January 11, 1952

Mr. Darwin Stolzenbach
ORO
6410 Connecticut Avenue
Chevy Chase, Maryland

Dear Darwin:

Enclosed my section on organization. It grew into a much bigger job
than I anticipated because I engaged in a pretty thorough tabulation of our
interviews. You may notice my effort to get as much objective support for
our findings as possible. You will have to insert the appropriate figures in
the table on page 8 from your analysis of questionnaires. Also please check
the terminology particularly regarding the various agencies. Could you have it
typed and get it back to me with your comments and with an analysis of the
recommendations section of our questionnaire. How about stealing Sue Billingsley
for this. She did a first-rate job on the Personnel business. Also I would
appreciate your views on the introduction as it stands now and maybe get a
chance to correct it once more. Did you find it in the "hold" box and did you
have Mrs. De Britto do the changes?

I am doing the Personnel section now and will finish it over the week-end.
I shall mail it to you then. That will leave only the Refuge section, which I
will probably not do until shortly before I come down. I had wanted to come on
the 26th and get to work over the week-end, but under the circumstances will not
do so. You can expect me on the 28th without fail. This brings me to a rankling
subject.

I have had a chance to sleep over our phone conversation twice but my
sense of outrage over the news you gave me has, if anything, grown:

I do not understand why an issue like this could be permitted to arise
without the person who could have cleared it up in two minutes even being
notified. To this moment I have had no communication whatever from Crowe. A
simple phone call on Monday--when presumably this thing started through the
mill--could have explained everything.

I do not particularly appreciate a mode of operation in which neither the
guards nor any of the staff members who knew what I was doing informed me of my
alleged security violation until it was too late to do anything about it. It
is ridiculous to be accused of a security violation after I had stayed every
night on every trip till 8 p.m. without any comment and after I told the guards
in the morning that I expected a visitor. I did not know that I was violating
security regulations; nor did you; nor did the guards. Does this reflect on my

Mr. Darwin Stolzenbach

-2-

1/11/52

security consciousness or on Crowe's security education? To this day nobody
has ever explained the security regulations or shown them to me in writing.

The only reason—as you well know—why I had to see anybody at the office
is because I spent every free moment on our report. Lest it be alleged that
"I should have known better" than to see anybody, I should like to insist that
it is a complete mystery to me what security I jeopardized: Not the name of
the organization, since that hangs in a big shield on the street and is listed
in the phone book; not its work, since I saw my visitors in the conference
room, not in the office; not my association with it, since we publish un-
classified directories. Moreover, need I remind you of our foreign employees
overseas, the Koreans in our Pusan office, the Japanese drivers and our office
in the Dai Ichi building, or of my insistence on security over there.

For your personal information I saw the individuals from 5:45 to 7 p.m. One was a native-born United States citizen from an agency whose sensitivity is incomparably higher than ours. The other was indeed a "foreigner." The purpose was eminently not social. I could easily make Crowe look silly, but I will stand on his behavior on the facts he had available. I do not want to have these last facts mentioned.

For all these reasons I do not propose to act in this matter as if I had
to apologize for a mistake or as if I wanted to remove a stigma, but as if I
insisted on being completely cleared . . . and as if I could expect full backing
from Pettee and you.

I want to add that none of this has in the slightest affected my attitude
toward you which, as you know, is not based merely on a "business relationship,"
nor toward Legate. I would appreciate keeping John out of this.

January 29, 1952

Dear Darwin:

I thought your letter of January 25 was very much to the point. I accept your good suggestions and have attempted to follow them. With no pride of authorship, with full realization of the necessity for substantial revision, but in order to have something in front of us I suggest the following language:

(1) Project Content

a. to analyse the methods by which the Departments of War, Army and Defense determined policy for the military government and post-war occupation of Germany, Austria and Italy, and the ways in which other agencies in the federal government determined policy for War, Army and Defense administration in those areas;

b. to determine whether those policies were distinctly articulated and clearly conveyed to occupation field forces; whether they were determined in time to be of practical assistance to theater commanders; whether they provided adequate solutions to the actual field conditions faced by the Army generally and military government specifically and its successor organization; and the consequences of the absence of policy or of tardy and obscure policy upon the overall occupation purposes;

c. to determine the extent to which War, Army and Defense Departments' administration of occupied areas was assisted, hindered or vitiated as a result of agreed, unagreed or disagreed Allied policy;

d. to make these analyses and determinations with a specific view to the adequacy of planning for said European occupations, and of the organisational structure employed in policy formulation, planning and execution both within the Departments of War, Army and Defense, the several agencies of the U. S. government and the inter-allied agencies whose determinations had direct and immediate bearing upon the manner in which the Departments of War, Army and Defense exercised their responsibilities;

e. to collect the widely scattered written materials on this subject into a single collection for use in this and such closely related research aspects of military government and occupation administration as subsequently may be undertaken by ORO, this Institute or other agencies in the Department of the Army.

February 7, 1952

Dear Darwin:

Enclosed you will find a corrected copy of the "Objectives" section. I have attempted to take account of your question marks, sometimes only by answering them in the margin. I have also made a few notes for you to check the correct authorities and citations.

Regarding the report I think we should agree on one point: It must get finished in the very near future, otherwise it will lose all meaning. I know we are not concerned with Korea as such but nevertheless if we delay beyond a certain point we will lose all effectiveness.

I see the need for the following: (1) A stylistic revision. This would probably be best done by me for purposes of consistency. I would like to see one fully assembled copy before doing it, however. At any rate, that is not a difficult task and I could certainly finish it in, at the most, two days on my next visit to Washington. (2) A check for accuracy and consistency and accuracy of terminology. This should be done by you. (3) The writing of a summary—this would be assembled by you by lifting the appropriate sections from the text. (4) The preparation of a Background section in tabular form (along the lines of our army advisory group report) as an Appendix. It should be an Appendix, not a chapter, because it is not integral to our report but an aid to the reader.

I do not believe that any substantive revision of the completed text should be attempted until this is out of the way. Also I should like to ask this: Please read the whole report through once as a unit. I think you will find that it is pretty tight and does make a point. Picking out isolated points will lead to a distortion. For example, your comment regarding statistics is a valid one if you treat my paragraphs regarding them by themselves. I think, however, that on rereading the whole section you will find that I did not say that all problems would be solved if statistics existed, but only that they could not be solved without statistics. Statistics are a necessary, not a sufficient condition. Similarly the rest of the section calls attention to quite a number of other problems. Nor did I say that basic information exists now in a completed form; only that UNCACK had to devote a disproportionate part of its effort to collecting them.

Mr. D. Stolzenbach

-2-

2/7/52

I know you feel reluctant to make recommendations, that our data will not support. With this I am in complete accord. Nevertheless it is methodologically impossible to make a recommendation completely supported by data; in that case you would have a description. In other words recommendations always involve an element of interpretation—you are always somewhat out on a limb. Now I believe that the recommendations we are making are really a minimum. If we water it down any further it will be unassailable but also meaningless. As our study develops we may amend some conclusions. There is nothing wrong with this. If one waits until one can say everything before saying anything, one will wind up saying nothing.

Also I sympathize with your attempt to consider the reactions of our readers. But that too can be overdone. If we write a report that every last colonel in the Pentagon understands we must accept the fact that every last colonel will feel he could have written it equally well. This will get us into an analogous position as all of ORO is in FECOM right now. I am eager for the report to be understood, but there is nothing wrong with making our readers think a bit.

In short, I think first things ought to be done first. The completed sections should be checked for accuracy and consistency; I shall check them for style; a summary should be written. If we start major substantive revisions, we will still be arguing while the army is fighting in Indo-China.

THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY
OPERATIONS RESEARCH OFFICE

6410 CONNECTICUT AVENUE
CHEVY CHASE, MARYLAND

OPERATING UNDER CONTRACT
WITH THE
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

TELEPHONE
OLIVER 4200

19 February 1952

Mr. Henry Kissinger
Harvard University
Cambridge, Massachusetts

Dear Henry:

I am enclosing one of the new, clean copies of our report, primarily so that you may have a chance to discuss it with John before you come down next week. I believe that his fresh reaction to it would be extremely helpful.

I spent most of Sunday going over the report in considerable detail. I have not yet tackled the time-consuming job of checking terminology and references. I was concerned with the sense of the report as a whole. As you know, I don't see any reason for substantial revision except in two places. That part of the section on "Objectives, Policies and Programs" which deals with "Programs" needs some attention. As it stands now it doesn't say anything of significance; a fact which is reflected in the absence of any conclusion stemming from this part of the section. One possibility is to leave it out altogether, and the other is to rewrite it including some new material. In any event, I don't expect you to do anything about this before you come down.

The other part which needs some rewriting is the part of the Personnel section dealing with military efficiency ratings. I believe that this part can be rewritten so as to present the statistical information more clearly.

I started to put together a summary of conclusions. I find this to be somewhat more difficult than I had expected since the several sets of conclusions are each written within the context of the respect~~ section.~~ In any event, I expect to have made some progress on this by the time you get here.

Looking forward to seeing you next Tuesday -

CDS/bsb
Encl.

17181

TELEPHONE
OLIVER 4200

22 July 1952

Mr. Henry A. Kissinger
10 Weld Hall
Harvard University
Cambridge 39, Massachusetts

Dear Henry:

I have made the following arrangements for Dennis Walters
on the 28th of July:

9 A. M. William H. Shaw, Assistant to the Secretary of Commerce, Room 5800A, Department of Commerce Building. Enter at 15th and Constitution Avenue entrance.

2 P. M. S. McKee Rosen, U.S. Bureau of the Budget, Room 412, Executive Office Building, 17th and Pennsylvania Avenue, N. W.

Shaw is an excellent man for information regarding the operations of a large governmental department. He also knows a lot about that Department's relationships with other key agencies of the Federal Government. I do not know Rosen's exact title. However, one of his jobs is to talk with visitors such as Walters and arrange for them to meet other Budget Bureau staff members who are qualified to discuss specific aspects of interest to the visitor. This arrangement should not be considered as a low level brushoff for Walters. I first raised the question with Stuart Rice, Assistant Director, and it was his candid opinion that Walters would learn far more by talking with Rosen than by a short but necessarily formal meeting with one of the higher Bureau officials. I myself have no doubt as to the wisdom of this advice. I tried to set up a meeting with Carl Wood but found that the two days of Walters' visit were already filled up for him.

I have made these appointments definitely so would appreciate greatly having them confirmed by you as appointments that would fit in with Walters' schedule.

July 31, 1952

Mr. Darwin Stolzenbach
Operations Research Office
6710 Connecticut Avenue
Chevy Chase, Maryland

Dear Mr. Stolzenbach:

When we talked on the phone the other day, I promised that I would
let you have my decision about next year by the end of this week. I have engaged
in a good deal of soul-searching and have come to the conclusion that I cannot
leave here at the moment. I think you know my reasons as well as anyone but, if
only for purposes of the record, I would like to summarize them briefly.

As you know, both the Seminar and CONFLUENCE have been pretty much my
creations and have been kept going to a considerable extent by my willingness to
do what was necessary. In the meantime many other people have been drawn into it
in one way or another and it would not seem right to me to let them down at this
stage. Mr. Elliott has put a good deal of his prestige behind this effort and
since I was the one who induced him to do so, I cannot really let him down now.
But more than that, it isn't often that one can do relatively early in life the
things one has felt to be extremely necessary and I would not feel justified in
leaving here unless I could be confident that the thing would continue in the spirit
in which I started it. Such a possibility does not seem to exist although this may
be merely my vanity. At any rate, it would be rather difficult to turn CONFLUENCE
over at this stage. I think you know that this has not been an easy decision for
me. I can assure you that I feel quite drained but that nevertheless I do not see
how I could leave.

All these considerations are all the stronger because of the unsettled
conditions in Washington. I do not really wish to spend my time trying to fight
over ground which you and I had already agreed upon again and I do not really know
whether the transition period after you leave is going to be a particularly productive
one. If I felt that I had a very peculiar contribution to make at this stage, one
moreover that I could make only by being full-time at the office, I should have
considered it most seriously but this does not seem the case to me. Needless to say,
I shall be available on a consultant's basis and I should be delighted to bridge the
gap, particularly during the months of September and October, if you or George should
consider it necessary. I think you know how much I have enjoyed our association and
how worthwhile I have considered our efforts. You will therefore always be able to
count on whatever help I can give in the time left to me by my other commitments.
I need hardly mention that financial considerations are not at all a factor in this
decision. As you know, quite the contrary is true. Maybe I can take up your offer
at some future time. At any rate, my best wishes go with you on your new assignment
and, if I may say so, a certain nostalgia too.

DEC 10 1952

OPERATIONS RESEARCH OFFICE

The Johns Hopkins University
G-3, Headquarters, Far East Command
APO 500, c/o Postmaster
San Francisco, California

CABLE ADDRESS
OPREOFE
TOKYO

2 December 1952

Dear Henry:

Your letter crushed me. Here I am in an alien country trying desperately to maintain the standards of American intellectualism - and what do I get from you but sarcastic rebuff. My greatest apologies to you, Dear Henry, for the unintentional silence. I will say only one thing in my defense, and that is - the effort required to survive here is indeed formidable.

Do not be mislead by thinking that we are having a hard time or that we are not enjoying our life in Tokyo. Margaret has taken to Tokyo like a duck - you know the rest. The boys have had a slightly more difficult time in adjusting but are reasonably well taken care of by the Army school system here which occupies them from 7:15 in the morning until some time around 4:00 o'clock in the afternoon. Margaret is proving to be an excellent linguist and already runs rings around me in speaking and understanding Japanese. She says now that if she had known what this country was like when I was here in '51 her alarm would have been far greater.

Dr. Paul Linebarger, Professor of political science at Johns Hopkins University, is out here for the purpose of making a general study of the potentialities of Project LEGATE. I think he is an extremely competent person for the job and I am intending to spend a good deal of time with him on this project. In this connection I would certainly appreciate any introductions that you would care to arrange.

Japan is as charming as ever. You would be indeed surprised to see me driving rapidly in the streets of Tokyo in my 1952 Javelin, honking away with the best of Japanese taxi drivers.

For your information, ORO-T-184 has at long last been published, as of 12 August 1952. However, its distribution has so far been withheld by the Department of the Army for reasons of which I know not. However, it has had an effect - draft copies have been made available out here and all of the key personnel in the Army have had the opportunity of reading it. Charles Henning did a brilliant job of writing about the economic and political aspects of civil affairs in Korea. Even George Pettee thinks it is a good job. I expect to do some followup on this this winter. Incidentally, I don't approve of the way in which ORO - LEGATE has neglected you and will so inform the chairman in my next letter. I still think you owe us some kind of a report of your Japan studies, if only a transcript of your notes.

February 25, 1954

Mr. Darwin Stolzenbach
ORO, 0-3, AFFE
A.P.O. 500
c/o Postmaster, San Francisco
California

Dear Darwin:

We have been out of touch for some time, but I have heard from
our various friends about your activities and I do not doubt that
you find it interesting.

I hear that you are returning by way of Australia. If my calcula-
tions are correct, this leaves only Greenland still to be visited,
and I have no doubt that if you put your mind to it you will find
a project to take you up there too.

I still look back to our association with a great deal of pleasure although I feel that I took on much too much that year. It is ironical to see that after the machine is built, the man who pulls the lever gets the credit for its production, but then credit was not the primary point.

There isn't much to report from Harvard. CONFLUENCE and the
Seminar are continuing although not prospering. Bundy, to whom
I introduced you, is now Dean of the Faculty which has not apparently
lowered his self-esteem.

I hope that after you return, you will come up here for a visit.
There are many people who would be eager to learn of your experiences
in Japan, and there are one or two whom you might wish to meet. Please
give my best to Margaret.

HAK:ebp

HAK:epd

Henry V. Kresinger

Sincerely yours,

Give my best to Margaret.

I hope that after you return, you will come to see for a visit.

I introduced you, I now know of the wealth which has not ablated

Seminar are continuing, although not brooding. Bung, to whom

There isn't much to report from Harvard. CONGRUECE and the

not the primary point.

the leader gets the credit for its production, but then credit was

therefore to see that after the machine is built, the man who builds

strongly I feel that I took or much too much that bear. It is

I still look back to our association with a great deal of blam-

and I have no doubt that it you but your mind to it you will find

those are correct, this leaves only Greenfield still to be visited.

I hear that you are returning by way of Australia. It is acfula-

You find it interesting.

Our various friends about your self titles and I do not doubt that

We have been out of town for some time, but I have been away from

Dear David:

California
\o Postmaster, San Francisco
V.B.O. 200
OKO. 0-3. AMM
Mr. Danita Stolzmann

February 22, 1924

OPERATIONS RESEARCH OFFICE
HQ AFFE (ADVANCE) APO 500

c/o Postmaster, San Francisco, Calif.

OPERATED BY
THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY
UNDER CONTRACT WITH
THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

CABLE ADDRESS
OPREOFE
TOKYO

5 March 1954

Mr. Henry A. Kissinger
Executive Director
Harvard University International Seminar
10 Weld Hall
Cambridge 38, Massachusetts

Dear Henry:

It is just one of the coincidences of life that I had planned to write you today and that your letter arrived today. Obviously you have your own private intelligence corps, since my last letter from John began with the statement that he had learned from you of my presence in Washington in December. As I look back upon our past association this all seems very normal.

To say that my activities here have been interesting is quite an understatement. They have been at various time exhilarating, amusing, frustrating, and exhausting, but nevertheless I consider it the best assignment I have ever had. I think Margaret and the boys have enjoyed it too, although for the most part their life has been quite different from mine. Actually I have been away from home for a period of 10 days to 2 weeks almost every month since I arrived here. During the first year these trips primarily were to Korea; now they seem to include Washington, Korea and other parts of Japan.

Now with the Korean war at least temporarily suspended a new look is being taken at our future role out here, with some possibility that we will be established as a permanent and integral part of the Army organization in this theater. It will be my job to preside over the transition to the new status and transfer my knowledge about the business to my successor, who is due to arrive in a month or two. As things now look, we should be returning home during June or July.

Your information about my plans to return via Australia was good at one time, but now a little out of date. The present thought is to go straight to the West Coast by American President Lines and then across the country by car or train, taking our vacation as we go.

One of the things that has made life particularly interesting out here has been my recent efforts to learn something about Japan's contemporary problems. It occurred to me last fall that if ever a country needed to have some scientific basis for determining its course of action it is the Japan of today. The idea was picked up by Ellis and I have been practically directed to devote a part of

-2-

my time to formulating a proposal for a large operations research
study in Japan. I still have my qualms about it but am convinced
that if it is worth doing at all it is worth doing in a big way.
I would probably have little connection with it after I complete
my initial work of providing Hopkins with background material. At
the present time I am trying to "explain" operations research to
the Japanese. If your experience with these people has given you
any clue as to how this can be done, I would certainly welcome any
advice you would care to give me. In this connection, I wonder if
you would be willing to write a personal letter of introduction to
Nakasone for me. I read the speech he delivered at your forum last
July in the Nippon Times, and have a feeling that he might under-
stand what I am talking about.

I think it is high time that you had some idea of the reception
out here to our great work on civil affairs in Korea. In the first
place, the formal Headquarters FEC evaluation of this was one of
the most glowing ones ever written about an ORO tech memo. When
a second LEGATE team, headed by Carl Wood, visited Korea last fall
they found that our report was considered as the "bible" of civil
affairs officers in Korea. Upon being asked by Carl for copies of
their recent directives on civil affairs, one team leader replied
that he could not provide this information beyond December 1951.
Up to that time he had on his desk an ORO report, but apparently
no one had seen fit to bring this up to date as of November 1953.
Carl Wood has just written me to say that our paper still stands
as the most helpful one the Army has had in this field. It is
still being talked about, apparently favorably, in review meetings
of the ORO Project LEGATE Advisory Group. Two of our major rec-
ommendations have certainly been acted upon -- they have created
a focal point of authority in Korea, and there has been marked
improvement in the caliber of personnel assigned to civil affairs.
Whether or not these actions can be attributed to our report is
almost impossible to say; however, in Carl Wood's opinion the ORO
report was influential.

It is questionable now as to whether or not I shall go back
to Project LEGATE; Ellis has asked me what I would like to do and
I have indicated some preferences for other Project Chairmanships.

I am sorry to hear that CONFLUENCE and the Seminar are not
progressing, although perhaps this is just modesty on your part.
If you have an extra copy of one of the recent issues of CONFLUENCE
lying around it would be very good to see one. One of my ambitions
in life is to become sufficiently sophisticated to be able to con-
tribute to this paper.

I think that by now we are ready to return to American with
considerable interest in observing it through new eyes. I never
realized before how much insight you can gain concerning your own
culture by living in another. This is certainly not a new ex-
perience as the world goes and may seem trite to you but is prob-
ably something which each person must experience for himself.

March 10, 1954

Mr. C. Darwin Stolzenbach
Operations Research Office
HQ AFFE (ADVANCE) APO 500
c/o Postmaster, San Francisco
California

Dear Darwin:

Thank you very much for your letter and the pictures. I
trust you are not trying to blackmail me. I assume the statute
of limitations applies to these things as well.

Seriously, I am most impressed by your project, and I do
think that a study of the future course of Japan is crucial. I
do think that, rather than engage in long discussions with Japanese
about the nature of Operations Research, I would simply formulate
a project and let them do it. I think that if they are told pre-
cisely what to do and how to do it, they will do it very well.
If you are going to discuss methodology with them, they will
prove extremely obtuse.

I would of course be delighted to write a letter to Nakasone
for you, and I am sure he can give you some excellent ideas. He
is, for a Japanese, unusually blunt and direct. On the other
hand, he is not at all a researcher and he is both too busy and
not really suitable for that kind of work. I have had here a
Japanese radio commentator who is also a Professor of Economics
who might be more along your lines. He is, however, not nearly
as intelligent as Nakasone. I think also that some of my Japanese
university friends might prove extremely useful to you. If you
are seriously going to go ahead with this, I will await a little
more precise description from you, and then I will send you the
letter.

What you say about the Korea report pleased me. Considering
the fact that it was our maiden performance, it indicates what
might be done in other areas.

I am sending you the last three issues of CONFLUENCE today.
Kindest regards to Margaret.

HAK:ebp

HAK:epb

Henry V. Kleisinger

Sincerely,

Kindest regards to Margaret.

I am sending you the last three issues of CONJUGENCE today.

might be done in other areas.

the fact that it was our maiden performance, it indicates what
what you say about the Korea report pleased me. Considering

fetter.

more precise description from you, and then I will send you the
are seriously going to go spread with this. I will await a little
university friends might prove extremely useful to you. It don't
as intelligent as Margaret. I think so that some of my Japanese
who might be more strong from lines. He is, however, not nearly
Japanese radio commentator who is also a professor of Economics
not really antitrust for that kind of work. I have had here a
hand, he is not at all a researcher and he is both too ideal and
to be a Japanese, unmanually blind and direct. On the other
for you, and I am sure he can give you some excellent ideas. He
I would of course be delighted to write a letter to Margaret

broke extremely optome.

It you are going to diacuse methodology with them, they will
clearly what to do and how to do it, they will do it very well.
s project and let them do it. I think that if they are told bre-
apout the name of Operations Research, I would attempt to formulate
what think that, rather than engage in long diacussions with Japanese
think that a study of the future comae of Japan is crucial. I
seriously, I am most impressed by your project, and I go

Thank you very much for your letter and the benefit. I

I am sure the署署署署

Dear Darwin:

California
c/o Boatswater, San Francisco
HQ AVE (ADVANCE) APO 800
Operations Research Office
Mr. C. Darwin Stolpepaach

March 10, 1954

May 17, 1954

Mr. C. Darwin Stolzenbach
Operations Research Office
HQ AFFE (ADVANCE) APO 500
c/o Postmaster, San FRANCISCO
California

Dear Darwin:

Your letter of March 15 regarding Kawamoto was filed away
without my noticing it. I am glad to have your comments about
him, but unfortunately I was in no position to take him. We
have a firm rule, indeed it is one of the conditions of our
grant, not to take individuals who have spent any length of
time in the United States. As you know, Mr. Kawamoto was born
here and spent the first 16 years of his life in this country.
In addition, he had a scholarship at the University of Cincinnati
in 1950-51. Under these circumstances, I really do not see what
we could do for him in a two month program here at Harvard. I
am all the more sorry about it, because on the basis of his quali-
fications, he was one of the top candidates.

Our trip to Japan seems very far back now, although I re-
member it still with a great deal of nostalgia. I hope some
project will take me out there again in the not too distant
future, partly of course because this is as far away from Har-
vard as I can get.

Our Seminar will run until the end of August. If you should
get back before then, we would be glad to have you join it for a
few days, and in any case, I look forward to seeing you as soon
after your return as you can make it.

HAK:ebp

HAK:epb

Henry V. Kieisinger

Sincerely yours,

after your return as you can make it.
low days, and in any case, I look forward to seeing you as soon
get back before then, we would be glad to have you join it for a
Our seminar will run until the end of August. It you should
and as I can get.

Lately, partly of course because this is as far away from Har-
project will take me out there again in the not too distant
member it still with a great deal of pleasure. I hope some
Our trip to Japan seems very far back now, although I re-
member as I can get.

tions, he was one of the top candidates.
all the more sorry I am, because on the basis of his desil-
we could do for him in a two month program here at Harvard. I
in 1920-21. Under these circumstances, I really do not see what
In addition, he had a scholarship at the University of Cincinnati
here and about the time he left for years of his life in this community.
time in the United States. As you know, Mr. Kawamoto was born
Grant, not to take individuals who have spent anyfg of
have a firm rule, indeed it is one of the conditions of our
him, but unfortunately I was in no position to take him. We
without my noticing it. I am glad to have your comments spent
your letter of March 19 regarding Kawamoto was lifted away

Dear Darwin:

California
c/o Postmaster, San Francisco
HQ AFFE (ADVANCE) APO 500
Operations Research Office
Mr. C. Darwin Stolzenberg

May 17, 1924

MR. CHARLES D. STOLZENBACH

MAY 14:

PAN AMERICAN AIRWAYS flight #122
leaves NYC, Idlewild........10:00am EST (11:00am EDT)
arrives Frankfurt...........1:25pm

THIS IS A ROUND TRIP TICKET; please retain your ticket receipts for ORO.