Roosevelt (114 page)

Hyde Park.
Sara Roosevelt’s remark about her son: NYT, Nov. 6, 1940, p. 2. Contemporary attitudes toward, and bafflement by, Roosevelt: Charles Hurd, NYT
Magazine,
Jan. 19, 1941, p. 3. Eleanor Roosevelt comment to Lash: Lash, p. 203; Vandenberg, p. 5. Roosevelt’s affair with Lucy Mercer: Daniels
²
, chap. 6; confidential source. Noddle-Fala exchange: PPF 1, Dec. 23, 1940; see also Roosevelt to Eleanor Roosevelt, PPF 2, April 9, 1941. Joan Erikson on Eleanor Roosevelt: Erik H. Erikson,
Gandhi’s Truth
(Norton, 1969), p. 127.

London.
This material is drawn largely from Churchill
²
, pp. 23, 375-376, 553; I have consulted also Ismay; Walter Henry Thompson,
Assignment: Churchill
(Farrar, Straus, 1955); Pawle; Moran, pp. 321-322. Churchill’s Dec. 8, 1940 letter to Roosevelt is quoted in full in Churchill
²
, pp. 558-567. A document that reflects administration views of the time as to ways of aiding Britain is E. S. Land to Roosevelt, “Proposed British Shipbuilding in the United States,” Dec. 2, 1940, OF 99.

Berlin.
For the general background to the events of fall 1941, see Shirer; Telford Taylor,
The Breaking Wave
(Simon and Schuster, 1967); Bullock; Frederick L. Schuman,
The Nazi Dictatorship
(Knopf, 1935). Quotations from Hitler’s speeches are from Raoul de Roussy de Sales (ed.),
My New Order
(Reynal & Hitchcock, 1941), pp. 871-873, 873-899. Taylor; Schmidt;
Hitler’s Secret Conversations;
and
Führer Conferences
are sources of private statements on Hitler. Molotov-Ribbentrop exchange in the bomb shelter: Berezhkov (Molotov’s interpreter) to author, Moscow, May 6, 1969

Tokyo.
Tokyo’s reaction to the election results: NYT, Nov. 7, 1940, p. 9. Description of the imperial ceremony: Hugh Byas,
Government by Assassination
(Knopf, 1942), chap. 5; Ambassador Joseph C. Crew’s diary,
Ten Years in Japan
(Simon and Schuster, 1944), pp. 352-353; but see Heinrichs, pp. 367-369. For the historical and general background to Japanese politics and policy, see Butow. Ike is an indispensable source of records of the 1941 policy conferences in Tokyo. Ruth Benedict,
The Chrysanthemum and the Sword
(Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1946), probes deeply into Japanese values and culture patterns. On more immediate events prior to fall 1941, see Langer and Gleason, chaps. 1 and 2; Hull, Vol. I; Heinrichs, chaps. 18-19; Mosley. The “Green Light” message is in Grew, pp. 1224-1229; see also Heinrichs, pp. 317-318. On various views within the administration: Morgenthau to Roosevelt, “Petroleum Situation in Japan,” Aug. 14, 1940; Stimson to Roosevelt, Oct. 12, 1940; Knox to Roosevelt, Oct. 23, 1940; Sayre to Roosevelt, Nov. 13, 1940; Eleanor Roosevelt to Roosevelt, Nov. 12, 1940; Roosevelt to Eleanor Roosevelt, Nov. 13, 1940—all in FDRL. Grew’s letter of Dec. 14, 1940 to Roosevelt and Roosevelt’s reply are quoted in Grew, pp. 359-363.

Washington.
On Roosevelt’s daily schedule and life, see Tully; Sherwood; Reilly. The source of Roosevelt’s statement to Lothian is Blum
¹
, p. 199; of Hull’s statement to Latin-American diplomats, Hull, p. 824. Roosevelt’s parking-shoulders crack: PC 697, Nov. 26, 1940; PPA, 1940, p. 584. Hopkins’s comment on Roosevelt’s Lend-Lease germinations: Sherwood, p. 224. Earlier origins of his Lend-Lease ideas: see Land to Roosevelt, Nov. 29, 1940, FDRL; Eccles, pp. 348-349; Churchill
²
, p. 567; Ickes, p. 367; Blum
¹
, pp. 98, 211; Freedman, pp. 573-574. The Lend-Lease press conference: PC 702, Dec. 17, 1940; PPA, 1940, pp. 604-615. The German reaction: NYT, Dec. 21, 1940, p. 6; Dec. 22, 1940, p. 1. Writing of the Dec. 29 speech: Sherwood, p. 227. The speech itself is in PPA, 1940, pp. 633-644; film excerpts are in NA. Grew’s reaction:
Ten Years in Japan,
pp. 357-358. See, generally, Clapper Papers (Diaries, 1940-1942), Box 9, LC, for this period.

Rosenman, p. 262 ff., and Sherwood, p. 231, describe Roosevelt’s preparation of his annual message to Congress; for the result, see PPA, 1940, pp. 663-672; and for one reaction, Freedman, p. 577. Roosevelt’s earlier reference to the “5th” freedom is in PC 658, July 5, 1940; PPA, 1940, p. 285. The Inaugural Address of 1941: PPA, 1941, pp. 3-6; see also PL, pp. 1111, 1117. Rosenman reports the President’s misgivings about the reception of the speech: Rosenman, p. 271.

The New Coalition at Home.
Cantril, pp. 756-758, provides a most useful listing over time of responses to the question “If you were voting today, would you vote for or against Roosevelt?” The responses are broken down by geographical section, economic status, and other categories. The Republican Senator was Vandenberg: Vandenberg, p. 10. Dr. McIntire’s comment on Roosevelt’s health: NYT, Jan. 19, 1941, p. 36. I have described the historical development and structure of Roosevelt’s party coalition of 1941 in
The Deadlock of Democracy
(Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1963). Noses: Roosevelt to Glass, PSF, U.S. Senate Folder, Box 58. Banning of Hamilton Fish: Roosevelt to Sherman Minton, March 1, 1944, PSF, Minton Folder, Box 52. Stimson: Stimson and Bundy; Elting E. Morison; Current. There is no adequate biography of Knox, and most of the other key civilian figures in defense have not had the biographies they deserve; but see Rogow’s probing
James Forrestal.
On Ickes, see
The Secret Diary of Harold L. Ickes.
Much of Frances Perkins’s personality emerges in her sparkling
The Roosevelt I Knew.
On Southern politics in the South and on Capitol Hill, see V. O. Key, Jr.’s brilliant
Southern Politics
(Knopf, 1949).

On the nature of public opinion on foreign policy, see Cantril Notebook I; Cantril, pp. 971 ff.; I have had some of these measures broken down with the assistance of the Roper Public Opinion Research Center, at Williams College. The two standard works on organized isolationists and interventionists are Wayne S. Cole,
America First
(Madison, Wis.: University of Wisconsin Press, 1953), and Walter Johnson,
The Battle Against Isolation
(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1944). How
closely in touch the White House was with William Allen White and his committee is indicated in William Allen White Papers, Box 317, LC. On the committee generally, see Clapper Papers (Diaries, 1940-1942), Box 9, LC. On the background of attitude and mood, see Selig Adler,
The Isolationist Impulse
(Collier Books, 1961), and Manfred Jonas,
Isolationism in America, 1935-1941
(Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1966). See Gabriel A. Almond’s path-breaking
The American People and Foreign Policy
(Praeger, 1960) on moods in American public opinion toward foreign-policy making. Roosevelt’s meeting with Willkie: Sherwood, pp. 233-234. HHP, Box 298, contain some public-opinion data.

Lend-Lease: The Great Debate.
Preparation of Lend-Lease legislation: Cox Diary, Jan. 6, Feb. 13, 1941, FDRL. The text of Wheeler’s speech is in
Congressional Record,
Vol. 87, Pt. 10 (Appendix), A178-179; Roosevelt’s reply, PC 710, Jan. 14, 1941; PPA, 1940, pp. 711-712. Blum
¹
, pp. 211-222, and Langer and Gleason, pp. 254ff., provide accounts of the Lend-Lease debate; there is some relevant material in HHP, Box 296. On Stimson’s dilemma, see Elting E. Morison, p. 518, and Current, pp. 148-149. Testimony is taken from the House and Senate hearings: “To Promote the Defense of the United States,” Hearings before the Committee on Foreign Affairs, House of Representatives, 1941; and before the Committee on Foreign Relations, United States Senate (on S. 275), Jan.-Feb. 1941, Pts. 1-4. See also Osgood, pp. 417-420.

Cole and Johnson describe the role of the two big isolationist and interventionist organizations. State Department, Box 28, FDRL, throws light on Roosevelt’s reaction to the debate.

“Speed—and Speed Now.”
Roosevelt’s indignation session: Sherwood, pp. 265-266; see also Rosenman, p. 273. Speech to the White House correspondents: PPA, 1941, pp. 60-69. On the general background of defense mobilization, see
The United States at War
and
Industrial Mobilization for War.
The press conference on the new defense-production setup is in PPA, 1940, pp. 684-685. On some of the problems of early 1941, see Janeway; the Stimson quotation on aluminum is from Janeway, p. 240. See Ickes, on other defense problems, especially oil and power. Press conference on the Dunn report: PC 722, Feb. 28, 1941. Baruch’s role and relation to Roosevelt: Baruch; Coit. On Baruch’s advice on defense production, see these works and Baruch to Roosevelt, PPF 88, Dec. 20, 1940, and Clapper Papers (Diary, May 19, 1941), LC. Stimson’s “sting of responsibility” comment: Blum
¹
, p. 272; see the same, p. 273, for Morgenthau’s view on defense organization.

PM’s story on the New York derelicts is in the edition of Jan. 21, 1941, pp. 1, 12-13; see this newspaper and the liberal weeklies
The Nation
and
The New Republic
for reports on social conditions during the mobilization period. The findings of Gunnar Myrdal and his associates were reported in the magnificent
An American Dilemma;
see pp. 420 and 421 for examples of the plight of Negroes in the Army. Josephson provides full coverage of Hillman’s defense role. Strike situation in early 1941: War Department Memo (n.d.), PSF, Strikes Folder. Allis-Chalmers: Patterson to Roosevelt, April 3, 1941, PSF, Strikes Folder.

Roosevelt’s White House.
The account of John Gunther’s interview is
taken from his sensitive and knowing
Roosevelt in Retrospect,
pp. 24, 27; I have both paraphrased and quoted it. Sherwood’s description and memories of the White House: Sherwood, pp. 203ff. The most revealing book on Eleanor Roosevelt in the White House is Lash; see also Alfred Steinberg,
Mrs. R: The Life of Eleanor Roosevelt
(Putnam, 1958); Eleanor Roosevelt; Tully; Roosevelt and Shalett. Roosevelt on Hopkins: Sherwood, pp. 2-3; on Hopkins in the White House: Ickes, p. 471; Blum
¹
, p. 231; Stimson Diary and Papers. Baruch’s comment on Hopkins was made to Raymond Clapper: Clapper Papers, Cont. 23, Jan.-Feb. 1942 Folder, LC. Moley’s and Corcoran’s departures from the presidential limelight: Raymond Moley,
After Seven Years
(Harper, 1939); Freedman, pp. 577-578. Many items in PL indicate Roosevelt’s capacity to deal with day-to-day problems and to indulge in small jokes; see, for example, PL, pp. 1092, 1100, 1148; also Rosenman to author. The call for diaper service is recorded for history in Henrietta Nesbitt’s Diaries, Feb.16, 1941, LC.

Churchill and Roosevelt exchange on repair of British ships: Langer and Gleason, p. 424; PL, p. 1137. On Roosevelt’s policies toward Vichy, Madrid, Athens, etc., see Hull; Leahy, chaps. 2-4; Churchill
³
, pp. 130-131. Langer and Gleason is especially useful for its detailed studies of the diplomatic background to the events of early 1941. Ickes’s denunciation of the State Department: Ickes, p. 473; see Ickes also for occasional criticism of Roosevelt’s failure to act more decisively, and for indicating Frankfurter’s view. Stimson’s comment: Stimson Diary, April 22, 1941. The President’s discussion on the flux of public opinion with the press: PC 737, April 22, 1941; and on defeatism: PC 738, April 25, 1941; PPA, 1941, p. 132. His letter to Norman Thomas, May 14, 1941, is in PL, p. 1156. For day-to-day attitudes of American and other officials, see Clapper Papers (Diaries, 1941), LC. Pacific Theater background: “Admiral Hart’s Narrative of Events, Pacific Theatre, Leading Up to War,” PMRP, Naval Aide’s Files (no box number).

Hitler: The Rapture of Decision.
Hitler’s Rheinmetall-Borsig speech, Dec. 10, 1940: Raoul de Roussy de Sales (ed.),
My New Order
(Reynal & Hitchcock, 1941), p. 889. Churchill’s comments on Hitler can be found in his works. Studies of Hitler’s personality are legion; I have used especially Shirer; Bullock; Trevor-Roper; Erik H. Erikson,
Young Man Luther
(Norton Library, 1962), pp. 105-110; Jochen von Lang,
Adolf Hitler: Faces of a Dictator
(Harcourt, Brace, 1969). Hitler’s strategic decisions of late 1940 and early 1941: Sontag and Beddie, pp. 258-259, 260;
Führer Conferences,
1941; Hinsley; other sources cited in Prologue notes; interviews with German and Soviet historians. Hitler’s strictures against the Russians and the Jews are quoted in
My Nexu Order,
p. 973. His message to Mussolini is in Sontag and Beddie, p. 353. The Führer’s relations with his generals are reflected in
Hitler’s Secret Conversations;
Taylor; and in Keitel and other memoirs by his generals. Shirer, p. 1080, and Keitel, p. 138, indicate Hitler’s reaction to the change of government in Belgrade. Hitler’s
Russian strategy: Hinsley, chap. 6; Warlimont, chap. 3; Liddell Hart, chap. 13. Warlimont, p. 161, is the source of the description of the officers’ meeting with Hitler; and Bullock, p. 652, of the Führer’s comment on kicking down the Russian door.

Churchill: The Girdle of Defeat.
Churchill’s estimate of the situation, winter 1940-41: Churchill
²
, p. 626. His note to Roosevelt on a possible invasion: Churchill
³
, p. 26. His vignette of Hopkins,
ibid.,
p. 24. Bryant
²
is a useful source for a more professional view of Britain’s situation during this period; see also Eden; Ismay. On the question of diversion from Africa to assist the Greeks, see the above sources. Brooke’s comment is in Bryant
²
, p. 198; see also Ismay, p. 199. Churchill’s questioning message to Eden: Churchill
³
, p. 70. The House of Commons debate is quoted from 371
H.C. Debates,
5th session, May 1941, pp. 871, 880, 927, 937. Roosevelt’s letter to Churchill on the Near Eastern situation: Churchill
³
. Churchill’s increasing emphasis on the need for full American intervention:
ibid.,
pp. 160, 274, 283, and his flat call for participation,
ibid.,
p. 235. The Prime Minister’s description of his relations with the Americans: 371
H.C. Debates,
May 7, 1941, p. 945. Forrestal on Churchill’s private attitude and expectations of American involvement: Clapper Papers (Diary, May 15, 1941), LC.