THE WHITE HOUSE

WASHINGTON

October 11, 1974

MEMORANDUM FOR THE SECRETARY OF STATE

FROM: DICK MOORE

SUBJECT: Background for Alfred E. Smith Dinner.

I have talked with Msgr. McCarrick, personal secretary to the Cardinal, who has been the co-ordinator of the dinner for several years. He gave me the following information and suggestions.

The Alfred E. Smith dinner is the major event of its kind for the New York Irish-Catholic Community, but is actually quite ecumenical. The toastmaster for the event for many years has been Mr. Charles Silver, who is Jewish. It is regularly attended by the top political, civic and business leaders of New York.

Mr. Silver will introduce the only other speaker, Judge Owen McGivern, presiding justice of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court for New York, who is expected to speak for seven or eight minutes, most of it on the light side.

After Judge McGivern, Mr. Silver will introduce the Cardinal, who will then make a brief talk introducing you. His theme will be your quest for peace and your emphasis on the interdependence of the human family.

The dinner always comes a few weeks before Election Day, but traditionally no one introduces serious political talk, although light political banter is in order.

Almost everything that can be said about Alfred E. Smith has been said at previous dinners. Thus any reference to Gov. Smith can be brief.

The tone of all the speeches is usually on the light side. The principal speaker is expected to be serious for the last half or three-quarters of his remarks.

- 2 -

Chairman Silver will probably introduce for a
bow only candidates for Governor and U. S. Senator, i.e.,
Gov. Malcolm Wilson and Democratic Congressman Hugh Carey;
Republican Senator Javits, Democrat Ramsey Clark and
Conservative Barbara Keating.

Nelson Rockefeller will not be present, but
Mayor Beame will.

Cardinal Cooke is still recovering from malaria
which he contracted during his tour of the drought stricken
areas of Africa. Archbishop McGuire may stand in for him in
the receiving line, but Cardinal Cooke will participate in
the dinner.

DRAFT

TO: HAK

FROM: DICK MOORE

Suggestions for Al Smith Dinner

Your Eminence, as I respond to your generous words tonight, my thoughts go back a year ago to the East Room of the White House when I took the oath of office as Secretary of State. On that occasion I said:

"There is no country in the world where it is conceivable that a man of my origin could be standing here next to the President of the United States."

I should have realized that, for a man of my origin, Secretary of State is one thing, but the Alfred E. Smith dinner is something else.

The really unpredictable thing is that I am standing here tonight by the side of the Cardinal Archbishop of New York.

Some might say: this shows what can happen in America.

All it really shows, of course, is what can happen to a man if he marries a nice Irish girl.

I am grateful for the influence of Nancy Maginnes Kissinger.

But I must say the situation can aggravate my innate inferiority complex.

For example, I stand here tonight envious of my good friends, Mayor Beame and Senator Javits. After all, they got here on their own.

*

*

*

2

Most seriously, Your Eminence, I deeply appreciate your kind words. Things were a little different a year ago. On that day the reporters asked my White House colleagues for reactions to my appointment, and the kindest thing they came up with was a quote from the White House barber, who said:

"Henry Kissinger is the first Secretary of State in this century who doesn't part his hair."

*

*

*

Senator Javits, you cause me a little trouble with my tilting tonight. I don't know whether to tilt my remarks toward the press or toward the Foreign Relations Committee. (Perhaps the best answer is to tilt toward the middle, like Senator Buckley.)

*

*

*

I congratulate you on the noble purpose of this distinguished dinner, for I understand that it benefits seventeen fine hospitals and a number of other worthy institutions. I have been checking the news reports, and I have concluded that in all of New York state there is only one list of charitable recipients which is larger than yours.

*

*

*

3

I share your reverence for the memory of the great Alfred E. Smith. I wish I could say that I knew him, as many of you did, but I got here a little late for that. However, I do share a very special bond with him. You will recall that he received an honorary degree from Harvard. And I dare say that he and I, by any standards, are the two most unlikely Harvard men that ever set foot in Cambridge.

*

*

*

When Governor Smith received an honorary LL. D. at Harvard, he reminded the trustees that the only degree he had ever earned was FFM -- Fulton Fish Market. Now I understand that Mayor Beame is going to move the Fulton Fish Market to the Bronx. I wonder if Al Smith would really approve of an uptown campus.

*

*

*

Your Eminence, I understand at last year's dinner your distinguished scholar, Judge Mulligan, demonstrated conclusively that Governor Smith was not of Irish ancestry but Italian. In a way I kind of wish he had been German. Things might have been very different if Al Smith had been in Berlin in the 20's and 30's.

*

*

*

DRAFT 2
October 4, 1974

REMARKS OF SECRETARY OF STATE KISSINGER

TO THE

ANNUAL DINNER OF THE ALFRED E. SMITH
MEMORIAL FOUNDATION

Waldorf-Astoria Hotel, New York

October 16, 1974

Your Eminence, Mr. Silver, Judge McGivern, [Governor Wilson, Mayor Beame, Senators Javits and Buckley, Miss Smith], distinguished ladies and gentlemen, and friends:

[Humor to be ad-libbed]

This is a tremendous honor for me, to be invited to address so eminent a gathering as the Al Smith Dinner. Al Smith was a man who enriched American political life. I know of the distinguished figures you have invited to speak in his honor at this podium in the past. I know of the superb humane contribution of the New York hospitals which this dinner serves.

Cardinal Cooke asked me, in his letter of invitation, to speak about my "vision of a better and more peaceful world!"

It is fitting to recall Al Smith and the American virtues and aspirations which he represented. For they have never been more necessary than they are today, even when America is summoned

*Principals mentioned are: Cardinal Cooke (President of Al Smith Foundation), Charles H. Silver (Chairman of dinner), Judge Owen McGivern (first speaker), the major current New York office holders, and Kate Smith (who will sing).

- 2 -

to new challenges not dreamed of when he lived. He was
a man of political wisdom in the best sense of the word; in
a pluralistic America, he sought and brought conciliation.
He was a man of compassion and decency; he understood the
cries and needs of ordinary people for economic and social
advancement, for self-respect, dignity, and justice. He
was a man of courage and self-confidence, proud of his
country; he knew the importance of leadership, knowing that
without it, there could be neither order nor justice nor human
betterment.

Today, 30 years after Al Smith's death, America and the
world urgently require, again, these qualities and this spirit.
The New Dimension of the Challenge

It is now universally perceived that a new dimension of
challenges has burst forth on the international scene. As we
have made some progress in recent years in pushing back the
dominating fear of nuclear war and ending our involvement in
the Indochina war, we are suddenly faced again starkly with
more elementary human needs -- ensuring against starvation,
ensuring the essential energy supplies for economic advance-
ment, ensuring the very stability of the economic system
against the threats of uncontrollable inflation and breakdown.

- 3 -

The crisis that has come upon us is so fundamental that it
calls into question whether men and nations can make the leap
of imagination required to overcome it. The challenge in its
deepest sense is not economic or technical; it is a test of
political leadership. All our policy premises of 30 years, our
habits of national and international conduct, the conventional
categories of our political thinking -- are dramatically shown
to be inadequate. Reality outstrips our routines and mocks
our rhetoric. Our institutions and policies have not kept pace.
We are confronted with the fragility of all that we have wrought.
Yet in the West we are still benumbed by the very progress to
which we have become accustomed -- and whose continuation
is now in doubt. But I am not speaking solely of the West, by
any means.

Will our peoples summon the understanding of a new era of
challenges?

Will our leaders have the vision and will to act?

Will we be the masters of our destiny, or its victims?

The problems of food and energy are a part of what we face.

Cardinal Cooke, as you know, has recently returned from the
drought-stricken Sahel region of West Africa. He has made an

- 4 -

eloquent appeal for redoubled efforts, public and private,
national and international, to meet this emergency which faced
20-25 million people literally with the threat of starvation.
The United States has responded and contributed 40% of the
foodstuffs, medicine, clothing, and emergency supplies that
have poured in. We have committed or delivered $150 million
in assistance; Congress has recently appropriated an additional
$50 million. I am pleased that the world community -- Canada,
the Common Market, the Soviet Union, and the People's
Republic of China and many others -- have contributed
significant amounts. The United States will continue its
effort, and urges other nations to do so.

At the World Food Conference in Rome in early November,
the United States will offer specific proposals to engage the
world community in a long-term campaign to see that the
world's food resources are matched to the world's burgeoning
needs. This will be one of President Ford's highest priorities.

America's response to these human needs reflects our
oldest traditions of concern for the well-being of our fellow-
men. Our national policy will reflect the humane spirit of
the American people.

- 5 -

On the worldwide economic crisis -- the crisis of inflation and energy, massive shifts of funds, and the threat of economic decline -- this Government has made its position clear. We have spoken on this problem on several occasions over a full year. President Ford last week presented a program of national and international action -- to emphasize what has to be done, and what we will do.

In all these calls for action, this Government chose its words carefully, with deliberation. The threat is real. The urgency is real.

## The Deeper Dimension of the Crisis

What is the danger we face?

It is far more than a technical problem of providing disaster relief, expanding agricultural production, recycling oil revenues, or reducing oil prices. Surely these must be done -- but I am afraid that the challenge is far deeper and the problems far more difficult.

For the 30 years since the Second World War it has been a goal of national policy in every advanced nation to ensure full employment and economic expansion, and to put a floor under the welfare of those less well off. So there was already an

- 6 -

inflationary bias built into the system. Moreover, economic institutions -- enterprises and labor -- have grown large in accordance with technological and economic necessity, and national economies have thus grown less and less susceptible to policy management by the national government. A boom in the late '60's, fueled by an American war buildup, was never completely braked in the early '70's. Thus an inflationary bias, rigid institutions, and the unchecked momentum of global expansion had already reached -- or crossed -- the margin of governments' ability to control our economic pace. On top of this came an abrupt and fourfold increase, by political decision, of the prices of the most strategic resource in the world's economic system. Our conventional tools of economic policy are, for this, inadequate.

This crisis came upon us at a moment when democratic countries were themselves suffering a malaise of social organization. A generation of spreading prosperity and education and equality, and the flourishing of culture and thought, brought with it, in its natural evolution, a skepticism about authority. Nations were free of the grave national crises -- depression or external attack -- that in the '30's

- 7 -

and '40's summoned forth great leadership -- and national solidarity in support of it. Bureaucracy absorbed government. The most advanced nations found their youth, and their citizenry in general, bored, vaguely discontented by the absence of inspiration and direction. In the United States a foreign war tore the country for 10 years, then was followed by another year and a half of political convulsion.

The long-term political consequences of the present crisis are unforeseeable -- but ominous.

It is well known that rampant inflation eats away the status and well-being of whole classes on the margin of social content; it is foreseeable that economic stagnation will feed the frustration of groups whose expectations for a share in a growing prosperity will be cruelly rebuffed. Thus the economic crisis threatens to magnify the discontent and ungovernability of modern societies. There is a genuine danger of political collapse in some democratic countries such as has not been seriously feared since 30 years ago. In the countries which are less vulnerable, there is still a question whether political leadership can summon the will and the support for drastic actions needed to preserve the foundations of their well-being.

- 8 -

It may seem unusual for a Secretary of State to be
discussing such subjects. But the international dimension
of the problem is most striking today.

For there is one fact that should be increasingly clear:
No solution is possible on a national basis.

-- Inflation, for example, is a global phenomenon, affecting all societies, and far stronger in its present surge than any national government's economic policy can control. Yet individual governments are still held responsible by their peoples. And individual governments are only beginning to explore coordination with each other.

-- The colossal balance of payments dislocations produced by the oil price rises -- the problem of recycling and of mutual assistance among the Western nations -- can only be addressed on a multilateral basis.

-- The crisis in food supplies, as we have said, calls for concerted international efforts of relief, assistance, technological development, and investment. Yet only now is the redoubled effort being attempted.

- 9 -

- The problem of energy supply requires new measures within societies, such as the President announced, to conserve and develop new sources. Yet it also demands collaboration between consumers to conserve and share and assist each other in a new world of scarcity. And any ultimate solution demands cooperation between consumers and producers, to assist the producers in finding productive uses for their revenues for their legitimate social goals, and to ensure that cooperation rather than antagonism shapes the emerging economic relationship between us.

Yet the consumer nations are still inhibited by national pride, by the instinct to preserve their autonomy of action, by skepticism about each other's motives, by the temptations of individual benefit, from taking the increasingly obvious steps needed for their common survival. The irony is that failure to take concerted action will leave them overwhelmed by global developments and thus bereft of the very autonomy they seek to preserve. We must learn to reconcile our unity and our diversity. We must reconcile our national identities and national independence with our collective responsibility.

- 10 -

The producer nations, conscious of generations of unequal
treatment, now retaliate by trying to hold to ransom an
economic system on which their own well-being and advance-
ment depend. Global economic decline, the increasing political
antagonism of those who are willing to provide the technical
assistance which they need, an inflationary spiral which only
redounds to the disadvantage of all developing countries
requiring imports -- and the devastating impact on their
less-well-endowed Third World brethren -- serve no positive
interest of those formerly exploited.

In such a world, national autonomy and regional loyalties
can be self-defeating. Ideological dogmas and historical
theories inherited from the 19th Century do not even address,
let alone solve, the unprecedented issues of the present moment.

The fact remains that we are all part of a global system and
all dependent upon it. If it breaks down, no nation or bloc is
spared the calamity. There are no individual or separate
solutions. With the crisis now upon us, the imperative is for
a new dimension of political consciousness, and a new commit-
ment to concerted action.

- 11 -

Will we recognize this necessity only after it engulfs us?
Can free nations act collectively -- and rapidly -- on the basis
of common awareness and independent decision? Can this
subtle and invisible crisis summon courage and statesman-
ship from national leaders and support from democratic
societies?

Opportunity for Leadership
---

I do not want to end on a note of despair. Nor, frankly,
can we afford to.

There are grounds for hope, if we but understand our
problem. The nations of the world face a common danger,
and their interests are identical or parallel. In the inter-
national economic field, there are institutions and practices
of cooperation that can be drawn upon and developed.

-- The consumer nations are beginning to show their
interest in concerted planning and action -- for
lending funds and sharing resources in emergencies,
for exploring ways of handling the recycling problem,
and for exchanging views on the common problem.
The meeting of Ministers in Washington at the end
of September was but a first step.

- 12 -

-- Consumers and producers have made tentative moves to act jointly to channel surplus revenues into productive uses for their own progress or assistance to their fellows.

-- We have an opportunity to address the food problem collectively, to meet human needs on a long-term basis.

Finally, there is the willingness and determination of the United States to make its indispensable contribution to the solution of these problems. With the Vietnam war and domestic constitutional crisis behind us, we are prepared to offer our help. It is not unselfish, because it is in our own inescapable interest. There cannot be "American" solutions, because the modern world is a world of pluralism, diversity -- and diffusion of power and responsibility. It is a task of creativity, of imagination, of patience and wisdom and perseverance.

I have just returned from another visit to the Middle East. I can report that our continuing effort to promote a just settlement between the parties shows further promise of bearing fruit.

The trust and confidence that all sides in the Middle East have for America is perhaps beyond the comprehension of people here. When I left Tel Aviv at the end of May, after

- 13 -

the completion of the Syrian-Israeli Disengagement Agree-
ment, I expressed this -- that what made my colleagues and
me most proud was to think that after ten years of anguish
in the United States it was America that was sufficiently
trusted by both sides, it was America whose values were
considered sufficiently relevant so that its good faith could
be counted upon, and it was America whose commitment to
peace and to a better future for all of mankind was seen as
an indispensable contribution to making peace in a region
torn by conflict for a generation.

This is our hope. And we are today united and at peace
with ourselves as we have not been in ten years. For this
reason I am doubly confident of America's future. Whatever
the accomplishments of the recent period, they pale before the
opportunity before us now.

FGA41GEHV455

ZZ RUFHRS
DE RUEHC #6201/1 2880038
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
Z 150033Z OCT 74 ZFF4
FM SECSTATE WASHDC
TO USINT ALGIERS FLASH 8388

BT
CONFIDENTIAL SE STATE 226201/I

EXDIS TOSEC 220

E.O. 11652: GDS
TAGS: OVIP (KISSINGER, HENRY A.)
SUBJECT: A. E. SMITH SPEECH

FOR THE SECRETARY FROM EAGLEBURGER

FOLLOWING IS A REVISED DRAFT OF YOUR SMITH SPEECH:

YOUR EMINENCE, MR. SILVER, JUDGE MCGIVERN, DISTINGUISHED
GUESTS AND FRIENDS,

I AM, FOR SEVERAL REASONS, DEEPLY HONORED TO ADDRESS THIS
GATHERING. FIRST, BECAUSE OF THE MANY DISTINGUISHED MEN
WHO HAVE SPOKEN FROM THIS PODIUM IN YEARS PAST. SECOND,
BECAUSE I KNOW AND ADMIRE THE HUMANITARIAN WORK WHICH THIS
DINNER HELPS SUPPORT. AND THIRD, BECAUSE WE PAY TRIBUTE
TONIGHT TO ONE WHO REPRESENTED THE BEST OF AMERICA -- A
MAN WHOSE GREAT HUMAN QUALITIES ARE AN INSPIRATION TO US
STILL.

AL SMITH'S AMERICA WAS AN OPTIMISTIC LAND -- A LAND THAT
NEVER DOUBTED ITS ABILITY TO SOLVE EVERY PROBLEM BEFORE IT,
REGARDLESS OF ITS MAGNITUDE. WE WERE A NATION CONFIDENT
OF OUR MORAL VALUES AND PURITY OF PURPOSE. WE WERE A
PEOPLE WHO FELT APART FROM THE REST OF THE WORLD'S
QUARRELS EVEN WHILE WE BELIEVED THAT OUR IDEALS WERE
RELEVANT TO ALL MANKIND.

RELEVANT TO ALL MANNINGS

QUARREL'S EVEN WHILE WE BELIEVED THAT OUR THEATRES WERE
PEOPLE WHO LEFT APART FROM THE REST OF THE WORLD'S
OF OUR MORAL VALUE AND PURITY OF PURPOSE. WE WERE A
REGARDLESS OF ITS MAGNITUDE. WE WERE A NATION CONFIDENT
NEVER DOUBTED ITS ABILITY TO SOLVE EVERY PROBLEM BEFORE IT.
OF SMITH'S AMERICA WAS AN OPTIMISTIC LAND -- A LAND THAT
STILL.

MAN WHOSE GREAT HUMAN QUALITIES ARE AN INSPIRATION TO US
TONIGHT TO ONE WHO REPRESENTED THE BEST OF AMERICA -- A
DINNER HELPS SUPPORT. AND THIRD, BECAUSE WE PAY TRIBUTE
BECAUSE I KNOW AND ADMIRE THE HUMANITARIAN WORK WHICH THIS
WHO HAVE SPOKEN FROM THIS PODIUM IN YEARS PAST. SECOND,
GATHERING. FIRST, BECAUSE OF THE MANY DISTINGUISHED MEN
I AM, FOR SEVERAL REASONS. DEEPLY HONORED TO ADDRESS THIS
GUESTS AND FRIENDS.

YOUR EMINENCE, MR. SILVER, JUDGE MCGIVERN, DISTINGUISHED
BOTTOMING IT IS A REVISED DRAFT OF YOUR SMITH SPEECH:

SUBJECT: A. E. SMITH SPEECH
TAGS: OVP (KISSINGER, HENRY A.)
E.O. 11/25: 6/2
EXDIS 10/28/SSO

CONFIDENTIAL STATE SESSONI

BE
TO BEINT. ALGERS, FLASH 8388
FM SECRET WASHDC
T 120023S OCT 14 SRA
EY CCCC SCH
DE RUEHC 4ESQV1I 5880032
ZZ RUEHR2

RBA116EV425

AL SMITH EPITOMIZED THE IRREPRESSIBLE SPIRIT OF HIS TIME AND HIS COUNTRY. HE NEVER FEARED A BATTLE -- BUT HE NEVER LET THE BATTLE BECOME AN END IN ITSELF. HE WAS WITHOUT ILLUSIONS, BUT EQUALLY WITHOUT RANCOR OR DESPAIR. HIS VISION OF A BETTER AMERICA SUSTAINED HIM, BECAUSE HE KNEW THAT GREAT ACHIEVEMENTS BEGIN AS DREAMS.

OUR AMERICA HAS, REGRETABLEY PERHAPS, LOST SOME OF THAT INNOCENCE. WE HAVE LEARNED THAT WE ARE NOT OMNIPOTENT.

NOW WE FACE THE TEST OF MATURITY: HAVING LEARNED OUR LIMITS ARE WE PREPARED TO DO OUR BEST WITHIN THEM, OR WILL WE, IN FRUSTRATION, RETREAT FROM THE REALITY OF WORLD INTERDEPENDENCE?

CARDINAL COOKE, IN HIS GRACIOUS LETTER OF INVITATION, ASKED THAT I SHARE WITH YOU MY "VISION OF A BETTER AND MORE PEACEFUL WORLD." IT IS NOT A SIMPLE ASSIGNMENT. FOR WHAT IS PEACE? THROUGH MOST OF OUR HISTORY WE THOUGHT OF PEACE AS A STATIC CONDITION -- AS A WORLD LIVING IN THE ABSENCE OF WAR; OF AN INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY SETTLING ALL CONFLICTS ON THE BASIS OF LAW. SECURE BEHIND TWO OCEANS, WE LEFT TO OTHERS THE DAY-TO-DAY DECISIONS THAT, OVER TIME, SPELLED WAR OR PEACE, SECURITY OR FEAR.

WE LEFT TO OTHERS THE AGONY OF RECONCILING THE IDEAL WITH THE PRACTICAL, OF ACHIEVING THE PERFECT THROUGH A SERIES OF PRAGMATIC STEPS, EACH OF WHICH WAS BOUND TO BE IMPERFECT.

BUT TWO WORLD WARS AND A SERIES OF LOCAL CONFLICTS SINCE HAVE TAUGHT US THAT PEACE IS A PROCESS, NOT A CONDITION. WE HAVE LEARNED THAT MORALITY IS DEMONSTRATED BY STEADFASTNESS OF PURPOSE EVEN WHILE COMPROMISING ON TACTICS. WE NOW KNOW THAT WE ARE ON A JOURNEY THAT HAS NO TERMINAL POINT -- A JOURNEY IN SEARCH OF PEACE AND A BETTER LIFE FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS. AND WE HAVE COME TO REALIZE THAT IF WE ARE EVER TO HAVE TRUE PEACE THERE CAN BE NO END TO OUR OWN EXERTIONS. FOR NO MATTER HOW MUCH WE MIGHT WISH OTHERWISE, A WORLD WORTH LIVING IN CANNOT SURVIVE WITHOUT US.

-- OURS IS A PLURALISTIC WORLD. IT IS A WORLD IN NEED OF A PEACE OF ACCOMMODATION RATHER THAN DOMINATION -- THE KIND OF WORLD WE HAVE ALWAYS SEEN AS CONSISTENT WITH OUR NATIONAL INTERESTS AS WELL AS OUR HIGHEST HOPES.

-- IT IS A WORLD IN WHICH THE NEEDS OF ORDINARY PEOPLE CRY OUT FOR ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL PROGRESS, FOR SELF-RESPECT, DIGNITY AND JUSTICE. THESE WERE OUR NATIONAL OBJECTIVES EVEN IN THE MOST ISOLATIONIST OF TIMES. THEY ARE OUR OBJECTIVES STILL. FOOD AID AND PUBLIC HEALTH, DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE, SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL COOPERATION -- THESE ARE FIELDS IN WHICH INTERNATIONAL EFFORTS HAVE BEEN SUSTAINED BY OUR CONTRIBUTION. THEY NOW BECOME NOT OBJECTS OF CHARITY, BUT THE CEMENT OF GLOBAL COMMUNITY.

-- IT IS, ABOVE ALL, STILL A TUMULTUOUS WORLD; A WORLD IN NEED OF A SELF-CONFIDENT AMERICA THAT UNDERSTANDS THAT WITHOUT ITS LEADERSHIP THERE CAN BE NO STABILITY, NO

PERMANENT IMPROVEMENT IN THE HUMAN CONDITION, AND NO
LASTING PEACE.

THIS IS THE WORLD IN WHICH WE LIVE. THESE ARE THE
REALITIES WHICH HAVE LED US TO TAKE A SERIES OF FOREIGN
POLICY INITIATIVES OVER THE PAST SEVERAL YEARS. WE HAVE
ENDED OUR INVOLVEMENT IN A DIVISIVE WAR; WE HAVE RESOLVED
THE PERENNIAL POSTWAR CRISIS OVER BERLIN; WE HAVE BRIDGED
TWO DECADES OF HOSTILITY WITH THE WORLD'S MOST POPULOUS
NATION; WE HAVE TAKEN MAJOR STEPS TO DIMINISH THE DANGER
OF THERMONUCLEAR WAR AND TO BUILD A MORE DURABLE POLITICAL
RELATIONSHIP WITH OUR MOST POWERFUL ADVERSARY; WE HAVE
SOUGHT A MORE MATURE AND EQUAL PARTNERSHIP WITH OUR
ALLIES.

WE HAVE EMERGED FROM, AND PERHAPS PUT BEHIND US, A
POSTWAR PERIOD OF COLD WAR MILITARY AND IDEOLOGICAL
CONFRONTATION. WE HAVE EASED MANY OF THE POLITICAL
ROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH TRADITIONAL CONFLICT. AMONG
NATIONS. WE HAVE ESTABLISHED RULES OF RESTRAINT FOR MANY
OF THE CLASHES BETWEEN REGIMES.

BUT NOW -- INDEED PARTLY BECAUSE OF OUR SUCCESS -- WE
FACE THE BIRTHPANGS OF A NEW ORDER -- AN ORDER GLOBAL IN
CHARACTER AND BASED ON INTERDEPENDENCE. AT THE MIDWAY
POINT BETWEEN THE END OF THE SECOND WORLD WAR AND THE END
OF THE CENTURY, WE ARE ALSO MIDWAY BETWEEN THE NATION-
STATE FROM WHICH WE CAME AND THE GLOBAL COMMUNITY WHICH
WE MUST FASHION IF WE ARE EVER TO LIVE IN PEACE.

IN SHORT, WE FACE A NEW AND FUNDAMENTAL CRISIS OF THE
INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM:

-- INDEPENDENCE IS A GED

INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM:

-- INFLATION IS A GLOBAL PHENOMENON INFECTING ALL SOCIETIES. IN ITS CURRENT SURGE IT IS BEYOND THE POWER OF ANY SINGLE NATIONAL GOVERNMENT TO CONTROL, YET ITS UNCHECKED ADVANCE WILL HAVE OMINOUS SOCIAL AND POLITICAL CONSEQUENCES AFFECTING THE STABILITY OF ALL GOVERNMENTS. COORDINATED GLOBAL POLICIES ARE THE ONLY ANSWER.

-- THE ABRUPT RISE OF ENERGY COSTS, AND THE ENSUING THREATS OF MONETARY CRISIS AND ECONOMIC STAGNATION, CAN ONLY BE ADDRESSED BY NATIONS IN CONCERT. CONSUMERS MUST BE PREPARED TO COOPERATE AMONGST THEMSELVES IN PURSUIT OF SHARING AND CONSERVATION MEASURES, AND WITH PRODUCERS IN SEARCH OF NEW AND MUTUALLY BENEFICIAL LONG-TERM SOLUTIONS.

-- FAMINE AND MASS STARVATION ARE AN AFFRONT TO OUR VALUES AND AN INTOLERABLE THREAT TO OUR HOPES FOR A BETTER WORLD. CARDINAL COOKE'S ELOQUENT APPEALS FOR ASSISTANCE TO THE DROUGHT-RIDDEN SAHEL, WHICH HE JUST VISITED, AND THE LONG-TERM INTERNATIONAL PROGRAM OF ACTION WHICH THE UNITED STATES HOPES TO LAUNCH AT NEXT MONTH'S WORLD FOOD CONFERENCE IN ROME, ARE ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF WHAT MUST BE A COLLECTIVE EFFORT.

-- THE INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC SYSTEM THAT GREW FROM THE ASHES OF WORLD WAR II LINKED THE FATE OF NATIONS BEYOND ANY UNDOING. YET TODAY, WITH THE CRISIS OF ENERGY SCARCITY AND A RAMPANT GLOBAL INFLATION, THE FRAGILITY OF THE MONETARY AND TRADING SYSTEM THAT HAS NOURISHED OUR WELLBEING FOR 30 YEARS PUTS OUR COMMON DESTINY IN JEOPARDY. OUR ECONOMIC SYSTEM...

OUR ECONOMIC THEORY AND POLICY ARE REVEALED TO BE
GROTESQUELY INADEQUATE. WE FUTILLY PURSUE NATIONAL
SOLUTIONS WHEN, MANIFESTLY, ONLY INTERNATIONAL SOLUTIONS
WILL DOM

-- IN THE POLITICAL REALM, FESTERING LOCAL CONFLICTS --
WHETHER IN THE MIDDLE EAST OR CYPRUS -- POSE, UTLIMATELY,
THE SAME THREAT TO GENERAL PEACE AS DO MORE DRAMATIC
GREAT-POWER CRISES. SUCH CONFLICTS, IF NOT URGENTLY
RESOLVED, MAY TURN INTO TESTS OF STRENGTH BETWEEN THE
SUPER POWERS, WITH DANGERS FAR TRANSCENDING THE INTERESTS
DIRECTLY INVOLVED.

-- AND FINALLY, AFTER 30 YEARS WITHOUT GENERAL WAR,
THE WORLD HAS BECOME TOO TOLERANT OF ACCELERATING NUCLEAR
PROLIFERATION AND THE PURPOSELESS QUALITATIVE EXPANSION OF
STRATEGIC NUCLEAR ARSENALS. NEITHER PROBLEM CAN BE RE-
 SOLVED BY PURELY NATIONAL INITIATIVES; BOTH WILL REQUIRE
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION AND GLOBAL RESTRAINT.

THE INTERNATIONAL ISSUES CONFRONTING AMERICA TODAY ARE
NOT, IN THEIR TRUE SENSE, ISSUES OF ECONOMICS, TECHNOLOGY,
OR POLITICS. THEY ARE A CHALLENGE TO THE CONCEPTS WE HAVE
LIVED BY FOR 200 YEARS, THEY ARE A TEST OF OUR VISION, OUR
WILL, AND OUR STRENGTH OF PURPOSE. SOLUTIONS WILL NOT BE
FOUND IN THEORIES OF NATIONAL AUTONOMY OR THE SANCTITY OF
BLOCS. DOGMAS LEFT OVER FROM THE 19TH CENTURY DO NOT EVEN
ADDRESS, LET ALONE RESOLVE, THE INTERNATIONAL ISSUES OF
THE LATTER QUARTER OF THE 20TH CENTURY. THE FACT IS THAT

ALL NATIONS -- EAST, WEST, AND THIRD WORLD -- ARE PART OF ONE GLOBAL SYSTEM WHICH EITHER PRESERVES THE PEACE AND ENHANCES THEIR PROSPERITY AND WELL-BEING OR DOES NOT. THERE IS NO MIDDLE GROUND -- IF THE SYSTEM FAILS NO NATION OR BLOC IS SPARED THE PENALTY.

YOUR EMINENCE, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, OUR COUNTRY HAS, FOR MANY YEARS, CARRIED A DISPROPORTIONATE SHARE OF THE BURDEN OF MAINTAINING THE PEACE, OF FEEDING THE HUNGRY AND GIVING HOPE TO THE WORLD'S DISPOSSESSED. IT HAS BEEN A HEAVY BURDEN -- ONE WE HAVE OFTEN BEEN TEMPTED TO PUT DOWN. BUT WE HAVE NOT DONE SO, NOR CAN WE DO SO NOW FOR IT IS WE -- AND THE GENERATIONS OF AMERICANS WHO FOLLOW AFTER -- WHO WOULD PAY THE PRICE FOR OUR WEAKNESS.

FOR MORE THAN A DECADE WE HAVE BEEN A NATION TORN BY WAR AND CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS. WE HAVE BEEN ENERVATED BY OUR EXERTIONS, AND AFFLICTED BY SELF-DOUBT. BUT NOW THE WAR IS OVER AND THE CRISIS RESOLVED. IT IS TIME WE MADE PEACE WITH OURSELVES SO THAT WE MAY GET ON WITH THE JOB OF BUILDING A BETTER AND MORE PEACEFUL WORLD FOR ALL NATIONS.

THE BITTERNESS THAT HAS CHARACTERIZED THE NATIONAL DEBATE FOR MOST OF A DECADE MUST BE PUT BEHIND US. OUR PROBLEMS ARE NATIONAL PROBLEMS; OUR SOLUTIONS MUST BE SOLUTIONS ACCEPTABLE TO THE NATION. ALL GOVERNMENTS, INCLUDING OUR OWN, MUST MAKE DIFFICULT CHOICES AND JUDGMENTS WHEN FACTS ARE NOT CLEAR, WHEN TRENDS ARE NOT DEMONSTRABLE. WE CLAIM NO INFALLIBILITY, BUT WE DO ASK FOR TRUST; WE DO ASK THAT DEBATE TAKE PLACE WITHIN THE

FOR TRUST: WE DO ASK THAT DEMOCRAT LEAVE WITHIN THE
DEMOCRATIBLE. WE CLAIM NO INMUTABILITY. BUT WE DO ASK
JUDGMENTS WHEN FACTS ARE NOT CLEAR. WHEN TREND2 ARE NOT
INCLUDING OUR OWN, MUST MAKE DIFFICULT CHOICES AND
SOLUTIONS ACCEPTABLE TO THE NATION. ALL GOVERNMENTS.
PROBLEMS ARE NATIONAL PROBLEMS? OUR SOLUTIONS MUST BE
DEBATE FOR MOST OF A DECADE MUST BE PUT BEHIND US. OUR
THE BITTERNESS THAT WAS CHARACTERISED THE NATIONAL
NATIONS.

JOB OF BUILDING A BETTER AND MORE PEACEFUL WORLD FOR ALL
MADE PEACE WITH OURSELVES 20 THAT WE MAY GET ON WITH THE
THE WAR 12 OVER AND THE CRISIS RESOLVED. IT 12 TIME WE
BY OUR EXERTIONS, AND AFFLICTED BY SELF-DOUBT. BUT NOW
WAR AND CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS. WE HAVE BEEN EMERGATED
FOR MORE THAN A DECADE WE HAVE BEEN A NATION IORM BY
ALTER -- WHO WOULD PAY THE PRICE FOR OUR WEAKNESS.
IT 12 WE -- AND THE GENERATIONS OF AMERICANS WHO BOTTOM
DOW. BUT WE HAVE NOT DONE 20. NOR CAN WE DO 20 NOW FOR
A HEAVY BURDEN -- ONE WE HAVE ORIGIN BEEN TEMPTED TO PUT
AND GIVING HOPE TO THE WORLD. A DISAPPROVED. IT HAS BEEN
BURDEN OF MAINTAINING THE PEACE, OF FEEDING THE HUNGRY
FOR MANY YEARS. CARRIED A DISPROPORTIONATE SHARE OF THE
YOUR EMINENCE, FADIES AND GENTLEMEN. OUR COUNTRY HAS.
NATION OR BLOC IS SPARED THE PENALTY.

THERE IS NO MIDDLE GROUND -- IF THE SYSTEM FAILS NO
ENHANCEZ THEIR PROSPERITY AND WELL-BEING OR DOES NOT.
ONE GLOBAL SYSTEM WHICH EITHER PRESERVES THE PEACE AND
ALL NATIONS -- EAST, WEST, AND THIRD WORLD -- ARE PART OF

["PARAMETERS OF A GENERAL RECOGNITION THAT WE ARE ALL\nENGAGED IN A COMMON ENTERPRISE. WE WELCOME DEBATE ON THE\nMERITS; WE DEPLORE IT WHEN IT DEGENERATES INTO AN ATTACK\nON MOTIVES.", "A YEAR AGO, YOUR SPEAKER SAID, \"MY OWN GREAT HOPE IS\nTHAT ALL OF US MAY DO HONOR TO THE MEMORY OF ALFRED E.\nSMITH BY LOVING THIS COUNTRY AS DEEPLY AS HE DID, AND BY\nSERVING HER AS FAITHFULLY.\" THAT SPEAKER WAS GERALD FORD.\nTONIGHT LET US ALL ECHO THAT SENTIMENT. LET US\nDEDICATE OURSELVES TO SUMMONING AMERICA ONCE AGAIN TO\nLEADERSHIP, TO HELPING THE WORLD EMERGE FROM A TIME OF\nFEAR INTO A NEW ERA OF HOPE. WITH OUR OLD IDEALISM AND\nOUR NEW MATURITY, WE ARE GIVEN ANOTHER HISTORIC OPPOR-\NTUNITY FOR GREATNESS, FOR AMERICANS DO STILL BELIEVE THAT\nPROBLEMS ARE SOLUBLE IF WE BUT TRY. WE DO STILL BELIEVE\nIT IS RIGHT TO SEEK TO UNDO WHAT IS WRONG WITH THE\nWORLD, JUST AS WE CONSTANTLY STRIVE TO RIGHT WRONGS HERE\nAT HOME. AND WE DO STILL SEEK THE EXCITEMENT OF NEW\nFRONTIERS RATHER THAN RETREAT FROM THE UNCERTAINTY OF\nTHEIR CHALLENGES. WHERE ELSE IS IT POSSIBLE TO SAY:\n\"WE SHALL BRING PEACE; WE SHALL SOLVE THE PROBLEM OF\nENERGY; WE SHALL OVERCOME WORLD HUNGER\" AND BE CRITICIZED,\nNOT FOR OVERCONFIDENCE, BUT FOR FAILING TO ASK ENOUGH.\nAND SO WE RETURN TO OUR STARTING POINT. OUR \"VISION\nOF A BETTER AND MORE PEACEFUL WORLD\" BEGINS WITH A VISION\nOF OURSELVES. AND THIS, TOO, REMINDS US OF THE JAUNTY\nLITTLE MAN FROM THE SIDEWALKS OF NEW YORK. LET HIS"]

LITTLE MAN FROM THE SIDEBALF OF NEW YORK, LET HIS
FAMILY GO INSIDE, AND THIS, TOO, REMINDS US OF THE FAUNTY
OF A BETTER AND MORE PEACEFUL WORLD. BEGIN WITH A VISION
AND SO WE RETURN TO OUR STARTING POINT. OUR "VISION
NOT FOR OVERCONFIDENCE, BUT FOR FAILING TO ASK ENOUGH.
EMERGY: WE SHAFT OVERCOME WORLD HUNGER, AND BE CRITICISED.
"WE SHAFT BRING PEACE: WE SHAFT SOLVE THE PROBLEM OF
THEIR CHALLENGES. WHERE ELSE IS IT POSSIBLE TO SAY:
FRONTIERS RATHER THAN RETREAT FROM THE UNCERTAINTY OF
AT HOME. AND WE DO STIFF SEEK THE EXCITEMENT OF NEW
WORLD. THAT AS WE CONSTANTLY STRIVE TO RIGHT WRONGS HERE
IT IS RIGHT TO SEEK TO UNDO WHAT IS WRONG WITH THE
PROBLEMS ARE SOLUBLE IF WE BUT TRY. WE DO STIFF BELIEVE
TUNTY FOR GREATNESS, FOR AMERICANS DO STIFF BELIEVE THAT
OUR MENT MATURITY. WE ARE GIVEN ANOTHER HISTORIC OPPOR-
TYEAR INTO A NEW ERA OF HOPE. WITH OUR OLD IDEALISM AND
LEADERSHIP, TO HELPING THE WORLD EMERGE FROM A TIME OF
DEDICATE OURSELVES TO SUMMING UP AMERICA ONCE AGAIN TO
TOWARD LET US ALL ECHO THAT SENTIMENT. LET US
SERVING HER AS FAITHFULLY. THAT SPEAKER WAS GERALD FORD.
SMITH BY LOVING THIS COUNTRY AS DEEPLY AS HE DID, AND BY
THAT ALL OF US MAY DO HONOR TO THE MEMORY OF ALFRED E.
A YEAR AGO, YOUR SPEAKER SAID, "MY OWN GREAT HOPE IS
ON MOTIVES."
MERTZ: WE BEFORE IT WHEN IT DEGENERATES INTO AN ATTACK
ENGAGED IN A COMMON ENTERPRISE. WE WELCOME DEBATE ON THE
PARAMETERS OF A GENERAL RECOGNITION THAT WE ARE ALL.

ARCHDIOCESE OF NEW YORK

1011 FIRST AVENUE, NEW YORK, N.Y. 10022 (TEL.) 371-6100

Office of Communications

MSGR. EUGENE V. CLARK, DIRECTOR

FOR RELEASE FRIDAY, A.M., SEPTEMBER 27th, 1974

September 25, 1974

Contact: Monsignor Eugene V. Clark
Rev. Kenneth G. Jadoff
Rev. Peter J. Madori
(Plaza 9-1918)

CARDINAL COOKE IN WEST AFRICA

PRESS CONFERENCE: THURSDAY, OCTOBER 3rd, 1974 -- 11:00 A.M.

CARDINAL WILL PLEAD AGAINST HIGH CONSUMPTION AND WASTE IN UNITED STATES

Terence Cardinal Cooke, Archbishop of New York, will embark on an intensive six-day visit (Sept. 27th - October 3rd) to Upper Volta, Senegal and Mauritania, the heart of the drought area of West Africa. Despite recent rains, the sub-Saharan regions (The Sahel), Bangledesh and other areas are incapable of producing enough food for their people following six years of devastating drought.

The Cardinal will see at first hand the attempts of relief agencies to respond to a desperate short term need for food this fall and winter.

On his return he expects to speak to many groups about the need for America's generosity and a reduction of wasteful consumption to favor the starving peoples in the world.

September 25th, 1974

Page #2

The Cardinal will make his first statements at a press conference on Thursday, October 3rd, at 11:00 A.M. -- a few hours after his return from Dakar, Senegal -- at 1011 First Avenue (56th Street) on the 9th floor. Camera crews and reporters are welcome.

The Cardinal's itinerary in Africa will be:

<table><tr><td>Saturday, Sept. 28th</td><td>- Ouagadougou, Gorum-Gorum and Dori in Upper Volta</td></tr><tr><td>Sunday, Sept. 29th</td><td>- Dakar, Thies and Diourbel in Senegal</td></tr><tr><td>Monday, Sept. 30th</td><td>- Dakar and Nouakchott in Mauritania</td></tr><tr><td>Tuesday, Oct. 1st</td><td>- Areas near Nouakchott, Rosso and St. Louis in Mauritania</td></tr><tr><td>Wednesday, Oct. 2nd</td><td>- St. Louis and Dakar areas</td></tr></table>

The Cardinal expects to consult in West Africa with a wide range of leaders of government and voluntary agencies involved in relief and development works.

Last spring (April 30th), the Catholic Bishops of New York State issued a strong plea to the government and to the people to do what was possible to avert mass starvation in Africa and Asia. They warned that "drought, combined with soaring prices of food and fertilizer, has reduced food resources to an amazingly low level in these countries". (copy enclosed)

On July 7th of this year, Cardinal Cooke asked Catholics and others to set aside one day a week for fasting as a "spiritually rewarding way of offering up

September 25th, 1974

our sacrifice for the grave human needs of our fellowmen". (Copy enclosed)

On August 12th he wrote to all 408 parishes of the Archdiocese asking for special financial support of Catholic Relief Services (1011 First Avenue, New York City - 10022).

On Thursday, September 26th, before his African trip, Cardinal Cooke will complete a month long Theological consultation at which 73 American bishops reviewed recent developments in the Theological and Scriptural sciences in Rome.

Enclosures

STATEMENT OF THE NEW YORK STATE BISHOPS - APRIL 30, 1974

Over the past several months, news report has followed news report concerning the ever-worsening situation of famine and critical human need in many of the developing nations of the world. A disasterous combination of circumstances, some natural and some man-made, has brought the grim specter of starvation to literally millions of our brothers and sisters in God's human family.

The areas under the shadow of this mounting holocaust of hunger stretch
around the earth. There are almost a billion people in the forty or so poorest
nations of the world which are the hardest hit. This belt of agricultural disaster
touches the six nations of the Sahil, Ethiopia, India, Kenya, Pakistan, Sri Lanka,
the Sudan, Uganda and Zaire.

The most ominous note of all is that this spiral of starvation is even now
accelerating rapidly, and, as Secretary General Kurt Waldheim of the United Nations
said recently, "the fate of millions of people may well depend, within the next few
months, on what is done or not done now". Drought, combined with the soaring
prices of food and fertilizer, has reduced food resources to an amazingly low level
in these countries. The need for financial assistance, for food and fertilizer has
never been greater than it is today among these impoverished people.

The truth is that both food and fertilizer are available in the United States
and other food-exporting nations to a degree that could help to solve the present problem
of hunger in this emergency for these millions of God's children, -- this could be done
with a small sacrifice, simply through that use of moderation in consumption which is
the mark of a healthy society and the tradition of our Judeo-Christian culture. Not

only charity but justice demands that it must be done by a sharing of resources with
our brothers and sisters in such dire need.

We urge the officials of our nation, both in the Administration and the
Congress, to give immediate attention to this critical problem, and to the need for
an overall program of human development which could prevent such calamities in
the future.

As a nation which is so richly blessed by God, we must not allow our
preoccupation with our fiscal and political problems at home to cause us to turn our
backs on a growing tragedy of world-wide magnitude which we can help avert with
such a small sacrifice in food and fertilizer supplies. We know that in this catastrophic
situation the people of the United States will not fail in their own tradition of generous
response to the poor and hungry.

CARDINALS RESIDENCE

452 MADISON AVENUE
NEW YORK, N.Y. 10022

July 7, 1974

Dear Friends in Christ:

Last Thursday, we celebrated the 198th Anniversary of the birth of the American dream of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. In spite of crises and problems, our beloved Nation has indeed been blessed both materially and spiritually over the course of the past two centuries. For this unique blessing we thank Almighty God whose gracious Providence has protected and developed these United States for almost 200 years. We pray that He may continue to grant His abundant graces on Americans of every race and color and religion. We ask Him in a special way never to let our own blessings blind us to the needs of the poor here at home nor to the needs of other peoples around the world.

Today, the needs of millions of our neighbors -- all, our brothers and sisters in God's human family -- have become a mighty voice that cries out for our help. These are the voices of the starving, desperate poor in the nations of Central Africa and Southern Asia.

A month ago, the Bishops of New York State joined me in calling upon the leaders of our Government to speed the opening of channels whereby God's hungry children in these stricken lands can be saved from the terrible ravages of death-dealing starvation. I call on God's people of this Archdiocese to assist in that effort of social charity by your prayers, your continuing support of our relief services, and your own contacts with our elected representatives.

-2-

The union of God's family on earth, however, demands from each of us a more personal role as we come face to face with a calamity of such proportion, the gravity of which we are only now beginning to realize. Our worries over rising food prices and the cost of living here at home, while a cause of real concern to us, can be brought into proper perspective when we compare them with the terrifying statistics of the awesome death which waits at the door of millions of human beings. Should we not be moved to make a personal sacrifice as a symbol of our common humanity and our Christian love? As your Servant here in the Church of New York I have seen your generous response in so many ways to so many good causes. I believe that this is the time for us to demonstrate again in a very personal, private way that we truly share a concern for those less fortunate than we.

A day of fast and abstinence each week would be a most suitable -- and a most spiritually rewarding -- way of offering up our sacrifice for the grave human needs of our fellow man. In this Holy Year of Renewal and Reconciliation it is a most proper and fitting work of virtue.

Since Fridays are still being observed in a praise-worthy penitential spirit by many of our Catholic people, I would recommend that we set aside the Wednesdays of each week for the next year as a time of prayer and voluntary fast and abstinence for our hungry brothers and sisters throughout the world.

A Wednesday observance of fast and abstinence out of loving concern for the poor and hungry of the world would be a most fitting Christian response at this time of need. For those whose health or the demands of their state in life will permit them to accept this recommendation, I know that this practice of voluntary sacrifice will be blessed by our Loving Father in Heaven. Do not the words of St. Paul encourage us -- "Help carry one another's burdens; in this way you will fulfill the Law of Christ." (Galatians 6:2)

With gratitude for your concern for our brothers and sisters in God's human family, I am

Faithfully yours in Christ,

P.S. Please read this letter at all the Masses on Sunday, July 7th.

NEW YORK TIMES

Waiting
For
Jerry

By James Reston

In the normal switch from one American President to another, the new man has about ten weeks between election and inauguration to figure out where he's going and who's going with him, but Gerald Ford was an instant President who had to put the ball in the air before anybody knew the signals.

The result has been about what might have been expected from any new coach: a lot of cautious plunges and dust along the line, a few broken plays, and plenty of locker-room speeches.

Now, however, the exhibition season is over, and the gap between the problem and the performance is clear. Secretary of State Kissinger, both in Washington and at the United Nations, is defining the problem of the modern world in the most solemn, even in apocalyptic terms, but so far there are no policies to meet his perception of the problem of inflation, and everybody is "waiting for Jerry."

What will he do? How can a conservative, partisan politician, even with the best of intentions, and diverted by serious personal problems within his own family, handle radical world problems that require unpopular political remedies? These are the hard questions now, and even with the greatest sympathy for the President, they cannot be evaded.

Secretary Kissinger, if we understand his argument to the President, the Cabinet, the officials here at the United Nations in New York, is saying that democracy as we have known it in this century cannot survive for more than three or four years at the present rate of inflation. If the people, parties and governments of the Free World do not cooperate and sacrifice to get this inflation by the throat, the result will be economic, financial and political anarchy—with authoritarian governments of the right or left—and Western civilization will be transformed beyond the desires or imagination of the leaders now in power.

Obviously, there are tactical political and diplomatic reasons for this melancholy Kissinger theme. The inflation cannot be turned around by a single party or a single nation. It is a world problem demanding policies no party or nation likes, and Mr. Kissinger is trying to startle people into reality, but he is also talking as a historian, who knows something about the fragility of nations, and he is pleading privately and urgently for a whole new way of looking at things, of sacrificing and cooperating, at home and abroad.

President Ford is well aware of Mr. Kissinger's perception of the world problem, of the warning signs out of Britain, with its 20 per cent inflation, out of Italy, Greece and Turkey, and even out of Germany and Japan, which are worried about unemployment and the dangers of excessive deflationary, policies in the United States.

The leaders of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund presented an equally gloomy view of the world picture to Mr. Ford in Washington this week. Robert McNamara, president of the World Bank, told him that the poor nations faced "apalling deprivation" and "the risk of death" under present economic conditions, and called for more aid from the industrial nations.

The managing director of the Monetary Fund, H. Johannes Witteveen, suggested that the situation in the industrial world is now "becoming more suitable" for government efforts to influence or control wages and prices.

But the United States Congress is opposed to more foreign aid, and Mr. Ford, facing awkward elections next month, is opposed to wage and price controls and not wildly enthusiastic about more foreign aid.

In short, while he has been more willing than President Nixon to listen to Henry Kissinger's vision of the world as it is, it is not yet clear that President Ford is prepared to support hard and politically unpopular policies to correct it.

"We want solutions," he told the leaders of the World Bank and I.M.F., "which serve broad interests rather than self-serving ones. We want more cooperation, not more isolation. We want trade, not protectionism. We want price stability, not inflation. We want growth, not stagnation."

But within the new Ford Administration, which has had so little time, and with its mixture of old Nixon and new Ford advisers, there is no agreement—indeed, there is, fundamental disagreement—about how these admirable hopes and principles are to be achieved.

It is reassuring how the new President has opened up the decision-making process to everybody who has something to say, and even to a lot of people who have nothing to say. In fact, he has devoetd so much time to listening to what over people think that he has scarcely had time to define what he thinks himself.

-And this is what everybody is waiting for now, waiting for the President, and his decision on gasoline consumption, food consumption in a hungry world, unemployment and taxes.

There is, in Mr. Kissinger, a deep pessimistic historical strain, and in Mr. Ford a pervasive optimistic political strain, but fairly soon now, the President is going to have to sort out all the conflicting advice and call the signals.

State Dept. Summit

WASHINGTON

By James Reston

WASHINGTON, Sept. 28—Over the weekend, the foreign and finance ministers of the United States, Britain, West Germany, France and Japan have been meeting privately at the State Department to discuss the world economic crisis. This is the first indication that the major industrial nations have finally recognized that they must try to agree on common policies to deal with the common threat of worldwide inflation, soaring prices of oil and other raw materials and the consequent danger of economic depression and financial, social and political anarchy.

This was a limited meeting, with limited purposes, and with some awkward handicaps, Canada, Italy, the Scandinavian countries and many others were left out, but it was at least a beginning by the big boys toward cooperation.

Earlier this year, they were dealing with this critical problem separately, and fussing with one another about how to analyze what everybody agreed was a worldwide crisis.

President Ford and Secretary of State Kissinger have been criticized in the last few days for over dramatizing the problem and seeming to threaten the oil-producing states with military action, if the latter did not roll back the prices that were disrupting the economies of the industrial and underdeveloped states alike.

"Sovereign nations," Mr. Ford said in Michigan the other day, "cannot allow their policies to be dictated or their fate decided by artificial rigging and distortion of world commodity prices."

"Throughout history," he added, "nations have gone to war over natural advantages such as water, food or convenient passages on land or sea." And now, he insisted, "exorbitant" oil prices set by the oil-producing nations and their cartel were threatening "the breakdown of world order and safety."

Mr. Kissinger was more subtle, but Mr. Ford's remarks were taken in the Arab world as a military threat, and this troubled the Japanese and the Europeans, for the threat did not seem to be credible. It violated the first rule of diplomacy, namely, that nations should never threaten to do what they are not prepared to do, or suggest policies their allies could not afford to support.

Nevertheless, the Ford-Kissinger speeches did dramatize the dangers, and, what was largely forgotten, insisted that cooperation by the industrial nations with one another and with the oil-producing nations was imperative if the world was not to drift into political, social and financial chaos.

What the President and the Secretary of State were saying, not too subtly, was that a continuation of soaring oil prices would shatter the world as we know it, that it would lead to unemployment and human misery all over the world, that democracy might not be able to survive inflation at the present rate and that it might even lead to Communist or other authoritarian governments in many parts of what now remains of the free world.

The facts before the ministers at the State Department were not in dispute. These facts demonstrated the strain on the industrial nations by the rise in oil prices and also the dramatic swing of monetary reserves to the producers of oil. Here are the basic facts and projections of the money flowing out of the industrial nations and to the oil producers as the result of the rising price of fuel.

<table><caption>Payments (in billions of dollars) made by:</caption><thead><tr><th>Year</th><th>United States</th><th>Other Major Importers</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1972</td><td>4.9</td><td>14</td></tr><tr><td>1973</td><td>8.5</td><td>21.1</td></tr><tr><td>1974</td><td>25.2</td><td>74.8</td></tr><tr><td>1975</td><td>27</td><td>81</td></tr><tr><td>1976</td><td>30.3</td><td>90.7</td></tr><tr><td>1980</td><td>43.3</td><td>129.7</td></tr><tr><td>1985</td><td>64</td><td>192</td></tr></tbody></table>

The movement of revenues into the oil producing (OPEC) countries over this same period is estimated by the United States Government and the World Bank as follows:

<table><thead><tr><th>Year</th><th>Oil Revenues of OPEC Countries (In Billions of Dollars)</th><th>Reserves of OPEC Countries</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1972</td><td>18.9</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>1973</td><td>29.6</td><td>26</td></tr><tr><td>1974</td><td>100</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>1975</td><td>108</td><td>170</td></tr><tr><td>1976</td><td>121</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>1980</td><td>173</td><td>653</td></tr><tr><td>1985</td><td>256</td><td>1,206</td></tr></tbody></table>

On the basis of these staggering figures, the primary questions before the ministers in Washington were how the oil-consuming nations were going to meet these bills, and what the oil-producing countries were going to do with this vast and growing accumulation of petro-dollars.

The trend in the industrial world is toward more unemployment and social and political disruption. In the underdeveloped world, particularly in Africa and the Indian subcontinent, the trend is toward hunger, malnutrition and death. In the oil-producing countries, the trend is toward riches almost beyond absorption and control. In the world at large, the trend is obviously toward revolutionary change.

No wonder, then, that the State Department was surrounded this weekend with secrecy and security measures. The major nations have just begun to think together about the alarming consequences of the inflation. They are all diverted by domestic, economic and political crises, with weak governments, most of them facing elections, but at least, they are now recognizing that they are faced with problems beyond their national control and have to find international remedies for what is obviously a worldwide danger.

Archdiocese of New York

Office of Communications

1011 FIRST AVENUE, NEW YORK, N.Y. 10022 (TEL.) 371-6100 MSGR. EUGENE V. CLARK, DIRECTOR

September 19th, 1974

Dear Mr. Secretary:

We all look forward to your appearance at the Governor Alfred E. Smith Memorial Dinner at the Waldorf Astoria in New York City on October 16th.

I enclose a timetable that I know you will share with your aides and the security personnel who will accompany you. I want them to know that I will be happy to speak to them about the many details that will concern them regarding your visit.

For their use, I am taking the liberty of enclosing last year's program, last year's talks and some information regarding Governor Smith.

Cardinal Cooke is in Rome at this time but I know that he joins me in expressing to you his kindest personal wishes and our anticipation of your visit.

I'll be grateful if your secretary will send to me your vita brevis and a glossy photograph.

With kindest personal wishes, I am

The Hon. Henry A. Kissinger
Secretary of State
The White House
Washington, D.C.

Archdiocese of New York

Office of Communications

September 18th, 1974

To: His Eminence
Charles Silver
Monsignor Ruvo
Monsignor McCarrick

From: Monsignor Clark

Following our decisions of last year, before and just after our very successful dinner, we continue to be resolved to keep the dinner on a tight and precise timetable for reasons of courtesy and convenience toward our guests.

Revisions are contained in this year's schedule: we are starting fifteen minutes earlier to allow 7 or 8 minutes for His Eminence to greet those dais guests who have come from a distance.

Looking forward to the meanest enforcement, I have drawn up this timetable:

5:30 His Eminence departs 452 for Tower Entrance, Waldorf Astoria

5:45 His Eminence is in his Waldorf Astoria suite

6:00 His Eminence departs suite

6:10 His Eminence with Mr. Silver awaits arrival of Doctor Kissinger and Judge McGivern in the Louis XVI Foyer

6:15 Full party departs for Jade Room for photographs

6:30 Full party enters Basildon Room for formal reception

7:00 Dining room doors opened

7:03 Guests on line warned that Basildon Room doors will be closed in 5 minutes.

7:08 Close Basildon Room doors

7:10 Dais guests in Jade Room will be asked to stand at their chairs

September 18th, 1974

<table><tr><td>7:15</td><td>Members of the receiving line will enter Jade Room to meet other dais guests</td></tr><tr><td>7:22</td><td>First dais guests begin line moving to dais</td></tr><tr><td>7:30</td><td>Mr. Silver, the Invocation and the Star Spangled Banner</td></tr><tr><td>7:35</td><td>Dinner service begins</td></tr><tr><td>8:45</td><td>Waiters signalled to begin to end service</td></tr><tr><td>9:00</td><td>End of service</td></tr><tr><td>9:00</td><td>Mr. Silver</td></tr><tr><td>9:05</td><td>Miss Kate Smith</td></tr><tr><td>9:20</td><td>Mr. Silver to acknowledge presence of two or three guests and introduce Judge McGivern</td></tr><tr><td>9:23</td><td>Judge Owen McGivern</td></tr><tr><td>9:35</td><td>His Eminence</td></tr><tr><td>9:40</td><td>Secretary Kissinger</td></tr><tr><td>10:00</td><td>Mr. Silver -- one sentence conclusion and request that guests remain until His Eminence and Secretary Kissinger depart</td></tr></table>

ADDRESS BY THE VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES
ALFRED E. SMITH MEMORIAL DINNER

New York, New York

October 19, 1972

FOR RELEASE: 8 P.M. EDT, October 19, 1972

I would like to talk to you for a few minutes about a topic dear to the hearts of all astute enlightened, observers of the political scene: power.

Now I realize that it is customary not to mention power in front of
professional politicians such as those here on the dias. It's sort of like
mentioning beauty in a roomful of Miss America contestants. Everybody
who has it knows it and doesn't have to be told about it; everybody who
doesn't have it doesn't want to be reminded of it.

Vice Presidents fall into one of those two categories.

Power can be the font of much good; in fact nothing constructive can be accomplished without the benevolent exercise of power. But, like beauty, power is one of those investitures which is talked about far more than it is understood -- and one which can bring as many problems as it does joys.

To some, the very mention of the word "power" conjures up visions of an Attila, running roughshod over lesser mortals.

To others, it brings to mind Machiavellian subtley, deviousness without scruple and scheming without ceasing.

Richard Nixon, Lyndon Johnson, Hubert Humphrey and I agree that there's no way to cram a Vice President into either of those categories.

It was Lord Acton, the great Catholic historian who told us that power tends to corrupt. Our system is based upon the recognition that if government is to be truly free, power must be divided between three separate branches. Indeed, it might be said that the entire political history of the western world is a continuing story of man's successes and failures in dealing with the problems of power.

Now power obviously has its drawbacks. The struggle for power often leads to practices that are at odds with the concept of brotherhood we are honoring tonight.

-more-

-2-

Particularly in an election year we are likely to hear very serious charges made against powerful political figures. Just the other day I read such charges about a figure well known to all of you. I read that he was "an agent in politics and public life of those in Big Business who sought favors and privileges," "that he was "a willing 'tool'" of the "Money Gang," and a "conniving politician." It was further alleged that this political figure was a "brazen performer in politics" and that "hypocrites... liars and press agents 'made'" this man.

I should perhaps pause here and say that while I read these charges only the other day, they were not made this year. In fact they were made 36 years ago. They were made against the man we honor here tonight, Al Smith. It is a comfort to know that Al Smith not only survived such charges but remains today a symbol of honesty and excellence in American politics. The man who made those charges was named Henry H. Klein. Nobody today remembers Henry H. Klein. But everyone remembers Al Smith. There is a lesson there for all of us.

Yes, power is something that, as history teaches us, sometimes brings out the worst in us. But when we are using it for a good purpose, such as the kind of charitable work that is at the heart of this annual dinner, it can be of great benefit to mankind. The power to do good is one of the great gifts God can bestow on any man or group of men -- or any nation. Once attained, such power is a sacred trust.

We in America have that power. Sometimes it is shown by our acts of international beneficence in programs such as the Marshall Plan, the Peace Corps, AID and South Asian Relief, and by programs funded by private citizens through CARE, The Save The Children Federation, the Christian Children's Fund, American ORT Foundation, Catholic Relief Services, the Red Cross and tens of thousands of other charitable agencies.

And then, of course, there is the power to help our fellow Americans who need help, exemplified by such charitable affairs as this.

I know His Eminence, Cardinal Cooke has seen evidence of both kinds of power. As Military Vicar of our Armed Forces he has visited our military men in Vietnam who have been doing what their fathers and their fathers before them have done -- using the power of the United States of America to protect others from domination by Godless dictatorships. And he has also seen the power of organized charity in New York and throughout the country.

-more-

-3-

Yet, when we get down to it, corrupt, repressive power is always
a terminal illness; such power is artificial, a facade. In contrast, there is
what there has always been -- men and women willing to devote their time
and their energy to creating something new or to conserving something worth-
while, and men and women willing to devote their lives to helping their
neighbors. That is what true power is: the force of the human soul in the
pursuit of good. All the rest is mere self-aggrandizement -- a transitory
shadow across the path of human progress.

I mention this only because Al Smith had what I would call an almost
inherent knowledge of the true uses of power.

When Al Smith was a young man he acted in plays in his parish. In one
of them, a famous play of the time, a British officer chides an Irish woman
for what he calls her ancestors' extravagance and imprudence. The Irish
woman replies: "Yes... the extravagance of their love for their country and
the imprudence of the fidelity to their faith."

I think those lines must have remained with Al Smith all his life. As a
poor boy, he knew first hand how tough it can be growing up without the advantage
of education and financial security. But he didn't spend his time knocking the
system or weeping and gnashing his teeth over the alleged sickness of his
country. He did what millions had done before him and millions have done
since -- he worked to build a life for himself and his family in the best country
in the world. When he became famous he didn't go to his old neighborhood on
the East Side and tell the youth there how bad they had it or how deprived they
were; he told them what a great country this is and what wonderful opportunities
could be seized. Now that attitude of Al Smith's may be looked upon by some
as naive, or even extravagant or imprudent -- but it's one I think we could use
more of in this country today. He knew that there was a power in faith and love
and hard work that can change the world and he wasn't afraid to use that kind
of power. He loved his country extravagantly and when some might have
thought it prudent to downplay allegiance to his faith, Al Smith would have none
of it.

He once ended a speech with a bit of Latin he had recalled from his days
as an altar boy. Many of you here tonight are familiar with that phrase --
*sursum corda* -- lift up your hearts.

And that is the greatest kind of power, the kind that lifts up the heart of
man. It is the power of brotherhood. That was Al Smith's great gift. He knew
it wasn't enough for us to verbally acknowledge the need for brotherhood or
even give to charitable causes. There must be an internal commitment as well.
There must be a lifting up of the heart, a spiritual dedication to the ideals of
brotherhood.

-more-

Al Smith knew that *sursum corda* was not a phrase from a dead language, but a message of living truth. He knew from his own experience that the United States of America is a nation that since the beginning has said to the poor and the needy and the enslaved of the world, *sursum corda*.

I believe in those words lies our greatest challenge as a Nation. We must be powerful, not because power in and of itself is desirable, but because it can be used for good. We must be strong, not because national strength is an end in itself but because our strength can, as it has in the past, be used to help those human beings, and even entire nations, who are weak. We must be a land of great abundance and productivity, not only because it gives our citizens the highest standard of living ever known on the face of the earth, but because only out of abundance and productivity can come the food and clothing and shelter that the American people have given to help the world.

Let us remain strong. Let our abundance and productivity continue to grow. And let us never turn away from our responsibilities to help the weak to defend themselves, or to feed the hungry, or to clothe the naked as we have done and as we continue to do. Let us keep the United States what it is now and what it always has been -- keep it as Al Smith saw it -- the single Nation on the face of the earth that can credibly say to the needy and discourage, "we will help you, *sursum corda* -- lift up your hearts!"

# # #

UNITED STATES MISSION
TO THE UNITED NATIONS

FOR RELEASE AT 9:00 P.M. EDT

Wednesday, October 18, 1967

Press Release USUN-158

October 18, 1967

Address by Ambassador Arthur J. Goldberg, United States
Representative to the United Nations, at the Alfred E. Smith
Memorial Dinner, Waldorf-Astoria Hotel, New York, October 18, 1967

I greatly appreciate the privilege of being asked to address this annual gathering which His Eminence, Cardinal Spellman, instituted nearly a quarter of a century ago and which he has made into a truly American tradition.

Surely only in America, as Harry Golden would say, could a Catholic Cardinal, acting in memory of a famous politician of the same faith, bring together year after year such an ecumenical gathering of public servants and leading citizens from every walk of life -- without regard to their politics or their religious persuasion or their state of non-candidacy -- and in the interest of worthy charities of three major religious faiths.

I cannot fail to note also that, in the same ecumenical spirit, and with a thoughtfulness and finesse befitting a prince of his Church, the Cardinal this year has even taken care to balance the speakers' list: one Republican, one Liberal, and one diplomat.

Since we are gathered in memory of that admirable American public servant, Alfred E. Smith, I would like to contribute a word about his significance for our time. It is not for me to evaluate the many important lessons which his career provides. Let me emphasize only one lesson -- drawn not from his outstanding achievements as Governor, but from what is commonly regarded as his one historic failure: his defeat for the Presidency in 1928.

I vividly remember that campaign, as no doubt some of you do. I saw Al Smith in his famous brown derby when he came to Chicago that fall. Being just under 21, I could not vote, but we had

MORE

GOLDBERG

- 2 -

a straw poll at Northwestern University Law School; and although
Hoover carried Northwestern as well as the nation, let the record
show that I was one of eighteen out of a student body of nearly
300 who voted for Smith.

It is hard to realize, nearly 40 years later, what a powerful
political taboo was broken that year when for the first time a
Catholic ran for the Presidency. Although religious bigotry
undoubtedly played a large part in Smith's defeat, it seems to me
that the important and positive historical fact is that his
campaign opened up the religious question for vigorous public
debate. In the years that followed, the truth which had emerged
in that debate -- that under our Constitution a man's religion
is not and should not be a test of his fitness for public office --
gradually gained acceptance in public opinion. And when the same
question recurred 32 years later, it was possible for John F. Kennedy
who happened to be a Catholic, to be elected President.

The nation owes a permanent debt to Alfred E. Smith for having
had the courage to join the issue which contributed to his defeat.
This defeat was a bitter experience for him. But after his death
he won a vicarious victory in the election of 1960. Indeed, it
was a victory for fair play and for Americanism in the best sense.

Today our country faces new issues and new challenges, many of them
undreamt of a generation ago. Those in the international sphere --
Vietnam above all others -- have been my daily working preoccupation
for over two years. I do not propose tonight to discuss the
substantive merits of the Vietnam conflict, but rather another
question which troubles me about the Vietnam war: namely, the
tone and temper of our national debate on this subject over the
past year.

Let me make perfectly clear at the outset my personal belief
that, in view of the gravity of the issue, national debate on
Vietnam is inevitable, desirable, and indeed essential. We are,
after all, dealing with a great question of war and peace-- a
question which, in this nuclear age, can affect our very survival.
In view of the gravity of the issues involved, and their great
complexity, public debate on them is entirely understandable and
inevitable.

In a broader sense, indeed, I have constantly and vigorously
advocated the right of dissent, and the necessity to permit
free, open, vigorous, challenging debate as an indispensable part
of decision-making in our democracy. And I have not changed my
views in this regard since taking up my present post.

MORE

GOLDBERG

-3-

Nor have I ever agreed with the notion that this process of free debate should "stop at the water's edge," even when our armed forces are in battle. If America's enemies regard free debate in our midst as a sign of weakness, they must not have studied history -- and they are very much mistaken. It is not a weakness; it is a great strength. And as history has amply demonstrated, such debate does not in the least prevent this great country from making effective decisions and bringing its power and influence to bear in support of them.

Let me add that in the right of dissent I include the right of orderly protest. The First Amendment to our Constitution protects not only free speech but also "the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

But having said this much, I must declare with the utmost emphasis that the cause of free debate is ill served by imputations of base motives, words of scorn and contempt, ill-tempered invective, and wounding epithets. And likewise the cause of orderly protest is subverted, not served, by unlawful acts of disorder or civil disobedience.

I freely confess to being an old-fashioned liberal in this respect. When the President is called a usurper, or when a dissenter is called a traitor, I am shocked. No matter what Constitutional protections may surround such epithets, they go far beyond the bounds of healthy debate and do a grievous disservice to democracy. They do not bring us any nearer to the common ground we seek; rather they drag us all toward the swamp of common hatred and distrust.

It is natural and right that all of us should feel strongly about Vietnam, whatever view of the matter we espouse. But we should take care that our feelings, however strong, do not overmaster our reason. The problems we face in Vietnam are not open and shut. They are immensely complex -- all the more so because their successful resolution is not in our hands alone. They will not yield to the hammer blows of sheer emotion.

Let me be specific. Rational debate on Vietnam reveals not two sharply opposed views but a whole complex of views -- and a whole list of questions. The alternatives are not "win or get out." They cover a wide range of both military and political possibilities -- such as: holding the war at its present level; seeking to reduce it; intensifying it; taking up static defense positions; further increasing the bombing; ceasing the bombing permanently or suspending it for a limited period. In the political and diplomatic field there are questions: which, if any, of these military steps will lead us to the negotiating table; how to get a Geneva Conference in the face of the lack of agreement by one of the co-chairmen;

MORE

GOLDBERG

-4-

how to obtain UN action in the face of opposition by permanent members of the Security Council; and whether the effort should be made notwithstanding this opposition. All such possibilities, all such questions, are within the range of discussion by reasonable minds.

Similarly, there is room for legitimate debate about our objectives. Should our aim be solely to defend the self-determination of South Vietnam? Should it embrace frustrating the communist strategy of so-called "wars of national liberation" -- a type of war which communist theory still claims is good and justifiable? Does the national security of the United States require that we should oppose all such wars? These questions also merit discussion, and they cannot be resolved by name-calling.

I see the greatest value in full and frank national discussion on this whole range of questions connected with Vietnam. Indeed, I have sought to contribute to this discussion and have listened attentively to the views of others.

But in this debate, let all of us shun intolerance like the plague. As our sons and daughters would say: "let's cool it".

Perhaps it will help if we remind ourselves that the political life of a free nation requires adjustment on the part of all to its "normal delays, frustrations, compromises, and disappointments". But having said this, I hastily add what Winston Churchill once said, that "democracy is the worst form of government ever devised -- except for all the others."

Whatever our differences about Vietnam, we should agree that all who share the Constitutional responsibility for conducting our affairs, whether in the executive or in the legislative branches of the government, in good faith and by their own lights, are seeking a world at peace -- the world vision which Pope Paul expressed to the United Nations in his memorable appeal "never again war -- war never again".

Perhaps all that I have said tonight is to express the hope that our national debate be on a level of seriousness and mutual respect worthy of that great goal of peace.

********

842

NOCK — SMITH — TOMLINSON

The stones of it are laid in scorn
And plastered high with pride.

Wall. Stanza 1

There is no lover like an island shore
For lingering embrace;
No tryst so faithful as the turning tide
At its accustomed place.

Islands. Stanza 1

He who has given
A hostage knows
All ways of dying
Terror shows.

Hostage

## ALBERT JAY NOCK
[1873-1945]

The mere vagrant lust of seeing
things and going places.

*A Journey Into Rabelais's France. Chap. 10* [1934]

All Souls College, Oxford, planned better than it knew when it limited the number of its undergraduates to four; four is exactly the right number for any college which is really intent on getting results.

*Memoirs of a Superfluous Man. III, Chap. 3* [1943]

Money does not pay for anything, never has, never will. It is an economic axiom as old as the hills that goods and services can be paid for only with goods and services; but twenty years ago this axiom vanished from everyone's reckoning, and has never reappeared. No one has seemed in the least aware that everything which is paid for must be paid for out of production, for there is no other source of payment.

Ibid. Chap. 13

As sheer casual reading-matter, I still find the English dictionary the most interesting book in our language.

Ibid., IV, Chap. 1

## SIME SILVERMAN ¹
[1873-1933]

Wall Street Lays An Egg.

*Headline announcing the stock market collapse of October, 1929*

¹ Silverman, who founded and edited the famous theatrical trade paper *Variety* (1905).

Sticks Nix Hicks Pix.

*Headline, meaning that the rural audiences do not care for moving pictures dealing with country themes.*

## ALFRED EMANUEL SMITH ¹
[1873-1944]

The kiss of death.

*Alluding to W. R. Hearst's support of Ogden Mills, in the 1926 campaign for Governor of New York State. Smith was re-elected, and Mills defeated.*

Let's look at the record.

*Campaign Speeches, 1928*

Nobody shoots at Santa Claus.

Ibid. 1936

No matter how thin you slice it, it's still boloney.

Ibid.

The Governor of New York State does not have to be an acrobat.

*Speech in behalf of Franklin D. Roosevelt, 1928*

## H. M. TOMLINSON
[1873- ]

The sea is at its best at London, near midnight, when you are within the arms of a capacious chair, before a glowing fire, selecting phases of the voyages you will never make.

*The Sea and the Jungle* [1912]

How many grave speeches, which have surprised, shocked, and directed the nation, have been made by Great Men too soon after a noble dinner, words winged by the Press without an accompanying and explanatory wine list.

*Waiting for Daylight* [1922]

That figure of Nobody in sodden khaki, cumbered with ugly gear, its probably had more influence on American argot than any man of his time. He and his reporters (especially Jack Conway) enlivened show-business slang with brilliant coinages and made it current conversation from Coast to Coast.

¹ Al Smith knew as much as any living man of the art of democratic government. — ELERY SEDGWICK: *The Happy Profession*, *Chap. 17*

ANGEL

cious rifle wrap
ness anywhere a
of its eyes, its
which might ha
might have bec
running from
looms now in th
esque, silent b
overshadowing

What is that
of what was fa
is lost.

*Waiting for*
*Nobodies*

The reader w
a real sense, th

Bad and indi
is just as seri
drainage.

It has to be
maintain its va
ship's berth a
time and place
ing.

So
What was cr
in so airy a f
to America's d
gene shops ar

The

## SIR NO

The Great
Title

The power o
have prevente
the most impo
history.

Let th
Words
[1943]

MAU

Because of yo

¹ Lecture at
1927. Published

302 SMITH, ALFRED EMANUEL

work on the wealth of nations. Before writing the latter, he traveled on the Continent from 1764 to 1766, and while in France met some of the *Physiocrats*, whose important contributions to economics partially anticipated his own; but his indebtedness to them was limited. After returning in 1766 to the University of Glasgow, he labored there for 10 years more and brought out, in 1776, his masterwork, *An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations*. In 1778 he was appointed commissioner of customs for Scotland. Little more of note happened in the remaining 12 years of his life. His *Essays on Philosophical Subjects*, written relatively early in his life (before 1752), were found among his papers and published posthumously in 1795.

Smith's place in the age-long history of the development of political economy must be estimated as very high, although not as high as was widely supposed in the early 19th century. He was by no means the founder of that science, the beginnings of which go back at least to Aristotle, and to which numerous scholastic and other writers in the medieval and early-modern centuries made important contributions. Smith was one among many great economists in his own century, and stands above the others not as being more original, or brilliant, or penetrating, or invariably correct in his observations and reasonings; but in virtue of the nearly all-comprehensive breadth of his outlook and knowledge, and the surpassingly realistic, well-balanced, and moral wisdom of his treatment of the vast subject of his famous *Inquiry*. This work in its way sums up the main fruits of most previous research and thinking in its field, and contains the germs of many, it not most, of the advances that have since been achieved.

The generally prevailing impression, however, of the supposed, central thesis of the *Wealth of Nations* has always been somewhat incorrect; in part because, as was said above, there has been general neglect of the relevant psychological and ethical views expressed in Smith's earlier work on the moral sentiments; and in part because, as "capitalism" and attacks upon it, and diverse political ideologies, went on developing through the 19th century, it became the fashion to attribute to Smith the original sponsorship of the crude, dogmatic, unqualified, and biased laissez-faire gospel of later generations of conservative businessmen. The economic liberalism—in his phrase, "system of natural liberty" for all individuals—that Smith really sponsored, had behind it both his ethical and humane concern for equal rights and opportunities for all men. and his economic analysis of the requirements of an optimal growth of their common wealth and welfare. In his early treatise he argued that citizens of a free society could be led by their human-natural, humane, reciprocal "sympathies" and sensitivities to each others' moral judgements to develop a moral consensus and (to implement that) a just legal order, impartially defining the just rights and freedoms of all severally, and allowing none to infringe the rights of others. In his later, economic treatise, presupposing the existence (in a good approximation) of such a moral climate and legal order, he went on to argue that, *within it*, a generally competitive economic system could function in such a way that all in maximizing their private gains would also be maximizing their contributions to the aggregate wealth of the nation and the world. The wisdom of that outlook can be questioned, but its true meaning, grounds, and implications as elaborated in Smith's own writings need and deserve careful study

and just appraisal undistorted by confusions of it with propaganda. Nor is his program for creating a harmony of individual (suitably modified) self-interests and the common welfare the whole or main substance of his economics. His immortal *Inquiry* in its time was, and even today remains, an inexhaustible mine of wisdom about the processes and conditions of on-going growth of aggregate and per capita wealth or economic welfare in and throughout all nations.

**Bibliography:** O. H. TAYLOR, *Economics and Liberalism (Cambridge, Mass. 1955); A History of Economic Thought (New York 1960).* R. B. HALDANE, *Life of Adam Smith* (London 1887). G. R. MORROW, *The Ethical and Economic Theories of Adam Smith* (New York 1923). J. RAE, *Life of Adam Smith* (New York 1895). F. A. NEFF, *Adam Smith and His Master-Work* (Wichita 1940). Illustration credit: National Portrait Gallery, London.

[O. H. TAYLOR]

## SMITH, ALFRED EMANUEL

Governor of New York, presidential candidate; b. New York, N.Y., Dec. 30, 1873; d. New York, Oct. 4, 1944. His parents were Alfred Emanuel and Catherine (Mulvehill) Smith. After his father's death in 1886 he supported his mother and sister, and thus received little formal education. He described himself as a graduate of the Fulton Fish Market. He married Catherine A. Dunn on May 6, 1900, and they had five children.

A Tammany supporter, Smith began his political career in January 1895 as a clerk and server of jury notices for the commissioner of jurors. His election to the New York State Assembly in 1903 launched an 11-year service during which he became Democratic floor leader and chairman of the Ways and Means Committee (1911), and speaker of the Assembly (1913). With his interest in labor he was especially effective in the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire investigation (1911), which resulted in revision of the industrial safety code. In 1915 he was elected sheriff of New York County, and 2 years later, president of the Board of Aldermen. In 1918 he narrowly defeated Republican Charles S. Whitman for the New York governorship. Though defeated in 1920 for reelection by Nathan L. Miller, in 1922 he won a landslide victory over Miller; in 1924, over Theodore Roosevelt, Jr.; and in 1926, over Ogden L. Mills.

Smith's governorship was marked by far-reaching reforms. During his first term he obtained laws against rent profiteering, and in 1923 he vetoed the Lusk Committee laws, which established a loyalty test for public school teachers. Smith also urged expansion of state aid to schools. In a major reorganization of state government, he modernized its administrative bureaus and reduced the number of elected officials to four. He fought for expansion of low-rent housing, parks, and other recreational facilities, and for improved highways; he opposed national prohibition as being conducive to more abuses than it cured.

As his reputation grew, he attracted attention as a possible Democratic presidential candidate. Though nominated at the 1920 San Francisco convention, he was not a serious candidate until 1924, when the party was split over his refusal to withdraw in favor of William G. McAdoo. The nominating speech by Franklin D. Roosevelt felicitously dubbed him "The Happy Warrior." After 103 ballots, John W. Davis received the nomination but was overwhelmingly defeated in the election. Smith won the Democratic nomination at the 1928 Houston convention on the first ballot.

SMITH, HENRY IGNATIUS 303

An issue of the campaign questioned whether Smith as a Catholic was qualified for the Presidency. In answer he wrote, "I believe in absolute freedom of conscience for all men and in equality of all churches, all sects, and all beliefs before the law as a matter of right and not as a matter of favor" [*Atlantic Monthly* (May 1927)]. National prosperity, together with the deep-

Alfred Emanuel Smith.

rooted, often vicious anti-Catholic bias of the campaign, proved too great a handicap, and Herbert Hoover obtained a landslide victory. Smith's electoral defeat was overwhelming (444 to 87), but he obtained 6 million votes more than any previous Democratic candidate, and his party carried the great metropolitan centers for the first time.

Replaced in the New York governorship by Franklin D. Roosevelt, his personal candidate, Smith associated himself with various business enterprises, among them that of the Empire State Building. He served also as chairman of the County Trust Company of New York and director of the New York Life Insurance Company. Although he sought the Democratic presidential nomination in 1932, he supported Roosevelt in his successful campaign. Thereafter he expressed growing concern over the expansion of New Deal agencies, and fear that American society was being collectivized. As editor of the *New Outlook* and then as a member of the Liberty League, he denounced Roosevelt and the New Deal. In both the 1936 and 1940 presidential campaigns, he supported Republican candidates; with the coming of World War II, however, he endorsed Roosevelt's foreign policy and pressed for aid to the Western allies. By reason of his leadership as a Catholic layman he was appointed a Knight of Malta and papal chamberlain by Pius XI in 1939.

**Bibliography:** O. HANDLIN, *Al Smith and His America* (Boston 1958). N. HAPGOOD and H. MOSKOWITZ, *Up from the City Streets: Alfred E. Smith* (New York 1927). E. A. MOORE, *A Catholic Runs for President: The Campaign of 1928* (New York 1956). W. G. SCHOFIELD, *Alfred E. Smith: Sidewalk Statesman* (New York 1958). A. E. SMITH, *Up to Now: An Autobiography* (New York 1929). E. S. WARNER and H. DANIEL, *The Happy Warrior* (New York 1956). Illustration credit: Museum of the City of New York.

[J. P. SHENTON]

SMITH, SIR FRANK, Canadian merchant and politician who was one of the founders of the Ontario Catholic League; b. Richhill, County Armagh, Ireland, 1822; d. Toronto, Ontario, Canada, Jan. 17, 1901. As a boy he and his family immigrated to Canada, where they settled on a farm near Toronto. In 1849 he established his own wholesale-retail grocery business in London, Ontario, and was elected mayor of that city (1866). After moving to Toronto (1867), he became

one of that city's leading merchants and capitalists, serving variously as president of the Dominion Bank and of such companies as Niagara Navigation. Northern Railway, and Toronto Street Railway. He was appointed to the Canadian Senate (1871), where he served as minister without portfolio through successive Conservative administrations (1882-96). For a few months during the Abbot administration he acted as minister of public works (1891-92). A stanch Roman Catholic, he was one of the founders of the Ontario Catholic League (1871). He was created a knight bachelor (1894).

**Bibliography:** Encyclopedia Canadiana, 10 v. (Ottawa 1960) v.9. W. S. WALLACE, *The Macmillan Dictionary of Canadian Biography* (3d ed. New York 1963).

[W. E. KLOS]

SMITH, HENRY IGNATIUS, orator and educator; b. Newark, N.J., Aug. 25, 1886; d. Washington, D.C., March 8, 1957. He was the oldest of the eight children of Michael and Loretta (Gaskins) Smith, four of whom became Dominican priests. After study in New Jersey and Ohio, he entered The Catholic University of America, Washington, D.C., where he was ordained June 27, 1910, and received his Ph.D. in 1915. After teaching philosophy and sociology from 1913 to 1916 in the Dominican House of Studies, Washington, D.C., he was appointed national director of the Holy Name Society and of the Third Order of St. Dominic. He served also as editor of the *Holy Name Review* and the *Torch*, which he founded in 1916, and as prior and rector of St Catherine of Siena Church in New York, N.Y. In 1920 he returned to Catholic University as an instructor in philosophy, acting also as prior (1922-28) of the Dominican House of Studies. He was promoted to associate professor in 1926 and professor in 1947, and appointed to succeed Msgr. Edward A. Pace as dean of the School of Philosophy in 1936. Smith developed the School of Philosophy and made it a chief center of Thomism in the U.S. He was also responsible

Henry
Ignatius
Smith.

for the establishment of the Preachers' Institute. Reowned for his abilities as a speaker, he preached countless sermons, conducted many retreats and missions, and gave numerous talks to lay organizations. His training and interests were not those of the specialized

September 19th, 1974

TIMETABLE FOR DR. KISSINGER - SMITH DINNER - OCTOBER
16TH, 1974 - WALDORF ASTORIA HOTEL - NEW YORK CITY

The basic timetable of the Smith Dinner on October
16th, 1974, will be this:

The Cardinal will be waiting for Dr. Kissinger at
6:10 p.m. in the Louis XVI Foyer.

The press and photographers will be pleased if Dr.
Kissinger will appear with Cardinal Cooke in the Jade Room for
photographs at 6:15. If Dr. Kissinger wishes to chat with the press,
arrangements can be made; if he does not, appropriate arrangements
can also be made without offense to the press.

The Cardinal and his distinguished guests assemble to greet the other guests in a formal reception line in the Basildon Room at 6:30. At 7:15 the Cardinal and Dr. Kissinger will return to the Jade Room to chat with the other dais guests and proceed a few minutes later into the dining room where we hope to start the dinner promptly at 7:30 p.m. Hopefully, at precisely 9:00 p.m. the Chairman of the dinner will introduce our guests, Miss Kate Smith will sing two or three pieces; Judge Owen McGivern will be introduced and will speak for approximately ten minutes; Cardinal Cooke will speak briefly and will introduce Dr. Kissinger. The dinner will be ended promptly at the conclusion of Dr. Kissinger's talk and he will be escorted off the dais before any of the guests leave the dining room.

###

ADDRESS BY JUDGE WILLIAM HUGHES MULLIGAN,
GOVERNOR ALFRED E. SMITH MEMORIAL DINNER
OCTOBER 18TH, 1973 - WALDORF ASTORIA HOTEL

IT IS A GREAT HONOR AND PRIVILEGE TO BE INVITED
TO ADDRESS THIS DISTINGUISHED AUDIENCE AT THIS WONDERFUL
DINNER WHICH HAS BECOME SO WELL KNOWN IN NEW YORK. SINCE
THIS YEAR MARKS THE CENTENNIAL OF HIS BIRTH I THOUGHT IT
WOULD BE APPROPRIATE THAT MY SUBJECT TONIGHT BE ALFRED
EMANUEL SMITH.

AL SMITH, AS EVERYONE KNOWS, WAS BORN ON THE LOWER
EAST SIDE WHICH, AT THAT TIME, WAS POPULATED PREDOMINANTLY
BY THE IRISH AND THEIR PROGENY. HIS MATERNAL GRANDPARENTS
WERE THE MULVEHILLS FROM WESTMEATH, IRELAND. WHAT IS NOT
GENERALLY KNOWN IS THAT THE HAPPY WARRIOR--ALWAYS CONSIDERED
TO BE AN IRISH-AMERICAN FOLK HERO, MIGHT WELL HAVE BEEN, IN
PART AT LEAST, AN ITALIAN-AMERICAN. A BIOGRAPHY PUBLISHED
IN 1969 MAKES THE ASTONISHING CLAIM THAT HIS PATERNAL GRAND-
FATHER, EMANUEL SMITH WAS ACTUALLY BORN IN ITALY. IF MARIO
PROCACCINO HAD KNOWN THIS HE MIGHT WELL HAVE BEEN MAYOR OF
NEW YORK TODAY.

IN MY VIEW, THE CASE FOR SMITH'S ITALIAN ORIGINS

-2-

IS SOMEWHAT THIN. IT RESTS IN PART UPON THE CONTENTION
THAT EMANUEL IS AN ITALIAN NAME. IF CONGRESSMAN CELLER
HAD KNOWN THIS PERHAPS CONGRESSPERSON HOLTZMAN MIGHT STILL
BE PRACTICING LAW FULL-TIME IN BROOKLYN. FIRST NAMES ARE
HARDLY PERSUASIVE OF ETHNIC ORIGIN. FOR EXAMPLE, ABRAHAM
LINCOLN WAS BORN IN KENTUCKY AND ABRAHAM BEAME IN LONDON.
EVERY SCHOOLBOY KNOWS THAT HERCULES MULLIGAN, GEORGE
WASHINGTON'S FAVORITE SPY, WAS IRISH AND NOT GREEK. SMITH,
IN ANY EVENT, IS HARDLY A MEDITERRANEAN NAME BUT THE
BIOGRAPHER SEEKS TO AVOID THIS FACT BY CLAIMING THAT THE
IMMIGRATION INSPECTOR COULD NOT SPELL HIS LONG ITALIAN
NAME AND SIMPLY WROTE "SMITH" INSTEAD.

THE 1855 CENSUS OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK DID CONTAIN
THIS LISTING: EMANUEL SMITH - OLIVER STREET; BORN GENOA,
ITALY; OCCUPATION MARINER. HOWEVER, BY A CURIOUS COINCIDENCE,
IT HAS NOW BEEN ESTABLISHED THAT NOT ALL ALLEGED GENOESE
MARINERS ARE NECESSARILY ITALIAN. WE NOW KNOW THAT
CHRISTOPHER COLUMBUS, ALSO THOUGHT TO BE AN ITALIAN MARINER