren said:

We do not propose to deny the progress that has been made during the last decade. Neither do we aim to repeal it. Neither do we aim to turn the clock back and make an issue of every administration mistake in the past eleven years. We are less concerned about these past errors than about the direction in which, for the future, we are going.

The Republicans simply believe, he said, that the New Deal is leading the country “away from representative government.” They believe, he continued, that it is destroying the two-party system, that the New Deal is no longer the Democratic Party.

Mr. Warren said:

It [the New Deal] Is an incongruous critique within that party.It talks of idealism and seeks its votes from the most corrupt political machines in this country.

The leaders of its inner circle are not representatives of the people. They are the personal agents of one man. Their appointments to office are on the basis of loyalty to the clique. Under their rule, the Constitution has been short-circuited. Both Congress and the judiciary have been intimidated and bludgeoned to make them servile.

His outline of party’s job

Mr. Warren emphasized through his speech that the Republican Party had the responsibility not primarily to criticize, but to recognize and get to work on its own job, set forth thus:

To get our boys back home again – victorious and with all speed.

To open the door for all Americans – to open it, not just to jobs, but to opportunity!

To make and guard the peace so wisely and so well that this time will be the last time that American homes are called to give their sons and daughters to the agony and tragedy of war.

Thus, in guarding the peace, Governor Warren said, the Republicans were prepared to take a definite stand against aggression, “not merely to denounce it, but to resist and restrain it.” That, he said, calls for “effective cooperation with all the peace-loving nations of the world, for the establishment of a tribunal for the settlement of international disputes which otherwise might lead to war.”

The Republicans agreed, he added, that if international cooperation were to be effective, “the friendly cooperation of the war’s principal allied combatants – the United States, Great Britain, Russia and China – is as essential as the keystone of an arch.” But the party stood ready, he said, to welcome every nation that is prepared “in honesty and goodwill” to join in the accomplishment of the purposes of peace and world rehabilitation.

Republicans should also insist, he added, that America must be kept strong if this country is to keep its own commitments.

The job the party had to do, he went on, was too great for “petty politics,” name-calling or hate-making.

He said:

There is no place among us for malcontents. We are in no mood for torchlight jubilation. Whether we win as a party is of less importance to us than whether we win as a people.

The Governor excited his audience, sitting in intense heat, with his attacks on the New Deal and the “indispensable man,” by whom he obviously meant President Roosevelt.

Enthusiasm also greeted his assertions of the party’s aspirations for the soldiers and sailors when they come home. The reception otherwise was comparatively mild, except now and then when some particular epigram caught the fancy of the crowd. There were numerous vacant seats in the galleries, but it was a huge crowd nevertheless. The Californian delivered his speech rapidly, and so passed up applause he otherwise might have received.

Rep. Joseph W. Martin, House Minority Leader, will be chosen permanent chairman today to guide the convention through the business of nominating candidates. Mr. Martin will address the meeting upon his election.

Former President Herbert Hoover is to speak to the convention tonight, as is Rep. Clare Boothe Luce (R-CT).

Dewey leaders proceeded with detailed plans for the nomination and notification of the Governor as additional state caucuses added to the avalanche of delegate support for him.

Governor Dwight Griswold of Nebraska was chosen as the man to put the New York Governor’s name formally before the convention, probably tomorrow. Under a plan worked out yesterday, Alabama, the first on the list, will yield to Nebraska when the roll call of states is ordered.

top.banner.rep.conv

ACCORD OF NATIONS FAVORED IN PLANK ON FOREIGN POLICY
‘Participation in cooperative organization’ provided ‘to attain permanent peace’

Taft predicts adoption; declaration calls for seeking ‘economic stability,’ pledges constitutional procedure
By James B. Reston

Foreign policy plank

Chicago, Illinois –
The text of the draft of the Republican plank on foreign policy as approved by the Foreign Affairs Committee follows:

The Republican Party pledges:

  • Prosecution of the war to total victory against all our enemies in full cooperation with the United Nations, and the speedy return of our Armed Forces.

  • Support of our Armies and the maintenance of our Navy under the competent and trained direction of our General Staff and Office of Naval Operations without civilian interference, with every civilian resource.

  • Organization of the home front to the maximum of our civilian resources.

We declare our relentless aim to win the war against all our enemies: (1) for our own American security and welfare; (2) to make and keep the Axis powers impotent to renew tyranny and attack; (3) for the attainment of peace and freedom based on justice and security.

We shall seek to achieve such aims through organized international cooperation and not by joining a world state.

We favor responsible participation by the United States in post-war cooperative organization among sovereign nations to prevent military aggression and to attain permanent peace with organized justice in a free world.

Such organization should develop effective cooperative means to direct peace forces to prevent or repel military aggression. Pending this, we pledge continuing collaboration with the United Nations to assure these ultimate objectives.

We believe, however, that peace and security do not depend upon the sanction of force alone, but should prevail by virtue of reciprocal interests and spiritual values recognized in these security agreements. The treaties of peace should be just; the nations which are the victims of Axis aggression should be restored to sovereignty and self-government; and the organized cooperation of the nations should concern itself with basic causes of world disorder. It should promote a world opinion to influence the nations to right conduct, develop international law and maintain an international tribunal to deal with justiciable disputes.

We shall seek, in our relations with other nations, conditions calculated to promote worldwide economic stability, not only for the sake of the world, but also to the end that our own people may enjoy a high level of employment in an increasingly prosperous world.

We shall keep the American people informed concerning all agreements with foreign nations. In all of these undertakings we favor the widest consultation of the gallant men and women in our Armed Forces who have a special right to speak with authority on behalf of the security and liberty for which they fight. We shall sustain the Constitution of the United States in the attainment of our international aims; and pursuant to the Constitution of the United States any treaty or agreement to attain such aims made on behalf of the United States with any other nation or any association of nations, shall be made only by and with the advice and consent of the Senate of the United States, provided two-thirds of the Senators present concur.

We shall at all times protect the essential interests and resources of the United States.

Chicago, Illinois –
The Republican Party platform will favor “participation by the United States in post-war cooperative organization among sovereign nations to prevent military aggression and to attain permanent peace.”

The party’s Foreign Affairs Committee, headed by Senator Warren Austin (R-VT), has unanimously approved a plank which calls on the future world peace organization to “develop effective cooperative means to direct peace forces to prevent or repel military aggression.”

Pending the formation of this world peace organization, the plank recommends that the United States should “pledge continuing collaboration with the United Nations.”

Senator Robert A. Taft, chairman of the party’s Resolutions Committee, to which the platform will be submitted later this morning, said he was certain that the foreign affairs plank as recommended by Senator Austin’s committee would be adopted.

Objectives of peace treaties

After stating that the party favored “prosecution of the war to total victory against all our enemies in full cooperation with the United Nations and the speedy return of our Armed Forces,” the plank emphasized that justice in the writing of the peace was the essence of realism.

The Foreign Affairs Committee said:

We believe that peace and security do not depend upon the sanction of force alone, but should prevail by virtue of reciprocal interests and spiritual values recognized in these security agreements.

The treaties of peace should be just; the nations which are the victims of Axis aggression should be restored to sovereignty and self-government, and the organized cooperation of the nations should concern itself with basic causes of world disorder.

Elaborating on “cooperation,” the committee continued:

We shall seek, in our relations with other nations, conditions calculated to promote worldwide economic stability, not only for the sake of the world, but also the end that our own people may enjoy a high level of employment in an increasingly prosperous world. We shall develop Pan-American solidarity.

Open negotiations promised

The Wilsonian doctrine of “open covenants openly arrived at” was also supported in the plank which, pledging the party to keep the American people informed concerning all agreements with other nations, said.

In all these consultations, we favor the widest consultation of the gallant men and women in our Armed Forces, who have a special right to speak with authority on behalf of the security and liberty for which they fight.

Taking cognizance of reports that attempts might be made to submit peace agreements to Congress in the form of a joint resolution instead of to the Senate for ratification requiring a two-thirds vote, the committee put into the plank this declaration:

We shall sustain the Constitution of the United States in the attainment of our international aims and, pursuant to the Constitution, any treaty made on behalf of the United States with any other nation or association of nations, shall be made only by and with the advice and consent of the Senate of the United States, provided two-thirds of the Senators present concur.

Roosevelt plan compared

At first glance, there seems to be little difference between the organization which the Republican platform suggests and the world security body outlined by President Roosevelt and Secretary Hull.

The plank makes it clear that the Republicans, like the Democrats, do not favor the creation of any superstate, but are willing to see the United States cooperate in an association of sovereign nations.

No attempt is made to define the word “sovereignty” and the general impression here is that the party is not prepared to define, ahead of time, the specific conditions under which it would favor war or state specifically how far it would be prepared to go in applying sanctions.

top.banner.rep.conv

Willkie condemns peace-policy plan

Republican draft on foreign relations could be used to balk cooperation, he says

A few hours after Wendell Willkie had received the text of the proposed Republican foreign policy plank, the 1940 presidential candidate issued a statement denouncing the plan as ambiguous, subject to opposing interpretations and capable of being used to throttle effective collaboration by the United States with other countries to maintain peace.

Mr. Willkie’s views on the Platform Committee’s suggestions were presented to reporters who had been invited to visit his officers at 15 Broad Street. He explained that he chose this form of making them public because he was not a delegate to the convention.

Likening the language proposed for this year’s platform to that employed in 1920, Mr. Willkie recalled that 31 leading Republicans had assured the country that the 1920 formula “was the surest road to an effective international organization,” but that President Harding, immediately after the election, “announced that the League of Nations was dead.”

He continued:

A Republican President elected under the proposed platform of 1944 could, with equal integrity, announce that the United States would not enter any world organization in which the nations agreed jointly to use their “sovereign” power for the suppression of aggression.

The net result would be no international organization. No effective international force for the suppression of aggression. No peaceful world. Another world war fought in vain. And the youth of America once more betrayed.

As a Republican, I am desperately anxious for my party to pursue a course that will entitle it to win the November elections. As I am not a delegate to the convention, I take this method of presenting my views on the proposed foreign relations plank of the platform, which I understand will be presented to the convention tomorrow [Tuesday]. I have not, as yet, had the privilege of seeing the other proposed planks.

He also made it clear that his criticism was not directed against Senator Warren R. Austin (R-VT), chairman of the subcommittee which drafted the foreign policy recommendation. Describing the Senator as an “able, forthright statesman,” Mr. Willkie said that he hoped his own statement would assist the senator in obtaining “a better resolution.”

Mr. Willkie’s statement on the proposed foreign relations plank was as follows:

The Platform Committee presently proposes to submit to the convention on Tuesday a foreign relations plank, which pledges in part as follows:

We shall seek to achieve such aims [aims to keep America secure, to keep the Axis powers impotent to renew tyranny and attack, and to attain peace and freedom based on justice and security] through organized international cooperation and not by joining a world state.

We favor responsible participation by the United States in post-war cooperative organization among sovereign nations to prevent military aggression and to attain permanent peace with organized justice in a free world.

Such organization should develop effective cooperative means to direct peace forces to prevent or repel military aggression. Pending this, we pledge continuing collaboration with the principal United Nations to assure these ultimate objectives.

It [such organized cooperation] should promote a world opinion to influence the nations to right conduct, develop international law and maintain an international tribunal to deal with justiciable disputes.

Pursuant to the Constitution of the United States, any treaty made on behalf of the United States with any other nation or any association of nations, shall be made only by and with the advice and consent of the Senate of the United States, provided two-thirds of the Senators present concur.

In 1920, the Republican Convention adopted a foreign relations plank which provided as follows:

The Republican Party stands for agreement among the nations to preserve the peace of the world. We believe that such an international association must be based upon international justice, and must provide methods which shall maintain the rule of public right by the development of law and the decision of impartial courts, and which shall secure instant and general international conference whenever peace shall be threatened by political action, so that the nations pledged to do and insist upon what is just and fair may exercise their influence and power for the prevention of war.

Thirty-one leading Republicans, interpreting this language, assured the American electorate that a Republican victory was the surest road to an effective world organization.

The Republicans won the election of 1920. A Republican President, claiming that he in no way repudiated the party’s platform, immediately after the election announced that the League of Nations was dead.

A Republican President elected under the proposed platform of 1944 could, with equal integrity, announce that the United States would not enter any world organization in which the nations agreed jointly to use their “sovereign” power for the suppression of aggression.

And every effective world organization proposed could be rejected as a “world state.” And all proposed joint forces for the suppression of aggression could be called armed forces and not “peace forces.” And each proposed step taken by any world organization in which we might participate could be called a treaty and, as such, would be subject to ratification by two-thirds of the United States Senators.

The net result would be no international organization. No effective international force for the suppression of aggression. No peaceful world. Another world war fought in vain. And the youth of America once more betrayed.

It may well be maintained that the language of the resolution means otherwise. And so it might. And so might the language of the plank of 1920 have meant something different from the interpretation given it by the victorious candidate.

But we cannot afford in 1944 to be ambiguous. Sequences, as we may have seen, can be too grave. There must be no playing with phony phrases such as “world state,” or use of gentle language such as “peace forces,” or repeated emphasis on “sovereign” nations with nationalistic implications. There must be no self-defeating requirements about submitting each and every individual step in international cooperation to the advice and consent of two-thirds of the United States Senators.

We know from bitter experience that the United States cannot survive militarily, politically or economically in the modern world without close and continuing cooperation with other peace-loving nations. On the necessity for such cooperation, we should speak in words forthright, clear and strong.

We should demand the immediate creation of a Council of the United Nations as a first step toward the formation of a general international organization in order that all the peoples of the United Nations should have a voice in the decision which will shape the world in which they live. These decisions should not and must not be made by three or four great powers alone.

We should advocate the use of American sovereignty in cooperation with other powers to create a continuing international organization for the good of all, with the power to uphold its decisions by force if necessary. For our sovereignty is something to be used, not hoarded. Each nation should maintain land, sea and air forces to be used collaboratively, in agreed situations and within agreed limits, to prevent aggression.

International disputes, which are clearly covered by international law, should be submitted to courts and judges, and those which are not should be settled by conciliation and compromise.

For such a procedure to work successfully, the members of the international organization must say plainly, in advance, that if peaceful methods fail, the aggressor state will encounter sufficient armed forces to ensure his defeat.

In an international organization which was backed by the machinery needed to enforce its decisions, the United States, for the first time in history, would be in a position to deal boldly and effectively with the problems which will confront it. In cooperation with our allies, we shall still be leaders by virtue of the strength and ingenuity of our people. To use this leadership, for our own enrichment and that of mankind, will not be to weaken the sovereign power of the American people; it will be to widen it and make it more real.


Willkie’s friends ‘surprised’

Chicago, Illinois – (June 26)
Wendell Willkie’s statement, calling the foreign affairs plank “ambiguous” and ineffectual, caught supporters of the 1940 candidate off guard tonight. They said they were “completely astonished” by the statement of their principal.

The group, which is here, includes John Haynes (former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury), John Cowles and Gardner Cowles Jr. (publishers who have been warm supporters of Mr. Willkie), Ralph Oake (Mr. Willkie’s campaign manager before he withdrew from the race), Fred Baker of Seattle, and former Senator Sinclair Weeks of Massachusetts. They said they would issue a statement of their own, endorsing the party’s plank. Their reaction was taken to indicate a definite break with Mr. Willkie.

Word of Mr. Willkie’s statement came while the group was discussing ways and means for effecting a reconciliation between Mr. Willkie and Governor Dewey which would make it possible for Mr. Willkie to take the stump for the party.

Austin defends the plank

Senator Warren R. Austin (R-VT), chairman of the Platform Subcommittee on Foreign Affairs, said of the plank:

It is not ambiguous.

It definitely stands for the employment or direction of military or economic reactions to prevent or repel military aggression. It offers hope that military force may not be necessary ultimately to prevent war and that through the processes of a general international organization, we may attain security and peace on the basis of self-discipline of nations.

Our policy, stated in the plank, is against a superstate. It is for a new principle of international cooperation implemented by an organization to put it into effect for the security and peace of the world. It is for development of international law and establishment of a world court.

There is no ambiguity about the use of the words “sovereign nations.”

It intends that sovereignty shall be used internationally to keep the peace.

Mr. Willkie is mistaken in saying that if the policy were carried out, it would result in no international organization. It expressly supports such an organization. It does not support an international integrated army. Its military resources are vested in a council with power to direct them in the right regions to the right places on the right occasions.

Senator Joseph Ball (R-MN) said of the statement on foreign policy:

On the whole, it is a strong commitment by the party to a strong and effective international organization to stop future wars.

Disagreement with Mr. Willkie was voiced by Senators White of Maine and Burton of Ohio. The latter said:

I think we can stand on this platform and the candidate can elaborate it to the satisfaction of the nation in the campaign.

Edge upholds the draft

Governor Edge of New Jersey, commenting upon the Willkie statement, said he approved the plank and had confidence in Governor Dewey’s interpretation of the statement.

He said he was not concerned with any interpretation that Governor Dewey would repudiate any obligation to use force if necessary to maintain peace.

Governor Edge added:

I am especially confident in view of Governor Dewey’s speech last April before the newspaper publishers of the nation when he gave this pledge, “To carry on the war to total and crushing victory, and in so doing, to drive home to the aggressor nations a lesson that will never be forgotten.”


Chicago, Illinois (AP) – (June 26)
Senator Taft (R-OH), chairman of the Republican Resolutions Committee, challenged tonight “any adherents” of Wendell Willkie to press before the committee his protest against the foreign policy plank.

He added:

I’d be very much surprised if the plank adopted by the Democratic Platform Committee suits Mr. Willkie any better than that of the Republicans.


Chicago, Illinois (AP) – (June 26)
Senator Vandenberg (R-MI), defending the proposed foreign policy plank against criticism by Wendell Willkie, said tonight that he hoped it was “too late” for anyone to break down efforts made to unite Republicans “upon a program to preserve America and exert our national power for organized peace with justice in a free world.”

top.banner.rep.conv

Convention opens on a hopeful note

Spangler presides at first session – Green pledges ‘free hand’ to services
By Charles Hurd

Chicago, Illinois – (June 26)
The 23rd national convention of the Republican Party finally opened at 11:17 a.m. CT today in a mixed atmosphere of hope and optimism that this year may work a return to the national control rested by the Democrats from the “Grand Old Party” in 1932.

Harrison E. Spangler, chairman of the Republican National Committee, declared the convention formally opened while powerful lights illuminated the scene for newsreel cameras.

Miss Naomi Cook of Chicago led the convention in singing “The Star-Spangled Banner.”

The Rev. John Holland of the “Little Brown Church of the Air” pronounced the invocation. He prayed “that somehow our statesman may have brains enough and sense enough to enact a peace that is worldwide.”

Governor Green of Illinois formally welcomed the convention on behalf of the state and Chicago. He varied the usual form of such speeches to announce his purchase of $5 million of war bonds on behalf of the State Treasury.

By the time Mr. Green began the body of his talk, the convention floor had settled into its orderly pattern of seated rows of delegates. The day was hot and steaming, with the heat indoors increased constantly by the powerful lights.

Green speaks 32 minutes

Governor Green won frequent applause by his forecasts of victory for the Republicans and the election of the eighth Republican President in line from Abraham Lincoln, who was nominated as the first Republican candidate in Chicago.

The delegates applauded when Governor Green exclaimed, “There is no ‘Win-the-War’ Party in America.”

He went on to say that if the Republicans won, the leaders of the Armed Forces would have a free hand, “free from restrictions by second-string bureaucrats.”

Governor Green’s welcoming speech was of record length, lasting 32 minutes. Some regarded it as virtually a keynote speech.

At the close of the speech, Mr. Spangler introduced Harry Reasoner, a private first class of Minneapolis, now stationed in California, who won an essay contest in which members of 2,000 Young Republican Clubs took part on the question of why the Republicans should win.

Mr. Reasoner, in accepting the award, said, “We are all gathered here in one mind, and determined to do something constructive about it.”

Harold W. Mason of Vermont, secretary of the National Committee, presented the call for the convention. No contests over the seating of delegates were put before the convention.

Spangler notified the convention that he had been “instructed by our National Committee” to nominate Governor Earl C. Warren as temporary chairman, which is synonymous with keynote speaker.

Elected temporary chairman

A committee was appointed to notify Governor Warren of his honor after he was elected without an alternative name being offered.

Then there followed the adoption of the usual formal resolutions to govern procedure of the convention.

The opening session of the convention recessed at 12:20 p.m. until 8:15 p.m. CT.

Although scheduled to start at 10:15 a.m., the stadium a quarter hour later was still a picture of milling, perspiring persons on the floor and very thinly dressed galleries. The great hall was sparsely decorated, in keeping with wartime economy. A gilded eagle was suspended from the speakers’ platform. There was a display of flags at one end of the stadium; facing it a banner read, “Godspeed Our Boys to Victory.”

The state standards, marking the blocs of seats assigned to delegates, were plain poles without ornament, with one exception – a feather lei on one marking “Philippine Islands.”

The first touch of convention color was lent by Carl Chaven, leather-lunged Chicagoan, who went to the microphone at 10:25 and with the help of the great organ, played with all stops open by Al Welgard, endeavored to organize some community singing. He opened with “God Bless America” and everybody seated stood up and joined. As “Home on the Range” and “Pack Up Your Troubles in Your Old Kit Bag” followed, the delegates resumed their buzz of conversation, evidently interested far more in the job of organization than in singing.

The Senate was well represented in the opening session. Senator Arthur H. Vandenberg of Michigan and Senator Joseph H. Ball of Minnesota were walking about discussing the convention’s foreign relations plank. Senator Warren R. Austin of Vermont alternated between the platform and the floor.

Just before the convention was called to order, word was passed around that Governor Dwight Griswold of Nebraska would nominate Governor Thomas E. Dewey of New York as the presidential candidate. Alabama agreed to yield when its name is called on Wednesday, in the traditional alphabetical order.

At 11:00, 45 minutes late by the program, Mr. Spangler started banging the speakers’ stand with his gavel, ordering the sergeants-at-arms to clear the aisles. The organist swung into “The Air Corps Hymn,” but talking continued. He switched to “The Marine Corps Hymn,” with the same result.

At 11:11 a.m., Mr. Spangler tried again, with considerably more insistence. The suspicion held by delegates that no one had really meant 10:15 when it was announced was verified when it developed that the radio chains had scheduled 11:15 to broadcast the opening.

The night session

Governor Warren’s “keynote” speech as temporary chairman of the convention was received with repeated applause at tonight’s session. The Governor made a favorable impression on his audience. His declaration that the United States, to maintain a peaceful world, would cooperate with other Allied nations, won approval. Great applause came when, in his discussion of post-war policy, he asserted that the American people wanted a peace which, being mindful of the interests of other nations, did not neglect or sacrifice the interests of our own country.

The delegates and spectators gave their greatest signs of approval to Governor Warren’s denunciation of the Roosevelt administration and the New Deal. Applause followed his assertions that the New Deal was destroying the two-party system, that it was no longer the Democratic Party, and that it had built up a huge bureaucracy by alliances with corrupt political machines.

Bureaucracy is denounced

Governor Warren brought the delegates and many of the spectators to their feet by declaring that the bureaucrats required the farmer to work in the fields all day and keep books for the government all night. They cheered his assertions that the government encumbered the small businessman by a multiplicity of rules and regulations, and that the bureaucrats told the worker what union he must join, how much in dues he must pay, and to whom he must pay them.

Mr. Warren reached the climax of his speech, so far as audience reaction was concerned, when he attacked the New Deal for seeking to perpetuate itself in power by capitalizing a succession of crises, the depression, the recession, and keeping us out of war, and by now bringing out the achievement of peace as the next crisis for which an “indispensable” was necessary to obtain peace.

Saying that the American people were being conditioned for a new song, “Don’t Change Horses in the Middle of a Stream,” Mr. Warren asserted that we had been in the middle of a stream for eleven years and were not amphibious. The delegates and spectators rose and cheered when the Governor added that we in this country wanted to feel dry and solid ground under our feet again.

Delegates slow in gathering

The delegates and spectators gathered slowly for the night’s meeting.

Before Mr. Spangler called the convention to order at 9:05, the audience joined in singing a series of patriotic and familiar songs. Miss Shirley Dickinson of the Chicago Civic Opera Company sang the national anthem. This was followed by recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance.

The Right Rev. George J. Casey, Vicar General of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Chicago, delivered the invocation. About 20,000 persons, four-fifths of the seating capacity, were in the Stadium.

Introduced by Mr. Spangler as a veteran of three wars, Governor Martin of Pennsylvania urged the purchase of war bonds.

Governor Martin said:

Gen. Eisenhower has said that 1944 will be the year of decision if those on the home front do their duty. We must do more, give more to the Red Cross. We must produce more food and munitions. Above all, we must buy more war bonds.

After Mr. Martin’s speech, Mr. Spangler presented Governor Warren, who then made his address. Following this, the convention adjourned until tomorrow morning.

top.banner.rep.conv

16 governors fail in platform plea

Win demand to see draft, but gain no change for stronger foreign plank

Chicago, Illinois –
Sixteen Republican Governors, delegates to the National Convention, who demanded last night that they be made better acquainted with the platform, apparently succeeded early today in inspecting the proposed planks, but not in changing any of them substantially.

Their chief objective was a stronger plank on foreign affairs, one which would call for joining with the United Nations in the use of “economic sanctions backed by force” to maintain peace instead of the plank recommended by the Austin committee, which offers a general formula of “participation in post-war cooperative organization by sovereign nations.”

A conference of the Governors yesterday named a subcommittee, comprising Governors Raymond E. Baldwin of Connecticut, Sumner Sewall of Maine, and Bourke B. Hickenlooper of Iowa, to inform Senator Robert A. Taft (R-OH), chairman of the Resolutions Committee, of their demands. In response, he had them meet with his drafting subcommittee at 10:00 last night.

After this meeting, Senator Taft, in the presence of the Governors, faced a press conference at 1:00 this morning. He told the reporters that no important changes had been made in the foreign policy plank since the original Vandenberg draft, that no final draft had been made, and that redrafting of the entire platform would continue through the night and possibly into the day.

Mr. Taft denied knowledge of any mention of “economic sanctions,” but Governor Baldwin insisted that “economic sanctions backed by force” had been discussed.

The Governor declared that the foreign affairs plank should be forthright, “one that says what it means and means what it says.” He made it clear that the Governors were fighting for a plank which was closer to the Mackinac Declaration.

But questioning by reporters did not elicit that the Governors had attained their aim. In fact, all had the contrary impression.

The Governors attending all or part of the conference, besides those already mentioned, were Blood of New Hampshire, Wills of Vermont, Saltonstall of Massachusetts, Edge of New Jersey, Martin of Pennsylvania, Kelly of Michigan, Bacon of Delaware, Thye of Minnesota, Schoppel of Kansas, Griswold of Nebraska, Willis of Kentucky, Warren of California and Donnell of Missouri. The absentees were Governors Bricker of Ohio and Green of Illinois.

At a meeting yesterday, Governor Griswold offered a resolution endorsing Governor Dewey, but his fellow Governors rejected it as wrongly timed, holding that it should follow the nomination.

The only good supreme court chief justice and it’s not even close.