In the summer of this year (1939) I was asked to collect the material for some maps showing the growth of Parliaments and Parliamentary Régimes in Europe from 1815 to 1914, which were to be included in a new historical and economical atlas.

Originally the idea had been to show on four or five maps the "Constitutional developments" of 19th century Europe and the changing forms of government (from absolutism to parliamentary democracy) rather than the growth of "Parliaments and Parliamentary Régimes." It was, however, agreed very soon that it would be superficial and probably misleading to classify the countries as "limited" or "constitutional monarchies", "parliamentary monarchies", "parliamentary republics" and so on. In fact, the terms limited monarchy, constitutional monarchy, parliamentary republic etc. are vague and have been applied in a widely different sense at different times and by different authors. I felt that by labelling the Prussia of William I and William II a constitutional monarchy or by describing Italy before the war as a parliamentary monarchy we would not really convey any precise and substantial information to those who might consult the maps in the hope of getting a clear idea of the actual political "régimes" of Europe in the period between the Congress of Vienna and the outbreak of the first world war. If something really useful were to be accomplished, and if substantial information were to be supplied by the maps, they would have to be arranged, it was felt, in such a way as to indicate which were at different periods, the actual and essential characteristics of the politico-constitutional régimes of the European nations.

Now the essential feature of the political régimes established during the first stage of modern Europe's constitutional history is the existence of an elective body representing the whole nation (Parliament) without the consent of which no law can be made. It is, in fact, the establishment of such a body which marks the decisive turning point in the evolution from the political systems of the 17th and 18th century to the "democratic" modern State. In a

-2-

later period of this evolutionary process the question of "Parliamentary
Government" proved to be the dominating issue, the question, in other words,
of whether or not the government, though formally appointed and dismissed by
the head of the State, had to withdraw (1) when confronted with a vote of no-
confidence from the legislative body elected by the people.

It was, therefore, decided on my suggestion that the "constitutional"
maps to be included in the new atlas should indicate two things for each of the
European countries (except Switzerland, which having an absolutely unique con-
stitutional history, was to be excluded altogether from the scheme):

1) The exact period - or periods - during which no law could be made
without the consent of an elective body representing, if not in fact
at least in theory, the whole nation.

2) The exact periods during which no government - or industrial member
of a government - could remain in power, when confronted with a vote
of censure by the elective body (Parliament) representing the people.

The task of collecting the material necessary to answer two ques-
tions as precise and as important as these did not seem to present any parti-
cular difficulties at first. Very soon, however, I was to discover that the
undertaking was far from easy. It appeared indeed that the information con-
tained in the standard works on Comparative Constitutional law was neither
sufficiently detailed nor sufficiently reliable, and that moreover, they
tended to ignore the constitutional history of the smaller states. In order
to obtain reliable information with regard to each of the 30 or more European
States it thus proved necessary to consult *special* works dealing exclusively
with the constitutional developments of one single state.

(1) The only alternative to withdrawal being an immediate appeal to the country.
i.e. the convocation of general elections which might create a majority favor-
able to the government defeated by the parliament which had been dissolved!

-3-

Since practically all publications concerned exclusively with the constitutional history of one single country are written in the language of that country, this meant that not only German, French and English books had to be consulted, but even books written in Dutch, Swedish, Danish or other less known languages. As however, I read German, English, French, Italian, Spanish, Swedish, Norwegian, Danish and Dutch <sup>(2)</sup> I was more or less successful in evolving this problem which otherwise might have been a particularly serious one.

But even so it proved to be more difficult to gather the material for the maps than might have been presumed. The main difficulty arose from the fact that those writers who deal with the constitutional developments from a purely historical and political point of view and who have had no legal training show a marked tendency to overlook the legal aspects even the practically important ones, whereas jurists writing on constitutions and constitutional issues are generally concerned to such an extent with the legal interpretation of constitutional texts that frequently they neglect to indicate clearly how

<sup>(2)</sup> The knowledge of these languages enables one in fact to obtain the necessary information not only on England, France, Germany, (including Austria, the single German states, and Liechtenstein), Spain, Belgium, The Netherlands, Italy (and the formerly independent Italian states), Luxemburg, Denmark (and Iceland), Norway, and Sweden but also on Hungary and Finland. The more important works on Hungary's constitutional history in fact, were either originally written in German by Austrians or Hungarians or have since been translated into German from Hungarian, whereas practically all the works dealing with the constitution of pre-war Finland have been published in Swedish by authors belonging to the Swedish group of Finland's population. Russia had no constitution or Parliament before 1906 and the number of publications in German, English, and French dealing with the short and relatively uneventful constitutional period from 1906 to the war is sufficient to give all the dates and facts required. - Constitutional life in Turkey before the war was virtually limited to the periods from 1876-1878 and from 1908-1914, and here, as in the case of Russia, French, English, German and Italian books supply sufficient information. The same is true of the majority of the Balkan countries. Greece, Serbia and Roumania (Moldavia and Walachia), of course, look back on a long and complicated constitutional period, rich in changes and developments, but the constitutional problems of these countries for a long time were so closely connected with the "Oriental question" that they have been studied closely and elaborately by German, French, English and Italian authors. There exists, moreover, a great number of monographs regarding the constitutional problems of Romania, Serbia, and to a lesser extent, of Greece, published in French by scholars from the respective countries. - Only in the case of Portugal, Poland (1815-1830), Bulgaria and Montenegro is it difficult to obtain sufficient information on constitutional issues unless one is able to consult works in these respective languages.

-4-

these texts have been applied to practical politics.

This is particularly true in respect to the question of "Parliamentary Government" (as defined above, see p. 2). As to the appointment and dismissal of ministers nearly all the constitutions of pre-war Europe with some very rare exceptions simply provide that they are appointed and dismissed - or even that they are "freely" appointed and dismissed - by the head of the state, but in many countries in the constitution of which such a clause was to be found, ministers resigned after a vote of no-confidence in Parliament.

In some countries, as for instance in Belgium or (Sardinia-) Italy, the monarch never tried to maintain in power a government which had been confronted with a definitely hostile majority in Parliament, and it can not be doubted that to have done so would have clearly constituted, in both countries, a breach of the constitution. In Belgium and Italy, in other words, the principle of Parliamentary Government is not merely a political principle which king or ministers may, at least in theory, set aside on occasion but it has clearly the character of a strict and definite rule of (constitutional) law.

With regard to many other countries, however, the question of whether a Parliamentary Régime has been definitely adopted or not is much more complex and more difficult to answer, - In France for example during the Restoration period (1814/15-1830) the question of whether the king could maintain in power ministers, who had lost the confidence of Parliament, was widely discussed not only in theory, i.e. by students of international law, but also in practical politics as for instance in the debates of the Chamber. It is well known, of course, that Charles X' attempt to impose upon a hostile Parliament a government formed by his favorite Polignac eventually lead to the Revolution of July (1830), but it needs a careful study of the history of the governments succeeding each other during that period to discover that from 1814 to 1829 actually no Cabinet ever remained in power against the clearly expressed will of a majority of the Chamber. The principle of Parliamentary Government always asserted itself, in fact, when it came to the test, although this principle had not been formally and definitely recognized as forming part of the constitutional law in the strictly legal sense and in spite of the fact that it had been frequently declared, not only by the royalists but even - when it suited them - by the liberals, to be inconsistent with the royal prerogatives as established by the constitution (Charte) of 1814. A somewhat similar situation prevails in modern Sweden. Writers commenting shortly before and after the war on the Swedish Constitution generally admit that "the country is marching towards a Parliamentary Régime," but at the same time they maintain that in Sweden the king is "not yet bound" to yield to Parliament and to dismiss his ministers if a resolution of no-confidence has been adopted. This, however, already in 1914 was mere theory. A close survey of the actual situation, as it stood when war broke out, shows not only that since 1905 - a year that must be regarded as a turning point in modern Swedish history - the king has never tried to maintain in power a government against the will of the majority of the Lower Chamber, but it appears also that since then the establishment of the Parliamentary Régime has been looked upon as definite, and permanent by all political groups. - - - Even slightly more confusing as to what the "real" situation had been at that time are the publications which might be consulted on the question of Parliamentary Government under the Second French Republic. It is commonly stated that in the Constitution of 1848 the position of the ministry towards the president on one hand and towards Parliament on the other, had not been clearly defined but that Napoleon had more or less settled the question by claiming the right (message of October 31, 1848) to appoint and dismiss ministers as he saw fit. But neither statement withstands close examination. In the final report submitted to the Constituent Assembly by the committee charged

-5-

with the elaboration of the constitution of 1848, it was indeed clearly expressed that under that constitution, ministers were to resign in case of a vote of censure, and Napoleon, as a matter of fact, and in spite of his famous message of October 1848, did not before 1851 maintain in power any government which was not at least tolerated by a majority of the Chamber. As late as January 1851 he dismissed in fact a government in respect to which the Chamber had adopted a resolution of censure. — Sometimes, in research, difficulties arise simply from the fact that the same term — the term "Parliamentary Government" for instance — is used in a different sense by different writers. The establishment of a Parliamentary Régime, in Holland, for example, is sometimes stated to date as far back as 1848, whereas others mention the year 1868 as the beginning of the Parliamentary period in that country. The apparent contradiction implied in these two statements can be explained easily however, if one studies the history of Holland more closely. It then appears that after 1848 ministers unfailingly resigned when actually with a vote of no-confidence, but that on the other hand up till 1868 the king made several attempts to carry out a more or less personal policy appointing ministers, on various occasions, who were not actually taken from the majority and who for this very reason were not regarding as forming a "Parliamentary Government" in the strictest and narrowest sense of the word, even if they were tolerated by the majority in order "to give the men of his majesty's choice a fair trial." — Similar differences with regard to the use of the term "Parliamentary Régime" are responsible, by the way, for the difficulties in stating the exact time when this form of government was definitely adopted in England. It was certainly in 1784 that for the last time an English government insisted on remaining in power against the clear will of a majority in the House of Commons as expressed in a vote of censure, but, as in Holland, it took some decades before any attempt of the sovereign to reinstall a more personal government was definitely abandoned.

The discovery however, that frequently the essential principle of Parliamentary Government (i.e. withdrawal of ministers having lost the confidence of Parliament) has been definitely adopted and fully recognized for all practical purposes in cases where the mere consultation of works dealing with the subject conveys a somewhat different idea of the situation, is certainly not the only result of a closer study of the history of European Parliamentarism. Sometimes, in fact, just the contrary happens: the overwhelming majority of learned writers — jurists or historians — agree that a particular country during a particular period, enjoyed "Parliamentary Government", whereas it then appears from a more thorough survey that such a statement, though perfectly correct from a formal point of view, is in fact misleading.

It is formally correct for instance, to say that in Rumania from the beginning of the Hohenzollern rule till after the great war, the principle of Parliamentary Government was regarded as a basic principle of Rumanian public life and that no Cabinet could have remained in power against the will of the majority of the Chamber. In reality, however, the working of the Rumanian political machine was such that with some rare exceptions all attempts to have a resolution of no-confidence adopted by Parliament, were bound to fail. We are even startled to discover that Rumanian Governments frequently left power shortly after having won overwhelming Parliamentary victories over the opposition. The explanation is to be found in the fact that in Rumania it is actually the Government itself that controls or rather "makes" the elections so that it can always count on a strong majority in the Chamber. Changes of government therefore for more than half a century have been brought about in that country much less by Parliamentary means — this way being practically barred — than by extra-Parliamentary pressure (press campaign, organization of demonstrations all over the country, formation of "Committees of Action," etc.). Such

-6-

a pressure campaign having reached a certain degree of intensity, the king would in fact dismiss the government in power and appoint a new one from among the ranks of the opposition. Then the Chamber elected under the retiring government was immediately dissolved and general elections held, which did not fail to result in a victory for the new government under whose "control" the elections had taken place. - What has been said of Rumania is also true of Spain, at least for the period beginning with the reign of Alfonso XII (1876) and ending with the establishment of the dictatorship of Primo de Rivera (1926). The only difference being that the artificial creation of government majorities, by means of "controlled" elections and the inevitable effects of this system (Sistema de la Mayoria) on Parliamentary life are openly discussed as far as Spain is concerned - the Sistema de la Mayoria is even mentioned in the leading Spanish encyclopedia - whereas works dealing with the constitutional history of Rumania frequently contain no hint as to the sharp contrast existing between Rumanian constitutional theory and political practise.

In some cases, finally the question of whether in a particular country and during a particular period of its constitutional history ministers were held to be bound to withdraw in front of a definitely hostile Parliament, can be answered only if one takes the trouble to examine closely the circumstances which led to the formation and withdrawal of every one of the various governments succeeding each other during that period. This procedure had to be followed for instance with regard to Austria for the time from 1867 to the outbreak of the great war and with regard to Spain, for the years from 1821 to 1823 and from 1834 to 1876. Writers dealing with the general as well as the constitutional history of Austria or Spain or commenting from a strictly juridical point of view on the Spanish constitutions between 1821-1823 and 1834-1876 or on the Austrian constitution of 1867 respectively are indeed either altogether silent or else very non-commital on the issue of Parliamentary Government, which seems to have been a particularly delicate one in the Austria of Franz Joseph. In order to obtain the material on which to base a general and more or less final answer to our question, it proved in fact necessary, as far as Spain was concerned to go through a detailed "Historia de los ministros en España desde 1800 á 1869" and a not less detailed "Historia parliamentaria de España desde los tempos primitivos hasta nostros días" comprising three large volumes each. (3) A similar effort was needed to obtain the material for Austria.

Thus while the problem of collecting the necessary material regarding the question of "Parliamentary Government" was particularly arduous, it must not be assumed, on the other hand, that the second question (4) we had undertaken to answer did not present some difficulties also. It will be remembered (4) that this second question concerns the ascertaining of the exact periods during which no law could be made in the various European countries without the consent of an elective body representing, at least in theory, the whole nation.

Now it is precisely the problem of whether or not the legislative bodies of the earlier 19th Century and especially the so-called "Assemblies of Estates" represent the whole nation which requires a careful study. The Swedish Parliament, for instance, up to 1866 was a Parliament of four separate Estates

(3) It should perhaps be mentioned that the notes which had to be taken to answer this single question (Parliamentary Government in Spain 1821/1829 and 1834/1876) cover both sides of forty cards in small handwriting.

(4) See p. 3

-7-

(Clergy, Nobility, Burghers, Peasants) the consent of at least three of which was necessary to enact a law. The whole structure of this "Parliament of Estates" however, was such that, in point of fact it represented the (whole) Swedish nation at least as completely and faithfully as the English Parliament before the Reform Bill (1832) represented the English nation. And, what is more important, it had been expressly stated in Article I of the "Riksdagsordningen" of 1810 that the members of the Assembly of Estates were the representatives of the Swedish nation and that as such they could not be bound by any instructions or orders from their respective Estates. — This is true also, and perhaps even more so, with regard to most of those Legislative Bodies of the individual German States which officially, and for historical rather than for any other reasons, were called "Assemblies of the Estates," although they were very similar in their whole structure to the Western European "modern" Parliaments of their time and had lost the essential features of true Parliaments of Estates. —

The Hungarian Parliament before 1848, on the other hand, could not be said to have represented the whole nation. Its members, all noblemen, were elected exclusively by the nobility of the various districts ("Komitat") and legally bound moreover, to comply strictly with the orders and instructions given them by their electorate. — Neither can the Moldavian nor Walachian Legislative Assemblies during the period from 1832 to 1849 be described as representing the nation, only the Bojars (nobility) being eligible and enjoying the right to vote. — Finland finally offers an example illustrative of the complications which might arise as to the question of when exactly in a particular country the consent of a representative body became the *conditio sine qua non* for the promulgation of laws: Under the constitution of 1809 no law could be made without the consent of the Finnish Parliament (of Estates) which however, for more than half a century from the year of the country's annexation to Russia (1809 to 1863) was never actually convoked by the Czar-Grandduke. Faced with the dilemma of either openly violating the constitution by promulgating laws without asking the consent of Parliament or of convoking the Finnish Diet, which they wanted to avoid, the Czars-Grandduke preferred to have no laws promulgated at all. And only on a few occasions during the whole period from 1809 to 1863 was the Finnish Constitution clearly violated by the publication and enforcement of "Laws", whose sole and illegal source was the autocratic will of the ruling Czar. It is true that the whole situation can only be explained if one knows that it was actually possible to govern the country by "Decrees" since constitutionally the Czar-Grandduke had an extraordinarily large decree-making power which was used to its utmost limits, all ideas of more fundamental reforms requiring the enactment of laws having been abandoned at the same time. It is equally true however, that from a more formal point of view it *can* be maintained that no "Law" could be made in Finland without the consent of the Finnish Diet.

One of the typical difficulties in ascertaining whether in a particular country and during a particular period the consent of a representative body was the necessary prerequisite for the making of a law, arises from the fact that frequently in a time of revolution and transition, the Government or the Head of the State issue decree-laws not consented to by any Legislative Assembly but which, they declare, shall be submitted "later" for approval to an ordinary Parliament or a Constituent Assembly. Now, whether this approval has subsequently been given is very very often hard to discover.

Among the other questions which sometimes it requires considerable research to answer the following may be mentioned:

-8-

1) The question of whether in the making of laws the functions of a Parliament are deliberative or consultative only. This problem, of course, arises only with regard to that early and more or less experimental stage in the history of Parliaments when the powers and competence of these bodies were not yet clearly defined.

2) The question of whether the consent of Parliament was a necessary prerequisite for the promulgation of all laws or only of a definite category of Laws. The wording of the Bavarian Constitution of 1818 for instance is such that the consent of Parliament seems to be required for some categories of Laws only, whereas it appears that practically this consent was sought by King and Government for all sorts of Laws.

3) The question of whether the so-called Constituent Assemblies charged with the elaboration of new, fundamental Laws (Constitutions) functioned at the same time as legislative bodies or whether in the period before the actual coming into force of the new Constitutions, the Law making power was still exclusively in the monarch, or sometimes, in the Government.

When in the middle of September of this year, after more than three months of research the material for the maps (5) had been finally collected. I had come to the conclusion that the publication of a juridico-political handbook of about 150 pages - supplying exact dates and facts concerning not only the two topics I dealt with (see p.  ) when collecting the material for the maps but concerning also five or six other clearly defined essential issues of the juridico-political history of European Parliaments from 1815 to 1914 - would fill a real gap in the list of extant works on the subject.

These issues should be selected in such a way that their examination would reveal:

1) The general structure and character of the individual Parliaments (i.e. whether they are Parliaments of Estates, Parliaments in the modern sense or a mixture of both, and whether they are two-chamber or one-chamber parliaments.)

2) Their composition (i.e. whether they are composed of hereditary, appointed or elected

(5) It is to be noted that the maps, which might not be published for a year or so, will not be accompanied by any text but only by half a page of explanatory notes. So there is no danger of repetition of the subject matter treated in the maps, which have no accompanying text, and in the handbook.

-9-

members, and whether the elected members were elected under a system of general franchise, "Census" franchise or under some other system).

3) Their legislative Functions

(i.e. whether they have deliberative or consultative powers only, whether they enjoy the right of initiative, whether their law making power is unrestricted or can be limited by the exercise of an absolute or suspensive veto on the part of the head of the state and finally whether their participation is required for the making of all laws or of certain categories of laws only).

4) Their position with regard to the Ministry

(Question of Parliamentary Government as defined above p. 2 and of responsibility of ministers towards Parliament).

It can hardly be doubted that a handbook of this kind would be really useful and therefore sincerely welcomed by all students of Constitutional developments whether university professors, graduates, undergraduates, diplomats, civil servants, journalists or politicians, provided, of course, that it would really supply reliable and factual information not to be obtained or not to be obtained easily from other sources. The reasons why students of constitutional history would find it rather difficult to obtain such information, especially with regard to the smaller countries, from existing works, have been pointed out above and they appear clearly from the numerous practical examples given on p. 4/10.

The practical examples at the same time show better and more clearly than any theoretical explanations would do what I understand by "factual information", and how in my opinion the subject matter should be approached and treated. The handbook as I see it is not to be a political history of European Parliaments from 1815 to 1914 and should not contain any political judgments either on the various forms of government or on constitutional details. of Its object, indeed, would be to give a substantial and wholly detached account/

-10-

the *legal* and *de facto* situation, as it really stood, in the different European countries during the various phases of their constitutional history - with regard to the four groups of issues enumerated on the foregoing page. Its object, in other words, would not be to express political opinions but to supply the legal and historical dates and facts which could serve as a solid and reliable basis on which the reader might build his own conclusions.

It would be one of the distinctive features of the handbook that the subject matter would be treated not only from the point of view of a jurist interested exclusively in the formal and strictly juridical aspects of problems, but also from the point of view of a historian accustomed to probe the actual workings of the constitutional machinery and eager to know, whether there was any reasonable contrast between constitutional theory and political practise. The legal examination of the issues involved must, however, in my opinion, constitute the *basic* task and the firmly established starting point, and the *de facto* situation should only be considered if and when the purely juridical discussion of a problem would leave the reader with an incomplete or even misleading picture. This method of procedure would not only greatly facilitate the arrangement and treatment of the whole material along very clear and definite lines, but it would also be a guarantee against the danger of carrying the discussion too far into the boundless field of politics.

The handbook would contain as many chapters as there were European States during the period from 1815 to 1914, each chapter dealing with one country. It seems advisable, however, not to include Switzerland since the constitutional problems of the Swiss Confederation (till 1848) and of the Swiss Federal State (from 1848) as well as those of the more than twenty "cantons" are absolutely unique in Europe and moreover particularly complicated, their examination would require more space and time than would be reasonable under the circumstances, to devote to the problems of one single country.

The following States should be excluded from the scheme in view of their

-11-

relatively limited historical and political importance: Liechtenstein, Monaco, Andorra, Republic of Cracow, Ionian Islands, some of the smaller Italian states (for instance, Lucca, San Marino) and finally the smaller German States (for instance the three "free" cities: Hamburg, Lubeck, Bremen, and the Principalities Waldeck, Lippe, Lippe-Schaumburg, etc.)

The chapters would be subdivided into paragraphs according to con-
stitutional periods. The chapter "France", for instance, would consist of the
following paragraphs: Restoration period (1814/15 - 1830); Time of Louis Phil-
ippe (1830 - 1848); Second Republic (1848 - 1852); Second Empire (1852 - 1870);
Third Republic (from 1870).

The reasons which induce me to seek a fellowship - or at least the
backing of a University or individual authorities in the field of Political
Science - which would enable me to write and eventually publish the Handbook,
may be summarized as follows:

1. The Handbook would fill a gap in the list of existing works on Constitutional Law and represent, undoubtedly, something new in its field for these reasons:

a. It would deal with the juridico-historical development of the Parliaments of <u>all</u> and not only of <u>one</u> or <u>some</u> European countries,

and this not simply through the device of uniting in one volume numerous monographs (each concerning one single state) written by <u>different</u> authors, but in a way which would insure the exposition and examination of the developments in <u>all</u> the individual countries along <u>identical</u> lines of approach and following <u>identical</u> methods.

b. It would give exact dates and facts which the student of Parliamentary history would frequently find difficult to

-12-

obtain elsewhere, especially with regard to smaller countries.

c. The legal and de facto situation - prevailing in the different countries with respect to the constitutional issues involved - would be discussed therein at the same time (combined juridico-historical method).

2. If the Handbook is really to present the features outlined above which would make it something new and really useful in the field of Political Science, it must be written by one who

a. knows seven or eight European languages

b. has complete legal training

c. has sufficient historical training

In view of the fact that I have a speaking knowledge of four and a reading knowledge of five more European languages, that I am Dr. of Law and Dr. of Political Sciences, and that I have already done important research work in the juridico-political field (see list of publications), it seems that I might fill these qualifications.

3. Having worked for the last four months on questions closely related to those which would be discussed in the Handbook, I have not only collected material, which would prove valuable, but also developed an intense interest in the subject. The idea of the Handbook has come to my mind gradually, but now I feel that I could and should write it.

4. For practical reasons it would be virtually impossible to carry the plan into effect without the aid of a Fellowship or at least the backing of a University or individual authorities in the field of Political Science.

-13-

Having done considerable research regarding constitutional problems in New York, I believe that the New York libraries, especially that of Columbia, are sufficiently equipped to permit the collection of the necessary material for the planned Handbook, in N. Y. C. In the course of time, it might prove necessary, however, to consult the Harvard libraries as well.

In view of my experience concerning the difficulties (see Page 6 footnote) involved in answering some of the questions to be dealt with, I expect the book to be completed in ten or twelve months.

The End.

put pressure on the Government or to change that Government to one that would bring about peace."

## Says Bill Is Act of War

Mr. Foster, in a prepared statement read for him by Mr. Gates, declared that the Mundt-Nixon Bill was "a Fascist act of war preparation, just as Hitler's Nuremberg decrees and the Japanese ban on 'dangerous thoughts' were acts of preparation for World War II."

"The millions whose hopes rise with every new peace initiative of the Soviet Union," he asserted, "recognize that the Mundt-Nixon Bill would bar them from crying

OBJECTIVES OF THE PEOPLE AND GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Being comprised of the representatives of the people of the several
states, being the body in which the Constitution of the United States
of America has vested all legislative powers granted by that Constitution,
and being mindful of the current need in the conduct of the national
and international affairs of these United States for maximum clarity
and understanding among all the people of the world of the objectives
of the people of the United States and of the Government of the United
States, the Congress of the United States hereby states and gives re-
affirmation to these objectives. The objective of the Government of
the United States is to attain for the people of these United States
those things and conditions which they desire and which they cannot
attain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of this Govern-
ment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the
laws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,
and treaties made and to be made under the authority of the United
States. The objectives of the people of the United States are to pro-
mote and maintain conditions within and without the United States which
will be most favorable to the continued enjoyment by the people of the
United States of equality before the law and equal protection of the
laws and of justice for all of them without distinction as to color,
race, sex, language, or conscience; of domestic tranquility; of an
ever augmented general welfare; and of maximum individual freedom for
each and every person of the United States consistent with promotion
and maintenance of the general welfare and with the protection of funda-
mental rights of all the people including but not necessarily limited
to the following rights:

1. Right of freedom of speech and of the press and of conscience.

["I. Right of freedom of speech and of the press and of conscience.", "to the following rights:\n\nmental rights of all the people including but not necessarily limited\nand maintenance of the General welfare and with the protection of the\ngovernment and every person of the United States consistent with promotion\neven augmented General welfare; and of maximum individual freedom to\nfree, sex, language, or conscience; of domestic tranquillity; of an\nlaw and of justice for all of them without distinction as to color,\nUnited States of equality before the law and equal protection of the\nright to be most favorable to the continued employment by the people of the\nstate and maintain conditions within and without the United States which\nare in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the Govem-\nment or choose not to choose except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nand free and peace made and to be made under the authority of the United\nlaws of the United States made and to be made in pursuance thereof,\nment in accordance with the Constitution of these United States, the\nattain or choose not to attain except by the functioning of the three\ndepartment of the

- 2 -

2. Right of freedom to organize for any purpose except to change by violence the Constitution and the laws made under it and of freedom to assemble peaceably and to ask redress of grievances and make proposals.

3. Right of freedom of all persons, dwellings, communications, papers, and effects from unreasonable searches and seizures, and freedom from warrants unless issued upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized.

4. Right of freedom from ex post facto laws and from bills of attainder.

5. Right of freedom from suspension of the writ of habeas corpus except when public safety may temporarily require it in case of rebellion or invasion.

6. Right of freedom from being held to answer for a capital or infamous crime except on indictment of a grand jury--save in the armed forces in time of war or public danger--; from being twice put in jeopardy of life or limb or liberty for the same offence; and from being deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; and from having property taken for public use without just compensation.

7. The right when accused of any crime to have a speedy public trial by an impartial jury of the district wherein the crime shall have been committed, as previously ascertained by law, and to be informed in good time of the nature and cause of the accusation, to be confronted with the witnesses against one, to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in one's favor, to be under no compulsion to be a witness against oneself, and to have the assistance of counsel for one's defense.

8. Right of freedom from excessive bail or excessive fines or cruel and unusual punishments.

9. Right of freedom from slavery and from involuntary servitude and forced labor except in legal punishment from crime.

In order to promote and maintain these conditions, a further objective of the people of the United States is to provide for their common defense. The people of the United States seek to attain these objectives not only through their own efforts and through the functioning of the Government of the United States but through cooperation and collaboration with people elsewhere outside the United States. The people of the United States believe that these objectives

["States. The people of the United States believe that these objectives\noperation and collaboration with people elsewhere outside the United\nunions of the Government of the United States put through cood-\nthese objectives not only through their own efforts and through the\ncommon defense. The people of the United States seek to attain\nobjective of the people of the United States to provide for their\nin order to promote and maintain these conditions, a further\nand forced labor except in legal punishment from crime.", "8. Right of freedom from slavery and from forced labor, servitude\nand numerical bantlings.", "9. Right of freedom from excessive pain or excessive lines orpain\nfor one's defense.", "for one's witness against one, and to have the assistance of counsel\nfor obtaining witness in one's favor, to be under no compulsion\ntroubling with the witnesses against one, to have sufficient process\nin good time of the nature and cause of the accusation, to be con-\nsumed committed, as previously ascertained by law, and to be income\nby an essential part of the district wherein the crime shall have\nbeen committed, and to have a speech, a speech, a speech, a speech\nand a speech, and to have a speech, a speech, a speech, a

- 3 -

are common to those of free men everywhere. When progress toward objectives common to the people of the United States and the people of another country or area can be served effectively thereby, the people of the United States stand ready (a) to accept as an additional state or states the other country and its people, (b) to form a federal union of which the United States and the other country or area will comprise component states, and (c) to participate in international organizations and arrangements. It is the sense of the foregoing that any federal union of which the United States would become a component part would function to provide advantages not attainable through the functioning of the United States Government and would have no attributes or powers not required to perform such functions.

States Government and would have no attributes or powers not
advantages not attainable through the functioning of the United
States would become a component part would transaction to provide
cause of the foregoing that and federal union of which the United
 States in international organizations and arrangements. It is the
country or area will comprise component states, and (c) to carry-
tom a federal union of which the United States and the other
additional state or states the other country and its people, (d) to
people of the United States and ready (a) to accept as an
of another country or area can be served effectively therefrom, the
objectives common to the people of the United States and the people
of the common to those of the free men everywhere. When brook these terms

Letter of 6 June 1943

from: Prof. Philip C. Jessup
(at present: State Dept., Wash., D.C.

to: Pvt. Fritz G.A. Kraemer
Camp Lee, Va.

Note: I first met Prof. Jessup in the early summer of 1939, a few weeks after I had come to the US. He, better than others, must have known my feelings and views at that time because I tried, successfully, to obtain his help for Prof. Karl Strupp a Jewish Prof. of International Law, whose assistant I had been in Germany from 1931 to 1933, when Prof. Strupp was dismissed by the Nazi regime. I am convinced that even to-day Prof. Jessup would remember my case, should he be questioned by investigators.

Prof. Strupp's widow, Mrs. Thilde Strupp, now lives at
729 Columbus Ave, New York City. Her own attitude regarding
Germany is determined by her bitter experiences. She has
known me since 1928, when I was 20 years old. I saw her
not infrequently in the years preceding my induction in 1943.

Original. return to kraemer

Columbia University
in the City of New York

TRAINING IN INTERNATIONAL ADMINISTRATION

431 WEST 117TH STREET

June 6, 1943

Pvt. Fritz Kraemer
Co. D., 1303rd Service Unit
Camp Lee, Virginia

Dear Dr. Kraemer:

I was very glad to hear from you and learn that you are well-established in your new and very different type of life. I know it is a satisfaction to you to be in the Army, just as it will eventually be a satisfaction to you to get back into scholarly life and more normal circumstances.

You are very generous in your references to me but I have appreciated from the first your extraordinary lack of egoism and your unselfishness. I shall always remember how constantly you sought to help Professor Strupp without any reference to your own immediate situation at that time.

I saw Mrs. Strupp and Werner just before he left for the Army. As you probably know, she has taken a job in a summer hotel in the Adirondacks. I hate to think of her being wasted in that way but the efforts which Mrs. Jessup particularly made to find something more satisfactory here have not yet been successful.

With very best wishes to you, I am

Hq 84 th Inf Div
G-2 Section

28 Febr. 1944

Dear Dr. Marty:

As a friend of Pvt Kraemer, presently of the G-2 Section, headquarters; it is presumed that you are interested in his life as a soldier in the Army of the United States and the reaction of his immediate superior officer to his peculiar accomplishments. The above and the orders of the Commanding General of this division, prompt this report.

It has been my privilege to directly supervise Pvt Kraemer's work, which because of War Department regulations, cannot be described here. I will omit mention of his extraordinary abilities which must be well known to you, but his deep earnestness and untiring devotion to the work he has been called upon to do, have won for him the respect and admiration of the officers and men here. His bareness of rank is in keeping with his penetrating simplicity. It is a condition upon which depends, to a great extent, the success of his mission. He is a most unexpected sort of a "private".

I trust that the above report has been pleasing to you and that your amazement at being chosen as "next of kin" to Pvt Kraemer has by now been replaced by a state of satisfaction that none of the above is a revelation to you.

Very sincerely yours

(sig.) Austin A. O'Malley

2 nd Lt.

["Sgd. Lt.", "(sg.) Anton V. O'Malley", "Very sincerely yours", "the above is a revelation to you.\nhas dy now been replaced by a state of attraction that none of\nthat your amendment at being chosen as \"next of kin\" to Pat Kraemer\nI treat that the above report has been pleasing to you and\nof a \"private\".", "tend, the occurrence of this misfortune. He is a most unexpected sort\nof simplicity. It is a condition now which undergoes, to a great ex-\nample. - His presence of rank is in keeping with his benevolence\nnow for him the respect and admiration of the officers and men\nfiring deviation to the work he has been called upon to do, have\nwhich must be well known to you, but his deep affections and nu-\ncurated here. I will express my own appreciation of his extraordinary\nwork, which because of War Department regulations, cannot be de-\ncribed here. I will express my own appreciation of his extraordinary\nability to direct and supervise Pat Kraemer's\nof this misfortune, brought this report.", "of this misfortune, brought this report.\n\nof this misfortune

[1]

7 March 1949

Dear Henry:

The attached paper will I hope prove helpful to you. You must
forgive me that I have remained silent for such a long time, but
as you may remember I don't write any letters or semi-official
memos easily and there is really a rather intense pressure at
present. Sgt Vinson typed the paper in the office from a manu-
script I had prepared on Sunday. Thus you will understand that
only these few lines accompany it, because there is always so
very little time during office hours.

Our best wishes go to both of you and may you get the scholarship
you so richly deserve. In great hurry but unchanged cordiality,

My dear Henry:

It was all my fault - in the rush making the 2:00 o'clock
mail collection.

Hope this reaches you in time - and with all wishes
for the best of luck.