(1)

Green Wood Gate, Ashdown Forrest,
Sussex, England.

July 14, 1919.

I have written nothing in the diary since the day after the signing of
the Peace Treaty at Versailles.

What I have done since iss: I motored to Boulogne on Sunday afternoon,
June 29th, spent the night there and crossed the Channel on Monday the 30th
and came directly to this place to visit my friend, Frank Trumbull of New York.
I went almost immediately to London to get in touch with Sunderland House, the
temporary home of the League of Nations.

On Saturday, July 5th, I motored down to Ichens Abbas near Winchester
to visit Edward Grey. He has a cottage there which he uses as a fishing lodge
when he wishes to be in seclusion. It is a primitive place, nothing more than
a "shack" but covered with roses and surrounded by beautiful lime trees. He
has no room for guests, but puts them up at "The Plow" a near-by inn.

We had many long and intimate talks. At last we were able to say "the
war is over". He told me many things which were of interest because they bore
directly or indirectly upon some of the happenings in Paris, and some of the
English public men who had to do with the making of the Treaty. It was inter-
esting to hear him say that Lloyd George and Winston Churchill were the only
two members of the British Cabinet before the war who were persistently against
increasing armaments either by land or sea.

Another interesting thing he told me was that when he was in the Cabi-
net as Minister for Foreign Affairs, there was never a thought of competing with
the United States in naval armaments. The United States was never taken into
consideration when "two keels for one" was the policy regarding other countries.
He said they did not fear war with the Unit3d States, and they did not wish to
compete with us because they realized that we could beat them, having more money

(2)

and more resources. What he said was almost identical with what I said to Lloyd George when he were framing the Armistice with Germany, and when I was insisting that sea laws were a proper subject for international discussion.

Grey has about the same opinion of Lloyd George as I have. He knows his good qualities and regrets his weaknesses.

He has been preparing his memoirs, but thought to discontinue them after the Prince Lichnowsky disclosures because he thought the answer was fully made then. I urged him to continue them and have them ready for posthumous publication if it was thought advisable.

I returned to London July 7th, and Grey, Cecil and Tyrrell lunched with me.

On Tuesday, July 8th, I began sitting on the Commission on Mandates. The other members present were Lord Milner, M. Simon, Marconi and Viscount Chinda. We finished Mandates for Classes B and C in three days, and deferred Class A until later. The *proces verbal* will give the details.

My cable to the President of July 8th, and the President's cable to me of about July 6th are parts of the record. My letter to the President of July 4th is also part of the record, as is also my letter to Clemenceau of July 11th. Clemenceau's despatch of about the 8th is also attached. He invited me most warmly to be with him at Paris today at the great Victory Parade. I was touched with the warmth of the message and sent one in reply equally cordial. My letter to Clemenceau of the 11th was written at the instigation of M. Monnet, and was not in accord with my judgment. What I said I meant, but I had told it to him in person and it would have been better not to have urged him again to place a particular man upon the League of Nations.

July 24, 1919.

The letter I wrote Clemenceau which I mentioned in the diary of the 14th

(3)

was not delivered. I am delighted. I have promised to write another letter
of the same nature, but it will be without any special suggestion as to men.

I have been at Green Wood Gate most of the time since the last entry.
I have been to London only once, and that was for two days the 22nd and 23rd.
I did nothing of particular interest while there excepting the discussion with
some of our people methods of procedure for the League of Nations. Cecil and
Drummond have different ideas from mine regarding what is necessary to be done
now. They say, however, they will defer to my judgment. I hope they will.

They wished to postpone the Washington meeting while I wish to have it
sometime in October, certainly not later than early November. Their reasons
are that we will not have time to get up an impressive agenda, and that the
meeting will not impress the world with the potency of the League of Nations.
I differ from them. If we postpone the meeting until the first of the year,
the world will begin to say that it is another case of the Hague Conference.
We have formed the League but it is not functioning. I wish to get at it
at once and let the Washington meeting continue as long as is necessary to
work out an impressive agenda and obtain results.

We also differ on the question of publicity. I told Fosdick not to
press the point now because I would prefer that the matter should not be taken
up until it was certain that an American representative was to sit on the Coun-
cil. It would seem that England, France and Italy would ratify the Treaty and
put it into effect. Then there would be a meeting of the Council. Drummond
and Cecil think the United States could be invited to sit whether we had rati-
fied the Treaty or not. I differ from them and so does Fosdick. Even if they
are correct in their interpretation of the Covenant, it would be bad policy,
for it would put an additional burden on the President in his fight with the
Senate.

(4)

Since the last entries were made, the President sent me a cable accepting
as satisfactory Mandates B and C which I submitted for his approval. I sent
him a cable also about Mandate A which is a part of the record.

On the evening of the 22nd we dined with Lord and Lady Curzon to meet
King Manuel and his Queen. There was a rather impressive list of guests in-
cluding the American Ambassador, General Pershing, Admiral Beatty, Lord Buck-
master, the Spanish Ambassador, Lord Revelstoke, Sir William Tyrrell and many
others. Manuel asked me privately if there was anything I thought he could
do to help in the work I was doing. He spoke of his kinsman, the Duc de Ven-
dome, whom he said had told him of his conversation with me some weeks ago in
Paris. He expressed himself as being at my service and hoped I would commu-
nicate with him if I thought he could be useful. I did not quite understand
his reference, but I did not press the matter since I had my doubts as to what
he was talking about. My activities are rather diversified and I was not
certain just what part of them he wished to further.

I had a delightful talk with Buckmaster. He thinks conditions are
lamentable in England.

We lunched with Mrs. Astor yesterday. She had some "labor women"
who were not in the least interesting. The poorest people I have met in Eng-
land are Mrs. Astor and the Duchess of Marlborough. Both plead poverty. The
Astors do not know how they are to keep warm next winter, and the Duchess told
me in the afternoon when we went together to see the statue of Chatham which is
to be presented to the United States by the American women in England, that she
wished to sell Sunderland House and reduce her establishment. She said she
occasionally sold jewels to meet current expenses. It may soon be necessary
to take up a collection to relieve the rich.

Mrs. Mary Fels was a caller. She desires me to meet H. G. Wells.

(5)

I shall try to do so when we go for our promised week-end with Lord and Lady
Sandwich. Wells lives between London and Cambridge and I may drop in on him
for lunch.

Sir George Paish has been one of Mr. Trumbull's guests during the week.
He asked me to meet the Liberal press representatives at dinner which I agreed
to do. The list he gave included Gilbert Murray, Spender, Gardiner, Hobson,
Sidney Webb and several others.

I received a telegram from Henry White the other day asking me if I
would come to Paris to sign the Austrian Treaty. I declined to do so, giving
as an excuse a meeting of the Commission on Mandates, August 5th. I do not
want to go to Paris again. If I was there I would of necessity have to see
a great many people and would get mixed up with their troubles, which I can
avoid by remaining away. As I said in a recent letter to the President, I
would have been entirely willing to have remained with the Conference provided
I had been left in absolute charge, which, in the circumstances, was hardly pos-
sible.

I have often wondered whether I advised the President wisely when I sug-
gested his coming to Europe to attend the Peace Conference. I am sure, as far
as his reputation is concerned, it was a mistake, for he lost much prestige.
It can never be determined whether his coming resulted in more general good
than if he had remained in Washington. Some think one way and some another,
and it must always remain a matter for speculation.

What I should have preferred would have been to have had the chairman-
ship of the delegation and to have had as my colleagues Taft, Root, McAdoo and
Bryan. I could most have driven that team successfully if I had been in charge.
To Root I would have given matters of international law of which there were
He would have been quite content with serving in that capacity.
Many Taft, I should have placed on the League of Nations Committee with my-

(6)

self. That would have contented him. McAdoo would have had to do with reparations, finance and economic clauses. He would have been busy enough in the doing of this successfully. To Bryan I would have given labor questions, self-determination and problems of that kind. He does not care for details and, from what I know of his attitude as a Cabinet Member, I am reasonably sure I could have held him content.

The President in Washington was the final arbiter of the Conference would have been in a much stronger position than when he left his pedestal to sit with common clay. He had a place before the Conference without precedent in history. Many looked upon him as a second Christ come to deliver the world.

With the personnel I have mentioned I am sure we could have finished the labors of the Congress many months sooner. I would have been in a position to have forced orderly executive action, which was never done and is not being done now. [It was not only neglected at the Congress, but all the governments of which I am informed have neglected it at home. Great Britain, the United States, Italy, France and Belgium are floundering hopelessly under conditions met by a created by the war and which needed to be well thought out program. I suppose Great Britain will muddle out of the present situation in some way, but the outlook is dark and the future, at the moment, seems even darker.

Going back to the Conference, I am inclined to believe that Clemenceau will come out of it as the outstanding figure. We are too close at present to speak with certitude. The President's chances for fame growing out of his work at the Congress lie with the League of Nations. If that is a success, then all will be well with him.

July 28, 1919.

On Saturday, July 26th, Loulie and I went to London, took lunch with Lady Scott and met Mrs. Reginald McKenna, Admiral McCully of our Navy, and Col.

(7)

Stirling of the British Army. After lunch I had Monnet, Fosdick and Bonsal come in for a conference.

We then motored to Hinchingbrooke, the country-seat of the Earl of Sandwich. At my request they had no other guests excepting Lord Haldane and Lady Scott. Hinchenbrooke is one of the loveliest places in England. It was very beautiful, and I thought I should like it very much. It was in a place called Easton House, near Easton, and there was a fine lake in the front garden. It was interesting to be in the Cromwell atmosphere and where he had lived at one time.

It was our intention to remain over Monday and I had agreed to take lunch with H. G. Wells at Easton Glebe near Dunmow on that day, but Haldane persuaded me to motor back to London Sunday afternoon in order to dine with him and Lord Grey. It seems that Curzon and Lloyd George asked Haldane to press Grey to accept the post of Ambassador to the United States, and Haldane desired me to assist in this effort. Haldane and I felt that it would be useless to ask him to become Ambassador but we thought it might be possible to persuade him to go for a few months as a special envoy. The matters Curzon and George told Haldane they wished Grey to deal with were the Irish question, the Navy Building Program and the League of Nations.

We left Hinchingbrooke in the afternoon at three o'clock, motored to Cambridge and called on Dr. Shipman, the Chancellor of the University. I arranged to lunch with him on the 11th when we shall be passing through that neighborhood on our way to the Norfolk Broads. We then went to Easton Glebe and took tea with Mr. and Mrs. H. G. Wells. From there we went to Hatfield House to call on Lord and Lady Salisbury. The young Earl Grey was also there. They wished us to remain for dinner and the night but I had to hasten on to London to meet Grey and Haldane. I was almost a half hour late as it was.

(8)

We had a delightful and interesting evening. Grey told Haldane that he would write a memorandum of his views on the naval building program between the United States and Great Britain, and would send it to him within a day or two so he might hand it to the Prime Minister to inform him of the policy he would pursue if he went to Washington as Special Envoy. Grey outlined his view as follows:

The United States could build as large a navy as she desired and Great Britain would not compete since the United States could outbuild her if she desired to do so, but more particularly for the reason that there was no cause to fear war with the United States. However, it was to be understood that Great Britain, if she found it necessary, should build two keels for one against Russia, Germany, France or any of the European Powers regardless of what the United States might do or not do in the circumstances. On the other hand, Great Britain recognized that the United States might feel it necessary to enter into a large construction program against Japan and if she did, Great Britain would not consider that it was in any way directed at her. Grey thought the Navy people in Great Britain would seriously object to such a policy and that Lloyd George would have trouble with them.

As to the League of Nations, neither of us thought there would be any difficulty. Grey insisted there must be a British program regarding Ireland before he would consent to go to America, and it must be a program that he could accept and advocate in the United States. My suggestion here was that Haldane should put it to Curzon and George that Grey could scarcely discuss the Irish question at Washington without knowing what the British Government had in mind, therefore, he would like to know what their policy was. That the burden of forming a policy should rest with George and Curzon and not with Grey. Grey was not to accept it if it did not meet his views.

(9)

It is a great pleasure to come in touch again with a man of Grey's high
character. He is, as I have said before, in many ways the most splendid
figure that has come out of this war.

Haldane and Grey réminiscent about the beginning of the war. In 1905,
they told me, the French Ambassador, Cambon, first approached the British
Government through Grey concerning an alliance between Great Britain and
France. It was at the time of the Algeciras crisis. Grey pointed out to
Cambon that it was impossible for the British Cabinet to promise definitely
to help France in the event of an aggressive war by Germany, he could only say
that, in his opinion, if Germany forced a war, Great Britain would come to the
rescue of the French. That, Grey said, was the beginning of the Anglo-French
understanding.

Grey was leaving for the north on the 10.45 train and I motored him
to King's Cross.

I spent most of this morning at Sunderland House discussing League
of Nations matters with Drummond, Fosdick, Shepardson, Bonsal and others. I
constantly regret that the President's relations with the Senate are not such
that we could have known before the Treaty was signed that it would have the
approval of that body. The entire organization of the League of Nations
would have been in our hands, may I say, in my hands. We could have had an
American for Director General and the rest would have been easy. It was im-
possible to do this in the circumstances; the Senate would have resented it
and there would have been no way by which we could have secured money to keep
the League running until the Treaty was ratified. As it is, the French and
English are scrapping around for the funds necessary for expenses. None of
the staff are being paid except the clerical force. The joint expenditures
of all the belligerents for one day during the war was more than the cost of

(10)

the League of Nations will be for a hundred years.

August 2, 1919.

Our interesting visitors this week have been Admiral and Lady Beatty, who spent the night on Wednesday, and Baron Goto, Minister for Foreign Affairs in the late Japanese Cabinet, who took lunch with us yesterday.

I had an intimate talk with Beatty. He told in detail of the Battle of Jutland. He spoke of it as the greatest tragedy in history. I shall not go into it because it will be written of better than I could do it here. He spoke more kindly of Jellico than I expected, because I know in his heart he feels great bitterness on account of Jellico's failure to press the German fleet to a conclusion. He said the Germans opened fire fifteen seconds before the British and that they made a hit ten seconds before the British. That in the first twenty minutes the German fire was as accurate as that of the British, but after that it became uncertain and before the fight was ended they showed every sign of demoralization.

It is to be remembered that the British battle cruisers were fighting German battle ships for Jellico never brought up the British battle-ships which might have turned what was only a slight British advantage, into the greatest naval victory of history. Beatty believes the war would have ended two years sooner if Jellico had pressed the Germans to a conclusion on that fateful day. With the German Fleet gone, he contends, the German submarine bases could have been choked, and that menace would never have assumed the proportions that it did.

Beatty said he tried to get Churchill not to appoint Jellico as Commander in Chief, but urged him to make him First Sea Lord instead. Jellico, he thinks, is an able man but lacks initiative and the push necessary for active

(11)

command.

He was as much puzzled as I have been during the war that the Germans did not do two or three things. One was to come out and force battle. He believes they had more than a gambler's chance of success for the reason that the initiative was with them which would have given them sufficient advantage to neutralize the difference in the fleets. For instance, they could have chosen the day and could have sent their submarines in advance along the track they knew the British Fleet would have to follow the German Fleet. They could have laid minefields and manoeved the British into them. A few successful torpedoes would have equalized the difference between the two, and then it would have been for the best man to win.

Another thing I have never been able to understand, nor does Beatty, is why the Germans did not send out some of their fast battle cruisers to destroy British shipping and at least break up for a time the transportation of American troops. Beatty says that a daring commander could have gone into the Channel and sunk as many as four hundred English merchantmen lying in the harbors along the coast.

He said that as soon as he assumed command of the Fleet he insisted upon the Government deepening Scapa Flow so it might hold the entire Grand Fleet. The Government insisted that it could not be done and tried to dissuade him, but he demanded it as a measure of the greatest importance. The Cabinet gave way and he said that in four or five months it was finished. This brought his naval base appreciably nearer the Germans.

Beatty is evidently disappointed that he has not been made First Sea Lord now that the German Fleet has been destroyed. I gathered this from the indiscreet talk of Lady Beatty. I also got from the same source that they had no particular love for the Prime Minister.

(12)

My impression of Beatty is that he is an energetic, courageous seaman, and that if he had been in chief command at the Battle of Jutland, a different story might have been written. Just how much ability he has I am unable to say, but I should think as a sailor considerable. Thaxxarrikish Fisher impresses me more than any other British Naval man. He talks too much but he has real ability, combined with the necessary attributes for a successful commander at sea.

Baron Goto came with his secretary and son-in-law, Mr. Yusuke Tsurumi. Much to my surprise, he talked during the several hours he was here on one subject alone and that was the opium question as far as it related to China and Formosa. He wants China to have a monopoly of the opium traffic, and to use it as a means of revenue just as Formosa has done. Prime Ito was persuaded by Goto not to abolish the opium traffic in Formosa, but to use it as a source of revenue. Goto claims beneficent results. With the money they have raised from this traffic he states they have abolished malaria from the island, and have done all sorts of work of public benefit. Goto was Civil Governor of the Island of Formosa for many years. He thinks China could obtain a revenue of something like one hundred and fifty to two hundred million yen if she undertook to raise revenue from opium as Formosa has done, and he claims to believe that the result would be of benefit to the people in every sense. It was a most curious argument and reminds me of the Louisiana Lottery, of the traffic in whiskey and other such methods of raising public funds. I gave Goto no encouragement as to his proposal.

Yesterday we lunched with Lord and Lady Bryce at their country home Hindleap. Mr. and Mrs. Herbert Hoover are coming to spend the night. He is on his way to France and telephoned from London today that it was important to have a conference with me. My letter to the President of July 30th is an important part of the record.

(13)

August 3, 1919.

Hoover fairly wallowed in gloom last night. He talked to me steadily from seven o'clock until ten and there was not a ray of light to be seen in any direction. Europe is to be in chaos, according to him, within thirty days. I tried to get him to make it thirty-one but he refused. This time it is not food but coal that will bring the disaster. The situation is bad I admit, but I shall be surprised to find all his predictions come true.

Lloyd George read one of the reports made by the Economic Council and Hoover tells me he is thoroughly alarmed. It bears out my contention that the aftermath of the war should have been carefully thought out and some comprehensive plan reached to meet the conditions which were sure to follow. This hand-to-mouth policy is not to my liking, but I am helpless. If it were not for the fact that so many people are ventilating their views on the rostrom and in the press, I might be induced to change my policy of a lifetime and say something myself. However, that would merely mean more talk and what is really needed is intelligent action.

Hoover tells me that the Crillon is practically deserted and that the few who are there wish to go home.

August 7, 1919.

I motored to London Monday afternoon the fourth. I reached the Ritz at 7.20 and found an autograph note from Lord Grey which he had left in person. I also found a telephone message from Lord Haldane saying it was urgent that they see me and insisting that I come to dinner at once without waiting to dress. Grey was leaving on the 10.40 for Northumberland and they both considered it of importance for the three of us to hold a conference before he left.

I went to Haldane's and we sat down to dinner almost immediately upon

(14)

my arrival at 28 Queen Anne's Gate. Grey had taken lunch with Lloyd George and George had suggested that Haldane and I lunch with them. That was impossible since I was not in town. Grey considered that he had had a satisfactory conversation with George concerning not only the naval program but the Irish question. However, George told him that he would send a memorandum giving the Government's views upon the Irish question. The memorandum had just arrived before dinner and, much to Grey's annoyance and surprise, it was nothing further than the letter Lloyd George wrote Redmond last year.

It was agreed by the three of us that Grey should write a memorandum immediately upon his return to Fallodon and send it to Haldane who would first submit it to me and, if I approved, it should go to Lloyd George. Grey wrote this memorandum Tuesday, Haldane received it Wednesday, and last night after Sydney Brooks' dinner, I called by Haldane's at eleven o'clock and read Grey's note to Haldane and the memorandum which he enclosed for my approval.

Grey's letter was rather dense. Upon the face of it it seemed that the memorandum enclosed was to be handed me for approval and then returned to him. Haldane did not feel that he had any authority under Grey's instructions in the letter to let the Prime Minister see it, although George had telephoned him once or twice during the day asking if he had received it. I interpreted the letter differently from Haldane and he came round to my way of thinking. It was therefore agreed that he should go to Lloyd George this morning at ten, show him the memorandum, and that I should come by Queen Anne's Gate on my way to the country to find what had happened.

Haldane had just returned when I reached his home this morning a few minutes after eleven o'clock. He had had a rather stormy time with George who called in Bonar Law for consultation. According to Haldane, the difficulty was as to whether Ireland should be permitted to impose her own customs etc. or

(15)

whether that function of government should continue with the Imperial Govern-
ment. George finally gave Haldane a memorandum stating there were many diffi-
culties regarding the customs question of giving Ireland the right to exercise
her own customs, but that the Government would not consider the matter unfa-
vorably if a practicable way out could be shown. It was a very long way for
George and Bonar Law to go and I congratulated Haldane upon his success.

As the matter stands now, the Government is committed to home rule
for Ireland, for all of it that desires it, and on a broad scale, but the
details are yet to be worked out. Haldane wishes to put an administrator
in Ireland to carry out a home rule plan almost on the same lines as Domin-
ion Home Rule, believing that if this is done, the other will follow auto-
matically. My fear of this is that the Irish will not lend a sympathetic
hand to the carrying out of such a policy and, if they do not, it cannot be
successfully accomplished. Haldane was fearful lest I was right and yet
he was insistent that it was the best plan to follow.

The fact that George has accepted Grey's policy in regard to the
naval program of the United States and Great Britain goes a long
way toward settling our differences. Grey used much of my argument in his
memorandum to the Prime Minister. Among other things he told him he be-
lieved that if the British Government frankly stated in Parliament that
there could never be any rivalry in naval building between the two countries,
and that Great Britain would never undertake to lay keels against the United
States no matter what the United States might do, that it would practically
stop naval construction in the United States.

The only line concerning the naval program which I would rather have
had left out was the one George insisted upon putting in, that is, in the
event Great Britain announced such a policy as Grey Outlined, the United

Note. Grey afterwards told me that this meant that the United States would not undertake to build against Great Britain. E.M.H.

States should reciprocate. Just what he means by "reciprocate" I do not know. It is rather too general a term. (Note)

George and his Government find it almost essential to link Grey up with them, and Grey, Haldane and I have practically made them come to our terms. I was the final arbiter, because Grey insisted that he would not go to Washington as a Special Envoy unless I thought his instructionswise and possible of accomplishment.

On Tuesday we had two meetings of the Mandate Commission. My cable to the President of last night speaks for itself and I will not go into it further. I had a tentative understanding with Lord Robert Cecil that we should get together a week from next Sunday at Green Wood Gate and discuss the question as to when the Washington meeting of the League of Nations should be held. He has written a memorandum on the subject setting forth his views as to why it should be deferred until next year.

I took occasion Monday evening to ask the opinion of Grey and Haldane about this. They agreed with me that it should be held as soon as possible after the ratification of the Treaty.

On Tuesday night at the dinner given me at the Reform Club by Sir George Paish to meet the editors and writers of liberal opinion in England, I put the same question to them. They were unanimous in the opinion that the meeting should be held as early as practicable. I also put to Grey and Haldane and to these writers the question of publicity. There, again, there was unanimity in favor of publicity at the meeting of the Council and the Assembly.

I believe I have stated before that Wickham Steed, Editor of the London Times, came to the same view after I explained the situation to him.

(17)

Therefore, when it comes to an issue, I shall be able to thorw the weight not only of liberal England against Lloyd George in this controversy, but also the Northcliffe Press. I am doing my best not to allow the issue to come up until we are ready to combat it.

At the Reform Club there were among others: J. A. Spender, Sir Gilbert Murray, Graham Wallace, J. A. Hobson, H. W. Massingham and Sir George Paish. There were ten of us in all. It was a delightful evening and a profitable one I think. When the dinner was over, Gilbert Murray thanked me in the name of the guests for coming and talking with them. He said, "I think I express the unanimous opinion of those present when I say that we all agree with what Col-House has said this evening."

We talked of Russia. I gave a summary of the Russian controversy both at the International Conference in Paris in 1917 and at the Peace Conference in 1918-19. In the conversation there was displayed much distrust of France. They seem to attribute what is wrong in the Peace Treaty to France.

I was very frank in telling them of all the happenings, and I particularly tried to show them what a difficult role the President had to play. They understood I think, for the first time, what it meant for England to express herself overwhelmingly in favor of a Conservative rather than a Liberal Government, and at a time when the President needed his hands upheld as never before. I advised those gathered at the dinner to press the Government at every turn of the road when they went in the direction of reaction. I advised them to ask about army and navy estimates and to constantly keep before the people the things being done about which there was no satisfactory explanation. I thought if the Government knew they had to explain, they would be very much less likely to decide upon matters in secret. I thought we should have a group like them in America and also in France to put the same disagreeable questions to the governments.

(18)

Strangely enough, the first attack was made in the London Daily News on Secretary Baker's army program of some 500,000 men and compulsory service. Personally I agree with the idea of a mild form of compulsory military service such as Baker has advised, but I do not agree with his program for a standing army of anything like the proportions he has recommended. If we are to have compulsory service, even in so diluted a form, a very small standing army is sufficient.

Yesterday we lunched at Kenwood on Hampstead Heath now occupied by Mrs. Leeds. The Grand Duchess George was there and so also was Lady Sarah Wilson and General Sir Arthur Paget. I took Sir William Tyrrell out with us as a condition of my going since I had a tentative engagement to lunch with him.

I can understand how prejudiced the ordinary man is against society of that sort. Mrs. Leeds suggested machine guns as a remedy for strikes. The Grand Duchess asked Tyrrell why the British Government were not doing more in the way of propaganda against Bolshevism. She complained bitterly of the inertia of England in that direction. Tyrrell, who is a great Liberal, told her that the English Government had attempted to explain to the people how many murders were being committed in Russia, but some of the audience usually put the question to the speaker as to whether those being killed were not the idle rich, and the audience generally agreed that perhaps it was not a bad thing not only for Russia but that it might well be practiced elsewhere. The Duchess said nothing more except to indicate that this point of view had never reached her before.

Kenwood is a lovely place-- in some ways I would rather have it than any estate in England. It is only fifteen or twenty minutes from the heart of London and with its several hundred acres of exquisite landscape gardening, it appeals to me as hardly any other place does. The comfort and beauty of the house is also worth mention. Mrs. Leeds indicated a wish to have us as her permanent guests while we were in England. We have many invitations of this sort which, of

(19)

course, we do not accept.

Colonel Lloyd Griscom called yesterday to ask about General Pershing's home going. Griscom said Pershing knew that it was full of perils, and they both wished for advice. He outlined a program himself which I almost wholly approved. In addition I told him to tell Pershing to be careful about answering letters of a political nature. I advised, before answering them, to submit them to his wily and experienced father-in-law, Senator Warren of Wyoming, and to let Warren practically dictate the answers.

Griscom particularly wished to know what he should tell reporters when they asked him about the nomination for President. I advised saying "I never refuse in advance a thing that has not been offered me." Griscom seemed pleased with this formula and said he would submit it to Pershing.

Kent Cooper, of the Associated Press, was another caller. He wished to know whether in my opinion it would be advisable for the Associated Press to run a special wire into Geneva. I advised very strongly to do so. He also wanted to know what I thought of Charles T. Thompson, who has been in Paris all winter, for their permanent correspondent there. In my opinion it was as good a selection as could be made.

Justice Brandeis called by appointment before I left the Ritz Hotel this morning. He is just back from Palestine and gave a very lucid description of the country and of its diverse inhabitants. We talked of the difficulties attending the Zionist Movement and other matters in relation thereto. I explained to him the difficulty we were having with the French concerning the formation of Mandate A and I read him a part of the cable I sent the President last night.

We reached Green Wood Gate at half past one o'clock today in time to meet Lord and Lady Bryce who lunched with us. Bryce and I had an intimate conversation afterward concerning Turkey and its component parts. He is especially

(20)

ly interested in Armenia and hoped we, the United States, would not only accept a mandate for it, but that we would find it convenient to send troops there in the meantime to keep down massacres.

At the meeting of the Mandate Commission I took Viscount Chinda aside and urged him to advise his Government to make a statement immediately in regard to their intention of giving up Shantung. I thought they were doing themselves an injustice and an even greater injustice to the President, that he was being hammered in the United States because of the position he took in Paris in favor of Japan, and that he had upheld the Japanese in their desire to take this territory and transfer it to China through the medium of their Government rather than have it directly transferred in the Treaty. Chinda gave me an almost positive assurance that Japan would make the announcement. Note. I take it he is sending a strong representation to his Government in regard to our conversation.

One of the most beautiful dinners I have recently had given me was the one Sydney Brooks gave in my honor last night. He had a private room at the Savoy Hotel and he spared no expense in making it as attractive as possible. The food was delicious, the decorations beautiful and the guests distinguished and interesting. Among them were Lord Lee, T. L. Garvin, Wickham Steed, A. N. Pollen, Captain Chapman, Lord Garford and several others.

August 12, 1919.

Ambassador and Mrs. John W. Davis came down to spend the week-end with us on Saturday. Unfortunately, I had a chill and went to bed before their arrival and saw nothing of them. I also had to cancel an engagement for lunch with Lady Northcliffe who lives close by.

Yesterday I received a message from Lord Haldane saying that Lord Grey would be there this morning and that they would expect me at eleven o'clock. The

Notes. This was done a few days later.

(21)

Prime Minister had invited the three of us to lunch to discuss Grey's going to America. Haldane sent his telegram on Sunday but by some mischance I did not receive it until Monday morning. I at once telephoned to London, where Gordon had just gone on his way to America, and arranged for him to see Haldane and explain that I was not well enough to go to London, but I hoped that he and Grey would come to Green Wood Gate for the afternoon and night.

Grey came and remained until after dinner when I sent him to London by motor. Immediately upon his arrival we went into conference and, at my suggestion, he drew up more definitely his terms about Ireland. My Secretary, Miss Denton, took the dictation and we afterwards read and corrected it and Grey, at my suggestion again, will present it to Lloyd George this morning as one of the conditions of his going to America.

Grey sees the peril of going on a mission for a Prime Minister and a Cabinet with whom he is out of tune, but he grimly remarked that they ran as much danger as he did because if they did not give him a free hand and were not willing to have an understanding with the United States in regard to the League of Nations, the Navy and Ireland, which he thought proper, he would return and give to the public his reasons for doing so. Grey goes with the greatest reluctance. He likes the freedom of private life and since he is nearly blind it is irksome to consider such a task as he has consented to assume.

He plied me with many questions about Washington, as to its social functions, and whether he needed an equipment of clothes. I advised him to stop at the British Embassy and to insist that Sir William Wiseman be kept in the United States while he was there. I let him know that the Prime Minister did not like Wiseman, nor Wiseman the Prime Minister, but I thought it essential for his, Grey's, convenience and comfort to have him there.

Much to my delight, he is to take Sir William Tyrrell as his private secre-

(22)

tary, provided Tyrrell will go. With Grey, Tyrrell and Wiseman there one could not
wish for a better combination to work out the differences between our two countries.
Grey asked if I really thought he could be of service by going. My reply was that
if England had a Liberal Government, such as the Asquith-Grey Government, there
would be no need whatever for his going, but since there was quite a different kind
of Government, it was very essential that he should go because, as a condition of
his accepting the mission, he could practically settle the open questions between
the two countries. That, I thought, was the main good to be gained-- the commit-
ment of the Lloyd George Government to his own views which were also those of the
President as well as mine.

We were undertook for the moment whether to insist upon the Plunkett
plan for Dominion Home Rule, the Times plan, which is largely based upon the
Canadian plan, or whether we should take the one outlined by Lord Robert Cecil
in his speech the other day before the Center Party. We finally decided upon the
Cecil plan because, in some respects, it went further than either Plunkett's or The
Times', and Cecil is a Unionist and within the sacred Conservative circle. I read
the plan aloud to Grey, and then Miss Denton came in and took his dictation as he
walked up and down the room. A copy of this is attached.

After we had finished, Grey and I walked through the forest and talked
of nature and other subjects foreign to the political world. He left around nine
o'clock for London.

My letters to the President and to Senator Root of yesterday are parts of
the record.

The Prime Minister and his Cabinet asked Grey to discuss with me the with-
drawal of British troops from the Caucasus. They did not wish our people to think
they were trying to force the United States to take a Mandate over Armenia and that
region. It seems the general opinion that if the British troops are withdrawn

(23)

there will be a general massacre of Christians by the Turks unless other troops
are sent to replace them. They desired me to understand, and to convey the information if I thought proper to the President, the situation as far as Great Britain
was concerned.

August 14, 1919.

Lord Grey's letter to me yesterday goes further into detail concerning the
British withdrawal of their troops. This letter is a part of the record.

Raymond Fosdick came down from London yesterday and spent the greater part
of the day talking over matters relating to the League of Nations. Eric Drummond
and Lord Robert Cecil are anxious to make a start on the International Court. I
agreed that Drummond could sent out the names of those already selected for the
Court and leave the United States' place vacant. He will take a poll of the Or-
ganization Committee by letter. When this is in, I told Fosdick I would consider
what was further best to do. I am trying in every way possible to hold them down
from action until our Senate does or does not ratify the Treaty.

August 16, 1919.

I have several cables which are attached to the records. One from Frank
Polk and one which he encloses in his letter to me of August 13th from the Pres-
ident in which the President repeats my cable of August 6th relating to the Man-
dates and asking that Polk see Clemenceau in order to facilitate the making of
Mandate A.

Polk also sends me a copy of his despatch of August 11th to the President.
I have a despatch from Polk dated, Paris, August 14th, regarding Belgian claims in
East Africa. My reply is attached to it and explains my position.

Sir William Tyrrell came from London, took lunch and remained most of the

(24)

afternoon. We discussed plans for the Grey Mission to Washington. Tyrrell wrote me the other day that I was responsible for Grey's consent to go, and that both our countries owed me a debt of gratitude. He confirmed this today by telling me that he had asked Grey direct what had induced him to go and he had replied: "House convinced me that it was my duty".

Tyrrell told of the meeting between Grey, Lloyd George and Curzon on Tuesday of this week at which Tyrrell was present. Tyrrell had a feeling that George is already somewhat jealous of the laudations Grey is receiving. He said Grey would leave the time of his departure entirely to me. I do not desire him to reach Washington too soon. In my opinion, it would be a mistake to arrive while the Senate is wrangling over the Treaty. It would be difficult for him to keep out of it. The mere fact of his coming would cause some of the Senators to think that Great Britain was accepting the ratification of the Treaty as a fact and that the Grey Mission had to do with the putting in operation of its clauses.

I feel largely responsible for Grey's success and I am anxious that the situation should be as nearly perfect as we can devise. I shall undertake to try to get him a good press upon his arrival.

Tyrrell, at Grey's instance, cabled Wiseman asking him to either serve as a part of the Mission or in a private capacity. This was done at my instigation. There are many details which Tyrrell and I are working out but which are not of sufficient interest to relate. I have arranged to meet Grey in London on Wednesday of next week for a further conference. Tyrrell and I pretty well covered the foreign policy of the world in one way or another, and we believe when we reach America we can bring about an understanding between our two countries that will redound to the good of all.

I advised Tyrrell to tell Grey that it was essential to expedite the ratification of the Treaty in England, France, Italy and Japan. If this is done it

(25)

will force an early consideration in the United States. He is to tell Grey this
from me but I urged him not to let it go beyond Grey that I had given such advice.
I told him there were Americans in London and Paris hostile to the President and
quite close to members of the British Cabinet. If these Americans were told in-
advertently that I had given this advice, it would soon be in Washington and would
nullify any good effect the early ratification of the Treaty would otherwise have.
Tyrrell promised discretion.

Yester, my old Quaker friend, Joseph Wicksteed, came over to see me. I was
touched by the fact that he had walked a large part of the way in order to be here
for the few moments I was able to give him. He has a strange personality. One
finds him in Russia or in America and other countries preaching the gospel of peace
and good will toward men. In speaking of Lloyd George he said that he meant well,
but that he had a "spiritual vulgarity" that was offensive to many people.

August 18, 1919.

We went to tea with Lady Northcliffe yesterday. Sir Robert Hudson and
Garvin were there. In an intimate talk with Lady Northcliffe I found that she
and Lord Northcliffe were particularly bitter against Lloyd George because he had
made his attack upon Northcliffe at a time when he was about to undergo a very se-
rious operation. She said Northcliffe was coming from Scotland to see me before
I leave in September.

We went to Old Buckhurst to lunch with the Colfaxs. Garvin was also there.
There were several Lords whose names I have already forgotten. Garvin came home
with me and we had a further talk. He declared that when I gave the signal he
would support the views I expressed to him regarding the League of Nations.
Loulie and Janet went to Scotland tonight to be gone a week.

August 22, 1919.

I motored up to London on Tuesday. My first engagement was with

Editor of the Times. (26)

Wickham Steed. We talked over the general situation. He wished to see me before going on his vacation. He had a despatch from one of his correspondents in New York saying it was current that the President and I had had a falling out. Tyrrell later told me that the Foreign Office had a similar despatch with a request that the information be given the Prime Minister and Mr. Balfour. Tyrrell and I both thought this peculiar and he is cabling for the name of the informant. The Tyrrell despatch stated that the difference between the President and me had arisen because I had been so pro-British that he considered I had delayed the Peace Conference three months. This seems the acme of foolishness.

I have received several cables and have sent some to the President and one long one to Lansing in reply to his inquiry regarding the status of the non-signa-
tory powers to the League of Nations. Both his cable and mine are attached.

I cabled the President about the mandate position with France and made a recommendation.

On Wednesday Grey and Ambassador Davis and Tyrrell took lunch with me at the Ritz. We had a long discussion afterward regarding the League of Nations, Mandates and other matters of current interest in which Grey is now much interested because of his Washington adventure. I desired to inform Davis too concerning these matters. I have in mind to ask the President to let Davis sit on any future Man-
date proposed meetings which may occur after I have returned home. I am planning to return to the United States around the middle of September and I have promised Lord Grey, if he would wait, I would accompany him. Grey has left the time of his sailing entirely to me. He sees the importance of not getting to Washington at the wrong time. Davis concurred in the advice I gave Grey as to the time of his departure.

Later in the afternoon of Wednesday, Lord Grey and Lord Robert Cecil came to the Ritz for a conference. Cecil and I had our long deferred discus-

(27)

Cecil said: "This is something Lord Grey should not hear but which I think you should know. Our Government is not particularly favorable to any such League of Nations as the rest of us have in mind. Their idea is a League is one that will give some advantage to the British Empire." I asked if he thought he was giving me real information.

After Grey and Cecil left I had a long talk with Raymond Fosdick regarding the League, the Mandates etc. etc.

Yesterday the Lord Chief Justice and Sir William Tyrrell came to lunch. When we were reminiscing about the war Reading said "until the history of this war is written no one can know what an important part you have played." All of us agreed that one of the finest actions of the President was permitting our troops to be brigaded with French and English troops at the critical period of the war.

Just before lunch Fosdick and I had a conference. He brought a memorandum from Sir Eric Drummond which he is sending Clemenceau and Lloyd George and which he desired me to cable to the President. I declined to do so. The purport of the memorandum was that the three of them were to determine when the meeting of the League was to be held in Washington, when a subsequent meeting was to be held, whether or not there should be publicity at the meeting of the Council and many other things of that nature. I told Fosdick to tell Drummond that Wilson, Clemenceau and George

(28)

were not the League of Nations and that these questions he was asking them were matters
for the League itself to determine; That the sooner the notion that the heads of the
three Powers could determine the policy of the League of Nations was abandoned the
better. The thought has already gone out that the League is nothing further than
the "Holy Alliance" over again, and it looks as if we were trying to do everything
to make this thought real. I told him that as far as I was concerned I would have
nothing to do with it and I would advise if the memorandum had not already been given
George and Clemenceau to cancel it. Fosdick agreed with me without reservation and
he undertook, and later told me that he was able, to stop the memorandum going to
Clemenceau and George. It is to be held in abeyance until Drummond returns Monday.
I shall probably go to London Tuesday or Wednesday and have it out with Drummond di-
rect.

The League is in a precarious stage of its existence and if we are not careful, all our hopes will be futile. I intend to urge frequent meetings of the Assembly because by doing so the smaller nations will become enthused with the thought of having a part to play in the League. If there are merely meetings of the Council there will soon arise a feeling among the neutrals and smaller nations that there has been created a balance of power within the League and those nations sitting on the Council constitute it.

August 25, 1919.

I lunched with Lady Northcliffe yesterday. Sir Robert Hudson and several others were there. I was invited to come in order to receive some messages from Northcliffe. In his letter to Lady Northcliffe he spoke of me almost with affection and said he thought it necessary to see me before I sailed for home. He offered to come to Liverpool or London if his physician would permit. He sees our two countries headed for trouble because of the mischief makers in England and the United States.

I lunched today with the Colfaxs at Old Buckhurst.

(29)

August 27, 1919.

I have just returned from London where I went Tuesday. The first person I saw upon arrival was Raymond Fosdick. He said Monnet agreed with me as to the advisability of not sending the memorandum to Lloyd George, Clemenceau and Wilson. Drummond later became convinced it would be a mistake and has withheld the memorandum, I hope indefinitely.

The Ambassador followed Fosdick and remained for lunch. I had no one else excepting Roscoe Trumbull and his wife who motored to London with me. Davis was anxious to discuss the British withdrawal from Caucasia with me. I afterward talked with General Bridges about it over the telephone. Bridges has had charge of the troops in this region. He said they will probably leave a brigade there. If this is done, I believe the exigencies of the situation will be met.

Davis and I discussed the Anglo-Persian Treaty just made public. He said Lord Curzon told him that I knew its contents. I informed Davis of what happened in Paris, that is, Curzon came to me with the request that the Persian Delegation in Paris should not be received by the Conference because the British were dealing directly with the Persian Government unknown to the Persian Delegation in Paris, who were themselves appointed by the Persian Government. The reason he gave me at that time was that it would cause confusion. I passed this information on to the President and, if I remember rightly, he made no comment. Neither of us knew or were at the moment interested in Great Britain's negotiations with Persia. There were so many other matters occupying our attention that we did not seek further information. I advised Davis to write Polk and urge him to do what he could in Paris toward facilitating the ratification of the Versailles Treaty by Italy, France and Great Britain, telling him the President and Lansing considered it would be a great help to them if this were done.

(30)

In this connection I saw Whitney Shepardson today and, much to my surprise, found that Polk, White and Bliss are doing all they can to prevent the French, English and Italians from ratifying the Treaty before we do. In my opinion, it would be best to have the Treaty ratified by three of the Powers and allow it to be put in force. I further believe it would be best if the other Powers would go ahead with the League of Nations regardless of the United States. I so advised Shepardson and Fosdick. Davis agrees with this view. If the United States wishes to keep out let them do so, but let us have the League of Nations for the balance of the world in any event.

Among my other callers were Dr. Field of Zurich. He desired to enlist my good offices in behalf of an institution which he wishes to establish in that city for bringing about a better understanding of American institutions and aims. He said he was constantly meeting people in Switzerland who claimed to be on intimate terms with me, many of them stating they had reason to believe their advice had great weight with me.

Dr. Guesdorff, ex-Minister for Foreign Affairs of Bulgaria, was another caller.

I have a cable from Lansing, in which the President joined, regarding the meeting of the Supreme Economic Council in Washington. Also a cable from the President, in answer to mine of the other day, relating to appointment of commissioners on the Saar Valley and Dantzig Commissions. Also a despatch from Hapgood.

Whitney Shepardson says Clemenceau has changed front as to France's consent to the formation of Mandate A at this time. He has given copies of some cables Polk sent to the President, and a letter from Polk to Clemenceau. These are attached. Clemenceau now wonders whether it would be well to dismember the Turkish Empire. He is evidently distrustful of Great Britain.

Justice Brandeis and Felix Frankfurter were morning callers. I told

(31)

Brandeis of Clemenceau's change of front and of its probable effect upon Zionism.

August 28, 1919.

The Associated Press and newspapers have been telephoning today asking about a dispatch from New York relating to a supposed difference between the President and myself. It is headed "Mr. Wilson breaks with Colonel House". "The David and Jonathan of the United States politicians part." I told one of the press associations that if there was any coolness between the President and myself I had not been conscious of it. I told the New York Tribune correspondent that I had not seen the despatch to which he referred but had heard of it; that, obviously, any statement that was made must come from the other end.

September 4, 1919.

I have been much annoyed by newspaper representatives seeking some expression from me concerning the alleged break between the President and myself. It has been a new sensation for London. They did not realize that it was a "hardy annual" in the United States. The cable from the President about the report is a part of the record. He is always more annoyed about these rumors than I am.

A cable from the President concerning my return home and also one in regard to a clause which he hopes may be inserted in Mandate A are parts of the record as, indeed, are cables from Breckenridge Long, Secretary Lansing, Frank Polk and several others.

I have been greatly upset over the change in my plans. I wished to return home with Lord Grey on the Mauretania, September 20th. However, the President is so urgent in his request for me to remain that I had to yield.

(32)

He gave out a statement very much as I suggested in my cable to him, but I am afraid it was changed enough to irritate the Senate. He should have left out all direct reference to the League of Nations.

Sir William Tyrrell lunched with me Saturday. I motored over to Stonington to fetch him. He was disturbed because I was not to go with Grey. He thought it would distress Grey. He suggested that Grey should not be told until he comes to London next week. I consented to this for the moment but later wrote Tyrrell I thought it unfair and asked him to let Grey know at once. My letter to Tyrrell and his reply are attached.

Tyrrell is concerned at the growing ill feeling between Great Britain and the United States. He declares the only hope he sees is centered in Grey's mission. I am not sure that I would not serve better by going home than by remaining here. My letter to Polk about going to Paris is a part of the record.

I lunched Monday with Mr. and Mrs. Colfax at Old Buckhurst. The other guests were Austin Chamberlain, General Storrs and Henry Harris. Chamberlain is now Chancellor of the Exchequer, Storrs is Governor of Jerusalem and Harris is the British Papal Delegate. Each in turn took me aside for private conversation. Evidently The lunch was given for the purpose of giving them this opportunity. With Chamberlain it was finance. He gave me a memorandum which is attached and with, with my letter of September 3rd, to the President, will explain his conversation.

August

The President's letter of the 15th to me is interesting.

General Storrs wished to discuss the danger of Zionism and of how foolish the Jews were acting in Palestine. They are constantly irritating the Arabs. He evidently has no sympathy with the movement, and yet he believes that in some way it is to be reckoned with because of the promises made by the British and United States Governments. Storrs is only a wartime General. He is an anthro-

(33)

pologist by profession and is an able man with much charm.

Harris thought it important for the United States to send a Papal Delegate to Rome and that the British should continue to be represented there. I was not particularly impressed with his arguments.

I am planning to return to Paris on the 14th and I have had much to do to
finish up my work here preparatory to leaving. Janet and Louise sail on Satur-
day on the S. S. Aquitania and we go to London tomorrow to see them off.

September 8, 1919.

We spent Friday in London and I saw a great many people, among them Her-
bert Hoover. He thinks now that it is barely possible Europe may not go into
the abyss until 1920 or '21. This is better and exceedingly optimistic for
Hoover.

It saddened me to say goodbye to Janet and Louise. Green Wood Gate has
not been the same without them and we are leaving today for London.

Sir Henry Thornton was with us over Sunday. He is a forceful American and his
six years in England have not made him less so.

September 12, 1919.

In motoring to London Monday we stopped at Reigate Priory to lunch
with Mr. and Mrs. Irwin Laughlin. It was the most expensive meal I ever had.
Philip de Laszlo was a guest and it resulted in his painting a portrait of Loulie.
The Laughlines have had him doing some of their family but he begged off until
Saturday or Sunday of this week to come to London to paint Loulie.

Innumerable people have called at the Ritz where we are stopping, Grey and
Tyrrell among the number. I have gone over the situation in the United States
with Grey. I am urging him to take up the financial question. Europe must be

(34)

resuscitated, and everyone seems to be evading the issue, largely, I think, because they do not see a way out.

I have had several talks with Benjamin Strong of the New York Federal Reserve Bank. I am pleased to find him in agreement with me. I believe we can formulate a plan, and after our conversation I asked him to draw up something which I may submit to the President.

I had Strong come in yesterday and meet Lord Grey. I had already impressed Grey with the importance of financial questions, and while he knows next to nothing about finance, he clearly sees how essential some solution is. I told him his people were drifting as were all the other Allied nations, and I suggested that a plan be worked out and submitted to Lloyd George and the Chancellor of the Exchequer for their approval. He hoped I would undertake it and after some discussion with Strong, he is to write a memorandum for Grey to hand his Government.

It is a curious thing that Americans should be working out a financial plan for the British. At first I thought I would write the President and lay the entire scheme before him, but after consideration, I concluded it was not possible to do it by letter. I may therefore defer it until I reach America.

The plan Strong and I have in mind is a redistribution of the debts in a way which will make it easier for Europe to liquidate her indebtedness to us. We wish to put it so as that it will not seem like charity, for, in the long run, that would have a bad effect. Strong made a very good point when he argued that it would be a bad thing for nations successful in war to be compelled to repudiate their war obligations, and this is what some, if not all, must do in the event a feasible plan is not worked out.

Among others I have seen A. G. Gardiner, Francis W. Hirst, Sidney Brooks, Admiral Knapp, and among those who have lunched with us are Sir John and Lady Maxwell. A great many people of importance are out of London on vacation.

(35)

Raymond Fosdick, Monnet and other members of the League of Nations—some have been constant visitors. Marten Bailey gave us a dinner and theater party Wednesday evening at which Sir Eric Drummond was present. It gave Drummond and me an excellent opportunity to talk.

We are leaving tomorrow for Sandwich to lunch with the Astors; then we motor to Deal to take tea with Lord Loreburn; spend tomorrow night at the Royal Pavilion, Folkestone and take ship for France Sunday morning. We are motoring all the way and hope to reach the Crillon about as soon as we would by train.

September 14, 1919.

I went to the Embassy to the Grey dinner, at least I went in just after dinner. It was so warm that I did not care to sit through a tiresome meal. Among the guests were Mr. Balfour and Judge Alton B. parker, Senator Saulsbury and Cecil Harmsworth. There were only some twelve or fourteen. At this season it is impossible to get much of a crowd together in London.

I had a long talk with Balfour who told me that while he was nominally Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs actually he was doing none of the work and had no intention of doing so. I also had a talk with Judge parker. He explained to Saulsbury and me the origin of his celebrated telegram to the Saint Louis Convention regarding Free Silver, a telegram, indeed, many think cost him the Presidency. In my opinion, he had no chance anyway.

Grey came to the Ritz before dinner and remained for nearly an hour. We again went over the financial plan I had presented. We finally concluded that nothing should be done until I returned to the United States. It is a delicate piece of business and unless it is done right it cannot be put through. I should prefer to handle it personally from the start. Grey was rather relieved at this decision because he knows nothing of finance and was nervous over facing the sit-

(36)

uation alone.

We motored to Sandwich yesterday and took lunch with the Astors. There was no one of note there excepting Mrs. John W. Davis who is a nearby neighbor. In the afternoon we took tea with Lord and Lady Loreburn at Kingsdown House near Deal. It is a lovely place, nicely situated on the Downs. We talked for nearly two hours. I am always glad to see Loreburn. I showed him the form of Mandate A which I had submitted to the Mandate Commission. He was delighted with it and made a suggestion in regard to Article 10 which I got him to insert in his own handwriting with a lead pencil.

We motored from Deal to Folkestone where we spent the night. Sir Francis Dent of the South Eastern & Chatham Railway made our trip across the Channel as pleasant as possible. He had not only reserved space for our cars, but they refused to accept pay for them or for the cabin reserved for us. On the boat I had several conferences with Monnet and Fosdick. Drummond was also aboard but I had seen him so recently in London there was nothing further for us to discuss.

We motored from Boulogne to Paris reaching the Crillon at eight o'clock.

Hotel de Crillon,
Paris.

September 15, 1919.

I was with Frank Polk last night until nearly midnight.

This has been a very busy day. I have had no end of visitors. Lord Milner came for an hour's conference. We determined what to do regarding the Mandates. We think it best not to push the French any further but to let the formation of Mandate A go for the present and wait until the Turkish Treaty has been taken up and considered.

(37)

The American Delegation in Paris and their British associates are exercised over the testimony of William C. Bullitt before the Senate Committee. Lansing was his chief, and the fact that he has given to the enemies of the administration his confidential conversations with him, speaks for itself.

I lunched with Lloyd George today at his apartment in Rue Nitot. The others present were RiskdxMarxhaxxAlkmahy Lord Milner, Bonar Law and Winston Churchill. Ghuuskiit Philip Kerr. After lunch Field Marshal Allenby and Winston Churchill came in. George excoriated Bullitt, and is authorizing the British to give out unqualified denial of his statements as far as they relate to him. He characterized the statements of Bullitt as a tissue of falsehoods. Cândor compells me to record that in my opinion Bullitt told the truth.

At luncheon we discussed many pending matters, principally when the Conference should come to a close. George is anxious to close it at once. Polk and Clemenceau are fighting the suggestion. I agree with George in as much as I believe it should close soon. It has gotten into much discredit. It has dawdled along an unconscionable time. No one is half working here. The Experts have all returned home and at the present gait the Conference will drag its weary length over many months. My suggestion is to finish up pending business regarding the Bulgarian and Hungarian Treaties, which could be done in ten days, and then form a commission to sit here indefinitely. This commission could sign the Bulgarian and Hungarian Treaties and complete unfinished business. The Turkish Treaty, by common consent, is to be left over until it is known whether the United States will ratify the Versailles Treaty without amendments, and whether she will accept a mandate for Armenia. My suggestion is to then form a new Conference, perhaps in London, to conclude the Turkish Treaty. George favors this plan, but I am confident that Clemenceau will oppose it.

The discussion ran into other channels. Lloyd George argued with Milner and

(38)

Bonar Law as to what characterized an "English Squire" and the type. Milner and Law thought Lord Grey a type, George did not think so. George said the regular English squire did not felt himself to be a great personage; that he succeeded to estates just as a prince succeeded to a throne, and that villagers and tenants regarded the squire with as much awe as people generally regarded a king or an emperor; that his word was law; that he dismissed tenants with a wave of the hand. George said when he was in public school one of the things he was taught was to respect the authority of the squire. Law replied that this accounted for his animosity and that he was trying to get even by appointing archbishops from the people. Law asked if he remembered how horrified Robert Cecil was when Lloyd George appointed the last archbishop. Cecil wanted the matter brought up at a Cabinet meeting and George refused. In reply to this George said that Cecil did not so much care for the Cabinet's decision as he did for the Cecils decision. Lord Robert could not imagine anyone appointing an archbishop in England without the consent of the Cecils. Milner referred to himself as being of the "middle class professional type". He said that Law was also of that type. Their people had never been land proprietors but had been in the professions.

After lunch Field Marshal Allenby came in and later Winston Churchill followed. With Allenby we discussed Syria and the French occupation. I understand that Clemenceau trusts Allenby. The English are withdrawing from Syria and will with an understanding with the French as to what areas the French will occupy. I am much impressed with Allenby. He is a fine type of soldier-- able, I think, than Haig. George considers him the ablest military man the Allies produced, with the possible exception of Foch whom he thinks has flashes of genius.

Winston Churchill waited until my departure before discussing his business with George. Before leaving I took George and Law aside and told them of my plan for the reconstruction of international finances. They listened as if

(39)

fascinated. It appeared too good to be true that this awful load might be lifted
ed from England's shoulders, by the wave of a hand. It seemed so simple. I thought
Chamberlain's plan entirely inadequate and that it did not reach the heart of the
situation; that it was superficial and left matters about as they were before.

Bonar Law asked whether my plan was not similar to that of Keynes. I replied
that they were quite unlike; that I considered Keynes' impossible and that it did
not meet the requirements of the situation. They agreed to keep the matter in
confidence until I presented the plan to them in final form. Then George is to
adopt the plan in dealing with Great Britain's debtors; provided the President will
take a similar attitude in regard to the United States.

I met the newspaper correspondents at six o'clock. I tried to beg off for
further interviews but they were so insistent that I have promised to see them when-
ever they desired to see me individually.

There was a meeting of the Commissioners this afternoon. It was a mere
formality. It started by a call from me on White and Polk came to look for me. We
then sent for Bliss. I presented my views on adjournment of the Conference. I
thought we had an admirable excuse in the resolution of the House Finance Committee
not to give the President funds to pay the expenses of the Commission. I felt
that the action of the British in breaking up their delegation was another excuse
we might use.

See my letters to the President and Gordon of today.

September 16, 1919.

The most important work I did today was to get the Commissioners to make a statement endorsing the Treaty of Versailles and the Covenant of the League of Nations. Copies of this are attached with the initials of White and Bliss upon them. The way in which this started was a cable from Gordon stating that he thought I should make a statement regarding Bullitt's testimony. Shepardson was of like opinion,

(40)

and came to me with a suggestion of his own. I declined to make it but it occurred to me that it would be an excellent opportunity to get all the Commissioners to endorse the Treaty and kill rumors of discord and dissatisfaction within the Commission.

As a matter of fact, there is truth in the rumors, but they now begin to see that it is better to have the Treaty go through than to accept the alternative. Bliss declined to sign the statement I had prepared. It was too strong for him so he wrote out one which I finally accepted and which White agreed to sign. I made a few suggestions which strengthened the document and they accepted them. I was very much pleased at being able to do this. It will certainly strengthen the President's hands and ought to please him.

We are astonished at Lansing's silence. My thought in getting out the statement was that it would indicate a way for Lansing. He certainly can indorse what we have said.

In the morning I had a long talk with Hugh Gibson, about affairs in Poland. Polk and I had a conference about pending matters. Francis R. Hirst, of "Common Sense" was an interesting caller. I outlined what I thought should be the policy of the Liberals regarding the Treaty and the League of Nations.

Congressman Flood, formerly Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee in the House, was another caller. I explained to him some matters relating to the Treaty and the League of Nations.

We lunched with Mrs. Charles Marshall at the Ritz. Fosdick, Drummond and Monnet called concerning the League of Nations program. It is agreed to adopt my suggestion that the first meeting of the Council shall be merely *pro forma* in order to put into effect the clause governing the delimitation of the Saar Valley. Lloyd George and the English will agree to hold the first Council meeting in Paris, but they will want the second, which is the more important, to be held in London.

(41)

My own thought, at the moment, is to hold it in Washington, for I have no notion of remaining in Europe to attend it. If it is held in Washington the President can sit himself, which he will doubtless desire to do.

In order to button the matter up before Drummond and Fosdick return to London, I got Fosdick to draw up a cable for Clemenceau, as President of the Conference, to send the President requesting that he call the meeting, and to also draw up a reply for the President to use. Both of these forms are attached. We got an fax trying to get Clemenceau and Lloyd George to agree to both before we submit them to the President for his consideration.

Vesnich came to pay his respects and to tell of the Serbian and Jugo Slav troubles during my absence. They did not sign the Austrian because they do not believe the Conference has any right to tell Serbia what she shall do with her minorities in Serbia proper. They are willing to accept direction or advice in newly acquired territory, but they do not consider the Powers have any right to interfere in Serbia's internal affairs any more than they would have the right to interfere in that of a neutral country. The point they make is a good one and personally I consider they are within their rights.

We went to the Embassy to dinner. The other guests were Cornelius Vanderbilt and Mr. and Mrs. Robert Bliss.

September 17, 1919.

Wellington Koo and the Chinese Minister for Foreign Affairs called in the morning to pay their respects and ask advice regarding the general situation as it affected China. I told them, in my opinion, they made a mistake in not accepting Japan's promise to withdraw from Shantung and provided she could do so on her own initiative rather than through the Peace Conference. If they had been well advised the Chinese would have accepted that proposal and used it as a lever not alone to get rid of Japan but to force Great Britain and France out of China.

(42)

Smith, City Editor of the Chicago Daily News, followed the Chinese and then came a representative of La Prensa of Buenos Aires. After him Mr. Shuman, who is acting as purchasing agent for the Polish Government, came in. Henry Wales of the Chicago Tribune took lunch with me. He tried to inform me of happenings in the newspaper world of Paris since I had been away.

Viscount Chinda and Sir George Paish were my most interesting afternoon callers. I outlined to Paish the fight we were making in behalf of the democratization of the League of Nations, and pointed out a way for him and other Liberals to help. He is one of a committee of three to draft an address expressing the feeling of Liberals of England toward the Treaty and the League. I suggested the kind of address that would be most helpful to those of us who were trying to make the League a world forum, rather than an exaggerated foreign office. I thought there was danger of a balance of power being formed within the League. I thought publicity would do more to kill such dangers than anything else.

Chinda wished to know about the immediate program of the League. I gave it to him, and went so far as to show the memorandum I had prepared for Clemenceau and to send the President and the President's reply. I told him of my conversation with the Chinese Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs and Wellington Koo. Chinda said Japan would ratify the Treaty of Versailles by the first of October and would keep her word as to the evacuation of Shantung, and would do even more than promised. I expressed entire confidence in Japan's promise.

September 18, 1919.

Philip Patchin and McLaughlin, formerly of the Chicago Tribune, were morning callers. They now represent some financial corporation and contemplate

(43)

doing business in Poland and Russia. I promised to read the memorandum they submitted, but they neither asked nor received any further encouragement.

Venizelos called with the Greek Minister. Their visit had to do with the question of Thrace. I asked Colonel Bonsal who was present to write a memorandum of our conversation.

Hugh Wallace and I were together this afternoon for a general talk. Polk came in for a similar purpose. He agreed upon the telegram I should send the President about our Peace Delegation.

The President of the Council of Geneva was another caller and desired information concerning the League of Nations.

September 19, 1919.

We dined last night with M. and Mme. Paderewski who are stopping at the Ritz Hotel. Hugh Gibson was the only other guest. I promised to see Paderewski again this afternoon and he arrived late as usual. This threw my whole schedule out and I could only give him some ten or fifteen minutes since he was unwilling to ask the Spanish Ambassador to wait. He desired to talk of conditions in Eastern Europe but there was nothing said of more than passing importance.

The Spanish Ambassador's call was one of courtesy and to inquire about the meetings of the League of Nations. I informed him as to what had been done since I last saw him. I advised him to sit at the first *pro forma* meeting, but to decline to sit at the second as it might embarrass him with the French Government since some questions may come up in which it might be necessary for him to take sides against the French.

I had a long talk with Sir George Paish about world finance. I gave him a peep into the plan I have in mind of the rehabilitation of world finance.

Mr. De Lima, of the Guaranty Trust Company, was instructed to tell me that the Paris edition of the New York Herald would soon be under the control of

(44)

the parent company of New York. The Guaranty Trust Company is an executor of James Gordon Bennett's will and there have been differences between the management of the New York Herald and the Paris Edition. Mitchell, Editor of the Paris Edition, is an Englishment and thoroughly out of sympathy with the United States and American ideals. This is a matter about which I talked with Francis H. Sisson in England, and I would like to keep in touch with it as it is a question of some importance to America.

I have sent two very important cables to the President today and they are parts of the record. One concerning the business of the Conference here, and the other in which I suggest raising the Warsaw Legation to an Embassy.

September 20, 1919.

Colonel Green was my first caller. He is one of the men we have had in the Baltic Provinces and he came to tell of conditions there.

Ex-Congressman Chandler brought in a delegation of Esthonians, Letts and Lithuanians. They gave practically the same views as Green, so there was not much advantage in seeing them.

Edward Price Bell, of the Chicago Daily News, flew from London and we conferred for an hour. He discussed a letter and telegram he had received from Lord Northcliffe which has disturbed him no little. Northcliffe believes unless something is done to soften the situation in England and the United States trouble between the two countries is not impossible. Bell, who has just returned from America, was much surprised and said he did not find, outside of Irish and German circles, any feeling against Great Britain in the United States. He was surprised to hear me say there was considerable resentment in England against us and that he was mistaken in believing there was not much feeling in the United States against England.

(45)

September 21, 1919.

Cables received from Breckenridge Long and Gordon are parts of the record with my answer to Gordon. It looks as if I may have a serious controversy with the President over my return home. I am so certain that I am right in going home that unless the President declares his belief that my return may defeat the Treaty I shall go. I took up the question with Wallace who agrees as to the correctness of my view.

Clemenceau came at seven and remained for an hour. He greeted me by saying: "I understand that you are to be tabooed, and it is the wrong thing to call on you". Pressed for an explanation he said it was generally thought that I was at out with the President and that he had given me instructions not to interfere with negotiations while I was in Paris. I replied that many people had at one time or another decided that I no longer counted. I was quite willing for them to believe this since I wanted nothing from anyone, either the President or the people, and if it was thought I could not be useful, nothing suited me better than to be left alone.

I asked the old man to come to America to sit with the League of Nations when the meeting was called there. I promised him a royal welcome. It was understood if no one was to know of his tentative promise to come but before I left Paris, we should have a final talk. He said that Foch had received an invitation to the United States. I showed him a cable from Breckenridge Long stating that the invitation to Foch was from the American Legion and not from the Government. I asked Clemenceau whether he wished Foch invited or whether he would prefer him not to be asked. He disclaimed any preference in the matter, but it was clear that he would rather Foch went unofficially if at all. He said Foch had asked permission to go and he had told him he could do as he liked. I have not yet determined whether I shall take the matter up with our Government.

(46)

Clemenceau spoke of Poincaré and of his latest act of treachery toward him.
He was glad to hear me say that I did not believe the President, under any circum-
stances, would invite Poincaré to visit the United States. He said Poincaré
much to his chagrin,
would be delighted to go. According to Clemenceau, Poincaré forced the King to
invite him, along with Madame Poincaré, to England. undxmuuxhxxkthxxKingixxhagxinx.
He said Poincaré

The old man remarked that Lloyd George was one of the greatest liars he
had ever met. I asked him to remember that George was not an Englishman but a
Welshman. He replied "I am not certain that I trust any of them".

We spoke of Syria, and I told him of my conference with George and
Allenby. He admitted the facts were as I had outlined them. An artist has
sent him a drawing of a tiger and he said he intended to send it to me as a
token of his affection. I introduced him to Wallace, stating that Wallace was
a good friend of mine. "Then," said the old man, "he is my friend also".

I did not know at the time but Tardieu called five minutes after Clemenceau
arrived and waited in another room for an hour. It was too late after Clemenceau
left for us to confer and so we are to get together tomorrow at six.

Clemenceau said he intended to retire as soon as the elections take place.
His plan is to deliver an address to the people of France declining to stand for
either Chamber. This is in line with the advice I gave him last Autumn and
which I thought he would be too tardy in adopting. It would be a source of
deep regret to me if he were put out before he had an opportunity to
get out of his own volition.

And this reminds me, I wonder what the President will finally do about a
third term. I am never sure of an office holder. I am watching with great
interest the President's speaking tour in the West. I believe he realizes
how much he has at stake in this fight with the Senate. No matter how wrong
the Senate is, if he loses he will necessarily lose prestige that he can never

(47)

regain. What a gamble it all is, and how easily he might have made it a cer-
tainty rather than a gamble. He owed it to the great cause for which he is
fighting to make success as certain as possible. On the contrary, he made it
as difficult as one could. He is not a good pilot.

September 22, 1919.

Andre Tardieu was the most important visitor I had today. I outlined
my plan for revamping the finances of Europe. He accepted it as wise and holds
himself subject to further direction. I gave him my permission to mention it
to Clemenceau provided he felt that he could impress upon him the necessity for
silence. I am entirely willing for Clemenceau and Tardieu to take any credit
if the plan should benefit France provided I can put it through. Next to win-
ning the war, the stabilization of their financial and economic life is by far
the most important work to be done. When I reach home I am to advise Tardieu
when to take action. My idea is for England and France to put the plan into
operation, even though the United States declines to take the leading part.

Tardieu told me, as Clemenceau had, that the rumor was rife as to my
breaking with the President. He said his enemies were saying that the mere
fact that he was my close friend indicated that he did not stand well with the
President.

Before he left I introduced him to Frank Trumbull as Trumbull wished
some information about French railways.

I am sitting for McClure Hamilton, the American artist, who is painting
two portraits of me to be presented to our Government. It seems that some
Norwegian made quite a fortune during the war out of shipping. This was large-
ly acquired in the United States and he wishes to make some return. He is there-
fore having painted portraits of those Americans who have taken prominent parts
in the war.

(48)

September 23, 1919.

Most of my day has been taken up with sittings for McClure Hamilton. My letter to William Bryce Thompson of the Roosevelt Memorial Association is a part of the record. This letter is to be used in raising funds for the Memorial and reads as follows:

My dear Mr. Thompsons

I consider it both a privilege and pleasure to be associated even in a small way with the purposes of your organization. Theodore Roosevelt needs no memorial, but coming generations should constantly be reminded of what he stood for in our public life. When he died he was a great, virile, wholesome figure disappeared from amongst us. Roosevelt do not belong to many generations. Let us be thankful that he belonged to ours.

Breckenridge Long's cable and my answer are attached.

September 30, 1919.

I have not been keeping a close record of events because there has been little of consequence to say. I have seen a great many people of various sorts like T. P. O'Connor. O'Connor came ostensibly to discuss the Irish question. Before he left I found that his real object was to obtain from me his opinion concerning Thrace. I gave some advice which he asked permission to take to Venizelos.

Cables have come from Gordon, Miller, Morris of Stockholm, Hapgood of Copenhagen, and others but none are of great consequence. We are planning to sail for home next week.

My letter to the President of today and one to Lansing of the 26th are attached. I feel the President is making a mistake in keeping this Commission

(49)

going and I am wondering just what he has in mind.

Manley O. Hudson has arrived from the United States and gave all the latest information of the Treaty. He says the President's denial of knowing anything about the secret treaties before he made his Fourteen Points Address to Congress has created a most unfavorable impression throughout the country.

I cannot understand just what he was thinking about when he said this, but I am confident that he did not deliberately make a misstatement, though, indeed, it was. I am eager to get home and go before the Senate Committee so as to help the President in his fight. I shall make a bad witness for myself, but I am certain I can help his case. Then, again, I do not relish the thought of appearing to be afraid of the Senate. That, I think, is more back of my desire to go home than any one thing.

October 3, 1919.

The French Chamber of Deputies ratified the Versailles Treaty yesterday. I wrote Tardieu a note of congratulation, a copy of which is attached. I also sent a card of felicitation to Clemenceau. I have an engagement with him tomorrow at ten o'clock and one with Tardieu in the afternoon.

I am worried over dispatches concerning the President. I am afraid he is in for a serious time. It is such a pity that he should have broken himself down. There is no necessity, in my opinion, for a President to overwork. He has all the facilities and all the power to get the most efficient help to be had in the United States. It is a wonder that the President has been able to keep going as long as he has, and I fear the mainspring has snapped at last.

Clemenceau had Tardieu telephone asking my permission to publish the letter he wrote me while I was in London regarding the League of Nations. Of course, I was glad to consent.

Monnet and Aubert called separately but both about the League of Nations and

(50)

plans for the future.

The vote in the United States Senate yesterday on the Fall Amendment indicates that the Treaty may be ratified sooner than we expected. In view of this, and in view of the upset conditions in Italy, we concluded it would be best to wait for ratification by the United States before Italy and Japan ratify. I have told Monnet and Aubert to tell the Foreign Office here and, through Drummond, to notify the Foreign Office in London, of this change of program. It may be too late. This change indicates how rapidly the scene may shift. What is advisable today is not so tomorrow.

Venizelos called and we had a long conference as to the disposition of Thrace. He gave me a letter to the President with explanatory maps and documents which I have promised to deliver in person and explain the Greek viewpoint.

A letter from George Herron about the Adriatic settlement is also attached. I mailed the President a copy, sending it by Robert Bliss on the S. S. France.

One of the most important letters I have written the President in a long while is that of September 30th concerning the reconstruction of European finances. At one time I thought I would not write, but I concluded it would be best to do so and let him have the letter a week before my return. I will have difficulty enough talking him into it and I have serious doubts whether it will be possible to get the plan, or any plan, going in time to prevent disaster.

My several cables and telegrams, letters etc. are parts of the record. Wallace gave a luncheon today in honor of the economic group who are sailing for the United States on the S. S. Northern Pacific.

We are busy getting odds and ends together, bidding people goodbye, and doing other things preparatory to our departure.

The portraits of me by McClure Hamilton are not good.

(51)

October 4, 1919.

This has been a day of turmoil and preparation for leaving. I called on Clemenceau at the Ministry of War at ten o'clock. I explained my plan for the reorganization of European finances. He, like Lloyd George, was intensely interested since, if it goes through, it means much to France. I do not believe he understood the details but he grasped the larger view. He said Tardieu would be sent to the United States at any time I cabled for him. He also said he would put out the plan here when I advised. He asked me to communicate with him through Ambassador Jusserand. On the contrary, Tardieu, later in the day, asked me to communicate with him, Tardieu, through de Casenave.

Clemenceau was not so certain today of going to America. He could not see how it was possible to leave France. This indicates some backsliding on his part as to continuing in office. He knew of no one in France who could carry on his work. This is always the feeling of men in office. He spoke bitterly of Briand and better of Viviani, whom he declared was merely an orator. "Pichon" he said, "is no good". Just what he meant I do not know. I think he meant that Pichon had but little ability for I believe their relations are cordial.

He declared his intention of going to the train tomorrow night to bid me farewell. I urged him not to do so but he replied, "I love you-- you know that."
Tardieu told me later that it was a very unusual action on Clemenceau's part; that he had never known him to go to the station to see anyone excepting heads of states.

I had a long conversation with Tardieu later in the day. He told of the terrible strain of the past few weeks getting the Treaty ratified by the Chamber. The members, according to him, were not only stupid and could not understand, but they wanted to talk and make their ignorance verbal. He was appreciative of the

(52)

letter I wrote him and said my friendship was one of the blessings the war had
brought him that he valued most.

I called on Pichon to say goodbye. We fell to discussing my visit to France
and who was present
in 1915. Jules Cambon, at the time, wrote a memorandum of my conversation with
Briand, who was then Prime Minister, Cambon gave Pichon a copy of the memorandum
for his information. He not only recalled my promise that the United States
would not allow France to go down in defeat if she notified us in time, but he
also recalled my promise that someday France would change her opinion of Woodrow
Wilson.

The Spanish Ambassador was an afternoon caller. He not only wished to
bid me goodbye but to obtain my latest advice as to his sitting on the Council
of the League of Nations. He asked me to communicate with him through the
Spanish Ambassador at Washington.

Henry Roberts has just returned from San Sebastian where he visited the
family of Ambassador Willard. The King and Queen were in residence there and
he said he frequently heard me referred to as "the best friend Spain had". The
Spanish Ambassador, at Lord Derby's request, made an engagement for him, Lord
Derby, to call tomorrow afternoon.

I have had many callers, newspaper men and what not.

October 5, 1919.

White

I had dinner last night with Henry and, at my request, no one was present
excepting General Bliss. We got through the dinner and evening very pleasantly
until, just as I was leaving, I made the suggestion that one, or both, of them
home
should return to explain the Austrian and Hungarian Treaties. This led to an
explosian on the part of Bliss in which White half-heartedly joined. Bliss said
if he were called before the Senate Comittee he would have to tell them that he

(53)

knew nothing about any of the treaties made in Paris. His advice had not been asked on any essential point, and, outside of the military, naval and air terms, he was in complete ignorance.

He told of the memoranda he made covering conversations with those connected with the Peace Conference, which proves that he was recording himself for future use if need be.

If I had been in Paris a year as a Commissioner I do not believe I would acknowledge such ignorance even if it were true. As a matter of fact, the President did consult him and if he had had a little more initiative he could have taken a better part in negotiations. The only bright feature in what he said was that he did not want to be called before the Senate Committee because he would not like to testify in a way that would be hurtful to the President.

We are having to lunch today, M. and Mme. Paderewski, Admiral McCully, Commander Koehler, Mr. and Mrs. Jo Davison, Mr. and Mrs. Colfax and Mrs. Charles Marshall.

Nubar Pasha and Lord Derby called in the afternoon.

(54)

115 East 53rd Street,
New York City.

October 21, 1919.

We left Paris by special train the night of October 5th. Clemenceau showed the unusual courtesy of coming to the station to see me off. I greatly appreciated this act of friendship. Pichon, Tardieu, Monnet, Aubert and a military representative were among the French officials who were there. Then there was the Spanish Ambassador, the American Ambassador with nearly all members of our Embassy and many others. Paderewski arrived too late and sent a wire of regret. The Crillon was notably absent in its representation. Neither of the Commissioners were there. Polk was on the Rhine, and Bliss and White contented themselves with bidding me goodbye at the hotel.

I was sick with fever when I left and it was a trying ordeal to stand up under. I went to bed at once when the train pulled out and was half carried on board the Northern Pacific next day at Brest. I have had an attack of renal colic which kept me in bed with fever during the entire voyage. I did not get up until we reached New York on Sunday afternoon, October 12th, after a remarkably quick passage.

Everything possible was done for our comfort, both on shipboard and on land, and I shall never forget the kindness of Commander McLean who acted as both physician and nurse all the way over. The arrangements for my landing were very complete. The War Department sent a large tug to Quarantine and when they found I was unable to get off there, they followed us to the dock. However, Major General Shanks thought it would be more comfortable if I used his automobile which brought us directly to 53rd Street where I was again put to bed for almost a week. I am now up and about and am beginning to see callers.

Lord Grey has been my most important visitor, both yesterday and today.

(55)

He came from Washington for a conference. He wished to advise as to his own movements. We discussed my plan for revivifying the finances of Europe. Now that the President is so ill and it is not possible to bring such matters to his attention, I suggested that the British Government write a letter to the French Government embodying my suggestion and, when the French ~~and~~ agree, submit the correspondence to the United States Government with an invitation to cooperate with Great Britain and France in the plan.

Grey, Tyrrell and Wiseman lunched with me and Grey outlined a letter to his Government which he submitted for my approval. It needed some changes and he is re-writing it and will send me a copy in the morning. Wiseman who sails on Saturday is to bring the matter in person to the attention of Lloyd George and Bonar Law, explaining my advice in the premises.

It is a great satisfaction to have Grey here. His courage, his probity and his breadth of vision all make for good understandings. He is leaving for Washington tonight but said he would be glad to return to New York at any time I indicated a desire to see him.

I have a letter from Senator Lodge in reply to my letter to him of a few days ago. They are a part of the record as, indeed, is my letter to him of today.

Mrs. Wilson writes Loulie that the President does not know of my return or that I have been ill. This indicates how seriously ill he is. It also indicates his desire to have me remain in Europe. I am filing Mrs. Wilson's letter with the diary.

Raymond Fosdick and George Louis Beer were callers today. So also was Stephen Bonsal and Hugh Frazier. I am beginning to pick up through them the thread of affairs. Bonsal gave an interesting account of his trip to Germany and of his conversations with Renan Bernstorff, Rathenau and the messages to me.

(56)

He is to write a memorandum which I shall attach.

Fosdick has just landed, and we have agreed that I shall ask the President to call the Assembly in Washington sometime in January, even though he cannot preside. I advised Beer to return to London immediately in order to continue his work in connection with the League of Nations. Frazier, I am planning to send to Washington to look out for the League in the State Department until the meeting of the Assembly in January, or until the League goes permanently to its Geneva home.

Sulser, the Swiss Minister, was another caller today but I was able to see him for only a minute.

The President's condition is such that no one is seeing him outside of his physician and Mrs. Wilson. Both Burleson and Lansing have been here to see me. Burleson came at the request of Secretary Baker. The entire Cabinet are greatly exercised over the President's inability to transact executive business. Lansing clearly desires the Cabinet to proceed independently. Burleson and Baker are more considerate of the President's sensibilities. Lansing told me that he had called one or two Cabinet meetings already and he understood the President was displeased. He indicated, however, that he intended to continue to call them because he thought it the proper thing to do. He was anxious that I see Mrs. Wilson and persuade her that it would be wise to allow him, Lansing, to act for the President during his disability. It is a question whether the Cabinet shall go ahead or whether the Vice President shall be called in. Of the two it seems to me that the President would prefer the Cabinet acting, although, if I were in his place, I should do the reverse and allow Marshall to act. I should take a complete rest until I recovered.

There is much discussion in Washington and elsewhere as to whether the President has suffered a stroke. McAdoo, who has seen him, declares Grayson

(57)

says he has not had one. On the other hand, when the President became so much
worse after he returned to Washington, Tumulty told Lansing the President had
had a stroke which affected his left side. However, Tumulty has only seen the
President once and that within the last few days, and he may or may not have
gotten his information from Grayson.

It is a great tragedy that the President should be stricken at this time.
The very nature of his illness makes it fairly certain that he will never again
be able to perform the ordinary functions of his office but I doubt whether it will be possible for
him to initiate anything of importance. For instance, I came home filled with
financial
the idea of having him back my plan for the resuscitation of Europe. I am cer-
tain he will not be able to do it at this time. I have therefore turned the
plan around and suggested that the initiative come from Great Britain or France.
It seems to me the end of things generally, and I am making my plans accordingly.
It is not my purpose to go to Washington unless it becomes absolutely necessary.
If the President's disability continues, it will soon cause much comment as I am
sure he will refuse to allow anyone to act for him. I do not wish to be placed
in the position of seeming to direct affairs as I should be accused of if I were
in Washington advising Mrs. Wilson to call the Cabinet. Some of the papers have in-
timated that I would go to Washington and act in some such capacity for the Pres-
ident. In no circumstances would I do so as I feel it would not be right and I
would be open to just criticism.

October 26, 1919.

I am still convalescing and only see a limited number of people.
I have a letter from Senator Hitchcock which indicates, as did the one from Sen-

(58)

ator Lodge, that the Foreign Relations Committee do not desire me to come before them unless I insist upon it which, of course, I shall not do. It never occurred to me that the Senate majority desired information regarding the Treaty, but I placed myself at the Committee's disposal for two reasons; one was I did not wish them to think I was afraid to come before them, and again I thought I might place the President in a better light than he has yet been placed either by his own testimony or that of others.

In no illness have I ever received so much kindly attention from my friends. Letters, telegrams, cables, flowers and calls have been too numerous to recite.

I have been surprised at the way my letter to the Roosevelt Memorial Association was received. It seems to have struck the right note as, indeed, did the little statement I gave out upon my arrival saying that I had nothing to say because everything had been said upon every vital subject; that what the world needed was to get to work and to be steady and tranquil. Strangely enough, the editorial comment on this statement has been more complimentary in republican than in democratic circles. I wished to put out the statement as I wrote it in Paris but when Gordon came aboard at Quarantine and I read it to him he was afraid that it might seem a reflection upon the President. I therefore toned it down to two short sentences.

My letter to Mrs. Wilson and hers to me, and my letter to Dr. Grayson are parts of the record. I feel more strongly than ever the desirability of remaining away from Washington and I am determined not to go until the President asks for me.

In reminiscing I am filled with regret for, what I consider, the President's mistakes. He began with the statement on the elections given out toward the end of October last year. In my opinion, that was as great a political blunder as he has made during his term of office. I recall that before I left

(59)

for Europe Lansing suggested that a twist be given to the President's notes to Germany which would have an effect upon the coming elections. I was indignant to think that anyone in authority would play with such an occasion for party advantage and I expressed myself very warmly at the time. It may be that I did not myself appreciate, and I do not believe I did, the disaster to the President of an adverse majority in the Senate. I am wondering, therefore, if I laid sufficient stress upon the elections which were to be held during my absence. However, I have always believed and shall continue to believe that the best morals are the best politics, and that to serve the people in the most conscientious way possible was the best way to serve one's individual political fortunes. Therefore, if I had to advise again, I would certainly counsel against taking advantage of such an opportunity, as Lansing was urging, to promote the fortunes of the Democratic Party. In my opinion, the President would have won handsomely if he had not put out the statement, and the whole trend of events would have been different. After he lost the elections, his next blunder was not to appoint upon the Peace Mission some such outstanding republican as Elihu Root. It is seldom I ever advised the President twice about anything, but it will be recalled that I sent him two urgent cablegrams about this.

While the President has made many blunders during the past years, I cannot understand the feeling of hatred he has aroused in so many quarters throughout the country. The man has sacrificed himself for the public as no man within my memory, and as few have done in all history. He has spared himself in no single direction and he has done it with the consciousness that his health was not robust and the strain might snap it at any moment. It is incomprehensible to me that now he is lying ill as the result of a breakdown in the service of the people, he should be vilified, slandered and reviled by a considerable part of our public. No one of the great leaders in Paris worked

(60)

so hard as the President and no one carried so heavy a load of responsibility.

November 5, 1919.

I am not keeping my diary regularly for present events seem unimportant compared with the work I have been doing in Europe. I see many people. For instance, I saw Ambassador Willard, Judge Gerard, Gov. Strong, Herbert Hoover, Otto Kahn and several others yesterday. Gerard said he intended to run for President but he would not announce for sometime. I have my doubts as to his ever announcing, because I do not believe he will receive sufficient encouragement.

Governor Strong and I discussed the international financial situation. We are in agreement as to the advisability of a moderate deflation of our currency. The pendulum has swung as far in the direction of inflation as it once was toward contaction. In my opinion if the currency is deflated it will have an effect on the high cost of living. Money has to be more desired than commodities before the high cost of living comes down. I am not in favor of too great deflation but I am in favor of sufficient to bring things back to as near normal as possible.

Hoover remained with me for an hour and a half. He read an article he is writing for the Saturday Evening Post and he wished my criticism and advice as to whether it would be well to publish it. I liked the article almost in its entirety and advised its publication. There is nothing new in what he says, but it is worth while saying it now particularly if he wishes to keep himself in the public eye which is undoubtedly his aim, for if I ever knew a prospective candidate, Hoover is the man.

Hoover is the kind of man I like to help push to the front. He cannot fail to have much influence upon our public life. He has sense and a spirit of fair-

(61)

ness that appeals to me.

Otto Kahn was interesting. We discussed the future of the German people.

Last week I sent Colonel Bonsal to Washington to see Senators Hitchcock and Lodge to tell them I was ready to go before the Committee when wanted. I told Bonsal to ask Hitchcock whether he should approach Lodge. Hitchcock advised against it, saying in his opinion the republicans did not wish me to appear; that the Committee hearings were closed and he advised me to do nothing further. When Bonsal repeated this over the telephone I told him to go to Lodge nevertheless and to say that while I understood hearings were closed, I wished the Committee to know that I was at their disposal in any other matter about which they thought I might give information. I asked him to say to Lodge that I desired to visit my daughter in Boston and would like to know when I would be called since I did not wish to remain in New York unnecessarily.

Bonsal has written out his conversation with Lodge and I append it herewith. I am glad the Republican Senators think I have done my full duty as, indeed, I have tried to do.

We expect to leave tomorrow for Boston to be absent a week.

November 5, 1919.

It has been an interesting day. Among my callers were Oscar Strauss and Senator Murray Crane. Crane stayed for an hour and excoriated Lodge. He is for the Versailles Treaty as it stands and thinks it will be ratified. He talked with great frankness and said he would let governor Coolidge know when I was in Chestnut Hill and would ask him to call upon me.

November 13, 1929.

We returned from Boston today. I had a delightful quiet time. It is

(62)

the first absolute rest I have had for a long while. I saw no one of importance excepting Judge George W. Anderson. Governor Coolidge telephoned from the country where he had gone to rest. He expressed a desire to return to Boston and have me lunch with him but I begged off and said we would arrange a meeting at some time more convenient to us both.

Raymond Fosdick was a caller today. His visit had to do with the Treaty and the League of Nations.

November 20, 1919.

I am not keeping a daily record and it is doubtful whether I shall do so in the future.

Col. Arthur Murray called before sailing for England. He gave me a lot of information of British affairs and the inside workings of the Embassy at Washington.

Attoleco, Italian High Commissioner, was also an interesting caller. He expressed appreciation for what I have been trying to do to bring about more cordial relations between Italy and the United States. He wishes to bring the new Ambassador to call as soon as he arrives next week. I suggested that it might be better to allow him to go directly to Washington and return at a later date.

Monday of this week, James Speyer and Col. George B. McClellan came to ask advice as to German relief work. They wished a letter from the President approving it. I told them the President was not in a condition to be approached on such a subject and suggested that they go to Hoover and get his approval.

This seemed to satisfy them and I gave a card of introduction to Hoover.

On Tuesday I had a long talk with Sir William Tyrrell. He remained for two hours. I had to excuse myself and see William Phillips for a moment.

He came to New York from Washington with the Prince of Wales. Tyrrell suggested

(63)

that I should not tell Phillips he was here. He said there was so much jealousy in Washington of my influence that he thought it well to take this precaution.

Tyrrell told of Lord Grey's activities and of the controversy they are having with the State Department. One Crauford Stuart, of the British Embassy entourage, seems to be the storm center. First Lansing demanded that he be sent home for talking disrespectfully of the President. When this was cleared up the President sent a demand that he be sent home for talking disrespectfully of Mrs. Wilson and this is now under process of being worked out. Neither Grey nor Tyrrell believe the President sent the message and they have some corroborative evidence from Mrs. Wilson's Secretary, Miss Benham. It all seems trivial to me and unworthy of the grave situation facing us at this time.

Lord Grey came yesterday and remained for an hour and a half. He wished advice as to the length of time he should remain in Washington. He does not believe it will be of service for him to remain as he thinks it improbable that the President will be able to take up such serious subjects within the next two or three months. I agreed that if the President did not show marked improvement he might as well make arrangements to leave around the middle or the end of January.

He told of the different communications he has been sending his Government about the Treaty and other matters. He said he had "thrown a fly at Lodge" but that "Lodge did not rise to it". We read the reservation passed by the Senate the other day as to the votes of the British Dominions in the League, and he concluded if it was in conflict with the Wilson, Clemenceau, Lloyd George letter to Sir Robert Borden, it would mean the rejection of the Treaty. After some discussion we thought it well for him to send this information to Lansing.

Sir William Tyrrell came in at this point and Grey dictated a letter which Tyrrell wrote in long hand and my Secretary took in shorthand in order that

(64)

Grey should have a copy. I also have a copy which is attached.

I read Grey parts of a letter I received from Mrs. Wilson. This letter
is also a part of the record. Neither Grey nor I can understand why Mrs. Wilson
feels that the President should not know I have returned. To me it is inexplica-
ble. I feel as certain as can be that if he knew I was here he would have wished
me to help with the Treaty situation and other important matters. I thorough-
ly disapprove of many things being done and do not believe they are being done
with the President's sanction. He is evidently very sick and weak. While his
mind is clear, it lacks the vigor necessary to grasp the problems facing us. If
my advice had been asked, I would have urged that Vice President Marshall act dur-
ing the President's disability for certainly he is disabled. It would have re-
lieved the President's mind and it would have had a good effect upon the situation.
The Republican Senators like Marshall, and they would have been inclined to let
him take the kudos for putting the Treaty through. It might then have gone
through with such mild reservations as to leave no question of its acceptance by
the other powers.

No one can know how strongly I feel about the action of the Senate Majority
in the matter of the Treaty. I would never have thought it possible that personal
hatred and partisanship could have gone so far. As a matter of fact, it is not
partisanship so much as bitter hatred of the President and this hatred is largely
shared by the Democratic Senators. Partisanship would not have led them so far
for such republicans as Murray Crane, Taft, Oscar Straus, Root, Hughes and other
party leaders have advised against their action. The Administration's direction
of the Treaty has been deplorable. A compromise should have been effected long
ago and the Treaty would now be in operation.

I have a contempt of the intelligence of any Senator who believes reser-
vations are necessary or that they add to the prestige or conserve the welfare of

(65)

this country. The Treaty itself is sufficient and so is the Covenant. The
Treaty is good enough for other powers and it is even good enough for Spain, Ar-
gentine, Chile, Switzerland and other neutrals to accept without amendment or re-
servation, but it is not good enough for the Republican Senate. This is merely
because of their intense desire to discredit President Wilson. It is contemptible
beyond expression and I believe history will so record their action.

Paul Warburg was another visitor yesterday. He has recently returned
from Germany and wished to talk about means of resuscitating Germany so as to
make her a going concern, and also the necessity for making the finances of the
world sound. He left a memorandum of the situation as he sees it in Germany and
elsewhere.

November 23, 1919.

On Thursday General Pershing called and remained for an hour. We had an
interesting and, to me, an amusing conference. After a little careful inquiry
I found he was still nursing a presidential bee. I developed this until I found
myself in the position of his political adviser. He understands, of course, that
between him and a democrat I am for the democrat, but he also understand that I
would prefer him, for personal reasons, to any other republican. He is satisfied
with this status and anxious to have the benefit of my political experience and
judgment.

When I was in Paris in 1917 I did my best to discourage Pershing from be-
coming a candidate and pointed out the failures of military Presidents. At the
time, I seemed to have convinced him but during my stay in Paris during 1918-19
it became evident that the flame had not been smothered. I do not approve of
military men as presidents, but after knowing Pershing better and after knowing
something of the character and fitness of other republican candidates, I am

(66)

wholeheartedly in favor of Pershing if his nomination can be brought about. I
doubt whether he has any chance but he desires to test his popularity and I shall
give him my advice.

One of the callers this week was A. G. Gardiner of London. We talked for an
hour and a half. He is sick at heart over the President's failure to get the
Treaty ratified. He believes in the President with all his soul but he recognizes his defects and laments the fact that so great a cause should be wrecked
because of the President's dictatorial and uncompromising attitude. He excor-
iates the petty minds full of hate, envy and venom that have pulled him down.
Nevertheless, he recognizes that they could not have been successful had not the
President himself helped.

This has been an exceedingly busy day with me. Gordon gave a dinner at
the Knickerbock Club Thursday evening in honor of Lord Grey. It was a successful
affair but I did not find an opportunity to talk with Grey more than a few min-
utes. We agreed, therefore, for him to come to my apartment at eleven o'clock
toward
Saturday to fully discuss what attitude was best to take against the Treaty.

Grey came yesterday as planned and we drew up what we considered the es-
sential changes which should be made in the Lodge Reservations. I attach this
memorandum. We arranged to meet again at seven o'clock an hour before the din-
ner we gave him last night.

At the evening conference I outlined a plan I thought best to follow. At
first I suggested Lansing calling together Grey, Jusserand and Lodge, and that
Grey and Jusserand present the memorandum prepared by Grey and myself. My
name, of course, is not to be mentioned either directly or indirectly because
of the feeling it might excite. I later withdrew this suggestion as I did not
believe Lansing equal to carrying out the plan. Grey suggested that Jusserand

(67)

take the lead with Lodge. I vetoed this as I was afraid to trust Jusserand's
discretion. I finally thought it would be best to have Tyrrell feel Lodge out
on the one hand and Hitchcock on the other as to these changes. I strongly
urged in talking with Lodge that the President's name should not be used. I
thought Lodge should be told that the matter was now not a question between the
President and the Senate, and that it was hoped Lodge would so modify the re-
servations as to make them acceptable to the Allies.

If Lodge is properly approached in this matter I feel confident his vanity
will lead him to acquiesce. The next move would be to get the President to
aquiesce, so the democratic vote in the Senate might be thrown in behalf of the
reservations to the Treaty as amended by Grey and myself.

Grey and Tyrrell returned to Washington last night and I am to be kept in-
formed as to developments. Tyrrell is to return to New York on Friday of this
week.

The dinner I gave to Grey was a pleasant affair. It was almost a family
party. I had besides Grey and Tyrrell, Herbert Hoover, Ellery Sedgwick, E. S.
Martin, S. E. Mezes, Gordon and his brother, Hugh Auchincloss.

Another visitor yesterday was Judge Abram Elkus.

November 27, 1919

I have been unusually pressed during the past few days. Sunday
ex-Governor Folk came about the Egyptians he represents.

Sunday evening Judge Anderson rang me up from Boston to ask if he might
call early Monday morning about some matters of importance. He came at nine
o'clock and remained for over an hour. He discussed the railroad problem. He
was on his way to Washington to confer with the Director General of Railroads
and Interstate Commerce Commission. I outlined my views and, later in the

(68)

week, R. W. Woolley, of the Interstate Commerce Commission, came over to
bring a memorandum embodying the agreement Anderson and I had reached. This
memorandum was prepared for the President's Message. Woolley took it to
McAdoo who disapproved it. I approved it in toto with the exception of the
last two sentences which Woolley agreed to eliminate. McAdoo's view of the
memorandum was purely political. He desires to put the republicans in a hole
regardless of what effect it might have on the railroads and transportation
problem generally.

The main subject Anderson and I discussed was the Treaty. His letter
to me of a few days ago indicates how strongly he feels upon the subject. He
had a meeting Sunday in Boston at which Lawrence Lowell and others were present,
and they expressed the opinion that unless I actively took hold of the Treaty
situation, it would fail of ratification.

I have had such pressure brought to bear upon me that I have determined,
much against my inclination, to impose my advice upon the President. Mrs.
Whitelaw Reid told Frazier the other day that, in her opinion, I was the only
one who could bring about a settlement. Coudert said practically the same.
Many republicans and democrats seem to have a like feeling and have put the
matter to me so strongly that I dare not refuse to take some action. My let-
ter to Mrs. Wilson of the 24th, enclosing one to the President of the same date,
is a part of the record. Gregory's letter of the 25th and mine to the Pres-
ident of today are also attached.

I brought Gregory around to the soundness of my views. In taking my
walk Monday morning, I thought of what might be a way out without loss of
prestige by the President. Up to the present, it was always that something
must be done to save the faces of the republican senators. Unhappily, the
mistakes made by the Administration have brought about an entirely different

(69)

situation. It is now a question of how to save the face of the President. I
believe I have thought of an easy way out for him and without loss of dignity.

Gregory, Mezes, Gordon, David Miller, Cleveland Dodge, Melville Stone, Thos.
Lamont, E. S. Martin, Raymond Fosdick, R. W. Woolley and Secretary Baker are the
jury I have had pass upon the suggestion, and the verdict is unanimously in
favor of the plan. Baker is the only one who does not take it without quali-
fication. Mrs. Wilson sets her judgment against ours and it is not certain
she will even allow the President to have my letters. It is an astounding
condition. I purposely did not leave the decision to her discretion but she
has assumed the responsibility.

Lawrence Lowell's letter of the 24th is a part of the record.

Senator Murray Crane, Judge Jas. W. Gerard, McDonald, of the League of
Free Nations, and many others called Tuesday. I did not quite understand Crane's
reason for calling. He is bitter against Lodge but he had nothing new to com-
municate. Crane's visit reminds me that on the occasion of his last visit I
suggested if Governor Coolidge was brought out as a candidate for the republican
nomination for President, the most effective platform would be that of sustaining
law and order, practically upon the lines of his recent race for Governor. I
see by the papers that the Republican Club of Massachusetts have declared for
Coolidge for President upon almost the identical platform I outlined to Crane.

Melville Stone was my first caller yesterday. He sails for Europe Sat-
urday and came for a last word. Without showing him the letter I wrote the
President I gave him the substance of the plan. He said it was "a brilliant
suggestion" and thought if the President would accept it, at the same time
making a statement to fit the occasion, he would regain all the popularity re-
cently lost.

(70)

Filene's visit had to do with business representation of England, France, Belgium and Italy now in this country trying to secure a two billion dollar loan from our business men.

Lamont's visit had to do with the ratification of the Treaty.

We dined last night with Mr. and Mrs. Charles Dana Gibson. The other guests were Mr. and Mrs. August Belmont and Mr. and Mrs. Jas W. Gerard.

November 30, 1919.

De Casenave called Thursday to bring word that Clemenceau and Tardieu had cabled him to express their thanks for my congratulations over the elections which I also sent through de Casenave.

He was disturbed over Marechal Foch's interview in the New York World and said his Government had cabled him about it. He knows as I do, that Foch and Clemenceau are not working cordially together and Foch is doing his best to upset Clemenceau's plan for a settlement which does not include the Rhenish Republic.

Melville Stone telephoned Friday and asked if I would meet Will Hays, Chairman of the Republican National Committee, in order to discuss the ratification of the Treaty. After a moment of consideration I concluded to do so.

We met at the Lotus Club for dinner at the early hour of seven. There was no one present other than the three of us. We had a private room and, after the first two or three courses of a very excellent dinner, we began the discussion of the subject in hand. Stone made a stirring appeal for a little bending both on the side of the Senate and the President. I was urged to undertake to get the President to yield and Hays was to undertake to secure some modification from Lodge.

(71)

I was not impressed by Hays, although he undoubtedly has a considerable amount of political cleverness which has carried him this far up the ladder.

I left shortly after nine o'clock and while the meeting may not be conducive to any definite result, at the same time, it was not useless.

My old friend, Mrs. Fels, came yesterday for advice and approval of her discontinuing "The Public" which she has been financing for the past few years.

I thought she might as well do so. She asked advice as to whether she should turn her interest to Zionism rather than the Single Tax. Since it did not seem to me important I advised her doing the thing that interested her most which is Zionism.

General Pershing called yesterday afternoon for an hour's conference.

What I advised was this: To take no chances in making himself a candidate. He has something to lose and not a great deal to gain by becoming President. The other Republican candidates can afford to take long chances since they have nothing to lose and much to gain. His reputation, I told him, was secure and I advised against doing anything to tarnish it. There were, therefore, two courses, one to take a gambler's chance and go after the nomination in earnest, making speeches of pronounced character, or moving cautiously being in no sense a candidate, but bringing himself sufficiently before the public to make him a dark horse in the event the Convention was locked.

This latter course appealed to him and it was decided that he should pursue it. He asked me to talk to Lloyd Griscom and I agreed to do so. I do not believe Pershing can make a successful candidate as his ideas on domestic affairs are not prolific and his imagination does not seem very fertile. He starts his first tour in the South this week and he will return here during the holidays for further consultation.

Jos. E. Willard, Ambassador to Spain, was an excited caller. He tele-

(72)

graphed from Washington yesterday asking to see me. He arrived on a morning train, remained a few hours, and returned to Washington. When he sent the telegram he intended to resign but thought better of it because of the President's illness. He feels he has been discourteously treated by both Dansing and Phillips. He has not been able to see Phillips at all since he has been home and saw Lansing only for about four minutes.

I applauded his intention of not resigning while the President was ill. He has therefore decided to return to Spain almost immediately. He said he could not get nearer the White House than the policeman on the outside of the gates and he left his card with him. Willard's experience is not unusual. The State Department is a thoroughly bankrupt concern. Everyone admits it. Lansing is principally to blame although the President comes in for his share.

McAdoo was another caller today. He declares he does not know who is running the Government at Washington, and he showed considerable pique that he had not been called in for advice either by the White House or the Cabinet. He was pleased with himself over the position he has taken in the last few days in the coal strike. I gave a summary of the advice I have offered the President regarding the Treaty and he approved.

Captain Gherardi of the Navy was another caller today.

December 2, 1919.

Among my callers yesterday were Isaac Marcosson and Hamilton Holt. Holt has in mind to write a history of the League of Nations from its inception in the United States to date. He asked me to assist him when he reaches the stage where I played a part.

Robert Underwood Johnson and a Mr. Torbert of Dutton & Company came today. Torbert wished to advise me to write an autobiography.

(73)

Apropos of my two letters to the President advising about the Treaty, I have changed my mind as to the advisability of sending the Treaty back to the Senate now. I now suggest that it be held until some compromise can be reached. In my opinion it should not be sent back until sixty-six Senators are ready to ratify it with reservations agreed upon in advance. The advice I offered that the Treaty should not be mentioned in the President's message has evidently been followed, but just how far they will go in other directions I do not know since I have not heard directly from Mrs. Wilson.

It is an astonishing thing that Mrs. Wilson is willing to assume responsibility of action in this matter. As far as I can gather, no one is being consulted. I wonder how long the present state of affairs in Washington can continue. The small entourage of the President evidently feel that he should be kept in office at all costs. In doing so they are crucifying his reputation. Vice President Marshall should have been acting President for the past two months. If this had been done the whole situation would have been different.

December 5, 1919.

Senators Saulsbury and Owen have called during the past few days. Owen said Oklahoma would put him forward as a presidential possibility. He thought he would receive the support of Bryan and was hoping the President would regard his candidacy kindly.

Huebsch, publisher of Philip Dru, called yesterday. He is getting out a third edition and we discussed whether I should review it. I should like to do it, but I could see very much improvement in the English and so as there are many things in the book I would change, yet I have no time to give to the work. There is a constant stream of callers all day and many demands in other directions so it is difficult to keep up with correspondence and diary.

I gave Lord Grey a luncheon today. The other guests were Cleveland H.

(74)

Dodge, W. H. Short, Richard Washburn Child, Ralph Pulitzer, Judge William McAdoo, Thos. W. Lamont, Dr. Frank Crain, Dr. Robert T. Morris, Frank Trumbull, and Cyrus Curtis.

When she was inviting the guests the other day my secretary rang up the Henry C. Frick residence to invite Mr. Frick to the lunch. She was told that he had passed away some two hours before. I was shocked as he seemed to be a man robust in both mind and body. He was one of the ablest of our captains of industry.

I believe the luncheon was a success for the conversation was brilliant. They were an able lot of men and each one seemed more or less on his mettle.

Before lunch Grey and Tyrrell came for an hour's conference. Grey read a cable he thought of sending his Government but desired my advice before doing so. He made some addition and I approved. It related to his return home. He has sent January 2nd for the date of sailing. He feels it is important for him to be in London to persuade the British Government to accept the Treaty with such reservations as are almost certain to be appended if, indeed, it passes at all. He gave as a further reason that it was impossible to see the President, that Lansing himself had not seen him for more than three months, therefore he could not even get in touch with him at second hand. He sees no prospect of the President's complete recovery in the near future. Neither do I.

Lord Grey came to the United States, as the diary discloses, largely upon my advice and I regret that his mission has been such a failure. He feels somewhat compensated since Dr. Wilmer, the famous occulist at Washington, has found the cause of the trouble with his eyes. He assured Grey his eyes would be no worse although there is little hope of their being better.

Another reason for Grey's departure is the trouble he continues to have about Major Crauford Stuart, one of his attaches. This trouble has become acute.

(75)

It involves Baruch and a lady friend of his. Grayson has evidently taken Baruch's end of the controversy and has succeeded in persuading the President, or at least those acting for him and who speak in his name, to demand that Stuart go home. Grey had a meeting with Landing and Grayson and refused to dismiss Stuart without first investigating the charges. If he found the charges were not sustained by the evidence, his purpose was to go to the President direct. Grayson contended that the mere wish of the President to have Stuart sent home should be sufficient.

Tyrrell said that even at the height of the Kaiser's arrogance and power, he would not have considered taking such action. Both Grey and Tyrrell feel that it is a very high-handed procedure. I do not believe the President has had anything to do with it.

Tyrrell lunched with the lady in question and she complained bitterly, among other things, that the British Government, at Stuart's suggestion, had placed a dictograph in her house in Washington and kept her under surveillance.

It all shows the power of the Baruch-Grayson influence at this time when no one other than Grayson has access to the President, from the outside. The lady told Tyrrell she intended to bring suit against the British Government. Tyrrell advised doing so and said Lord Grey would throw no obstacle in her way and would rather help to secure her rights if she brought the case before the courts. However, Tyrrell knew, for reasons the lady appreciates, that there will be no suit brought.

December 7, 1919.

After luncheon Friday we took Lord Grey and Sir William Tyrrell out to Syosset for dinner with the Jas. A. Burdens. They left in time to catch the midnight for Boston where Grey is to make an address Monday. Loulie and I remained with the Burdens until this afternoon. It is the most restful time I have enjoyed recently although they had a number of guests for luncheon and dinner.

(76)

I returned Sunday afternoon in order to keep an engagement with Will Hays. We passed information in regard to the Treaty. The Republican National Committee is to meet in Washington and I advised Hays to do what he could to keep the Treaty from becoming the subject of discussions and to also keep out of the Committee all talk of the Mexican trouble. In other words, my advice was that foreign affairs should not be injected into party politics. Hays agreed to this and said he would use all the influence he possessed in that direction.

He was distressed to have me say that the President had not consented to yield in the Treaty controversy. He believes Senator Lodge is in a more mellow mood and if approached by Hitchcock something might be done toward a modification of the Lodge reservations.

Felix Frankfurter followed Hays. With him as usual it was the Zionist Movement which has gotten into the doldrums along with the Treaty.

December 11, 1919.

The New York World carried a sensational article this morning by Louis Seibold. It stated that there had been a break between the President and me and gave specific reasons for it. Although there were five or six columns outlining causes, he did not state a single truth. For instance, he said the President was dissatisfied by the selection of Paris for the Peace Conference rather than Geneva. He said the President was dissatisfied at my abandonment of the "freedom of the seas". Of course, the facts are the President abandoned it himself and so announced to newspaper correspondents in Paris.

Such an article in the World, which is considered an Administration paper, has caused a great sensation. The telephone has been busy and so has the door bell with reporters and others endeavoring to get in touch with me. I told the reporters I would make a statement later. I then made the following statement

(77)

to the Associated Press:

"I have read Mr. Seibold's article in the New York World but, for obvious reasons, I have no comment to make further than to say that my admiration and affection for the President are unchanged."

Frederick Dixon, of the Christian Science Monitor, happened to be with me. He was incensed at the injustice and inaccuracy of the World's attitude and said he would write an answer in Tuesday's Monitor. He did this and it is appended. Carl Ackerman also wrote a general denial in the Public Ledger and other papers in his syndicate. The Ledger wrote a leading editorial on the subject, and the Baltimore Sun gave several editorial columns to it, all taking a sympathetic attitude toward me. I attach these articles.

There is a general feeling that the drive being made against me from Washington is engineered by Baruch, Grayson and Tumulty. I do not know, although newspaper people tell me he is a "certain offender". The articles in influential papers have caused something of a panic in certain quarters. Tumulty called me over the telephone today. He talked some fifteen or twenty minutes expressing innocence and affection for me. He told the newspaper men on Tuesday that I was responsible for his appointment as Secretary to the President and, in no circumstances, could he ever do anything offensive to present me. One of the newspaper men whom I said not one man there believed Tumulty.

I really do not know who instigated the article or whether it was instigated by anyone. Just how much truth there is in the report of the break I am not able to determine. As I have indicated before for nearly a year the President has not sought my advice often nor followed it as closely as he formerly did. In my opinion, he has no conception of the gravity of present world and domestic situation as it relates to himself and the completion of his work as President. I have tried to make him understand that after he lost the election he can do nothing entirely

(78)

new policy should be pursued. The Senate majority should have been taken into
account and a cordial working arrangement should have been made, regarding our
foreign policy. Even if the Treaty is ratified, unless he has this working
arrangement, every move will be blocked and our influence in the Treaty's exe-
cution will be nullified. It is not a time to be stubborn and yet he believes
it is. The sentiment throughout the country is crystalizing against him because
of his unyielding attitude.

Senator Hitchcock, who has charge of the Treaty in the Senate, came to
see me yesterday to discuss the situation. I tried to put some courage into
him and urged him to lead. He constantly returned to the President's uncompromising attitude and said he was afraid anything he might do would not be sanctioned by the President. He also thought the republicans would question every proposal he made, wishing to know if they yielded whether the President would accept the compromise. He outlined a speech he intended to make last night at the Southern Society Dinner which, by the way, is an excellent one.

Tuesday, Lamont called up Grayson to say that he regretted the President
was taking such an uncompromising attitude as indicated in Hitchcock's remarks
after he and Senator Fall had seen the President. Grayson promised to talk to
the President about it and to let Lamont know the result today. He telephoned
Lamont this morning, giving a message from the President to the effect that
Hitchcock had misrepresented him and he was irritated over what had been given
out. The President indicated that after the holidays he would take the matter
up again and that he was not pleased at the report of his uncompromising attitude.

The truth is, the President is in no condition physically to direct im-
portant business. He undoubtedly told Hitchcock what he gave to the press. The
Senator told me the President showed signs of irritability which is often
a consequence of serious illness.

(79)

Judge Anderson of Boston came in Wednesday following Senator Hitchcock. He, too, attended the Southern Dinner and I suggested what he should say to Hitchcock about the Treaty. Anderson and I are in entire agreement as to what should be done.

Cleveland H. Dodge called today. He is anxious for me to get in touch with the President regarding the Treaty. His especial interest is in the Near East as it affects the missionaries and American Colleges in Constantinople and Syria. I gave him to understand that in all probability feeling at the White House had cooled toward me. I was certain of this so far as Mrs. Wilson was concerned, but uncertain as to the President.

Yesterday I received a cablegram from Clemenceau which is attached. McAdoo was a caller today. We went over his presidential prospects. He is undetermined whether to become a candidate. His inclination is to allow the matter to drift and if the Convention comes to a deadlock he believes he is the said one to break it. He spoke of the Seibold article and asked if it were true that the President and I were no longer as friendly as formerly, he wished me to know that it would make no difference in his friendship for me. He expressed his intention of speaking to the President about the matter the next time he was in Washington.

Outside of the affection I feel for the President I view a possible coolness between us with equanimity. My work for the public would have been accomplished had the Treaty and the League of Nations functioned as planned. That they have not functioned in some way is due to the President's methods, and no matter if the Treaty is ratified the Senate will so hamper the work of the delegation to Geneva that I would not care to be a member. We came so near doing a great thing in a great way, but Fate ordained otherwise and while something may still be done, it will be done in a small way and in a way full of humiliation for those of us who wished the United States to lead in a new

(80)

world movement.

December 12, 1919.

Gregory telephoned from Washington to tell several things of interest. Secretary Wilson had his resignation written ready to send to the President. Gregory persuaded Wilson not to do so not alone on account of the President's illness but because of the Industrial Commission now sitting.

Gregory told of how Alexander happened to be appointed Secretary of Commerce. I have been interested in this appointment. I did not believe the President made it himself but thought it had been suggested by Tumulty either at the instigation of McAdoo or Mitchell Palmer. McAdoo denied all knowledge of the matter yesterday and Gregory tells me that the President first offered it to Vance McCormick. This was before the President became so ill. McCormick declined it. The President then picked up a Congressional Record, looked over the Committee on Shipping and Commerce, and selected Alexander because his name came first among democrats on that committee.

Alexander is on bad terms with both Champ Clark and Senator Reed and is the friend of nobody in particular, and did not want the place. It gives two Cabinet officers from Missouri and, if McCormick had taken it, it would have given three to Pennsylvania, a rockribbed republican State, one the democrats in no circumstances could hope to carry.

Another thing Gregory told which was of interest was that Baruch and McCormick came home from Europe with the story that I intended to back Hoover for the democratic nomination for President. This made Mitchell Palmer furious and McAdoo also had some hurt feelings which he is apparently getting over.

Gregory believes Lansing will resign shortly and he has word that Lane will soon retire. Gregory expressed a hope that enough would be left to obtain

(81)

a quorum when the Cabinet met. I have never, in all my political experience, seen such desertion of the ship in time of stress. It makes me heartsick when I think of the President lying so ill.

I lunched today with Frank Trumbull to meet Lyman and Laurence Abbott.

December 13, 1919.

John Rathom of the Providence Journal called today. He brought a letter from Stephen F. Metcalf, owner of the Journal and Bulletin, which I greatly appreciate. It came from a clear sky and a political opponent. It didn't seem to please Rathom much. Rathom considered an extravagant talker before I did not put too much reliance on what he told me. He said he had luncheon at the Union League Club yesterday to meet some gentlemen who were interested in General Wood's campaign for the presidency. They offered to put up $25,000. if the Providence Journal would employ the General for a year to enable him to resign from the Army and escape the odium attached to running for the presidency while an Army officers. Rathom declined to take him on. He said the Journal did not commit itself to any candidate for the nomination. He thought they would make the offer somewhere else and that it would be accepted. It will be interesting to watch developments.

Rathom was just from Washington and said he had never seen affairs of state in such hopeless confusion. Many members of the Cabinet were disloyal to the President and were talking about him in a way that even he resented. He said, too, that a large part of the Cabinet and Tumulty were constantly at odds. None of this was new to me for reports of a similar nature come from day to day.

I received an interesting letter from Sir Horace Plunkett dated December 1st. He is very flattering in his estimate of me. He sends a clipping from the Irish Statesman of October 25th which is complimentary. There is one sentence referring to me which I hope will not reach Washington. "The story of his

(82)

world service cannot be told now for it would involve too great a percentage of
credit from the great and wise to a man who persistently shuns the limelight."
And again: "History will be searched in vain for an outstanding figure in the
public life of great nations bearing any resemblance to this remarkable product
of American Democracy". Both letter and article are attached.

I also attach an article cabled this morning to the New York papers from The
London Times and which is also very complimentary.

I have heard nothing from the White House since my letters to the President
of the 24th and 26th of November. He seems to have followed my advice partially
but I have received no acknowledgement either directly from him or from Mrs.
Wilson. I am sure the letters displeased her as Gregory indicated. I thought
it wise to address my letters to the President himself rather than to Mrs. Wilson
and that, too, may have added to my offence.

The President is improving so rapidly now that I shall soon know whether
he has any ill feeling toward me. I am waiting philosophically, conscious that
I have done nothing to warrant a severance of our friendship. Of course, one
never knows what stories are taken to him, but if he is willing to pass judgment
upon me in this way, I am content.

I regard the entire matter with equanimity for I am getting well
and plan to go South after the holidays-- something I have not done since the
war began in Europe. I have felt heretofore that I should be at the Pres-
ident's disposal at all times, and it is with a feeling of relief that it seems
likely in the future I may follow my own inclinations. I have been very
ill but I am doing day by day what I can to help with the Treaty and am pushing
and advising in every direction where I think it may aid. My heart has seldom
been so much in anything and I have the deepest concern in the matter on account
of the President. He does not realize the situation and those around him dare

(83)

not inform him. This may be for his physical good, but it is bad for the public welfare.

I am urging Lamont to see the President if possible to tell him the truth and the truth is the country is blaming him now almost as much as it is the Senate for the delay in ratification. It is a pity this should be so, for he is mainly right and the Senate mainly wrong, and it is only his unyielding and stubborn attitude that gives his enemies the right to criticise.

December 20, 1919.

A good many interesting people have called during the last few days, among the Dr. Bliss of the American College of Beirut. His daughter married the son of Cleveland H. Dodge and he has been a great admirer of the President. However, he said that great as the President's abilities were he lacked certain qualities, and the lacking of these had brought about the unhappy situation of the Peace Treaty. He thought it a pity I had not returned with the President as he believed if I had the Treaty in charge, it would have been ratified months ago.

Mrs. Borden Harriman was here yesterday and talked in the same strain. She admires the President tremendously and thinks he has been the only hope of the world, and yet she is almost bitter in her resentment of the way he has permitted the situation to collapse. American prestige abroad has gone; the Treaty is trembling in the balance, and the Democratic Party is floundering in the mire. She went into the situation in Washington in much detail and said it was nothing short of chaos. She has seen Grayson and Tumulty, most of the Cabinet, and many others around the President. The Cabinet she describes as disloyal. When I asked her to be more specific, she said they were all explaining that they were

(98)

through various available sources; Monsignor Kelly having given me a most intimate view. The Catholic Church has its finger upon that situation. There is a strong feeling among certain republicans to urge the President-elect to either make Mexico yield to the wishes of the concessionaires or run the risk of intervention. This feeling I fear is largely responsible for the desire to be rid of Article 10 of the Covenant. I am doing my best to block it. If the President will recognize the present Mexican Government, and if England and France will do likewise, and if through the English and French influence Mexico is admitted to the League of Nations, this scheme will be blocked.

Rutger Jewett of Appletons brought me proofs of a book about to be published by Stephen Lausanne. It is called "Great Men and Great Days". Of Americans he gives a chapter each to the President, Roosevelt and to me. He writes most pleasantly concerning my efforts to help France during the war, but he has written depreciatingly of the President and I asked Jewett to eliminate the most objectionable part. He promised to do so in the American edition, but thought the French edition would have to go as Lausanne wrote it.

On Sunday, October 11th, I gave a luncheon at which I had professors from Harvard, Yale, Cornell and Columbia to discuss the Philadelphia Academy of Music Forum lectures.

Thomas Nelson Page was one of my callers. He told some interesting gossip about the wedge between the President and me. It seems tragic that the President's "solemn referendum" was the final signal of the defeat of the project over which we have both labored so long. In throwing the Treaty into a Presidential election he did an incredibly unwise thing. It was as if we had written the Federal Reserve Act and then submitted it to the people for approval before having it enacted into law by Congress.

The Houston Post says humorously: "The next time we have a referendum,

(94)

please do not make it a solemn one".

The election returns tell their own story. Another Samson has pulled a
temple down about himself.

We had an interesting luncheon with John Galsworthy. Richard Washburn Child called Thursday. He has been with Harding at Marion as mentor during the campaign. He said Harding was an indolent man but there was nothing of the fakir about him. While he was ignorant of most of the big questions that would confront him during his administration, he was not opinionated and would take advice. He gave a pleasant illustration of Harding's simplicity of mind. Moving picture men asked to take the President-elect in his dining room and library. After they finished with the ~~library~~ library they went into the so-called library. There was nothing to indicate a library excepting a small bookcase and a few volumes of an encyclopaedia. Someone present undertook to explain that the books were packed in the attic, but Harding said "no, do not let us pretend, I have no other books". I told Child if Harding kept this simplicity and did not try to pretend, the public would willingly forgive any mistakes he might make.

When Lansing came through New York on his way to Watertown to register, we had some conversation about the President and his treatment of him. Lansing is writing a book which I advised him not to publish until after March 4th, advice I think he will follow. He tells me he is writing an explanation of the differences between himself and the President at Paris. This is right enough, but Frank Polk tells me that he has seen some of the chapters and they are bitter. That, I consider, a mistake even from Lansing's point of view. If I were in his place and wished to make the record clear I should do it dispassionately and without rancor. The public could then judge between the two upon the merits of their respective views, while if he writes as Polk says he has written, they will look upon him as a disappointed and disgruntled man.

(95)

Lansing explained why he called the Cabinet meetings which were the immediate
cause of his dismissal. Dr. Grayson had told him that the President was in a
critical condition, and both Grayson and Tumulty advised calling together the
Cabinet in order to discuss what action should be taken. Lansing refused to call
a meeting at first, fearing lest it would create undue alarm. When he did call
it the President was better, and the question of disability was not discussed.

Mrs. Lansing, with whom I also talked, lays most of Lansing's trouble to
Mrs. Wilson. She says Mrs. Wilson wished to dominate the entire situation, and
to drive the President's friends away from him. Among other things, Lansing said
that the President had no imagination.

November 22, 1920.

On the 15th I received a letter from Governor Cox which is attached to
the record with my reply of a few days later.

We went into the country Saturday and lunched with Nathan Straus and his
family. Sunday the 14th we motored to Oyster Bay and lunched with Mr. and Mrs.
Frank Doubleday.

D. N. Heineman of Brussels and Paul Cravath have been among my callers.
On Thursday the 18th I received a letter from Mrs. Wilson which, with my reply,
is a part of the record. On Friday the 19th I gave a luncheon for General Persh-
ing. The other guests were, Frank Munsey, Paul Cravath, John J. Spurgeon, Cyrus
H. K. Curtis, S. E. Mezes, H. J. Wright of the Globe, Cass Gilbert, Edward S.
Martin and H. H. Kohlsaat.

On Saturday I lunched with W. G. McAdoo at the Ritz. He gave me to un-
derstand that he was making an income of about $90,000, a year and was spending
$60,000. He did not see much hope of being able to provide for his very large
family. We talked some of the President and Mrs. Wilson and found ourselves in

(96)

agreement as to the mistakes that have been made.

On Saturday the 20th we dined with Mr. and Mrs. James Byrne. It was an interesting party. Melville Stone and I took a long motor drive yesterday to compare notes. He says he voted for Cox because of the League of Nations. He takes a gloomy view of general conditions both in this country and in Europe. As an American who loves his country and is proud of its achievements, he is filled with sorrow at the thought of its shirking its obligations to the rest of the world.

Paul Warburg called today and so also did Jane Addams and Lillian Wald.

The two latter wished to talk about Ireland, and Warburg about the resuscitation of Germany.

November 30, 1920.

My notes tell that B. M. Baruch called on Tuesday the 23rd. He practically spent the morning with me driving away Frederick Dixon who had come from Boston. I talked with him about the series of lectures to be given at the Academy of Music in Philadelphia. He appeared interested and said he would be delighted to be one of the speakers if he could arrange with Thomas W. Lamont and Dr. Young of Harvard as to a division of the economic questions to be treated. I felt certain that he had no intention of doing so but turned him over to David Miller who saw him the next day and who was also thoroughly convinced that he would not speak. After a few days of discussion he decided it was not possible, which was as I had forecasted. He gave as his reason that Lamont and Young had covered the subject.

That afternoon I had a conference with Seymour and Miller regarding the lectures and we arranged a schedule.

There were several other callers. Mr. Howland was the only one of any interest. He discussed the feasibility or advisability of having Lord Robert

(97)

Cecil come to the United States this winter for the purpose of talking on the
League of Nations. I strongly advised against it.

On the 24th I had a letter from Viscount Grey of Fallodon which is at-
tached to the record. I also had a letter from Houghton, Mifflin & Company in-
quiring whether I would consent to give them the publication of any book I might
write upon the war.

Herbert Hoover was a Thanksgiving caller. We went over the political
situation as far as it related to the incoming administration and the League of
Nations. He wondered whether he would be offered a place in the Cabinet. I
expressed a belief that he would. He says Root, Taft, Wickersham, Lowell and
other pro-League Republicans expect to make the fight of their lives for it. I
try to impress them with the responsibility they assumed when they issued a letter
to the country during the campaign stating that in their opinion the League would
have a better chance with Harding than with Cox.

On Friday the 26th Mrs. Borden Harriman gave all the Washington gossip.
She has had Grayson to lunch recently and told him the President had hurt himself
more because of his treatment of me than anything he had done. She said Grayson
admitted it. Waseman, who has also been in Washington, saw both Grayson and
Tumulty and says Grayson told him Mrs. Wilson was the cause of the trouble and
intimated that it was jealousy. He also intimated that McAdoo had a finger in
it. This surprised me coming from Grayson, and I do not credit what he says as
far as McAdoo is concerned. He told Mrs. Harriman something of the same sort.
Grayson claimed that he and Baruch had done everything they could to bring the
President and me together, and that Baruch had spoken to Mrs. Wilson several times
during the campaign telling her it was hurting the Party and that the President
should do it for that reason. This, too, I fail to accept as being true.

(98)

I told both Mrs. Herriman and Wiseman, who are evidently bent upon getting me an invitation to Washington, that it would be embarrassing to me and embarrassing to the President. I thought the matter had gone too far to be rectified and no good could come of it. The opportunity to serve has now passed and matters are best left where he has chosen to leave them during the past year. When the new administration comes in I may go to Washington and call upon the President of my own volition.

Wiseman tells me that Tumulty said he had been eager to have the President invite me to the White House for a visit before his retirement. He considers the President's treatment of me the only blot on his administration and hopes to see it wiped out. This, too, I take with a grain of salt, although Wiseman, like Mrs. Herriman, believed what he said.

Cunliffe Owen, the English writer, who lives in New York, asked me to see me on Saturday the 27th. He said the British Ambassador desired to meet me and wished to know if I would come to his, Owen's, house today at five o'clock. I declined giving some trivial excuse. The last time the Ambassador was here an influential republican editor in talking to him expressed surprise, when my name was mentioned, that he did not know me. He knew the Ambassador well enough to say that, in his opinion, he was making a mistake in not getting in touch with me. Geddes quite frankly told him, what I had known from the beginning, that he was afraid to visit me, fearing it might offend the White House.

Cunliffe-Owen telephoned me again yesterday and asked if he might bring the Ambassador here at five o'clock today since I could not come to him. Of course I consented, and I have just finished an hour's conference with him alone. Cunliffe Owen and Loulie remained in the other room. I did most of the talking because there was little I wanted to know from him. I liked him better than I

(99)

thought I would. He is quite unlike his brother, Sir Eric, whom I have known
very well for some years. Among other things I told of my advice to Lloyd
George not to write the President an official letter concerning the readjustment
of war debts, but to write him privately and confidentially. I said I did not
know whether George had finally written the letter or what had been the outcome.
Geddes said the letter had been written, but the Prime Minister had not received
the slightest acknowledgement of it. I mention this as an illustration of how
demoralized the Government has been at Washington, in fact we are, as I told
George last summer, practically without a government and have been for a year.

Strangely enough, Harold Spender, who was with me yesterday, repeated this
very sentence as having been repeated to him by Lloyd George before he left Eng-
land a month ago. And this reminds me that I cautioned both Geddes and Spender
regarding the English attitude toward the League of Nations. I gave the advice
I give all foreigners, not to give way too readily. They should let it be known
that if the United States enters it must be in the existing League and not in one
yet to be made. I tell them if they treat us like a spoiled child should be
treated; we will play our part the sooner.

In discussing with Geddes the readjustment of foreign debts, I advised not
letting his Government mention the matter. The initiative must come from us if
there is ever to be an adjustment. If the proposal comes from abroad, there will
be an immediate rejection, but I believe that sometime our people might see that
eventually the United States will suffer as much, in a different way, as her bank-
rupt neighbors in Europe. The time is nearing for our wheat and cotton and other
commodities are now bursting our warehouses, and Europe while both cold and hungry
cannot buy because of the rate of exchange.

One of the things Grayson told Wiseman the other day was that the Pres-

(100)

ident had no notion of writing a book upon the war or upon any of the problems in which he had been a factor. The book he has in mind to write is to be called "The Dynamics of Politics" and is the same book he has had in mind for years to write as soon as he was out of office.

We went with the McAdoosto a speaking by Bramwell Booth at the Lexington Opera House on Sunday afternoon, and later went home with them for tea. They were never more pleasant or confidential.

December 14, 1920.

It has been two weeks since I made any entries in the diary but I have full memoranda of the happenings day by day.

Wiseman and I have been trying to formulate a plan to settle the Irish question. Walsh and Dudley Malone are attorneys for the Board of Inquiry now sitting in Washington and are acting for de Valera. Dudley sails today on the S. S. Aquitania for France and England. I gave him a letter to Lord Grey merely introducing him. I took the precaution to have Wiseman write Arthur Murray and Sir William Tyrrell explaining what Dudley will try to do in England, and ask them to inform Grey so that in the event he does not wish to discuss the matter with Malone, he can make some excuse for not seeing him. I did not want to throw it on Grey without his advance knowledge. In the meantime, Walsh is to keep in touch with Wiseman and we are to see what can be done.

The plan in general is to get Liberals like Grey, Bryce, Morley and Cecil to endorse some plan for an Irish settlement that is just and that will appeal to the unprejudiced opinion of the world. We are taking a long shot and nothing may come of it, nevertheless it is worth while since no one seems to be approaching the question with much sanity.

I have been busy with the Academy of Music lectures and with my week-

(101)

ly articles for the Public Ledger. General Bliss' opening speech last Friday
at the Phila. Academy & Museum Forum this
night was a marked success and has caused much comment. It has been arranged with
Mr. Charles Scribner for the publication of these lectures in book form.

In the Ledger of Sunday, December 12th, an刊 produced the chapter in Ste-
phane Lausanne's book on me. It is not expurgated as was the American edition
to be published by Appleton & Company, and there are several quotations attributed
about me
to me which are not accurate. The Ledger writes a complimentary editorial in the
same issue.

Among the publishers who have approached me recently about writing a book
on the war have been Ferris Greenslet, of Houghton, Mifflin & Co. and I have had
a renewal of former requests from Scribner and Harper.

I gave a luncheon on Saturday to D. N. Heineman of Brussels. Those present
were George Foster Peabody, Edwin Ludlow, Louis Wiley, Raymond Fosdick, Colonel
John J. Carty, Gordon, Sidney and Kohlseat.

Sunday we had for luncheon, Secretary and Mrs. Houston, Mr. and Mrs. Franklin
K. Lane, Lady Scott, D. N. Heineman and Nancy and Sidney. Houston gave me a
clearer idea of the President's condition than I have yet had. He sees him each
week at Cabinet meetings and says his mind is as clear as ever, and that he is the
only man around the Cabinet table who thoroughly knows the subjects discussed.
Houston maintains that he not only knows, but he has the courage to do the right
thing.

As to the President's mind, Houston only confirms what others tell me who have
had opportunities of talking with him. The theory that the President has not been
himself mentally for the past two years is the merest moonshine. There was cer-
tainly nothing the matter with him mind or health in Paris and up the time he left
on the 28th of June, 1919. Mrs. Lane said she lunched at the White House on the
15th of July, 1919 and that she never saw the President looking better or more

(102)

alert mentally. Cleveland Dodge has just returned from Washington with the
same story of his mental alertness, so I think the testimony in this respect is
absolutely conclusive.

Houston and I discussed the question of foreign loans and I found that the
President, about a month ago, answered Lloyd George's letter written the last of
July on this subject. I was struck with the fact that the British Ambassador, when he was here a couple of weeks ago, did not know that the President had sent a reply.

I told him I had suggested to Lloyd George the kind of letter he should
write. Houston believes the British will make a mistake if they do not accept
his proposal to refund *surrender loan* their present loan, most of which is
now on demand, on a thirty year basis.

I talked to Lady Scott on this subject and told her, in my opinion, the
British Government was making a mistake to gamble on what the incoming adminis-
tration would do for them. She is an intimate friend of the present Chancellor
of the Exchequer and I have no doubt will carry this opinion to him. She sailed
for England today.

(1)

New York,
January 23, 1921.

It has been some time since I have dictated for the diary. I can only say in general terms that I have been busy with the lectures at the Philadelphia Academy of Music Forum and the publication of the book by Scribners Sons. Dr. Seymour has about whipped it into shape.

On December 17th, Boris Bakhmeteff, pseudo Russian Ambassador, was a caller. A recent article on Russia by me stirred Bakhmeteff to make the call and talk over Russian affairs. In speaking of the President he said "He missed by five minutes being one of the greatest men in history."

On December 18th I had dinner and a long talk with Sir Horace Plunkett. I also had a pleasant talk with Waldorf Astor whom I met at the Vanderbilt Ball. I knew that what I said to him would go direct to Lloyd George therefore I gave him my usual talk on the League of Nations and the attitude I thought European Governments should take regarding our entrance into the League.

On Wednesday the 22nd of December we went to the opera and General Pershing came into out box for a call. He was not determined then whether he would be one of the speakers at the Academy of Music Forum, but subsequently he sent me a letter definitely declining. He has vacillated for two months in the matter and has shown characteristics I did not know he had and which do not seem conducive to success in war.

The Christmas holidays were pleasant and uneventful. We spent them at home with relatives and friends.

On December 29th we dined and went to the opera with Mr. and Mrs. Adrian Iselin. Nicholas Murray Butler called between acts and we fell to talking about Harding and the incoming administration. We missed almost an entire act. He excoriated the republican leaders in such a way that there was nothing left for

(2)

me to say. He thought the only man they had in the party who understood enough about foreign affairs to be Secretary of State was Elihu Root-- a man they would not have.

We have been to the usual number of dinners and entertainments. One of the pleasantest was the Round Table which met at the Knickerbock Club January 7th. Elihu Root, Nicholas Murray Butler, Henry White, Brander Matthews, George W. Wickersham, George Milburn and others made up the number and the conversation was brilliant although it related almost wholly to the Lincoln and subsequent administrations. Butler said that John Hay told Lord Morley and himself that he, John Hay, wrote the Bixby letter for Lincoln. This statement came as a shock to the entire crowd. Brander Matthews theorized that Hay must have imitated Lincoln's style and he thought it exceedingly probable if Hay drafted it, Lincoln himself must have copied it in his own handwriting and perhaps made changes in doing so. Butler said Hay stipulated that the fact must not be told until after his death. This goes to prove, what I have so often stated, that there is no telling who the real author of any public document is, or where a public official gets the thoughts he gives to the world.

I have had many publishers during the past month urge me to write my memoirs, but I have made no commitments. Burton Hendrick came Sunday, January 9th, to discuss the Life and Letters of Walter H. Page, which he is writing, and to ask my advice.

Daniel Roper was a caller on the same day and his theme was the reorganization of the Democratic Party.

We have given several dinners and lunches. On Thursday, January 13th, we entertained at lunch, Mr. and Mrs. Cyrus Curtis, and on Friday, the 14th, we gave a dinner to the Marquess of Carisbrooke. The other guests were Mrs. Cor-

(3)

nelius Vanderbilt, Mr. and Mrs. August Belmont, Mrs. Whitridge, Mr. and Mrs.
Frank Gray Griswold and Mr. and Mrs. John W. Garrett.

On Monday, January 17th, we went to Philadelphia to stop over night with
the Curtis' at their country home, Lyndon. They had a large party to meet us
at dinner, and next day Edward Bok took us over the Academy of Music to show
us the Foyer where the Forum lectures have been delivered. I arranged with
Mr. Curtis to go to Europe April 23rd in order to keep in touch with foreign
affairs.

Yesterday Roland Morris came to see me. He asked me to try and hole
the together "the intellectual liberals " of the Democratic Party. He said it did
not matter so much as to the party machinery if I would only keep the group
together that have made such a wonderful showing during the first six years of
the Wilson Administration.

On Thursday evening I dined with Robert Wilberforce at the Harvard Club
to meet the British correspondents in New York. I talked to them for nearly
an hour after dinner, mostly upon disarmament and foreign debts.

January 30, 1921.

Last Sunday, January 23rd, Judge George W. Anderson came from Boston
to take lunch with me. There were many things he desired to discuss, but more
particularly what could be done to further the cause of peace. He is one of
the Trustees, and a principal Director, of the Ginn Fund. He asked me to be-
come one of the trustees, an honor I shall decline because of my life-long rule
not to go on boards or committees, etc. He was very pessimistic regarding the
railroads of the country, on which he is an expert, and also regarding the Dem-
ocratic Party. He thought the President had given it almost a death blow, and
he expressed satisfaction that his administration was so nearly at an end.

(4)

Herbert Hoover was an afternoon caller and he remained for an hour or more.
I advised him not to go into the Cabinet even if he were asked, which he has been
though in a way that left Harding free to say nothing further in the event he did
not wish to appoint him. I could see, however, that Hoover has a keen desire to
become one of Harding's official family. We talked of politics in general and
of his relief work in particular. He has made for himself a unique place in
the world, and he should be content to do the humanitarian work which has caused
his name to be so widely known everywhere instead of becoming an office holder
and a very indifferent politician.

On Tuesday, the 25th, I lunched with Ogden Reid to meet Governor Coolidge.
The other guests were Vanderlip, Hoover and Dawson of the New York Tribune. I
was not impressed with Coolidge. He may have ability, doubtless has, but there
was nothing in his conversation to indicate it and he is totally without charm.
It was interesting to compare him with Hoover who shone in comparison.

In the evening we dined and went to a symphony concert with Mr. and Mrs.
Otto Kahn. The other guests were Mrs. Whitridge and Clarence Mackay.

On the 27th I received a letter from Stephen Bonsal which pleased me much.

February 7th, 1921.

January 30th we took supper with Herman and Mrs. Kohlsaat at the Hotel
Biltmore to meet Mr. and Mrs. George Arliss. The only other guests were the
Princess Cantacuzena and James Lyons. We spent a pleasant evening.

On Tuesday afternoon Princess Bisbesco took tea with us and gave the
latest European gossip.

On February 2nd we dined with the Barkley Parsons. The other guests were
Bishop and Mrs. Manning, Mrs. Douglas Robinson, Mr. and Mrs. George Milburn, Gen-

(5)

eral McKinstry and several others.

Thursday we lunched with Mrs. Bayard Cutting, and in the evening we went to the opera with the Newbold Edgars. Friday we dined with Mr. and Mrs. Cleveland H. Dodge, and Saturday with Dana and Mrs. Gibson. Among my callers that day were Frank Polk and Gordon Abbott. Polk came for some data for a speech.

Yesterday my most interesting caller was Benj. Strong of the Federal Reserve Bank in New York. He has just returned from a trip around the world.

in

My time is largely occupied with writing editorials for the Public Ledger, the supervision of the lectures at the Academy of Music, and the preparation of the book which Scribner is to publish under the joint editorship of Professor Charles Seymour and myself. I do everything I can to discourage callers since it is difficult to read and write with constant interruptions.

February 22, 1921.

I have been writing fairly steadily since I last recorded in the diary, and have been reading manuscripts to be published in the forthcoming book entitled, "What Really Happened at Paris". My chapter will close the book and is called "The Versailles Peace in Retrospect". I have tried to write it with as little criticism of the President as possible, and I have had Frank Polk, David Miller, Mezes, Gordon and others read it with a view of getting their opinion as to whether it is critical of him. Polk thinks those who are informed will not consider it a criticism at all, but the few who know the inside facts will. For instance, a few of us know how impossible it is for him to make publicity either at Paris or here. We also know that he dropped the "freedom of the seas". Then, again, he was one of the several who delayed the Conference unnecessarily not knowing how to expedite work.

I have also written an appreciation of Wilson to be published in the Public

(6)

Ledger Syndicate March 4th. It might more properly be called "The Incoming and Outgoing Administrations". In this I have eulogized Wilson. I do not touch upon his mistakes but dwell upon his many successes. This I could not do in the book where it will be a matter of historic record.

Among the people I have seen since the diary was brought up to date was Ray Stannard Baker. I had a feeling that he came to find whether I was writing a book. Frank Polk and I were talking about the President writing a book himself, and we both concluded that it would be impossible for him to write with any degree of accuracy for the reason that his memory is very defective and he has but little data worth while. Polk gave as an illustration the Siberian Expedition. The State Department end of this was in Polk's hands and he tells me that when he would send documents to the President he would invariably return them with memoranda indicating his approval or disapproval. The work was largely personal between Polk and the President, therefore there are no records in the Department. The President was prone to do this with me. He would often return my letters to him and such documents as I enclosed with a personal memorandum or an accompanying letter. Polk thought that any attempt by the President to write accurately of what has happened during his administrations would be grotesquely inaccurate, and in this I fully agree.

On the 11th we gave a dinner to Sir Horace Plunkett. The other guests were Frank and Mrs. Polk, Mrs. Cornelius Vanderbilt Sr. Mr. and Mrs. Ogden Reid, Mr. and Mrs. Glynn and one or two others. Plunkett and I have had several conferences.

On the 12th we dined with Louis Wiley to meet Mrs. Clare Sheridan. The Paderewskis have called twice, and we gave them a dinner of sixty-four at the Colony Club on the 18th. The Board of Governors gave us the reception room

(7)

to be used as a dining room and another large room in which to receive our guests.
They also brought from their homescandelabra, laces, linen etc. It made me
feel that New York is not so large after all, for we could not have been treated
with more neighborly kindness by our own Texas people. A list of the guests is
appended as a matter of record.

We have been out to dinner practically every evening for the past two weeks,
and often to the opera. It is wearisome when one has work to do.

Major Pechkoff and Dr. Bernard Fay have been interesting French callers.
B. F. Fleisher of the Tokyo Advertiser and Sir William Wiseman, who is just back
from Mexico, have also been visitors.

On Sunday the 20th we lunched with Mr. and Mrs. Julius Lay. Henry Morgan-
thau, whom I have not seen for a year and a half, came in yesterday. My stock
seems to be going up. I find no better barometer than the people who come and
go as one's power waxes and wanes. I introduced Morganthau to President
Judson of the University of California, and Herman Kohlsaat, who called before he
left.

Prince Lubermoski was a visitor yesterday. He said Paderewski chided him
for not breaking his engagements in Washington in order to attend our dinner the
other evening. He hoped I would understand. He gave the latest word from
Poland.

March 4, 1921.

On February 22nd we went with the Hoovers to the Gala performance at the
Metropolitan Opera House in behalf of the European Relief Fund. Hoover was
very excited having just had a long talk with Harding over the long distance -
telephone from St Augustine, Florida. Harding had sent him several messages by

(8)

the
friends asking whether he would accept Secretaryship of Commerce in his Cabinet.
Hoover had replied that he would let Mr. Harding know whenever he asked him di-
rect, consequently Harding called him over the telephone and offered him the place.
Hoover accepted conditionally. We talked it over during a large part of the eve-
turn
ning in the rear of the box. It was as evident to me then as it was last Augus-
when he first broached the subject, that he desired to be in the Cabinet and that
he would accept if a place was tendered. Hoover started in for the Presidency,
was afterward mentioned for Secretary of State, and has landed in practically the
lowest position in the Cabinet. I am wondering how he and Harding will get along.
My opinion is that Hoover will be in the newspapers to such an extent that he will
get on the nerves of the President and his fellow members of the Cabinet.

Richard Washburn Child and Mrs. Child took lunch with us on the 22nd
and we discussed the advisability of his accepting a private secretaryship under
Harding. The understanding is that Christian will do the regular routine office
work and that Child will do the writing, be liaison officer between Congress, the
Cabinet and the President, and consequently be at the President's elbow. All
friends and well wishers of the President are hoping that Child will accept this
position for it will mean much to the success of the administration.

Among the many people I have seen of interest were Sir Horace Plunkett, Cunliffe-Owen, Paderewski, McAdoo, Etienne Grosclaude, Sir Philip Gibbs and ex-Attorney General Gregory. Plunkett is still absorbed in Ireland and can talk of nothing else; McAdoo is absorbed in his own political fortunes and his attitude toward the nomination in 1924.

Sir Philip Gibbs came to tea and was full of his plans to bring the
English speaking nations closer together.

Paderewski wanted advice on a speech he has been asked to make in Washing-
ton.

(9)

Gregory and I had a delightful evening together. He came early and we did not part until nearly midnight. He says the White House behavior toward him and his as family is unaccountable as its behavior toward me. Mrs. Wilson did not go to Jane Gregory's wedding, and they have never heard from the Wilsons either directly or indirectly although many people have recently been invited to the White House. We both regret that the President has formed a partnership to practice law. He is not a lawyer in any sense, and he went to the limit of good taste in electing to live in Washington much less to practice law there.

General Smuts' eulogy of Wilson is very fine. It is not only well done but is largely just. In that part of it in which he tells how the League of Nations differentiated the Versailles Treaty from other treaties, he uses *akk* almost the same expressions I used to Wilson when he first came to Paris. The great trouble with the President is that he is too much concerned about the form and not enough about the spirit of the League. He holds tenaciously to every trifling detail of the Covenant as we wrote it. Maxhakààxxa His determination to refuse any other garb for this spiritual movement other than that made in Paris is responsible for the jeopardy it is now in.

March 20, 1921.

March 4th I had a long sitting with Burton Hendrick going over the Page book. He is making a feature of my visit to Berlin prior to the war and I am afraid there will be but little for me to say about that memorable trip. He had read an advance copy of Lansing's book which he declared he would not have written for a million dollars, if he had been in Lansing's place because it proved he did nothing at Paris except to permit himself to be snubbed day by day. Both the Outlook and Evening Post asked me to review it, but I declined in both instances. In my letter to Lawrence Abbott answering the request of the Outlook I said "So much is being said by so many people at this time that I hesitate to

(10)

become one of the number who are now fighting the war and its aftermath with ink."

One of the most interesting visitors I have had for sometime was Norman Davis who came to see me March 14th. He told the whole story, as he knew it, of his relations with the President and of his work at the State Department. He says the President first made the suggestion to Colby that they form a partnership for the practice of law. I was much surprised to hear this as everyone thinks Colby induced the President to give the use of his name to the undertaking. Davis said the President was unhappy because of his financial condition; that he had paid cash for his new home and had borrowed a large part of the money at a high rate of interest.

Davis said that Colby had a copy of the Lansing book and asked the President if he would like to read it. He replied "No, I do not care to read it. If it satisfies Lansing I am sure it will satisfy me".

Paderewski and Madame called on March 15th and we dined with them last night. It was a large family party. The only outside guests were Madame Sembrich and Cunliffe-Owen.

We have been to dinners nearly every evening. Norman and Elizabeth Hapgood took lunch with us Friday and that afternoon Dr. Bernard Fay and Dr. Redlich called. Redlich is a savant of note and something of a figure in Austria. He has a judicial mind and seems to be without bias. When he came I placed a time limit of thirty minutes on his visit but I became so interested that I countermanded the order and he remained as long as he desired. Fay as usual was also interesting.

Charles Scribner is disappointed that I did not write a chapter on the Armistice for the forthcoming book, "What Really Happened at Paris". I did not write this chapter because I did not care to tell at this time the whole story. I prefer to wait until I can for there is nothing I have ever done

(11)

that is of more importance, and it has never been properly told as far as I know.
In lieu of this, Scribner asked me to write a foreword which I have done today
and this with its concluding chapter "The Versailles Peace in Retrospect" with
be my contribution.

March 27, 1921.

On the 21st I spent a busy day starting with Mr. E. Phillips Ross who
desired to know how best to awaken public interest in the Russian trade situation.
I advised him to work through the United States Chamber of Commerce.

Mr. Charles Scribner was another caller. He wished to reinforce the re-
quest of Dr. Seymour that I write a foreword for the book "What Really Happened
at Paris". He seemed surprised when I told him I had written it the day before
and handed it to him to read.

Dr. Henry Crampton of Columbia was another caller. He is just back from
the Far East and Pacific Islands and desired to talk of the United States' inter-
est in those countries. He was concerned about the independence of the Phil-
ippines and the Island of Yap.

On Tuesday the 22nd I went to a meeting of the Committee having to do with
the raising of a "Woodrow Wilson Fund". Cleveland H. Dodge, Frank Polk, Franklin
Roosevelt, Henry Morganthau, Hamilton Holt and Dr. Gay of the Evening Post were
among those present. I differed from nearly every proposal made. I made a
motion that two sub-committees be appointed which was carried and the meeting
adjourned. At the meeting Franklin Roosevelt read a letter from Bernard Baruch
indicating a willingness to subscribe but stating that he disapproved the entire
movement. Frank Polk walked home with me and I told him I thought Baruch might
be voicing the feeling of the President Wilson. Polk did not agree with me
and he thought the President would probably be glad to see it go through.

(12)

On the 23rd, Raymond Fosdick called to show his review of Lansing's book. He has done it very well, but it is a caustic criticism of Lansing. Lansing sent me a copy of the book with an autograph inscription. I have not read it except to look over it casually when an advance copy was sent me a few weeks ago. I have read most of the reviews which are nearly all unfavorable. The criticism is that if he differed from the President so markedly as he indicates, he should have resigned. Many express the opinion that he justifies the President's action in putting him out of the State Department. It is too bad for he might have written something about the Peace Conference which would have been harmless yet interesting, and added rather than detracted from his reputation.

One of the reviews of the book, by P. W. Wilson, American Correspondent of the London Daily News and a former Member of Parliament, had this to say of me: "There is one nearer the former President than Mr. Lansing who might have written a book as embittered. He is silent. Even if he has somewhat to forgive, it may be that he deems Woodrow Wilson the man, of all living men today, best worth giving".

We had a pleasant dinner with Dana and Irene Gibson Thursday. Mr. and Mrs. Norman Davis and Mr. and Mrs. John Drinkwater were among the guests. Norman Davis talked entertainingly of his work in the State Department.

On the 25th we had for lunch Dr. Hogarth of Oxford University and Mr. and Mrs. McIver. Both Hogarth and McIver were entertaining. I am constantly impressed with the breadth of view and great culture of scholarly Englishmen. We have few on this side and the reason is obvious. England's interests are far-flung and her people are concerned with the most remote parts of the earth.

Burton Hendrick and David F. Houston were callers on that day. Houston spent most of the afternoon and I had to shift him from one room to another as

(13)

callers came and went. Later he remained for tea with Hampson Gary and his wife.
Houston is depressed. He has no prospects at present for employment and, having
little money, his situation is not encouraging. I am trying to get him with the
Foreign Trade Corporation. I have set the machinery working toward that end,
but I fear his faculty for making enemies may thwart the plan. The Federal Re-
serve Board would have sent him to Europe, but that matter was brought up in a
Cabinet meeting and Hoover earnestly protested stating if one of Wilson's of-
ficial family went abroad in such a capacity, he would be taken as the spokesman
of the new administration and it might cause trouble. Hoover and Houston dislike
one another; and Hoover is on the Executive Committee of the Foreign Trade Cor-
poration. I shall try to soften him if possible. Harding of the Federal Re-
serve Board has been offered the Presidency of it and has it now under considera-
tion, but if he declines and I can get Hoover to keep his hands off, I believe
they will elect Houston. The place carries about $50,000. a year as salary.

Herman Kohlsaat returned from Washington today. He spent two and a
half hours with President Harding Thursday evening. Harding told him of his
plans, why he appointed George Harvey as Ambassador to England; how Harvey pro-
mised not to drink anything while he was there; his intention of appointing Taft
Chief Justice of the Supreme Court in the event White resigned; of his further
purpose to make Sutherland a Justice, and George Wharton Pepper Solicitor Gen-
eral with a promise of a Justiceship later.

April 3, 1921.

This has been an interesting week. Commencing backward Edward Eok spent
most of today with me. He and his wife took lunch with us and we then motored
up to the Cleveland H. Dodge place at Riverdale. Eok was with President Wilson
when he had his last nervous spasm, about which there was so much talk a week or

(14)

or ten days ago. The President, he said, was lying on the bed resting after
having dictated some twenty-five letters. He asked Bok why the papers had been
kept from him that day. Bok said he did not know. Wilson then asked what was
in them and Bok replied that there was something about Russia and some other
things. Wilson insisted "I am sure there was something in them they did not
wish me to see. I am not a child or to be treated as one". Bok then suggested
that it was doubtless Lansing's book which had come out the day before and of
which the papers were full. The President said, "What do they think I care
about Lansing's book or about him."

Wilson then fell to talking about Lloyd George and dressed him down in
great style. He discussed the Senate in general and Dodge in particular and
what he said "was not fit to print". He worked himself into such a state
that it brought on the spasm which lasted for fifty minutes and they thought he
would surely die.

In talking to Bok about the Forum lectures I have been supervising at
the Philadelphia Academy of Music, he wanted to know if a book was to be publish-
ed and if I was to write any part of it. Bok told of my foreword and concluding
chapter. The President remarked "House will not say anything he should not."
A little later, my name came up again and the President said, after Bok explained
something I had done, "House has brains, he is all right", and turning to Mrs.
Wilson "I told you Edith".

I have been very careful in writing the preface and concluding chapter
not to make it critical of Wilson, and I have consulted a number of people on
the subject. Bok, who has now read it, says that by no stretch of the imagi-
nation could anyone see any criticism of him.

At Cleveland Dodge's we discussed the Woodrow Wilson Memorial Fund.

(15)

I gave them my idea as to how the fund should be used. I should like to see it
used to educate the public in the better assessment of values so that the youth
of our country would have ambitious for unselfish service without thought of per-
sonal gain or honor.

R. W. Woolley called yesterday and gave all the Washington gossip.

I have been trying during the past week to place Houston as President of the National City Bank. Cleveland H. Dodge is one of its most influential Directors and he promises to take the matter up at their meeting tomorrow.

Hamilton Holt, Arthur Bullard and a number of others have filled the
interesting
week. There was one thing the President told Bok and that was he did not him-
self write the letter dismissing Lansing from the State Department. He said he
approved the letter and signed it but did not compose it. He asked Bok why he
wanted to know about it, and Bok told him that the letter was not in his style.

When I see the entire structure of the League of Nations slipping away
day by day I can hardly contain myself for it is all so unnecessary. The country
was overwhelmingly for the League and the Senate would have accepted it with but
slight reservations if the President had not been so unyielding. There would
have been no question as to its enthusiastic enforcement by any administration,
republican or democratic. The republicans from party necessity have influenced
the country against the League until what was once an overwhelming majority for
it has become a majority against it.

April 23, 1921.

I find among my notes that George H. Doran called on Sunday, April 3rd,
and again on the 20th to discuss the publication of any prospective book pub-
I may write. He made a tentative offer of $100,000. guarantee with 20% royalty
and 75% of the syndicate rights. He is to put this in writing later.

(16)

I had a delightful visit from General Pershing on the 25th. He remained for an hour or more. He expressed the hope I would get out a book soon. He thought our stories would dovetail one another. Among other things he said that he and I were about the only ones connected with the Allied Governments who worked in harmony. Lloyd George and Haig did not work well together, neither did Clemenceau and Foch. It is rather an extraordinary way to put it, but what he meant was that I was in Europe so much during the war as the President's representative that I practically took his place while over there.

I suggested to Pershing that he go to Europe in order to make a report on the military situation. He was delighted with the idea and I offered to write a letter, which I later did, to be used to call the matter to the attention of the Secretary of War.

Frank Doubleday was another caller on the same day. He made a proposal in writing on any prospect for book I might publish. He would advance $2000, a month while I was writing the book and he made several other generous offers.

On Wednesday the 6th we gave a dinner to Lord Queenborough. The other guests were, Mr. and Mrs. John W. Davis, Mr. and Mrs. Charles Dana Gibson, Mr. James Clews, Mrs. W. K. Vanderbilt, je. and Mrs. George Vanderbilt.

We went to Boston on the 9th and remained a week with Mona. She gave us a large dinner at the Chiltern Club and others gave us luncheons and dinners.

I gave a luncheon on Friday the 15th to Dr. Redlich of Vienna. The others present were, Philip de Laszlo, the artist, Raymond Fosdick, Dr. Ludwig Kast, Charles Burlingham and Gordon.

On Saturday, the 16th, I gave a luncheon to Stephane Lausanne, and those present were, Governor Odell, Judge Mayer, Rutger Jewett, James Lyons, Cunliffe-Owen, Edward S. Martin, Herman Kohlsaat, Dawson, of the Tribune, and Vananda of the Times.

(17)

Collier's Weekly of the 16th had an exceedingly complimentary editorial about me. I was informed that it was written by Mr. Powell, the Editor, and I wrote him a note of appreciation. I found later that it was written by Richard Washburn Child. He wrote it nearly a year ago and for some reason it was held until now.

In the Philadelphia Public Ledger of April 21st there is a despatch from Paris giving an interview with Aristide Briand, and among other things he said:

"His first utterance was about Colonel House. He said, 'I am so glad Colonel House is coming over again, I consider him one of the ablest living Americans, especially as regards his knowledge of France. I understand he arrives May fourth. Please inform him I will see him the first day he is in Paris.'"

I have a letter from Helen Bones, President Wilson's cousin, dated April 10th, in which she writes this significant sentence: "You, the most wonderful selfless friend a lonely public man ever had."

April 29, 1921.

During the past week I have seen some people of note. Einstein, of relativity fame was by far the most interesting.

We dined with Cyrus H. K. Curtis on his yacht Monday evening, and today I gave him a luncheon to which I invited W. G. McAdoo, Benj. Strong, Victor Lawson, Frank B. Noyes, of the Washington Star and President of the Associated Press, Roy Martin, Manager of the Associated Press, Cleveland H. Dodge, H. H. Kohlseat, and Herbert Kaufman, Editor of McClures Magazine. We had a pleasant and vivacious time. After lunch, Herbert Brougham and Carl Heynen called. Heynen is right-hand man of Dr. H. F. Albert of pre-war fame. I told Heynen of my plan to go to Austria and that I had thought of going into to Germany. He assured me that every facility would be placed at my service and that Dr. Albert would

(18)

write me a letter to Paris to this effect. He said Americans were welcome in
Germany. I agreed to this, but told him that the most unpopular man in Germany
was Woodrow Wilson and that I was so closely connected with him in the German mind
that I thought it quite likely I would share in his unpopularity. He was rather
vague in regard to this, as, of course, he could not know about it from this distance.

I learned from Randolph Marshall, Managing Editor of the Public Ledger,
that W. F. McCombs left a posthumous book which is to be edited by Lang, one of
Hearst's reporters, and it is said to be vitriolic in its denunciation of Wilson.
I have no doubt McAdoo and I will come in for our full share. The poor fellow
was addicted to the use of both whiskey and drugs and was not wholly responsible.
Besides this his egotism was beyond all bounds.

I shall probably not take up the diary again until we reach Paris.
We are sailing on the S. S. Aquitania next Tuesday, May 3rd.

(19)

PARIS, FRANCE.

May 15, 1921.

We arrived at Cherbourg in the early morning of May 10th. We could have made a landing the night before but the Captain in consideration of our comfort arranged our disembarkation for the next day in order that we might make the trip to Paris in the day rather than at night.

It was a delightful voyage-- pleasant weather and good company. I had many long and interesting talks with Dr. Shotwell who with Mr. Frederick H. Allen occupied seats at our table in the dining saloon.

I also had several talks with Ambassador Harvey. We met on deck soon after the Aquitania was well at sea and walked together for awhile. In that conversation he gave me to understand that Hoover was <u>persona non grata</u> with both Congress and the influential part of the Cabinet. He said if Hoover attempted to interfere with Hughes in the conduct of the State Department, it would bring him a cropper. I suspected this was about the state of affairs.

I asked no questions and talked generalities except when he brought the conversation to a more intimate and interesting stage. Our last talk was the day before we landed at Cherbourg. We used up the better part of an afternoon and went into almost every subject of importance with which the Administration has to deal. He spoke with a frankness which astonished me. No ambassador of my own political party has ever talked more freely or given me his confidence to a greater degree. I was never more surprised in my life, and I felt touched and complimented.

As to the Panama tolls controversy, he stated that he had always taken the Wilson attitude on that question, and had had much difficulty with Borah and Knox in order to keep them from introducing a resolution in the Senate for their ap-

(20)

peal. He finally obtained their promise to give him a fair trial in London to see whether he could perfect an arrangement acceptable to all concerned. He said the unfortunate part of it was that President Harding, in a moment of abberation during the campaign, had committed himself to the repeal. It was while he, Harvey, was away from Marion. When he returned he urged Harding to drop it, pleading that it was needless to bring into the campaign another issue.

We discussed the influence he should exert as Ambassador to Great Britain. He said Harding intended to give him very wide powers and that the conclusion he, Harvey, came to, and what recommendations he made to the President, would probably be accepted. I pushed him as far as possible in this direction telling him it was important for the success of the Harding Administration that he be given a free hand, and the vexed questions confronting the administration be taken up and settled as far as possible. In my opinion, it would not be wise to evade issues under the plea that we did not intend to entangle ourselves in European affairs. That, I considered nonsense and something which could hot be avoided even if we cared to do so. If the Administration undertook to remain outside world affairs, and not take part in conferences now going on, it would indefinitely prolong their settlement and I felt certain, if they were not settled by the time of the congressional elections next year, the country would reverse itself and put the democrats in power in the House of Representatives. My advice was to insist upon sitting in the Supreme Council. It was only in this way, I thought, he could come directly in touch with Lloyd George and avoid discussion with Curzon.

Harvey agreed to this without hesitation, since it was as clear to him as it was to me that it would very much enhance his usefulness and power. Curzon, I thought, was an influence unfriendly to the United States and the

(21)

only way in which he could be eliminated was by getting in direct touch with
the Prime Minister, and the only way this could be done was through the Supreme
Council. If the Ambassador was not in the Supreme Council, he could then of
necessity have to take up matters through the Secretary of State for
Foreign Affairs who, in turn, would take them to the Prime Minister, a proce-
due we both thought would complicate and make negative prompt and effective ne-
gotiations.

Harvey led me to believe that his jurisdiction might embrace all Europe. I
have the impression that this is true and will be true as long as he is
able to maintain himself.

My general advice was to take up the Versailles Treaty and let that he the
instrument for a general settlement. He asked whether I advised stating the
minimum terms at once or the maximum with the idea of receding. My advice was
to state the minimum terms and explain how difficult it was for the Administra-
tion to carry on these negotiations because of the opposition of the Senate and
in the President's own party. I suggested that he make a plea for help so
as to get them to come as far in the Administration's direction as was possible
in the circumstances.

He asked about Yap and whether I thought Wilson had given such terms in
regard to it as the Japanese claimed. He said the only thing Wilson had asked
Harding to do was to sustain him in regard to Yap, since it was a matter of ve-
racity between himself and the Japanese Government. My reply was that Wilson's
memory was untrustworthy, but I knew enough about the controversy to know that
his attitude at Paris was such that it was impossible and incredible that he
should have acquiesced in the settlement as claimed by the Japanese.

I explained to Harvey what happened in the Mandate Commission during
the summer of 1919 when I representing the American Government, and how mis-

(22)

leading was the statement made in the Japanese note to our Government of my
position regarding Yap. They claimed that I was against the open door, which
of course is not true. I merely followed the precedence established in Paris
elaborating the possibility of Asiatic immigration into the German Colonies in
the Pacific which Australia and New Zealand had taken over under Mandate C.

It was the same question raised at paris in the League of Nations sittings
when the Japanese tried so hard to establish racial equality. I was pleased to
hear Harvey say that the American Government would not permit the word of the
President of the United States to be questioned.

Another suggestion I made to him was to bring about an American-British-Japanese understanding in the Pacific. The three Governments are the only great Pacific powers and instead of an Anglo-Japanese understanding I thought it would be advisable to have a triple understanding including the three Governments. This, I told him, could be brought about by its mere suggestion in London.

Having been fully advised by Herman Kohlsaat of Harding's position regard-
ing the Treaty of Versailles and the alternatives of a separate treaty with Ger-
many in which Italy would join, or entire isolation of the United States, I
gave it as my opinion that there was only one thing for the present administration
to do and that was to use the Versailles Treaty as a basis for negotiation. The
other alternatives might be used as a "bluff" to the other Treaty signatories,
but they were not practicable for use.

Harvey said Lodge's attitude was becoming more and more irreconcilable
and that today he was worse than Borah. I advised him to send his messages care-
fully. In my opinion, the British would be able to read the ordinary code as
easily as if printed in English. My suggestion was to code his messages and
then have the Navy put it in a Navy box, send it to the Navy Department at Wash-

(23)

ington and have the Navy deliver it to the State Department in the State Depart-
ment code. In this way I thought it would be fairly safe. It will be necessary
to speak freely of Curzon and, of course, it would be fatal to have him read the
messages.

When we parted Harvey asked when I would be in London, and when I told him I
expected to be there by July first, he said by that time he woudd need my advice
more than ever.

The trip to Paris was pleasant and we found upon our arrival many notes
and invitations to luncheons and dinners which we have been busy fulfilling.
Hugh and Mrs. Wallace gave us a large dinner at the Embassy at which there were
several notable guests including Marechal Petain, Viviani, Tardieu etc. etc.
It is quite a different Paris from what it was last August when everyone was
absent. I have had long conferences with Tardieu, Henri Bergson, Louis Aubert,
Stephane Lausanne and many others. D. N. Heineman came over from Brussels to
see me Saturday and has promised to go into Germany with us in the event we de-
cide to make the venture.

One of the most interesting occasions was a lunch Colonels Olds and Emerson
gave in behalf of the Red Cross in order to discuss the Russian refugee problem.
Until then I had no conception of its gravity. I had been told that the League
of Nations had presented three names from which to choose a high commission to
take charge of the situation and to enlist the governments of Europe, Taft, Root
and myself. They had a plan pretty well worked out and submitted it to me for
criticism. I did not think it workable and made another and entirely different
suggestion, outlining a plan I thought would be more successful. This they adopt-
ed and will try to put it into effect.

I suggested Governor Lowden as being the most suitable man for

(24)

High Commissioner and gave what seemed to them convincing reasons. I explained that in order to make it a success, Colonel Harvey would have to be convinced and his cooperation should be had at least to the extent of his putting it up to the President in order to obtain the moral support of the American people.

I am looking forward to a busy week, the event of which I shall chronicle.

May 20, 1921.

Dr. Henri Bergson came Monday and we had an hour together. There is no one in France I enjoy more than this genial philosopher. We arranged for a quiet luncheon with Briand for today when the three of us could talk without interruption.

It was a successful affair. Because of the crisis in the Chamber of Deputies it was necessary for us to have lunch at 12.15. When I arrived at Bergson's residence at ten minutes after twelve I found Briand waiting. I outlined briefly the situation at home and told something of the President's policy as to foreign affairs, or as nearly as anyone could define it, and I told him he would have to reckon with Harvey who would probably be the President's spokesman in Europe. Harvey, I thought, was an able man but an indiscreet one and he might last during four years or he might be recalled at any time. The fact that he was to sit in the Supreme Council would give Briand an opportunity to discuss matters of importance between the two countries, and I thought Harvey's recommendations would probably be accepted by the President.

We discussed Yap, which I told him would be one of the first questions Harvey would be instructed to discuss. About this question I let him understand that there was no difference of opinion in the United States between the outgoing administration and the incoming one. I outlined the history of ne-

(25)

gotiations on the Mandate Commission in London in the Summer of 1919.

As to the League of Nations, I thought the present Administration would
nullify it as far as they were able. I made the statement that only a minority
of our Presidents had been re-elected for two consecutive terms, and that if
Harding failed of re-election, a democratic President would be as fervently in
favor of the League as this Administration was against it. Therefore it seemed
to me that the only thing for Europe to do was to go on with the League and to
explain to our Government how necessary the League was to them, without insisting
that the United States should become a part of it. No matter what the United
States felt to be her interests in the matter, Europe's interests were bound to
the League and it could not be abandoned so far as Europe was concerned. The
United States, on the other hand, could take such part in European affairs as
her interests and inclination demanded and such action would be entirely agree-
able to the European Governments.

I impressed this view upon Bergson after Briand left. I thought he
could keep these facts not only before Briand but before any other Prime Min-
ister who might succeed him. I did this in order to save the League if it is
possible to undo some of the harm done by the violent anti-League speeches
made by Harvey yesterday before the Pilgrims Society in London.

Briand told of his attitude on Yap, and how he had taken the side
of the United States at the last meeting of the Supreme Council in which
Lloyd George took the side of the Japanese. Briand thought George's surly
attitude toward France on the Silesian question was largely due to France's
position on the question of Yap.

The luncheon was delightful from start to finish. We took our coffee
in the garden and Briand left soon after for the Chamber of Deputies where he

(26)

said a great duel was on between himself and his antagonists. I wished him suc-
cess.

One of the most enjoyable hours I have had was spent with Clemenceau
Tuesday morning. He seemed in good health and spirits yet I could see that his
defeat for the Presidency still rangled. He mentioned it casually, saying that
no one could speak the truth and state that he had ever asked for it. He has
what I consider a rather far-fetched theory that the English Clericals got into
the fight against him on the ground of religion.

He spoke of Foch as having "acted badly". He was delighted to recall the
House-Mantoux correspondence which was published last summer in which Foch's po-
sition at the Armistice was brought out in sharp contradiction to the claims of
his friends. Clemenceau told of India and of the British misrule there, and of
his tiger hunts. He spoke of the poverty there and said he had seen women with
babies at their breasts climbing ladders to carry stones for the builders, and
that they received but the small pittance of twelve cents per day. I think he
must have meant twelve pence which would be double the amount he mentioned. He
spoke of his little cottage in the Vendeå. It is within forty yards of the sea,
and his wants are cared for by one of the peasants of a neighboring estate. He
laughingly declared her to be "a royalist and a Catholic", his particular bêtes
noires.

He asked me to visit him stating there were two beds and one of them
would be mine. His friends, he said, had offered to purchase an estate for him
and they also desired to give him a Rolls Royce, which he had declined. He
said he had but little money but it was sufficient for his frugal needs and he
preferred not to accept favors. He paid $500. for his little Vendeå cottage.
It is a pleasant picture to contemplate. This rugged old statesman who has done

(27)

so much for France living in simplicity and retaining the respect and independence characteristic of him. The more one sees of Clemenceau, the bigger he becomes.

We talked of the difficulty of maintaining oneself even in private life. There were so many opportunities to do foolish things, and there were so many suggestions from friends to help one along that path. He hoped to go through unscathed. When we parted I said "God bless you". He replied "God has blessed me as, indeed, he has bless you". We both have much to be thankful for."

I shall not tell the story of my other interviews for they have been hourly and semi-hourly. There have been lunches and dinners and pleasant friends both in France and abroad.

May 30, 1921.

Since I last chronicled in the diary I have been saddened by the death of my friend, Melenko Vesnitch, the Serbian Minister. I lunched with him at the Union Club on Tuesday, the 24th. He asked me to indicate the guests for him to invite and I mentioned several of my warm friends such as the Spanish Ambassador, André Tardieu, and some fifteen others. We were to be together at lunch yesterday and again today but, alas, he died suddenly of heart failure Saturday. He was an able man and an honest one and his influence extended far beyond the confines of his own country. He was an international figure of note and he always stood for the right as he saw it.

I have had many interesting lunches and dinners, and have met many of our French, English and American friends day by day. Most of the dinners were given for us. One of the most entertaining occurred today at M. Schneider's Thaï The other guests were all French and included the Marquis and Marquise de Polignac and some six or eight others.

I have written an article on the economic and financial situation in

(28)

France, and I plan to do several others on the various countries visited.

I have a delightful letter from Brand Whitlock asking me to come to Brussels and stating the King had expressed a desire to talk with me. I may or may not go after we take the trip to Germany and Austria which we begin on Wednesday.

The German Government have arranged for our comfortable passage both in and out of Germany, and Ellis Loring Dresel, our American Commissioner at Berlin, has invited us to stop at the Embassy.

I had a talk with General Henry T. Allen last night at dinner and he invited us to come to Coblentz. He told many interesting things regarding the occupation and the attitude of the natives toward our troops.

Berlin, Germany.

June 3, 1921.

We reached Berlin Thursday, June 2nd, around six o'clock.

Dresel, one of his secretaries and C. B. Conger were at the station to meet us. We drove at once to the Embassy and I had a long talk with Dresel giving him the latest information I had from the United States. He has been so kind and so generous that I gave him the most confidential information in order to put him in touch with the situation not only in the United States but in France.

Coming back to the Embassy has awakened many memories. It was here that I tried to negotiate peace with the Chancellor, the Secretary for Foreign Affairs and other heads of the German Government. I am now talking with the present Government in the same rooms, but in a far different way and with a different atmosphere surrounding us.

Two of the most interesting of my visitors have been Max Warburg of

(29)

Hamburg, who came here to meet me, and von Rosen, Minister for Foreign Affairs. I found Warburg a very forward looking man. He believes the trouble England is now going through is largely because her statesmen and so-called governing class do not understand the changed conditions of the world and the impossibility of treating labor as formerly. I found him ready to make a rapproachement with Russia, and I was surprised to hear him say that eventually something might be worked out of the present bolsheviki plan which may suit the times better than the old capitalistic order. I was also surprised to hear him say he thought Germany was better off in defeat than she would have been in success. He believes if Germany had won the war, it would have been an impossible place for a man of his views to live, and in such an event he had planned to leave. He knows there is a long period of unrest and unhappiness before Germany but in the end he believes there will come forth a better and more useful Germany than if her arms had been successful. In this I agree with him.

I wonder whether the United States is not heading for trouble in some such way as Germany was. I do not like the arrogance we are beginning to assume in foreign affairs or the cock-sureness of our judgments.

The great difficulty in the resuscitation of Germany is the financial condition. Warburg thinks it is almost impossible to get back to a sound currency, because of the money that must necessarily be paid out for reparations, for the army of occupation, for the rehabilitation of the public service, the care of the unemployed etc. Sooner or later, believes, Germany must change the gold value of the mark. It will never come back to four marks to the dollar. Just where the stabilization will be he does not know; it might be at eight marks, it might be at ten or perhaps as high as sixteen. He does not think the time has yet come to make the revaluation and may not for some years. This is

(30)

interesting for I have a feeling that the gold franc too will have to be re-
valued, making it perhaps ten to the dollar instead of five as now.

One of the great difficulties under which Germany is strungling is the
deficit of the railroads. Instead of having six hundred and fifty thousand em-
ployees, they have nearly one million and fifty thousand. This is partially due
to shorter hours, but more largely due to the policy of taking care of the unem-
ployed.

It is interesting to see the economies of the rich. Von Gwinner of the
Deutsche Bank has no automobile, neither have any of the other rich men with whom
I have talked. Their incomes are almost wholly absorbed in taxes. On the other
hand, Berlin is full of profiteers spending their money recklessly. The Jews
predominate in this class of undesirable citizenship. Much of their money has
been placed in foreign securities remaining in foreign countries where it is
difficult for the Government to reach them. In this way they obtain the benefit
of exchange.

Von Rosen and I talked for two hours, and almost in the same spot where
von Bethman Hollweg and I talked for a similar time in February 1916. But what
a different man and what a different outlook! Von Rosen is clear-headed, has
a grasp of the situation as it is, without any illusions as to what Germany can
or cannot do, and what she should or should not do. I was complimented by his
frankness in giving me his Government's program. I believe the French and Belgians
are confronted by a very different man from those they have heretofore met among
German statesmen, and it will be more difficult for them to make whatever plans
they please under the assumption that they will be successful. My opinion of
course is merely superficial for I do not know Rosen well enough to have a pos-
itive conviction. He asked my advice upon many matters. One was the kind of

(31)

Ambassador Germany should send to the United States when diplomatic relations are resumed. He first suggested merely sending a Chargé. That, I thought, a mistake. He asked whether it would be best to send a diplomat of the old school, a man of commerce, or a man of high title. My advice was to send a man who spoke English perfectly, who could make an eloquent speech, and one who was in entire sympathy with the new Germany as it is under the present Government. I thought he should be a man who knew politics and had tact. I thought it was important a careful selection important since the right man could give an impression of the new Germany's purposes which would be perhaps lasting. The wrong man could do much harm; the right man much good. Rosen went over the men available who met these requirements. He suggested Solf as one and Count von Brentano as another.

The latter I do not know and von Rosen suggested that he send for him so that I might look him over before leaving Berlin. However, since I am leaving Monday and since Brentano is in Baden, we did not consider this practicable.

Dresel had Dr. Albert for dinner last night, and von Bernstorff called this morning. He was nervous and ill at ease and did not remain long. When he stated that it would not be wise for him or any of the old war regime to take important offices at this time, I heartily concurred. I thought there was a prejudice against him in the United States that time alone could overcome-- a prejudice which I am free to admit is not altogether warranted.

Among the many others I have seen are von Simpson of the Foreign Office, von Gwinner of the Deutsche Bank, and tomorrow the Chancellor comes to dinner with the British Ambassador, Lord d'Aernon.

My old friend and fellow Texan ex-Postmaster General Burleson has been another visitor. In reminiscing with him I was interested to find that my instinct was correct that President Wilson was a candidate for a third term to suc-

(32)

ceed himself. After the Jackson Day letter I was certain he was out for renom-
ination. He evidently believed that by making the League of Nations the issue,
he would be overwhelmingly re-elected and vindicated. ~~was~~ there ever such mad-
ness? It shows how little those in great positions know of public feeling.
Perhaps that is the reason he did not let the Treaty go through and the League
of Nations, with slight amendments, pass.

Burleson tells me that McAdoo urged him just before the Convention to get
a positive expression from the President that he was not a candidate. Burleson
was unable to do so and became convinced that the President desired the nomina-
tion himself. Burleson wired the President from San Francisco that he had no
chance and he said the President showed his irritation when he, Burleson, returned
from San Francisco empty handed.

Colby was the most persistent one of the President's backers at San Fran-
cisco, and sent a telegram, in cypher, I think, asking if he would permit his name
to be brought before the Convention. In reply Mrs. Wilson called Colby over the
telephone from Washington and told him the President would be glad to have him do
so.

June 6, 1921.

Berlin is suffering from an intense heat wave which is very trying to
me. However, since Dresel has made all my engagements at the Embassy it has not
been impossible to see the great number of people I have seen since I have been
here.

Last night the guests at dinner were Chancellor Wirth, Hanniel, Under Secre-
tary of State for Foreign Affairs, Lord d'Abernon, the British Ambassador and
the Italian Ambassador. I had long talks with both the Italian Ambassador and
the Chancellor.

(33)

Chancellor Wirth was quite frank in his statements as to the Government's policies. When I pushed him on the question as to whether his Ministry was in favor of a direct rapproachement with France, he evaded a direct reply but practically admitted it. He insisted that it was his intention to do what he could to meet reparations requirements and he thought it was possible. He surprised me by saying that he thought within a year it would be possible to make the budget and income meet. This would be a great achievement and personally I doubt its accomplishment. He also said that while he was Minister of Finance in the Simon Government he differed with Simon during the London Conference and wished him to accept the conditions laid down by the Allies. I thought if his advice had been followed there would have been no occupation of *kmaxRx* Dusseldorf and the other Rhine cities. He agreed to this. I expressed the opinion that the greatest thing for France at the moment was a continuation of his administration since it was democratic and had but one thought— to keep Germany a Republic.

Wirth said if the Reichstag had refused the other day to allow him to bring in his new tax measure, he would have dissolved it and gone before the people. I called his attention to the danger of such a course. If the French are wise they will do everything to hold Wirth's Government in, but it cannot hold on unless they show some consideration for it by evacuating the recently occupied towns in the Ruhr.

We discussed the question of getting iron ore in sufficient quantities to keep Germany's industries going, since the Lorraine mines have now gone to France. His reply was that with the Ruhr coke it would be impossible for the French to utilize the iron ore in Lorraine and that in that way there would of necessity be an exchange of commodities. He thought this was one of the reasons France was anxious for an excuse to occupy the Ruhr district. He thought the Germans would continue to get iron ore from Sweden and Spain.

(34)

The articles I have in mind to write for the Ledger bear the dates of today and a week from today, and will give my views in more detail. They should be included in the record.

This morning I had a long conversation with the French Ambassador, Lorenz, and the British Ambassador, Lord d'Abernon. There was no disagreement between d'Abernon and myself as to what should be done to compose the situation, but the French Ambassador was non-committal. In my opinion, the French are handling the situation unwisely from the view of French interests. Briand would act with more wisdom if he had a free hand but, alas, he has to take into account the Chamber of Deputies.

Vienna, Austria.

June, 9, 1921.

I was not so fortunate here as in Berlin with the newspaper men and the public. In Berlin they did not know I was there until the day I left. This gave me ample time to see the people I cared to see without interruption. On Monday, however, my presence in Berlin became known and newspaper men, photographers and movie men took up most of the day.

My arrival in Vienna was telegraphed from Berlin and was noted in the Viennese press the day we came. This brought a flood of visitors, many of whom were of no importance and a nuisance. I have seen everybody here who seemed worth while from the President down. I was amused when the President sent for a map of Austria as it is today, spread it out on a table before us and began to tell me what the Peace Conference had done to his country. I am the only Peace Commissioner, I take it, who had any part in the making of the Treaty of Versailles, who has dared show himself either in Germany or Austria. I had some doubts as to the wisdom of visiting either of these countries, and I have been

(35)

surprised to find, as far as I have seen, that I have received a good press in both places. Just why I do not know because in the public mind I am still linked up with Wilson, and Wilson, is by all odds, the most unpopular individual in Europe at this time, particularly in Germany and Austria.

I have been interested in the American Relief work here in Vienna and have made something of a study of it. My article on Austria, which I shall write for publication Monday June 20th, will deal more fully with my impressions.

London, England.

July 3, 1921.

I have made no entries in the diary since we left Vienna on the 9th of June.

Through the courtesy of friends we had two motors take our party from Vienna to Prague. It gave us an opportunity to see the country better than it could be seen from a railway carriage. We stopped at several villages along the route in order to observe conditions. I was surprised to find the roads in good condition, the country generally well tilled and the people apparently prosperous. We met but one motor between Vienna and the frontier and that was a military one. Three or four motors were all that were seen during the entire day from Vienna to Prague.

Richard Crane, our Minister to Czecho-Slovakia, hospitably entertained us at the palace he has purchased in Prague. It is a delightful old place and we enjoyed our stay in that historic old town very much. Crance did for us what Dresel did in Berlin though he did not have so much material to work with.

President Masaryk was away and also Benes, Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, both of whom I know well. Jan Masaryk, the son, entertained us at the Palace and gave us the President's box for the opera. I was delighted to hear

(36)

the opera presented so well. It was as creditable a performance as one could
hear in any of the capitals of Europe.

We came from Prague directly to Paris where we arrived June 15th and
remained until the morning of the 26th. Our stay there was not exciting but very
pleasant. I did what I could to avoid invitations and did not let anyone know we
were back. When they found we were there I said we were leaving almost immediately
for London. The weather was hot and nothing of interest was happening in French
politics that I particularly cared to follow. Loucheur, Minister for Liberated
Regions, gave a lunch for me the day before we left to which several members of
the Cabinet were invited. The weather was so warm I sent my regrets at the last
moment.

The only thing I did that was worth while was to try and bring about some-
thing like a rapprochement between the French and Germans. I strongly advised
making some concessions regarding the recently occupied territories and the customs
barriers put on after the Simons Government declined to sign the London agreement
in March.

I have written of this quite freely in my weekly cables to the American
syndicate. And this reminds me that my co-worker on the Public Ledger, ex-Pres-
ident Taft, who has been writing on domestic affairs as I have on foreign affairs,
has been appointed Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court.

We had a pleasant trip from Paris to London and found conditions here quite
the reverse from what we had been told they were, just as we found conditions in
Berlin quite different from the stories that had come to us.

I have seen many people here and have many engagements for the coming week,
the most important being with Lord Grey of Fallodon on Wednesday.

One of my earliest callers after we reached London was Colonel Arthur Murray.

(37)

He told me that at his solicitation Asquith had agreed to yield the Liberal Leadership to Grey. Grey has not yet decided to accept it, nor has it been decided what plans, if any, should be made in regard to it. They desire me to say something to encourage Grey when I see him Wednesday. Murray and I discussed the plan of campaign to follow in the event Grey should accept and an active reorganization of the Liberal Party made.

The most delightful lunch we have had was with Lord and Lady Bryce. No one other than ourselves was present and the talk was intimate. There is no one I enjoy more than Bryce. He had sent messages saying he wanted to see me the moment I arrived in London and he lost no time in seeking us out after we came. Bryce has broken within the last year.

I have seen Balfour for a moment. I had an interesting lunch with Austen Chamberlain at the House of Commons. Chamberlain and I had a few minutes talk afterward. Our conversation was largely about the Anglo-French relations, Silesia, Reparations and kindred subjects. He told of what happened at the meeting in London in March when Dr. Simons refused to accept the demands as to reparations. Strangely enough, he told me nothing new, for I had surmised it all and had written as clearly on the subject in my editorials in the Ledger as if I had been present at the meeting. Knowing the men and knowing the situation, there was but one conclusion to arrive at. However, I was glad to have him confirm what I had thought.

It is very clear that the English are piqued with the French although they feel under the necessity, so Chamberlain says, of maintaining good relations with them, for the present at least. In other words, the time is not ripe to side with the Germans as against the French, but it is clear that the time is not very far distant. Some of them are frankly in favor of it now, the late Chancellor of the Exchequer McKenna being one.

I took occasion to outline to Chamberlain the course I thought his Gov-

(38)

ernment should pursue regarding the Versailles Treaty and the League of Nations.
This in brief was that they should not decline any proposal put forth at Washing-
ton, but should express a sympathetic desire to meet them in their demands or re-
quirements. When these demands are made, no unwillingness to meet them should be
expressed by the British, but the difficulties should be pointed out. It was my
opinion that the Washington Government did not know enough about the subject to
understand the many and varied difficulties surrounding annulment of any of the
Treaty provisions, and they could be pointed out as the questions came up. The
British, I thought, must always assume a sympathetic willingness to meet the wishes
of Washington. In this way I thought the Treaty might be taken practically as it
is now and, sooner or later, the League would be accepted in perhaps a modified
form which would not impair its effectiveness.

July 7, 1921.

Since I last chronicled in the diary I have lunched and talked with
Lord Grey. Colonel Arthur Murray gave the lunch at the Bachelor's Club in a
private room. There was no one else present excepting Sir William Tyrrell.
Murray had some pressing engagements at the House of Commons and left early.
Grey and I did some reminiscing. He is lunching with me tomorrow and I am to
go with him to Kew Gardens for the afternoon.

We lunched with the Asquiths today. My talk was mainly with Margot
and Lady Desborough as I sat between the two. Margot is as frank as ever in
her expressions regarding people. Ambassador Harvey came within the scope of
her observations and suffered somewhat in the contact as, indeed, did Lloyd
George. She thought Wilson was a charming man and a brilliant one, but a
confirmed egoist. She never met him but once and her opinion is not of much
value.

(39)

Tyrrell told me that the King and Queen lunched with the Asquiths the other day and that Margot was explaining something the King did not understand. She said to him "you know there are lots of fools in England who do not understand that subject", and the King smilingly replied, "I expect I am one of them".

Mr. Baker, the architect, was one of the guests and we went with him to his office near Westminster Abbey to see the plans of the Government Buildings at Cape Town which he has built, and the Government Buildings at Delhi which are in process of construction. I enjoyed the few minutes with him as architecture is one of my hobbies.

One of the pleasantest things we have done was to go to Henley for the day to lunch with Lady Henry and see the Regatta. She had a box at the Club and we had a good view of the motley throng that gathers on such gala occasions. She had an interesting Italian as a guest, Mr. Gallenga Stuart. He is a close friend of Orlando and it made me happy to hear him say that Orlando still remembers me with affection.

I lunched with Edward Filene on the fourth to meet a number of those engaged with the International Chamber of Commerce. It was one of those occasions when I had to talk throughout the luncheon as I was invited for that purpose.

July 22, 1921.

It is impossible to be interested in the diary when events are so insignificant in comparison with those with which the major part of it is filled. I have seen a lot of people since the last record including the Prime Minister and practically all the members of the Government. I have also seen Members of Parliament, economists, labor leaders, financiers and literary personages, some of them interesting and some otherwise. Generally before writing my weekly

(40)

editorial for the Ledger Syndicate I see a number of people in order to get ac-
curate information on the subject about which I propose to write. This gives me
an advantage and I can speak with authority, although I am always guarded and
it does not appear that I am speaking with the knowledge I gain from those who
are treating subjects at first hand.

I have cut a good many lunches and dinners because of the heat, and in this
way have missed seeing some interesting people I should have been glad to have
talked with. Lytton Strachey is one of these. I have been seeing those who
come to me but have gone out much less than usual. Many dinners and lunches
have been given us but even some of these I have had to decline at the last
moment.

A tentative proposal was recently made to the French Government to have
me act as arbitrator in the Silesian settlement. Nothing will come of it but
it is interesting to know that I have been thought of in that connection. Sir
Horace Plunkett also has lingering hopes that if the Irish settlement does not
go through I will be called upon to arbitrate there.

July 29, 1921.

Since I last recorded in the diary I have had conversations with
Balfour, Curzon. Plunkett, Campbell Stuart and Smuts. I found from Curzon in
a very few minutes talk that he does not believe Harvey is in good repute with
Secretary Hughes. Balfour also told me the same thing. I am wondering whether
Harvey knows this. Either Hughes himself or someone near him is putting a knife
into Harvey.

I suggested to Lord Curzon and to Mr. Balfour separately the advisability
of having Harvey sit in at the next Supreme Council as an active participant
rather than in the negative way intended. Curzon was not enthusiastic and said

(41)

he understood the Ambassador did not have the confidence of the Secretary of State. I replied that while this might be true, he did have the confidence of the President. The intimation was that it was more important to be in touch with Hughes than with Harding since the former was the stronger man of the two. Curzon told me he was going to the Conference at Washington and I think George will also go if he settles the Irish question.

Balfour was frank in talking of the differences they are having with France over Upper Silesia. He said the whole story, most of which I already knew. I suggested the advisability of having Ambassador Harvey sit in and practically act as arbitrator. Balfour sheered from this just as Curzon had done and seemed somewhat distrustful of Harvey. He did not go very far in that direction but it was evident he is not the type that appeals to him either in Anyone knowing the two men would understand this. A personal or official way. That is the objection to sending a man like Harvey here. He is temperamentally unfit for the place, and there are many amusing stories going the round about his faux pas. It is too bad for it does our country no good and I am genuinely anxious to have him do well. I should never have selected such a man had I been President, but since he is here I should like to see him disappoint his critics.

I made a suggestion to Balfour given me by my friend Heineman of Brussels. It was that the Germans and Poles could probably be brought to settle the Upper Silesia question themselves without the interference of either France or England. I suggested that this be tried out at Warsaw and Berlin and if he found the plan favored, he could propose it when the Supreme Council meets. He said he would do this and thought well of the suggestion. I thought that such differences as were now occurring between France and England, and between Poland and Germany over Upper Silesia, could never have happened had the United States

(42)

ratified the Treaty of Versailles and entered the League of Nations, and had
done our share in bringing about composure. He replied "that is the crux of the
whole matter." and so indeed it is.

I was lunching with Sir Campbell Stuart, who has charge of the Times and
Daily Mail during Northcliffe's absence, when a telegram came stating that
Northcliffe had given out a sensational interview in the New York Times. North-
cliffe had cabled it over to London for publication in the Times and Mail but
Stuart told me he intended to suppress it. He said he had just learned that
the Foreign Office had asked Geddes to request the President not to receive
Northcliffe when he visited Washington. All this is now a matter of history,
since the Prime Minister made his sensational speech in the House of Commons
today in which he gave to the public the King's letter denying the truth of
Northcliffe's statements. Northcliffe has always been my friend and I like
him better than Lloyd George and I am sorry he allows his passion to run away
with his judgment, and that he every now and then delivers himself into the
hands of his enemy.

a few days ago
General Smuts and I were the guests of honor at a dinner given at the
Reform Club by the Liberal Editors of England. We had a delightful time. Smuts
and I did most of the talking. I was surprised to hear him speak of his fellow
Prime Minister, Hughes of Australia, in the way he did. He asked if we did not
want to exchange our Hughes for their Hughes. I replied that unfortunately
for them I knew their Hughes. I then told the story of the darkey in Austin
who "preferred Mr. Johnsing downstairs" to the two attorneys then in the court-
room whom he had seen.

Lord Haldane and Lord Astor have been interesting callers. So indeed
were Sir George Paish and Garvan of the Observer. I took tea with Lytton

(43)

Strachey, much to my disillusionment. I greatly admire Strachey's writing but his personality is not impressive and I was disappointed.

Admiral Mark Kerr and Sir Philip Lloyd-Graeme were callers during the past few days. Mr. and Mrs. John Pratt gave a dinner and, among others, Ambassador and Mrs. Harvey were present.

July 31, 1921.

Ambassador Harvey's dinner Friday evening was a pleasant affair. Balfour, Winston Churchill, Shortt, the Home Secretary, Massey of New Zealand, Lord Pirrie, the Chinese Minister Wellington Koo, and some ten or twelve others were present. He seated his guests queerly. Balfour was near the foot of the table, while Shortt sat at his right and next to him the Prime Minister of New Zealand. He placed me well-- two removed from himself and I had a particularly interesting talk with Lord Gainsford, the coal magnate, who has had much to do with the late strike. He spoke kindly of the miners and said they were a fine lot. He also spoke kindly of the labor leaders, particularly of Hodges. He believes the settlement is a good one, both for the miners and the owners, and that it will be more or less lasting.

I saw Harvey on Saturday for a few minutes to discuss the Silesian difficulty. He desires to act as arbitrator or to sit in as an active participant. I am trying to help him in this and have spoken to both Balfour and Curzon as I have mentioned before. I have also written something of it in my cable to be published tomorrow. Harvey told me that my talk about him to Briand bore swift fruit and that the French Ambassador here called immediately and had been in close touch with him ever since.

Saturday afternoon Lord Beatty came by and took us to Esher House in Surrey. It belongs to Lord d'Abernon who has recently purchased it and Beatty

(44)

has only hired it. Its situation and environment are delightful. The other
guests were General Sir Tom and Lady Bridges, Mr. and Mrs. Alfred Noyes, the
poet, and his wife, a young novelist by the name of Evans Morgan and some half
dozen others. Mr. and Mrs. Massey of New Zealand came in for lunch. Beatty
and I had an interesting talk in the library this morning, and if I had been a
member of his Government, he could not have been more frank.

August 19, 1921.

Since recording in the diary I have seen Lord Grey several times. I
gave him a lunch a few days ago at which I had Alfred Spender, Sir George Paish,
John Hobson and several other Liberals. Arthur Murray told me that Grey was
"slipping away" from the plan to make him Liberal Leader; therefore at the end
of the lunch I took Grey aside to tell him how much I thought it meant for him
to lead. He made no comment but Murray telephoned later that Grey was impress-
ed with what I said, and he, himself, hoped I had strengthened Grey's resolution.

I lunched with Grey a few days prior to my lunch to him and he and I and
Cecil had some talk about the League. Cecil wished my opinion as to the League's
future. In reply I thought it depended entirely upon the United States and
Great Britain. A government in either of these countries friendly to the League
could force the other into it. The trouble, in my opinion, was that the Gov-
ernment of Great Britain, as now constituted, was not at heart for the League
and was trying to make the Supreme Council a substitute. On the other hand,
the Harding Administration at Washington was doing what it could to kill the
League. If we can keep it alive until the Liberals take the reins in Great
Britain and the Democrats assume power in the United States, its future will be
secure.

In talking with Grey privately he spoke with something like bitterness

(45)

of Wilson's having struck down the League which we had all built up with so much
pains. He called attention to the speech which Wilson made when he returned
to the United States in the Spring of 1919 in which he said it was his intention
to so weave the League into the Treaty of Versailles that the Senate could not
disentangle it. Grey believes that in saying this it was equivalent to declar-
ing that he, Wilson, as the Executive, intended to over-ride the Constitution.
The Constitution gives the Senate the right to revise a treaty and in this de-
claration Wilson clearly announced his intention to fix it so they could not
exercise their right.

We have made some pleasant visits, one to Cobham Hall and one to Nuneham
Park, the country seat of Lord and Lady Harcourt. There is no need to describe
these delightful and interesting English homes for they have been written of by
many.

Mrs. Asquith and Elizabeth Bibesco lunched with us the last day of our
visit to the Harcourts.

I lunched today with Dr. Wellington Koo and had an enjoyable time. I
had a few minutes conversation with the Australian Prime Minister who was also
a guest. He said Lloyd George is peaved at the treatment he received from
Washington concerning his suggestion of a preliminary conference to be held on
November 11th. He had ordered a ship and planned to go himself with the Domin-
ion Prime Ministers and he had not doubted the suggestion would be welcomed.
Hughes thought the refusal by Washington to consider the suggestion doomed the
main conference to failure. He declared that Lloyd George would not go and
he also intimated that the Dominions had lost interest in it. I have an im-
pression he is wrong about George. I believe he will go for a few days. I
never thought he would remain long.

(46)

Quebec, Canada.

August 31, 1921.

Since the last record there is nothing of moment to mention. Before leaving London Sidney Brooks lunched with me. He said when President Wilson first had a stroke two years ago the London Times asked him to write an obituary notice. He did so but his criticism was so severe that they have asked him to revise it.

We sailed from Liverpool on the S. S. Empress of France and landed in Quebec today, August 31st. It has been a delightful voyage and the officials have taken pains to make us comfortable. We never had more attention or more efficient service. We left the Coast of Ireland at four o'clock Friday morning and on the late afternoon of Monday we picked up the Coast of Labrador, there being only two days in which we did not sight land. The thrilling part of the voyage were the enormous and very beautiful icebergs passed Monday. We had some fog early Monday morning and when it lifted we were heading directly for a magnificent berg.

Gordon and Janet met us here and we are to motor down with David Hunter Miller who has two cars to take us to Magnolia.

Magnolia, Mass.

September 22, 1921.

Our landing at Quebec was made as pleasant as was possible. Gordon and Janet were on the dock. We dined that night with Mr. Macpherson who lives in Quebec, and he had some of his friends to meet us. Early next morning we started on our motor trip to the North Shore of Massachusetts. We made Sherbrooke the first night, Poland Springs the next and Magnolia the third. The roads were bad and the weather very warm. The last day the roads were good but the thermometer was around 93 degrees in Boston and Portland and it must have been 100 on the road.

(48)

We remained with Mona two weeks and received much hospitality from our friends on the North Shore. Lord and Lady Bryce were stopping with friends and they came over the day before we left. I had an interesting talk with him and we planned to meet again when he came to New York prior to their departure for England.

Nothing of note has occurred since we have been here and our time has been taken up almost wholly with social affairs.

October 6, 1921.

I have had several interviews with Burton Hendrick who is editing the life and letters of Walter H. Page.

The Hearst papers are publishing the posthumous book of W. F. McCombs, edited by one Louis Lang, also of the Hearst staff. McCombs pays his respects to me in last Sunday's issue. It might have carried some conviction if he had stated a single fact correctly. There is no need to go into it further than to point out some of the glaring misstatements.

He states that I first met Woodrow Wilson in his apartment at the Hotel Royalton. I was never in McCombs' apartment in my life, and I first met Wilson when he called on me at the Hotel Gotham and there was no one else present. McCombs says that Wilson had to be reminded who I was when I returned from Europe in the summer of 1912. As a matter of fact, Wilson and I were in correspondence during that summer and had never been out of touch since the memorable day at the Gotham.

Upon my return from Europe, McCombs came all the way from the Adirondacks to tell me of his quarrel with McAdoo and to urge me to see Wilson in his behalf at the earliest possible moment. That explains my letter to McCombs which he mentions.

(49)

He claims that I had nothing to do with carrying Texas for Wilson and that I made no contribution to the campaign for his nomination. The truth is, the direction of the campaign was almost wholly in my hands and I financially backed it. Texas Headquarters would have closed if I had not sent Gregory to Cato Sells, who was the nominal manager, to tell him that he, Gregory, would guarantee Sells the expenses. My name was not mentioned because I feared they would be extravagant if they knew I was the real sponsor.

One of the most amusing things McCombs says is that I called at his apartment after the election of Wilson and suggested that McAdoo, himself and I should work together to control the United States politically; that he spurned the suggestion and that he spoke to me roughly and practically asked me to leave. As I said before, I was never in McCombs' apartment and he never said an abusive word to me during our acquaintance, although we differed many times about many things. Poor fellow he was a drinker took both whiskey and drugs most of the time which largely accounts for what he says and the wreckage of his career.

October 7, 1921.

I have asked Sir William Wiseman to see Frederick Guest, who is now Minister of Air in the Lloyd George Ministry, to take a message to George calling his attention to his opportunity to seize the moral leadership of the world by backing, with all his power, the League of Nations. I gave Wiseman the arguments to use which he is in turn to give Guest. Guest took notes. He was sailing the next day on the Olympic and by now is at Inverness with the Prime Minister. I will not go into the arguments I used for I have outlined them before. The main thing is that if he accepts the Harding program to scrap the League of Nations and work out something else, he will not only give the world an uncertainty for a certainty, but he makes himself an appendix to Harding's leadership

(50)

Guest was impressed with this and said he would take it "hot-foot" to the
Prime Minister. Another argument I used was that it would largely blanket
the criticism of English Liberals against George's lukewarm position in behalf
of the League.

I am curious to see the outcome. I work for the League unceasingly
and in every way I know. I have a letter from Carl Ackerman urging me to
come out in active leadership for the League but if I did this I could not be
as effective as now.

I have seen two interesting characters recently. One was Scripps of the
Scripps Press, and the other Henry Watterson. See Watterson's letters of re-
cent date and mine in reply.

Judge Llandis of Chicago paid me a visit the other day. At the request of
Collier's I have written a few lines for their issue of October 20th on publi-
city at the Washington Conference.

Frederick Dixon of Boston, and Judge George W. Anderson of the same place
have been in for long talks. Both of them have been in Europe during the summer
and Anderson was in Geneva during the recent meeting of the League.

Cyrus Curtis is taking his yacht, the Lyndonia, to Washington next week
and the President is to lunch with him Thursday. He has asked me to join them
and I shall fax go down on Wednesday to be present. I shall stop with Justice
McReynolds where I have a long standing invitation to visit. I have a cordial
telegram from Gregory offering me the use of his home, automobile etc. I shall
see as few people as possible and get away as quietly as permitted. I shall
probably leave cards on the Wilsons though I do not expect them to take notice
of it.

(51)

October 14, 1921.

I have just returned from Washington where I went Wednesday afternoon. Charles R. Crane, H. H. Kohlsaat and Jas. J. Lyons were with me. We had a drawing-room and Crane intertained us with his trip to Riga from Pekin to Riga. It is a thrilling story. He depicted shattered Russia graphically. He says it is being ruled almost wholly by Jews and the Terrorist Committee hold the people in check by the usual means employed by such bodies.

I stopped with Justice McReynolds at his apartment in the Rochambeau, Stephen Bonsal was my first caller. At one o'clock I went on board Mr. Curtis' yacht along with Vice President and Mrs. Coolidge, Secretaries Weeks and Denby, the Postmaster General and Mr. Lasker of the Shipping Board.

I was amused with the staid and solemn Vice President. He was goten up a la rigueur with silk hat and its accompaniments. In taking the launch we all stood aside to allow him to embark first. This he steadfastly refused to do, insisting upon going last. He was so determined that it occurred to me that there must be some official etiquette as to embarking and disembarking, and I learned later that the guest of honor was supposed to go on last and to get off first. We were all ignorant of this at the moment and thought the Vice President was unduly modest. However, he held firm to his rights and embarked last. It is a perfect joy to watch this mimic show at Washington. In the Capital of this Republic official precedence is valued more than in any of the capitals of Europe.

Mr. and Mrs. Curtis have evidently never been bitten by this particular kind of bug and we were seated at the table in a way to tear the nerves of the officials present. They placed me next to Mrs. Harding, who was at Mr. Curtis' right, but the Secretaries were scattered down the table without regard to rank.

(52)

It was the first time I had met the President and Mrs. Harding and I enjoyed talking with them, particularly Mrs. Harding who has much to say for herself. She is a handsome woman, well dressed and a good type of the Middle West.

In the afternoon Colonel Bonsal accompanied me on the calls I wished to make. I went first to ex-President Wilson's and left cards. I did the same with Senator and Mrs. Culberson, then to the Gregory's and Lansing's.

McReynolds and I had dinner alone and he gave an interesting account of the Supreme Court and its methods. The ex-Vice President and Mrs. Marshall have been visiting McReynolds. I asked if they had called on the Wilsons. He replied that they had not and that he himself had never called and all for the same reason, that is, the Wilsons had never shown them any consideration. McReynolds thought it a mistake for me to leave cards but I disagreed with him and was determined to do the courteous thing.

Herbert Hoover telephoned immediately after my arrival and asked me to breakfast with him the next day which I was unable to do.

The most interesting happening of my visit was a call from Irving Hoover, Chief Usher of the White House. He remained for more than an hour and told something of what had occurred during the last two years. He said the President's change of feeling toward me began at Paris just after his return from the United States in March. Somewhat to my surprise and much to my regret Hoover laid it chiefly upon the President himself saying that those around him fanned the flame. Hoover recalled that the President had a jealous streak and he believes that feeling was primarily the cause of the slackening of his friendship for me. What he told agrees almost wholly with the conclusions I had already reached without having all the facts upon the subject, that is, there was no particular incident which caused the cooling of his friendship

(53)

for me but that it began, as Grasty once told me, by my "piqueing his vanity".
From that time it was easy for others to increase this feeling. Hoover said
Baruch did not cut much of a figure after the President was stricken, but in
this he is mistaken. Hoover does not realize that while Baruch saw little
of the President he was directing affairs through Grayson and Mrs. Wilson.
He said no one could really ever know the situation at the White House after
the President became ill and up to the time he left. For months any decision
that Grayson and Mrs. Wilson wished the President to make, he would respond
according to the manner in which they placed it before him. If they wished
approval he assented, if they wished a negative he refused. He said Tumulty
had but little influence and would have acquiesced in the President's resigna-
tion, but that it was Mrs. Wilson and Grayson who kept him in office.

He confirmed what Burleson told me in Berlin, which I already knew by
deduction, that the President desired renomination and was much disappointed
when the members of his Cabinet returned from San Francisco empty handed. Bur-
Hoover
leson and Palmer, Mr. Reynolds said, were particularly blamed, and if they had
"crooked a finger" at any time up to the 4th of March, the President would
have put them out as unceremoniously as he did Lansing.

Hoover said, after the disappointment of the San Francisco Conven-
tion, the President fastened his hopes upon the Treaty going through either by
the success of the Democrats or by the Republicans reconsidering their former
attitude.

I came away from Washington glad that I went but with the hope that
I should not have to return soon. I do not like the atmosphere of the place
beautiful as it is and as desirable as it is in many ways.

(54)

New York,

October 28, 1921.

On Saturday the 15th at Saint Thomas' Church our young friend Mary Tomlinson was married to Herbert McCue. I gave the bride away. That afternoon we motorized to Tuxedo Park to spend the week-end with Mr. and Mrs. Montgomery Hare. The Park was in all its Autumnal glory and I enjoyed the quiet, the rest and the beauty of it all.

I learned from Herman Kohlsaat, and also from Mr. Curtis, that the President and Mrs. Harding wished to invite me to lunch on Saturday after I had left Washington. I am sorry I could not have been with them, but I did not want to disappoint my little friend, Mary Tomlinson.

Hamilton Holt has been a recent caller. He came to discuss the Woodrow Wilson Foundation and to get my opinion as to procedure. He is now in charge of the campaign for raising funds and has been advised by Cleveland H. Dodge and others that the time is not propitious. It is therefore a question whether to hold to the 16th of January as planned for the opening or to postpone it until the late spring. I had no advice to give him on the subject as I was not well enough informed. I thought, however, it a mistake to have attempted to raise such a fund during the lifetime of the ex-President.

On Sunday the 23rd we lunched with Mr. and Mrs. Oscar Straus to meet M. and Madame Venizelos. The other guests were Mr. and Mrs. Bainbridge Colby and Professor and Mrs. Seligman of Columbia University. Venizelos received me with open arms, took both my hands and afterward placed his arm affectionately upon my shoulder. In our talk after lunch he expressed regret that the things we had tried to accomplish had not been fully successful. He said significantly, "I have understood your position, have sympathized with it and have wished you success. It has all been a terrible tragedy and disappointment. We had

(55)

everything in our hands, and we let it slip. It is too bad!'

The Venizelos are on their way to California to spend several months and will return here the latter part of January when we will see more of them. I had a long talk with Madame Venizelos who is a sprightly woman, some fifteen years his junior. She was quite frank in expressing her opinions and asking advice. I received a clear idea from her of their intentions as to his political purposes in Greece. I thought it wise on their part to come to America and allow him to bury himself in the West during the coming winter, and to be out of Europe at present. I advised them not to go to Washington during the Conference.

Both Venizelos and his wife intimated that the French looked with suspicion upon his visit to the United States. They believe he is here to strengthen Lloyd George's policy in the Near East, as against the French policy. George and Venizelos are close friends. They are bitter against Constantine and his entourage and if they have another chance, I predict that Venizelos will not plead for a continuation of the Monarchy but will urge the forming of a republic of which he may become its first President.

On the 28th we went to dinner with Mr. and Mrs. Marshall Field to meet Lord and Lady Beatty who are their house guests. Judge James W. Gerard and I had a talk over coffee and cigars and he told some interesting incidents of W. W.

We gave the Beattys a luncheon yesterday. The other guests were Mr. and Mrs. W. G. McAdoo, Mr. and Mrs. August Belmont, Mrs. R. S. Lovett, Mr. Cyrus H. K. Curtis Mr. and Mrs. Marshall Field and Janet.

Beatty came a half hour in advance in order that we might have some talk before the others arrived. He has just returned from Washington and gave the substance of his experiences there, particularly the conversations he had with Secretary of the Navy Denby and the Chief of Naval Operations Koontz. He found

(56)

Denby more amenable to reason and sympathetic to a curtailment of armaments than the Admiral. I assured him that the Secretary voiced the President's views and the Admiral voiced the dominant opinion of the Navy. One of the difficulties of securing a reduction of armaments is the unyielding prejudice and attitude of Army and Navy men. Since it is their profession and entire life it is not to be wondered at. However, a few of the Navy people and many of the Army have been very fine in their attitude against war and the reduction of armaments.

I offered Beatty a suggestion to be used in the Armament Conference when it meets. The reason the United States and the Continental Powers desire naval power commensurate with that of England is because they are unwilling to run the risk of having Great Britain do what she pleases with our commerce in time of war. If France and Great Britain should become involved in war, I was sure Great Britain would undertake to prevent our ships going to neutral ports in Belgium, Spain, Italy and other countries. It was this fear, I thought, which made our people desire a large navy and one sufficiently large to prevent Great Britain from doing as she wished with our commerce.

Beatty replied that England would allow everything to go through except contraband of war. I answered that the trouble would be to define contraband. The English would insist, as they did in the last war, that not only munitions were contraband but food, clothing, cotton and manufactured products of practically every kind. He seemed impressed with this view and said he thought some agreement might be reached between us. I tried to make him see that an agreement of this sort would be of more value to Great Britain than to any other country. It comes back to the question of the freedom of the seas and the right of commerce to go unrestricted in time of war. As he remarked, "You would have us do away with capture and search at sea"; to which I assented.

(57)

It was surprising to have the Admiral of the British Fleet take so reasonable a view.

Lord and Lady Sandwich took tea with us today. I had a pleasant talk with
Lady Sandwich who is an unusually intelligent woman.

Professor William E. Dodd of Chicago University writes me as follows:

"Many things have happened, some public men have done strange things and the country as a whole has made a momentous decision since I heard you talk that March day, 1920, when I had the honor of hearing you talk so frankly and generously about many subjects. I have thought of you again and again these last months and indeed all along, but have not felt like breaking in upon you needlessly.

One thing I want to say: your attitude ever since I have known what it was has seemed to me to be noble; it is now noble. Few men have served the public more remarkably than you, none have received so little in the way of reward, although I am sure you must have a host of friends who do give you frequent expressions of their admiration. But you certainly were a public servant of the very highest type a few years ago and again at Paris. Now the public ought to find some way to express its appreciation, but it never will do so. Such as Wolsey made so clear to Cromwell in centuries gone by, according to Shakespeare, is the reward of those who serve the State".

November 7, 1921.

Several members of the Committee to raise funds for the Woodrow Wilson Foundation have been to see me and I have been advising as to methods of procedure.

On the 31st we gave a dinner to the Right Honorable and Mrs. Reginald Mc-Kenna. Mrs. McKenna is very bright and it was delightful to discuss English politics with her.

On Tuesday, Mrs. Walter Page telephoned to say that she was just leaving for Boston after a day or two in New York, and she did not wish to go without expressing her gratitude and appreciation for what I have done and am doing to make a success of the Walter H. Page Letters now being edited by Burton Hen-

(58)

drick. It was kind of her to do this since Page and I were not on the best of
terms toward the end. I resented the way in which he criticised the President.
I naturally agreed more fully with the President's point of view which, indeed,
was formed after our conferences together, than I did with Page's. Page never
saw but one side of the picture; the President and I were looking at all sides.
Toward the end, Page's antagonism to Wilson's policies became so marked that it
was impossible to tell him of the negotiations I was carrying on with the Bri-
tish Government. I would have been glad to have had him take part in these, but
there was such divergence of views between himself on the one side, and Wilson
and myself on the other, that it became impossible. Wilson was expecting and
trusting me to carry out his policies.

I would like to say this about Page, no American official in Europe ever
treated us more kindly or with more hospitality. They constantly tried to show
their appreciation of what he thought I had done for him.

On Thursday, November 3rd, I had Mr. Cyrus H. K. Curtis, Mr. John J.
Spurgeon and Mr. Frederick W. Wile to lunch. The purpose was to discuss ways
and means for handling the forthcoming Washington Conference.

I have had many long and interesting talks with others, Arthur Sweetser
in particular. He has come from Geneva and gave news of the League of Nations.
Sir Arthur Willert lunched with me yesterday. He is on his way to Quebec to meet
Mr. Balfour who arrives today.

Nearly every morning I walk with Herman Kohlsaat of Chicago. Our
friendship is a joy for he is one of the most lovable of men. There is no one
whose life is richer in interesting experience, and one anecdote follows an-
other of the notable men of this country with whom he has had close personal
friendship and contact. He has been and is still a power for good and his

(59)

influence is always exerted in the right direction. Perhaps his most notable
chievement was at the Republican Convention in Saint Louis in 1896 when against
the opposition of McKinley, Mark Hanna and nearly all the other leaders of the
Republican Party, he insisted upon the word "gold" being used in the financial
plank of the platform. They tried to compromise with him in every way and were
willing to endorse the plank without actually using the word "gold". Kohlsaat
had much influence at that time being owner of one of the two largest newspapers
in Chicago, and they did not dare go counter to his demand. It is an illustration of what courage and determination can accomplish. He has received scant
credit for this important public service, although Melville Stone mentions it in
his book recently published.

November 19, , 1921.

Breckenridge Long and Bob Woolley came to see me last week to talk over Na-
tional Democratic Party affairs.

On Wednesday, the 9th, we dined with Mr. and Mrs. Otto H. Kahn to meet
Harold Cox, Editor of the Edinborough Review, who is over here to discuss
his views regarding birth control. It was an interesting dinner composed of
such widely divergent types as Max Eastman, on the one hand, and some of the
New York society people on the other.

Carl Ackerman has been a visitor and I suggested that he write a
play around Theodore Roosevelt. I later wrote him a copy of which is incor-
porated in the diary. Newton Baker has also been in for a talk.

A few nights ago at a dinner at August Belmont's sea discussion arose
as to the author of the now famous "Lafayette we are here". They all attributed
it to General Pershing. Newton Baker wrote me that it was Colonel Charles E.
Stanton of Pershing's Staff. I knew it was not Pershing but I had forgotten

(60)

the name of the officer. Baker said Pershing told him at one time that he had
not said it and he, Baker, had wondered why Pershing had not since stated this
publicly.

Mrs. Joseph Fels came to urge me to go to Palestine and study conditions
there.

I had a talk with Frank Munsey at a lunch given by Grace Vanderbilt to
Lady Harcourt. He asked me twice to consider joining his editorial staff. I
made no direct reply.

Yesterday we entertained at lunch Baron General Jaques, head of the Bel-
gian Army.

I had a long talk yesterday with Dr. Charles Seymour of Yale regard-
ing the disposition of my papers. He was so successful in his "Woodrow Wil-
son and the World War" that I shall probably ask him to edit my papers in some
way, either during my life or afterward.

We are leaving this afternoon for Washington to stop until Wednesday
of next week with the Breckenridge Long's. Sir William Wiseman goes with us.

November 29, 1921.

Our trip to Washington was a success, the Breckenridge Longs en-
tertaining us in a delightful way. There were luncheons, teas and dinners
through which we met most of our friends. In addition the Chinese Delegation
gave me a lunch, and I went to the Foch dinner given by Hugh Wallace in his
honor. It was rather a notable gathering. Generals, Supreme Court Justices,
Members of the Cabinet and diplomats were present. I met Grayson there for
the first time in two years or more. There was little embarrassment on his
part and certainly none on mine. There was no reminiscing and it was as if
we had parted in the morning only to meet in the evening at dinner. On the

(61)

contrary, Tumulty and I had considerable conversation when he came to a tea given by the Longs. Here again, there was no embarrassment on either side although we had not met for three years. He was profuse in his protestations of friendship and gratitude. He declared that without my aid he could never have had the opportunity to serve as he had during the past eight years. He was unreserved and emphatic in this statement.

And this reminds me that after I returned from Washington the Times published that chapter of Tumulty's book treating of the President's famous pre-election letter of November 24th, 1918. In his chapter No. 24 he says: "Sometime after this the President conferred with Colonel House, and when I next discussed the matter with the President he informed me that he and Colonel House had finally agreed that the thing to do was frankly to come out without preliminaries of any kind and boldly ask for an election of a democratic congress."

I knew when I read this that Tumulty was entirely mistaken, but in order to be certain I looked up my letters to the President during this period and also my memoranda and diary embracing every topic of conversation the President and I had prior to my departure for Europe on October 17th, 1918. There were but two references to the elections. One was when the President informed me he intended to make an appeal for a democratic congress. My notes state that I received this information in silence. By this I indicated my disapproval-- a method thoroughly understood by the President.

Another reference to the elections was made by Secretary Lansing who thought they should be considered in framing our notes to Germany. I was emphatic in my disapproval of this and vigorously declared that politics should not even be in the back of our minds when notes of such importance were being framed.

I am further reminded by the mention of Tumulty's name of a statement he makes in a later chapter of his book about the President's return to Paris in

(62)

March, 1919, to find that Lloyd George, Clemenceau and others had during his absence determined upon a preliminary treaty with Germany without including the League of Nations. The President undoubtedly was told this and believed it but, as far as I know, the story is without foundation. Last night Henry White called my attention to this misstatement in Tumulty's book and suggested that Lansing, Bliss, himself and myself sign a statement to this effect. I asked him to prepare the statement and I would cheerfully sign it.

I saw everybody in Washington I cared to see. Balfour and Maurice Hankey lunched with us; the Dutch Minister for Foreign Affairs was among our guests for dinner. Foch and Briand were also among those with whom I had conversations. Briand was exceedingly cordial. He invited me to lunch which I could not accept and he then offered to come to the Long's to see me. I would not allow him to do this and called on him instead. Some of the French asked my advice about Briand's speech before it was made. I advised something different from what he afterward delivered. I thought he should make it short, not exceeding twenty-five or thirty minutes, and I advised that it should stress the French peoples' love of home and their desire to be left alone to pursue their lives in peace and contentment. In other words, I should have made a picture of a peace loving people with individual homes, and would have said that military preparations were for the purpose of protecting them and not for aggressive purposes.

If I had been in Briand's place I should never have come to the United States but would have sent my brilliant and conspicuous enemy, Poincaré. This conference concerns naval and Pacific questions in which France has but little interest, therefore it seems to me that Briand should have known he could only take second place, and that it would be impossible for any Frenchman to take

(63)

back to France anything worth while from this Conference. Briand will find a
critical Chamber of Deputies when he returns.

I advised the Chinese to be moderate in their demands. I thought it would
be better to ask for something that would have the approval of all fair-minded
people rather than to ask for something excessive with a view of having it trimmed
down. In other words, I would not ask for more than I could get with the expec-
tation of accepting very much less. That, I thought, was too much like a Jew
tradesman who asks fifty dollars for a suit of clothes for which he finally ac-
cepts twenty-five dollars.

I did what I could to help the League of Nations by advising the foreign
delegates. I made it clear to them that while this administration was against
the League, a democratic administration would be for it and would create another
one if this was not in being when the democrats came back into power. I thought
the policy for them to pursue was not to mention the League at Washington, but to
go along in the direction of the League's purposes as far as the Conference would
follow. At the same time, I advised keeping the League as the main rock upon
which disarmament and future peace must finally rest.

December 6, 1921.

On Tuesday the 29th we dined with Mr. and Mrs. W. G. McAdoo. The only
other guests were Mr. and Mrs. Doheny, the oil man and his wife. We went to a
play afterward and spent a pleasant evening. I often wonder what President and
Mrs. Wilson say to Eleanor concerning me. They certainly cannot be very critical
for if they did, his daughters and other relatives would share their resentment
and show it in their attitude toward me. As it is, I see no difference in their
attitude from other days.

(64)

On Friday, December 2nd, Mezes, Seymour and I had a long conference regarding my papers and what was best to do with them. Seymour's "Woodrow Wilson and the World War" impressed both Sidney and me so much that I concluded to ask him to edit my papers. We have not yet come to a definite conclusion but will probably do so at our next meeting December 16th.

Frederick Dixon of the Christian Science Monitor was a visitor that day. He talked principally of the troubles that have come to the inter-organization of the Christian Science Publishing Company which caused Dixon's retirement. I am sorry, for he has made the Monitor one of the most notable newspapers in the world and it will be a real sorrow if its usefulness and high standards crumble.

A number of people have called but there is nothing of interest to record. We have attended the usual luncheons and dinners and last night we went to the opera with General and Mrs. Charles H. Sherrill. Dr. and Mrs. Nicholas Murray Butler and the Dutch Minister were the other guests.

My correspondence with Joseph P. Tumulty regarding his statement in the New York Times that the President told him I had agreed it was wise for him to make a direct appeal for a democratic congress, speaks for itself. In the last chapter of his book, he makes a vicious attack on Lansing, quoting Wilson as saying that he found Lansing's disloyalty everywhere he went in Paris. Of course, this is not fair and is an exaggerated statement. The President forgets that he kept Lansing almost totally in the dark as to what was going on, and it is not to be wondered at that he should have had some opinions of his own which he occasionally expressed to his staff, of which Bullitt was one. The President evidently takes the position that any opinion by a member of the Peace Conference contrary to his own was an evidence of disloyalty. It is an astounding viewpoint and shows how self-centered he was.

(65)

December 21, 1921.

Lady Harcourt told me an interesting thing of Lord Grey when she was here. I allowed her to read an autograph letter I had just received from him and upon finishing it she said: "Lord Grey evidently has an affection for you." I asked wh y? She replied "he never signs himself 'Edward Grey' except to his closest friends". In other cases he signs himself 'E. Grey' or 'Grey of Fallodon' "

On December 6th I had a talk with Mr. Balfour who was over here for a few days.

On December 9th I received a letter from Tumulty enclosing manuscript of the second book he is publishing in the New York Times entitled, "The White House Looking Glass". In the chapter he sends he repeatedly speaks of how devoted I was to President Wilson's interests and how loyally I had served him. Coming from such a source, it is of value for it puts an estoppel on the question of my loyalty to the President which might someday be raised by critics of me who are close to him.

Tumulty, I am sure, has tried his best to bring the President and me together. His purpose was largely for political reasons and to help Wilson. And this reminds me that some of those having in charge the Wilson Foundation Fund have asked for slogans to be used in their campaign. I suggested, "Wilson blazed the way". I made a further suggestion that it be accompanied by a cartoon showing a path blazed through a forest and on the successive trees the words "justice, honor, international morals" and at the top, to which the path has not yet been cleared, "universal peace". Wilson is to be depicted as stricken and leaning against a tree with the axe falling from his hands.

I have a letter from Arthur D. Howden Smith this morning which is attached to the diary. He writes of a conversation he had with me before I sailed for

(66)

Europe in October 1917 in which I told him how opposed I was to the President's
issuing a statement calling for a patisan Congress. I thought if a call was
made it should be for a non-partisan Congress favorable to this country's war
aims.

We have been going out to social functions every evening. One of the most
treating was a small dinner given by Sir William Wiseman to Douglas Fairbanks
and his wife, Mary Pickford.

We gave a dinner on the 13th and our guests were Lord and Lady Granard, Mrs.
Cavendish Bentinck, D. O'Mills, Mrs. Twombley, Henry Clews, Frank Munsey and Mr.
and Mrs. Robert Brewster.

I am busy going over my papers with my secretary. It is the first time I
have had a peep at them since they were filed away in the safe deposit vault.

I have a feeling that one of Wilson's criticisms of me is that I am too in-
clined to compromise. As a matter of fact, I am more tenacious than he is him-
self when occasion requires it. For instance, at the Armistice meetings I fought
my colleagues single handed for days in order to get the Fourteen Points adopted
and I succeeded. It came almost to blows with George and Clemenceau, particular-
ly with George. I knew it was essential to put the peace upon that basis and I
was conscious of the fact that I had the power to do it if I remained adamant. In
a case like getting the Treaty through the Senate, where the power was all in
their hands, I was in favor of compromise. On the other hand, Wilson was yield-
ing when making the peace and unyielding with the Senate, with the result we all
know.

In Paris he yielded on the Tyrol and gave Italy something they should never
have received, and which Clemenceau, George and I had decided we would not give
them, and yet he was unyielding on Fiume where, to say the least, the question
was in doubt, and the success of the Peace Conference was at one time at stake.

(67)

On Christmas Day I had delightful telegrams from Paderewski and Venizelos who are both in California for the winter. Paderewski ended with this sentence: "To Poland's noblest friend, to her providential man, my most profound affectionate everlasting gratitude".

I also received from Tumulty his book "Woodrow Wilson as I know him" with the following inscription:

To my loyal friend, Colonel House,
Without whose aid and support in the
old days the story contained in the leaves
of this book could not have been written.
With this poor volume go my deep feeling
of loyalty and affection to you.
J. P. Tumulty.

Washington, December 22, 1921.

I feel kindly toward Tumulty for he has shown an appreciation and
loyalty strangely missing in some others.

And not the least of the pleasant things that came that day was a
photograph of Wickham Steed upon which he had written:

"To the Colonel,

Who wrought not for himself but for the thing,
Who strove in silence, and, in silence strong,
Never laments that envy did him wrong;
Knowing full well what cheer the years
Will bring."

Xmas. 1921.

December 31, 1921.

This is the last regular entry I shall make in the diary. In the coming
year I shall devote my time largely to looking over my papers, and what I may
write from now will be in the way of memoranda to clarify what has gone before,
or to make explanations as to current happenings.

I am glad to have done with it for it has been an irksome task for

(68)

both for me and my secretary. Day by day and oftentimes hour by hour we have
striven to record events as they occurred. Always pressed for time, they were
set down hastily but accurately as best I knew. In looking through the papers I
find but scant explanation of many important events in which it was my privilege
to play a part, but I hope letters and memoranda may be found to make them clear.

One of the things which has impressed me since this diary began is the tremendous power of the President of the United States. Soon after I became Wilson's confident and adviser I was conscious of the opportunity for service that lay before him.

No one can ever know how high my hopes have been, or with what anxious
eyes I have watched him on his way toward the goal upon which I had set my heart.
His first serious move in the wrong direction was in October 1918 when he asked
for a partisan Congress. However, the curve of his influence was still at its
maximum when the Armistice was signed and his war aims were accepted as the basis
for the coming peace. Even after he arrived in Europe the world was at his feet.
From then the downward curve of his fortunes began. I did what lay within my power
to hold things steady and cautioned him at the very end when he was allowing his
enemies in the Senate to outmaneuver him.

With Wilson's advent to the Presidenty, idealism, for the first time,
had its opportunity in government. That it did not wholly succeed was not due to
its lack of merit. God grant that the effort made and its partial success may
sometime stir another President to a further attempt. At least it has been shown
what can be done. With vision tempered by wisdom; with firmness and courage
softened with conciliation and humility, success may be brought about. When
the right man leads the people will follow and our mighty Republic will be lifted
from the low estate into which it has fallen, and we may yet reach that height
lofty height to gain which Wilson gave his life.

Finis.