(84)

not responsible for what was happening. She did not blame them greatly because they were being treated without any consideration whatever. Tumulty, she thought, was doing the best he could. The business of the Government, however, was with the hands of Mrs. Wilson, Baruch and Grayson.

When she deplored that there was no one to go to for advice or direction, Grayson said Baruch was the man to consult as his influence was paramount. She was indiscreet enough to give vent to her feeling on this subject. She asked Grayson the direct question why the President had broken with me. Grayson evaded this by saying the President did not know I had returned from Europe. That they had not told him because they thought it would irritate him since he did not wish me to return when I did. She told Grayson if the President broke with me she would believe everything his enemies said of him; that no matter what I had done to offend him he could not afford to break with me because of my services in the past, services, she declared, which to her own knowledge, had saved the President time and again. She was indiscreet enough to use the expression "he made Wilson". This will doubtless go directly to Mrs. Wilson and ultimately to the President. He will be told that my friends are taking this attitude.

(85)

Mrs. Harriman said I made a mistake in taking so many friends and relatives to Europe. I believe I have already admitted this error in judgment. It is a mistake I always make and probably always will for I do it knowingly, always hoping I may please my friends and that they may not do the harm I fear.

**current**

She also said it was said in Paris that I had set up a rival establishment to that of the President. This was constantly taken to him with the indiscreet remarks of my friends praising me to the President's disadvantage. I thought while she was speaking of the indiscreet remark she herself had made to Grayson the other day which I knew would be taken directly to the President. However, I love my friends and even their indiscretions though they sometimes work to my disadvantage.

It is to be remembered that I was in Europe months before the President's arrival, representing the United States in the Armistice proceedings and I was building up a very efficient organization to turn over to the President when he came over. He asked me to organize our end of the Peace Conference and I was undertaking to do this until Lansing, acting on his own initiative, placed it in the hands of Grew, Harrison and Patchin. When the President arrived in Paris, I offered to turn my entire secretariat and organization over to him which would have relieved him of doing any work excepting the making of decisions. The work he did himself might have been better done by others, but he could not be brought to see this.

While in some ways the President is the most efficient worker I have ever known, he lacks the power to delegate work to others. It is this defect that is largely responsible for the condition of his health and the present chaotic situation. What he tried to do in Paris was beyond the power of any man. He had two stenographers only, Close and Swem, while I had all the help

(86)

we could use. It was a constant grief to me to see him working in his lonely
efficient way when there was so much depending upon the conserving of his
strength and keeping his mind clear for sound judgment.

It may be that he shared the feeling that my organization was too
large and too influential, but that could not be helped. At his insistence,
I formed the group of experts to go to Paris. I was also head of the Economic
Council and a member, with him, of the League of Nations Committee, and they
had gave me a powerful position. However, all that water has run under the
mill and today we are facing facts. I wish to add that while I am content and
happy to be away from the confusion in Washington, I am doing so through no fault
of my own. I would be ashamed to shirk responsibility and my share of whatever
criticism being made of the Administration. I am willing to give my time, and
even my life if needs be, to help the President, the country and the world at
this critical time. But since I am barred, I am more than content to await
events. Meanwhile I am growing stronger in health each day. I suppose I
should be unhappy over it all, but I have a philosophical turn of mind and I
never worry where it cannot help, consequently life is running smoothly and
pleasantly with me.

December 21, 1919.

I have had a busy day with callers. Kohlsaat, Frank Polk and David Miller
were the principal ones. It was the first time Kohlsaat has been East since
my return from Europe. He told the story of his efforts to bring the republicans
and the President together. He feels, as everyone who knows does, that if the
President had not been so unyielding at the beginning, the Treaty might have
been ratified long ago. He said opinion was crystalizing against the President
because of his stubbornness. He thought the general sentiment was that the trou-

(87)

ble was not so much with the Senate as with him. We agreed that it was worth while for him to go to Washington and try to see Mrs. Wilson to offer his further services. He is to see me again in order to have a complete understanding as to procedure.

Frank Polk tells me that Baruch and others close to the President advised him in July, upon the President's return from Europe and before Polk went over, that the Treaty could be ratified without amendments or reservations provided he stood firm. Polk said he had a long argument with Baruch about the matter, taking the contrary view. In reply Baruch said that he, Polk, was too impregnated with the Washington viewpoint and did not see things as they really were.

Polk is much distressed over the thought of Lord Grey returning home at this time. The feeling between Great Britain and the United States is not good and Grey's leaving without having seen the President or having accomplished the business for which he came, make the situation worse. He knows Grey is going largely because of the Crauford Stuart-Baruch-Grayson embroglio. I gave Polk Grey's viewpoint, which is that he could not allow a member of his staff to be disgraced without a hearing. Grey does not condone anything Stuart may have done, only he feels he has a right to protection until the charges are substantiated.

Miller came back from Washington bitter because of conditions there. I try to keep my friends quiet but it is an ever increasing difficulty to do so. Gregory is due tonight. He has just arrived from Washington and says he has something to report.

December 22, 1919.

Gregory came to dinner last night and remained until nearly eleven o'clock. We reviewed the Washington situation in detail. He tells the same story of chaotic conditions and deprecates the fact that Marshall was not made acting

(88)

President when Wilson first fell ill. He believes, like every sensible friend of the President, that he has been crucified by trying to perform the functions of his office when totally unfit to do so. Gregory thinks no country except the United States could have survived such a condition without anarchy and revolution. I asked if he thought I was doing right in remaining quiescent. He did not think I could do otherwise.

Sir William Tyrrell came this afternoon and remained for nearly two hours. We reviewed the situation in Washington. He believes the Crauford Stuart incident has been dropped. Grey, he said, is going home fairly satisfied with his venture over here. This is because of the improvement in his eyesight and the assurance that it will not grow worse, and because the trip has revived his interest in people and life. I told him how gratified I was to hear this since I felt responsible for his visit. He said too that Grey would return as Ambassador, he thought, if the President recovered and resumed his relations with me, otherwise he would not come since it would be useless.

Tyrrell said there was much indignation in Washington on account of the situation at the White House. Vice President Marshall told him Thursday that he had been trying to see the President for two months without success and during that time "people had access to him who should be properly in jail." This is a strong statement and I wondered if Tyrrell repeated it accurately. Marshall expressed himself as being thoroughly tired of the delay in ratifying the Treaty and spoke with emphasis when he declared it would certainly be ratified within the next thirty days; that if there was an attempt to hinder it he, Marshall, would break his silence and make a public statement.

December 23, 1919.

We went to dinner and the opera last night with Mrs. George Vanderbilt.

Today Norman Hapgood returned from Copenhagen and came to see me. We conferred

(89)

for an hour or more. He is to reply to the vicious attack George Harvey made upon him.

December 27, 1919.

We spent a delightful Christmas. The weather was good, we were all well and it has been a long while since conditions were so conducive to contentment and happiness.

Lansing came in unexpectedly this morning and remained for an hour or more. He unburdened himself as to conditions in Washington. He knows no more about the President's condition or state of mind than I do-- hardly as much because his sources of information do not seem to be as close. He declared his intention of running the State Department as he thought best and of making decisions without reference to the President because of the uselessness of such a procedure. He said the matters he referred to him came back from Mrs. Wilson with notations in her own handwriting. He believes the President is much sicker than the public is led to believe. He does not think the President is writing any of the papers purporting to come from him. Lansing himself wrote the Thanksgiving Proclamation, and it came back unchanged with the President's signature, on the top instead of at the end, I believe he said. The signature was almost illegible.

Lansing made several attempts to get the President to act upon some of the foreign appointments. Word finally came back from Mrs. Wilson that the President would not consider these appointments until he was entirely well. He confirmed the Vice President's dissatisfaction over the trend of affairs. We discussed the Mexican situation. He says in the Jenkins matter he did more than send a peremptory note demanding Jenkins' release. He told the Mexican Ambassador if he was not released, we would send troops at once into Mexico.

(90)

Herman Kohlsaat, Dr. Bliss, of Beirut, Frederick Wile and others filled a busy
day. I have a letter from Sir William Wiseman containing an editorial from the
London Times about the World's story of a break between Wilson and myself. The
letter is attached.

December 28, 1919.

My most interesting visitors today were Herman Kohlsaat and Charles R.
Miller, of the New York Times. Miller and I persuaded Kohlsaat not to go to
Washington about the Treaty but to let matters go as they would.

December 29, 1919.

Richard Washburn Child and John King took lunch with us. King was the
man said to be closest to Roosevelt and he is now the manager of General Wood's
campaign for the nomination. I invited them to lunch at Child's suggestion. He
believed it would be helpful for us to know one another. I see almost as many
republicans as democrats these days and they are equally confidential in talking
with me. They tell their plans and ask advice and I give it as freely as to my
own party.

Marcel Knecht called to explain some matters relating to the Irish situa-
tion and the Catholic Church in America. He is an ardent churchman. He sug-
gested giving the D. S. M. to Madame Clemenceau-Maquemaire and my letter to
Secretary Baker indicates my action.

Sir Horace Plunkett followed Knecht. He has just landed. We talked of
Ireland and of European affairs as they touch this country. There is no one I
like better than Sir Horace and it was a joy to be with him again.

December 30, 1919.

Sir Horace Plunkett came again today to continue our conversations.

(91)

He is much impressed with maynard Keynes' book about the Peace Conference and believes it will have a far-reaching effect. He goes even to the length of saying that he doubts whether any book written in this generation has had so wide an influence.

Carl Ackerman, who represents the Public Ledger, talked with me for a half hour trying to convince me that I should write once a week for the Ledger. He had discussed the matter with Fleisher of the Tokyo Advertiser and Fleisher said he would be glad to have the articles cabled to Japan and would see they had wide publicity throughout the East. The Ledger would undertake to give them the same circulation in Europe and America. I refused to write unless he could show me I could do it without "cheapening myself".

They believe that upon international subjects, such as the League of Nations and its ramifications, I would be more widely read than any man in the world. This statement, of course, was for my benefit and I give it merely to show their arguments.

There were some sensational articles in the New York American today stating I intended to oppose the President for a third term and that I was considering supporting some conservative like Oscar Underwood. I occupied the front page and the article contained other fiction of like character. To inquiring reporters from other papers I declined to comment. The story seems too patent.

Big Bill Edwards and Walter Lippman were callers. I tried to make Lippmann understand that the President was sincere in his belief that the Versailles Treaty followed his Fourteen Points, but I do not believe I succeeded.

December 31, 1919.

I received a delightful message from Orlando today sent through Dr. Attolico. He sent a written message which is attached.

(92)

Gregory was with me two hours in the afternoon. Yesterday he saw Mrs. Wilson and of his own volition undertook to explain that the articles appearing in the newspapers regarding my plans and opinions were without foundation of fact. She brushed the matter aside saying she knew perfectly well I was not responsible for them. She failed, however, to throw light on the mysterious silence of the White House toward me. The rumors of the break are constant and no day passes without some reference to it in the press. The President's real friends appear to be concerned but his immediate entourage are fatuous enough to believe that in some way it is hurting me and helping the President. I feel deeply for the President for I have never known a man more crucified from day to day.

(1)

January 1, 1920.

Mrs. Whitelaw Reid gave a dinner to Lord Grey last night. There were about fifty present. It was a beautiful dinner-- I cannot recall one more beautiful among the many I have attended in this country and in Europe.

January 2, 1920.

We gave a dinner at the Colony Club last night in honor of Lord Grey. There were fifty-eight guests. I took out Madame Clemenceau-Jaquemaire, Clemenceau's daughter, and made her with Grey one of the guests of honor. I append a list of the guests.

Grey came this morning and we had a long and final conference before he sails for England. He sails tomorrow. He claims to have no feeling because he was not received, either directly or indirectly, at the White House, but I can see that he is chagrined and I do not wonder. If Mrs. Wilson had shown him some attention, even if he had not seen the President, it would have made matters better.

He said he had two appointments with Tumulty and both times Tumulty failed to come. Tumulty excused himself by saying he had to be at the Capitol on some mission for the President. The fact that such an ordinary man as Tumulty should have thought it possible to treat anyone of Lord Grey's distinction in such a way is beyond belief. Mrs. Wilson, too, seems not to realize that there has been no visitor to America during the President's two administrations of Grey's distinction, yet no one has been treated with such discourtesy.

I have a lurking suspicion that one of the causes for this action is because of his friendship for me, although the Crauford Stuart-Baruch-Grayson incident is the main cause. Nevertheless, it is a fact that this great statesman and friend of the United States has been treated in a manner which should cause every American to blush with shame. There is no man in all the world more modest, more unselfish

(2)

and none I have met with finer courage or greater nobility of soul.

January 3, 1920.

This has been a hectic day from start to finish. Sir William Tyrrell was an early morning caller. The Adriatic did not sail as early as he thought and he reexamined with me until Billy Phillips came. We reviewed the entire situation carefully but to repeat the conversation would be largely repetition. The effort to make trouble between the President and me is a great game and Tyrrell complimented me upon my attitude. Up to the present he thought I had acted wisely.

What I have had in mind was to avoid doing or saying anything critical of the President or those around him. I treat Baruch as the others with the same cordiality as formerly. Baruch came for an hour yesterday afternoon and was very friendly. We talked of the Treaty, of the President and of all matters intimately relating to the administration. Just why he came and just why he was so friendly I have not yet determined.

Billy Phillips had a sad story to tell. Lansing is insulted daily by the White House and does not resent it. His attitude is that he will not resign until the President has sufficiently recovered to indicate whether he wishes him to do so. Phillips said Lansing went to the White House the other day to tell Mrs. Wilson how necessary it was to take some action in some pressing matters which he had already brought to the attention of the President. Mrs. Wilson replied to him curtly, "The President not like being told a thing twice."

The State Department also received a rebuke from Tumulty's office to the effect that there was no use trying to go to the President through Mrs. Wilson, and if they desired action matters should come to him, Tumulty. This was notice, so the State Department believe, that Lansing was no longer persona grata with the President and Mrs. Wilson.

(3)

If Lansing was not such an amiable man he would resent such treatment and
would not tolerate it even under the present distressing conditions.

Paul Werburg followed Phillips. He wished advice on some international
financial matters of public or semi-public nature.

We went to lunch to meet Maetelinke. The lunch was given by Mrs. Ladenburg
at the Colony Club. There were about twenty-five present.

Sir George Paish was an afternoon caller. He has made some *faux pas* since
his arrival and the Hearst newspapers have been exploiting him every day in
order to accentuate anti-British feelings. Tyrrell talked of it this morning
and I promised to try and straighten Paish out. Unfortunately, Paish had just
seen the reporters before he came and had made matters worse rather than better.

January 4, 1920.

T. W. Gregory was my only important caller during the day. He is just from
Washington and is terribly distressed over the situation there. He believes it
grows steadily worse. He had a long conference with Frank Polk who was much at
sea as to what should be done. He is disturbed over Lansing's strained rela-
tions with the White House. It is difficult to determine how to act in the cir-
cumstances when his immediate chief is disagreeably involved with the President.

January 5, 1920.

Another busy day, Raymond Fosdick, Cleveland Dodge, Dr. Attolico
and a number of others called. Dodge and I had a long talk on the subject of
the rumored break between the President and me. He does not believe the fault
lies with the President but seems to think it largely due to Mrs. Wilson's jeal-
ously. When he went out he said, "dunk the women". He wished to write Mrs.
Wilson but I persuaded him not to do so.

(4)

Fosdick and I went over League matters, and Attolico came from the Italian Ambassador who wished advice as to taking up the Adriatic question at this time and how he should proceed. I advised discussing it informally with Frank Polk and doing nothing officially until the President could be reached directly.

We had a delightful dinner with Madame Jaquemaire. There were seventeen present and mostly French. She said her father writes about me and gives evidence of his affection for me.

January 7, 1920.

Monday afternoon, Weston of the Associated Press came to ask about my going to Texas. I had him write a short statement, read it to me and see if it was correct.

The Tribune and Herald by some inadvertence, mixed what I said with something Senator Edge of New Jersey had to say about Congress and the Peace Treaty. After investigation by Gordon it was found that the A. P. had sent out the slips with my statement and that of Senator Edge mixed in some way. The Tribune makes a handsome correction this morning. The incident goes to show how easy it is to widen a very small breach after it is once started between public men.

Metcalf and Rathom of the Providence Journal and Bulletin took lunch with us. We had as pleasant a time as one could well have with people of so opposite opinions. However, I am always glad to talk with those who differ with me on governmental matters.

Mrs. August Belmont, Ida Tarbell, Hamilton Holt and ex-Ambassador Penfield called in the afternoon. Mrs. Belmont's visit was for general information and to discuss Red Cross matters. Miss Tarbell came for a similar purpose accepting she wished to discuss her coming lecture tour and to get my advice as to

(5)

its scope. With Hamilton Holt it was the League of Nations, with Penfield it was merely to say goodbye. I have spoken to Lord Grey about the British Government giving Penfield a decoration similar to the one given Gerard and for the same reason, the care of British prisoners in Austria. Penfield has been very indelicate in the matter and has pressed his claim to an embarrassing degree.

January 8, 1920.

George Foster Peabody and Frank Trumbull were my principal callers.
President Lowell of Harvard wrote asking to come but I could not get in touch
with him. The telephone has rung constantly and I have had conversations with
Thomas Lamont and many others who wished to have a final word before I leave.

January 9, 1920.

My principal caller today was Cyrus Curtis of Philadelphia. He came to press me to write for his publications. I explained that I would not be willing to say anything of the past, but I might consider writing on international subjects at such time and about such things as seemed to me wise. He was entirely willing to let it go at that. I promised a definite answer when I returned from Texas.

Van Lear Black of the Baltimore Sun was another caller. He placed himself and his paper at my disposition in the coming campaign believing I would support the right kind of man he and his paper would approve.

Dr. Marcel Knecht was another visitor. He is going to France before I return and wished a last word.

Mrs. Harriman came to bid us goodbye and to tell the latest gossip in Washington. She said Tumulty went to Mrs. Wilson a few days ago and asked if she realized how much harm was being done by the story of a break between the

(6)

President and me, and suggested that some words should be sent out directly from
the President. Mrs. Wilson said the President did not know of the stories and
she hesitated to inform him. She promised to take the matter under considera-
tion. I doubt whether she does anything since her inclination seems to be to
let the matter rest as it is.

January 11, 1920.

Frank Polk was an interesting caller today. He remained over an hour
and told of Cabinet and departmental news. He told Tumulty that the tales of
a break between the President, Lansing and me were doing the President infinite
harm. Tumulty agreed but said he was more or less helpless. He complained of
the Baruch-White House visit and said Grayson was responsible for the hurtful
publicity. This reminds me to say that Baruch rings me up every day to assure
me of his friendship.

Polk spoke more definitely of Lansing's position. Mrs. Wilson was white-
hot with indignation and wishes him to resign, but Lansing refuses - believing
that as long as the President is ill he ought to stick to his post and wait un-
til the President is quite ready for him before he takes action. Polk said when he
heard the President intended writing a letter for the Jackson Day Dinner - he in-
sisted that Tumulty show it to him. Tumulty declined to do this but Polk ad-
vised him against any radical action. As a result, the letter was sent back
to the President and he modified it. Polk and I are both wondering what it
was like in its original form since it was finally what it was.

I cannot understand how a man of the President's perception could have
thought that a democratic caucus was a place to make remarks regarding the
Treaty. It puts his action almost on a par with his pre-election letter in
the Autumn of 1918 which was so disastrous in its results. The press excoriated
him even the faithful New York World.

(7)

Thos. Lamont tells me he talked over the telephone with Grayson and
Grayson claimed that the letter would not prevent a compromise. He intimated
it was the best they could do with the President. I have my doubts as to
whether any effort was made to soften him, for Tumulty told Polk it was a fine
letter, although he did not express approval of its timeliness. I take it
Mrs. Wilson was the President's only adviser, though Grayson knew of it and
possibly Tumulty.

Polk regretted the terrible state of affairs in Washington. The Mex-
ican situation grows steadily worse, and all other matters of importance are
held up. He believes the President is in worse condition than the White House
indicates. I hope Grayson is right when he states the President will be as
well as ever by February first.

Jan. 12th

We left for Texas at 5.04 yesterday. Every possible arrangement for
our comfort was made by the Secret Service men of the State Department. Num-
bers of people came in to say goodbye and as many more telephoned. This
getting away is always trying and I was glad to board the train headed west. I
purposely did not go through Washington but chose Saint Louis instead. It is
not only more direct but I did not want any significance attached to my not
stopping at the capital. I shall discontinue the diary for the time being.

January 27, 1920.

We returned to New York last night via the M. K. & T. and Big Four Ry.
after a delightful stay in Texas. We never had a warmer welcome nor one so
filled with tokens of affection. Naturally, there was no rest for me, there
could not be, since there could be no restriction as to callers. It was prac-
tically "open house" both in Houston and Austin. I tried to forestall some of
this by calling on many of my old friends. The things that touched me most

(8)

were the little homely gifts brought by both country folk and town people-- but-
ter, sausage, backbone, pecans, preserves, home made candy and flowers in great
profusion. There was little said, but I would be handed a little parcel with
"I thought you would like this as it would remind you of home".

The citizens of both Houston and Austin wished to give me a large
banquet and reception. The one at Austin was planned to be of state-wide pro-
portions and a committee was sent to Houston to ask my consent. I begged to
be excused stating I had evaded such functions all my life and was too old now
to begin. I found later that my friends appreciated this attitude for many of
them told me, "I knew you would not permit it".

However, Governor and Mrs. Hobby insisted upon giving us a reception at
the Mansion-- something in the nature of "open house" in order that we might
meet all our friends. This we were glad to accept for, in a measure, it re-
lieved our host and hostess, Mr. and Mrs. Lewis Hancock. It is a trying or-
deal for anyone to entertain us. Telephones, telegrams, visitors and packages
arrived at all hours. The Hancocks have the only house in Austin
large enough to even measurably meet such demands. It was largely because we
felt it to be something of an imposition that we remained so short a time, that
is about five days in Houston and six days in Austin.

January 31, 1920.

The most interesting visitor of the week was Attorney General Mitchell Palmer.
He came yesterday and remained for an hour. Palmer and I have never been very
close friends and I know him but slightly, but before he left he became confi-
dential and told of his embarrassment because his friends insisted that he per-
mit them to work for his nomination as a presidential candidate. The Presi-
dent's silence is particularly embarrassing to Mitchell and to McAdoo.

(9)

Vance McCormick, Palmer said, spoke to Mrs. Wilson about the matter but re-
ceived no satisfaction further than "the President has not made up his mind".

Palmer agreed that the President's Jackson Day letter made him the logical
candidate if the Treaty is not ratified. However, Palmer believes that with
the President a candidate for a third term, that issue will over-shadow every
other even that of the ratification of the Treaty. I cannot imagine that the
President is seriously thinking of running again. I take it that it is only a
continuation in his mind of the understanding we had in Paris, that is, it
would be best not to announce his intentions until after the Treaty was rati-
fied. And yet how can his Jackson Day letter be considered in any other
light than that of a candidate.

There is so much mystery surrounding the President and his condition
that I am wholly at a loss to form an opinion as to the truth. I wish I knew.
I am not writing to him or to Mrs. Wilson for the very good reason that I have
had no replies to my letters of November 24th and 27th and Mrs. Wilson has
seen fit to allow the stories that are rife as to the break between us remain
undenied. Denials come from Tumulty every few days, and he has called her at-
tention to the harm he thinks is being done the President, but she has never
given anything out from the President and I am forced to the conclusion that
she is willing to have the story credited. If she would write me and say the
President knows nothing of it and she was sorry such gossip was rife it would
be sufficient. I should know then what to do but, as it is, I am helpless and
the only thing I can do is to remain aloof until I receive some direct word from
the President. I have made offers directly and have sent messages through
others that I stand ready to help in any direction. I have publicly announced
my continued affection and admiration for the President. More than this I can
not do and yet I am afraid he is in a condition totally unfit to appreciate the

(10)

situation as it has developed.

In retrospect I can see what a mistake the President made when he came to Paris and in not holding the Entente to the Fourteen Points. It was with difficulty I succeeded in having them accepted as a condition of the Armistice with Germany. It has been stated that many of the Fourteen Points were so vague and so general that they were practically meaningless, and the Entente could very well refuse to interpret them in the way they were meant. This is not true for I interpreted each point before the Armistice was made and the interpretations filled many typewritten pages. I cabled them in advance to the President for his approval therefore, Georges Clemenceau, Orlando, Lloyd George and the others were barred from pleading they did not understand what each meant. These interpretations were on the table day after day when we sat in conference in Paris while the Armistice was in the making. Many times they asked the meaning of this or that point and I would read from the accepted interpretation. Therefore the skeleton of the Treaty was made before the President came to Paris, and if he had insisted upon the strict adherence to the Fourteen Points, Clemenceau, George and Orlando could not have evaded the issue. As far as I know, he never once referred to the Armistice or to the interpretation of the Fourteen Points after he came to Paris. He seemed never to realize how important it was that the powers had accepted the Fourteen Points as the basis of peace.

Gregory came last night and spent the entire evening. He said Ray Stannard Baker saw Mrs. Wilson the other day and she is now in favor of a speedy ratification of the Treaty, I take it upon practically the best terms to be had. She said the President was not of her way of thinking.

Gregory said conditions were still chaotic in Washington and he saw no indication of improvement. He believes the President much sicker than is

(11)

stated. The Government is not functioning but is merely drifting. The Democratic Party is on the rocks and so also is the great reputation of the President. If those around him could but have seen after he was stricken that it was best for him to call in the Vice President to act, much of the present situation might have been avoided.

I have a letter today from Frederick Dixon in which he quotes from a letter received from Mr. Balfour. It is a part of the record.

Thursday

Sir Horace Plunkett was a visitor Wednesday. I could get but little from him excepting the Irish question in which he is absorbed.

Raymond Fosdick came Wednesday. He came to tell more of the details of his resignation as Under Secretary General of the League of Nations. The President allowed him to go without protest. Frazier says Mrs. Wilson resented Fosdick's putting up his resignation to the President at all. She resents any responsibility being placed upon him.

I forgot to mention that when I was in Texas Governor Hobby spoke to me of his desire last Autumn to appoint me United States Senator in place of Senator Culberson should he resign. He told why he thought at that time Culberson would resign within a few weeks and why he hoped I would accept the place.

February 3, 1920.

The sensation of the hour is the letter Lord Grey wrote on Friday of last week to the London Times and which was cabled over in full to the New York Times and Philadelphia Public Ledger. The press without exception gives it the front page and page have written editorials commenting on it. It is as I feared and the ground is cut from under the President's feet. I suppose the White House entourage will make the President believe I am in some way responsible for the letter. As a matter of fact, I knew nothing of it further than I was informed

(12)

of Grey's views which he has now given to the public. I had no intimation of his intention to do this. In my opinion, he would not have done this if he had been on good terms with the White House. They treated him so discourteously that he evidently felt free to speak his mind regardless of what was thought. Grey was looked upon by the White House, the State Department and the public as my particular friend and properly so. It is known that he came over largely at my insistence and that he expected to be guided by me. If the President had not fallen ill and our relations had continued as of old, the greatest good might have resulted from Grey's visit. It is possible that even so difficult a problem as the Irish question might have been solved to the satisfaction of all fairminded men. Grey, as this diary relates, was ready to go far in pressing the Lloyd George Government into effective action. The question of naval armaments and building could have been settled. Then, too, we had in mind to take up the solution of the international financial problems which are weighing so heavily upon the world. By now, the financial question would have reached a solution. Questions relating to the League of Nations and its effective organization and operation were also in Grey's and my mind. I regard the failure of his mission as one of the great misfortunes that have befallen us all. If it had succeeded as planned, it would be hard to estimate its benefits.

The publishers are constantly pressing me to write my memoirs. One letter came yesterday insisting that in behalf of history it must be done. I was offered my own terms. As usual, I promised to take it under consideration.

February 9, 1920.

The diary has been neglected recently. I am not deeply interested in it these days. I see many people but after my work in Europe most things seem trivial.

(13)

Colonel Philipsen, a Dane, was an important visitor. He has a plan calling for the international opening up of trade with Russia and he desired my advice as to the best method of procedure. He had seen Hoover and Brandeis in Washington and the latter referred him to me. I suggested that he see Frank Vanderlip and ask him to look into it and give it his endorsement. I gave Philipsen a card of introduction to Vanderlip who was extremely interested and at first blush promised to go to Denmark to attend the international conference it is proposed to hold there. Vanderlip came to see me to discuss the matter and I outlined what I thought should be done. Briefly it was to pay little attention to Philipsen and his co-workers but for him, Vanderlip, to form a plan of his own which, being the American plan, would probably carry. He thought well of this and plans to take the matter up again with Philipsen and his confreres.

S. R. Bertron, President of the Russian-American Board of Trade, is to call this afternoon to discuss the same subject.

Sir Horace Plunkett was here Saturday to talk of Ireland and to ask advice as to whether he had best see Mrs. Wilson when he was in Washington. I advised him to send her a note so she might invite him to the White House if she cared to.

Robert Underwood Johnson, who has been appointed American Ambassador to Italy, was another caller Saturday. He considers that he owes his appointment to what I said in his behalf to the President last spring in Paris. He may be right in this but I have my doubts. I advised to the best of my ability as to the method he should pursue.

Friday we went to a delightful musical at Mrs. Sloane's to hear Fritz Kreisler. The same evening we attended a beautiful dinner given by Mrs. Twombley.

This afternoon Edward Filene called to tell how distressed he was over the situation in Washington where he has been for the past two days. He thinks the

(14)

Vice President should take charge. He feels that the President is doing himself, his party and his country great injustice. He said Secretary Baker was in agreement with him.

February 13, 1920.

I have much conversation over the telephone and also private interviews about the proposed international conference at Copenhagen concerning opening up Russian trade.

Sir George Paish has been one of my callers. I sent many messages by him to the Liberal group in England of which he is one. Upon leaving, he made this remark: "Sometime when you come to London we will give you the reception we have in mind to give." I asked what he meant and he smilingly answered "You will know when it happens". I have no idea what he means. If I had desired a public reception I should have permitted them to give it when I went over in 1917 on the, so-called, House Missions.

Stephen Bonsal was in today and gave all the Washington gossip. He saw Frank Cobb, of the New York World, who expressed regret that I was not at the President's elbow advising during these anxious days. He thought it little short of a tragedy.

Sir Horace Plunkett was among yesterday's callers. He has just returned from Washington. He saw Mrs. Wilson and in the conversation told her that he knew the President and she were aware of my services to him and the country but he wondered whether they realized the great service I had been to him and the country in Europe. She expressed both knowledge and appreciation and Sir Horace let it go at that.

We dined Wednesday with the Bayard Cuttings and I had an interesting talk with de Casenave and also with Mrs. Douglas Robinson, Roosevelt's sister. She expressed appreciation for the kindly things I had said about her distinguished brother.

De Casenave and I discussed the present political situation in France

(15)

and the members of the new Government.

Last night we dined with Mr. and Mrs. George Blumenthal. They have a very beautiful home. It was like stepping into the middle of the 15th Century. Bonnet, the French organist, played for us after dinner.

We were shocked on Wednesday to receive a telegram from Texas announcing the sudden death of Lewis Hancock with whom we so recently stopped while in Austin.

February 18, 1920.

Sunday was a very disagreeable day for me. Saturday I was on the surgeon's table for an hour. They were probing around to find the cause of my several illnesses while in Europe. On top of this it was necessary for me to see people from early morning until late in the afternoon when I took to my bed with a slight temperature.

Monday I rested quietly and on Tuesday was ready to function again. I sat for an hour in my study to Kenneth Frazier, the portrait painter.

Judge George W. Anderson of Boston stopped over for a few hours on his way from Washington to tell of conditions there and to get some advice. He has a fantastic plan of bringing together the President, Mr. Bryan, McAdoo and myself to select a standard bearer in the next Presidential campaign. I told him I was flattered to be in such company, but I pointed out how utterly impossible it would be to bring about such a conference. To go no further, the President would have none of it.

Wehle, of the War Industries Board, called to discuss Hoover's candidacy for the Presidency. It amused me to hear so many people state their belief that Hoover is sincere in saying he is not a candidate. He comes out every few days with a letter or a statement apropos of nothing unless he is a candidate. He has finally come out with a complete platform and yet people like Oscar Strauss and

(16)

others of like intelligence and political experience, think he is truthful in saying he does not want to be nominated for President. Hoover will overdo this if he is not careful and the public will begin to regard him as insincere. He is evidently playing for the republican nomination, but is casting an anchor to the windward for the democratic nomination in the event he cannot have his first choice. In this I think he is mistaken. He would do better to run on the democratic ticket than on the republican. He cannot control the reactionary interests directing the Republican Party. He could dominate the democrats as Wilson has done if he had the genius to do it. Then, too, if he lost the election as the democratic nominee, he would in all probability remain the leader of his party, would be nominated again in four years and be elected. The trend of the world is liberal and, in my opinion, the next republican administration will be just the reverse.

The sensation of the hour is the forced resignation of Secretary Lansing announced Saturday morning. I was immediately pressed for a statement, principally because in the New York Times and other papers his resignation was credited to differences with me in Paris. I declined to make a statement declaring that both the President and Secretary of State had been my friends and I had never had a disagreeable difference with either.

As a matter of fact, it is hard to tell who has the right of the situation. The President puts himself wholly in the wrong by asking for Lansing's resignation on the ground that he has usurped presidential authority in calling Cabinet meetings during the President's disability. The country has almost unanimously taken Lansing's part. If the President had adopted a different course he might have thrown the odium almost wholly on Lansing and received the sympathy of the country. On the other hand, Lansing's reply to the President was not so effective as it might have been made. He should have called attention to the fact that it was

(17)

the President who was straining the Constitution by not permitting the Vice President to act during his acknowledged disability. He might also have called attention to the fact that it was the President was in Paris for six months, the Cabinet met and the Government functioned at his, the President's, direction as he, Lansing, was trying to have it function during the President's disability. The difference, of course, is that in the one instance the President authorized it and in the other he did not, but since he was too ill to take the initiative, it had to be done in the way it actually was done.

From all accounts, Lansing has not been loyal to the President either in Paris or here. I am certain that in the memoirs to be published by Lansing and Bliss, or their executors, they will try to make the President's position appear wholly wrong. I, too, will doubtless come in for a measure of criticism.

A. S. Burleson was here yesterday for a long conference and said he saw Lansing just after he received his dismissal and that he told him without rancor toward me, that his friends thought that he should have resigned in Paris when the President asked me to sit in the Council of State during the President's illness. Lansing told Burleson the President explained the matter by saying that I knew more about the subjects to be discussed than he did. This indicates that Lansing complied to the President and, I take it, that it was from this period that the President saw less of me fearing lest Lansing would resign.

Burleson believes it quite possible the President will be a candidate for another term. He has not seen him or communicated with him since before his illness nearly six months. He believes the President feels toward me as he did before but this is an optimistic view which I in no way share.

John J. Spurgeon, of the Philadelphia Public Ledger, took lunch with me today. They are still urging me to write for them in any way I see fit and on almost any terms. I refused to consider it until after the Treaty had been ratified.

(18)

tified.

Oscar Straus in a conversation today thought the President had again made ratification of the Treaty almost impossible by his note to the Powers on the Adriatic question. He said the passage of the Treaty was practically assured until that note was sent. He was now doubtful of it's ever going through. Senators are saying if it is necessary to threaten withdrawal even before the United States has ratified the Treaty, what is the use of our getting in at all. I am sometimes in doubt whether Senator Lodge or the President has been the worst enemy of the Treaty. I gave the palm to Lodge at first but fairness and candor compel me to yield first place at present to the President.

Woolley told me the other day that the President had agreed to accept Taft's draft of Article 10. It would be difficult for anyone to define the difference between the Taft and Lodge drafts but, according to Woolley, the President said he would see both the Treaty and Lodge in Hades before he would give Lodge the satisfaction of having Article 10 labeled with his name. This is an astounding attitude and is similar to Lodge's attitude toward him. I believe if I could see the President for a few minutes I could show him conclusively that he is not only lessening his own reputation and prestige but is directly abetting the republicans in their effort to destroy his administration and the Democratic Party.

February 19, 1920.

Mrs. Borden Harriman came this morning with a budget of gossip from Washington. I have almost gone to grand seeing her. I cannot understand how intelligent people can listen to such stories.

I took tea with Mrs. Cornelius Vanderbilt who has been ill. She is one of my friends who generously offer me all the high places not within their gift. In this instance it was the Presidency which I firmly declined.

(19)

February 22, 1920.

We attended several dinners this week. One was at Mr. and Mrs. Montgomery Hare's where I had some conversation with Mrs. Thos. Hastings, a daughter of E. C. Benedict, Cleveland's great friend and backer. She told some amusing stories about Cleveland. She said he was thoroughly selfish and ungrateful and, big as he was in some ways, he was equally small in others. She declared she had heard him tell the incident of Lord Pauncefote's dismissal so often that she could repeat it backward, and she thought it only necessary to get close to heroes in order to find them common clay. She spoke of Wilson, whom she knows well, in much the same strain but said, to her mind, he was incomparably greater than Cleveland. I entirely agree with this.

Saturday evening we dined with Mr. and Mrs. Charles Dana Gibson. John Drinkwater and his wife were there and I had some talk with him. I suppose I am the only person Drinkwater has met since he landed who has not discussed his play "Lincoln" with him. I make it a point to try not to bore people in that way. There are only a limited number of questions one can ask and he must have answered them innumerable times. They are quite unaffected and as yet unspoiled by their success.

Senator Saulsbury lunched with me Friday. He desired me to join him in booming Vice President Marshall for President. I declined and explained my purpose to eschew politics as much as possible. Saulsbury said he thought at one time Wilson would rank in history with Jefferson, but he now believed he would rank with Andrew Johnson. I in no way concurred in this opinion as it seems absurd. Even with all the mistakes the President has made within the last year, in my opinion, he will come in the front rank of Presidents, that is, with Washington, Jefferson, Jackson and Lincoln and, if the Treaty goes through and the League of Nations is a success, he will rank them all.

(20)

I had a delightful call from Daniel Roper, Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Dixon Williams, of Chicago, and a Mr. Shaw from South Carolina. They discussed the political outlook.

One day last week we dined with the Roger Winthrops and after dinner I had an interesting talk with Peter Dunne. I am sorry he is giving up the "Mr. Dooley letters".

Saturday Mrs. Fannie Fern Andrews called to ask advice about promoting some of the matters in the League of Nations in which women are interested.

Yesterday we went to tea with the W. G. McAdoo's. I have never had a more cordial reception. Miss Bones and Nona were there and they were all very friendly and treated me as one of the family. It deepens the mystery of the long silence of the White House.

February 25, 1920.

On Monday I was notified that I had been elected President of the Alpha Delta Phi Fraternity. It is an honor I should have declined had I known of it in advance. The national convention met at Cleveland and was composed of representatives from chapters in both the United States and Canada and I was unanimously chosen. I am sorry no intimation was given me as in the circumstances I did not have the heart to dampen the enthusiasm of the young under graduates who wished to compliment me in this way.

Norman Hapgood was a Monday caller. Hamilton Holt and Herbert Hoover were callers yesterday. Holt wished advice concerning some features in the new management of the Independent. I made some suggestions which he said he would act upon.

Hoover came to talk about himself and the movement throughout the country in both parties for his nomination for President. I had already surmised

(21)

that he was after the republican ** administration ** rather than the democratic nomination and this conference confirmed this view. He does not believe the Democrats have much chance of success. He also believes, even if he could win by his own personality, he could not pull through a democratic Congress and his administration would therefore be a deadlock from the start. He said his background was republican, and he was not in accord with so many of the President's policies, that it would be necessary for him to say so during the campaign; he might make. In these circumstances, I did not try to persuade him to look toward the democratic nomination. He thought he might "liberalize" the republicans and perhaps force them into the kind of progressive party that Roosevelt at one time had in mind, but which he abandoned at Chicago in 1916.

Hoover thought if Roosevelt had not surrendered then and had kept the
Progressive Party together that he, Hoover, could now get the Progressive nomi-
nation and sweep the country.

I was glad he did not pretend to me that he was not interested in the
country-wide movement to make him President. It is patent that he has had it
in mind for at least two years and that his publicity organization has been
working overtime in that direction.

February 27, 1920.

My main caller was Dr. Wilbur, President of Leland Stanford University. He came to discuss Hoover's candidacy. He was a classmate of Hoover's and is his warm personal friend. He told of conditions in California and while he thought the state was five to one for Hoover over Johnson, his statement regarding the coming primaries in California was quite different from that of Hoover. Hoover told me he would be on both tickets. Wilbur said it would not be on either one, but an effort will be made to send uninstructed delegates on both tickets. Wilbur is a big sensible American and I liked the way he talked.

(22)

We dined Wednesday evening with Judge and Mrs. Jas. W. Gerard at a large dinner they gave in a private dining room at the Ritz Hotel. Last night we dined with Mr. and Mrs. Adrian Iselin and tonight we are giving a dinner ourselves complimentary to Robert Underwood Johnson, our new Ambassador to Italy.

March 2, 1920.

This is the Anniversary of Texas Independence and brings back many recollections of my native state.

The dinner we gave Robert Underwood Johnson was a pleasant affair. The other guests were Mr. and Mrs. H. H. Kohlsaat, of Chicago, John W. Garrett of Baltimore, Mr. and Mrs. Adrian Iselin, Mr. and Mrs. C. B. Alexander and Mrs. John C. Howe of Boston who took the place of Mrs. Garrett who was ill of flu.

During the past few months many people have asked what I would have advised after the President was stricken. Among those making this inquiry are Norman Hapgood, Ray Stannard Baker and Whitney Shepardson. My answer was as follows: I should have turned over the Government to the Vice President. I should have advised the President to make a temperate statement free from all rancor or criticism of any nature; stating he had done his best for the American people and the peoples of the world, that he had fallen ill before his work was finished but he felt certain that those assuming control of the Government would carry on to its completion the undertakings which the American people had so much at heart and for which they had made such great sacrifices.

If he had done this, there is not a critic in any party in the United States or Europe who would have dared say one word against him. In my opinion, he would have become a world martyr. Lincoln was assassinated, but Wilson would have passed out for the public good by his own hand. He would possibly have gone down in history as the greatest of martyrs. The Treaty would have

been ratified at once and the work for which he was responsible would have lived.

If I had had a moment with the President I am certain he would have responded to this suggestion. It would have been dramatic and it would have been wise and it would have left his reputation impregnable. The short-sighted coterie around him have urged to the contrary, because they feared their own displacement. They have done their best to wreck one of the most splendid careers the world has known.

Secretary Houston was a Saturday caller. He remained an hour. I found he had not seen the President since August and that he knew little more of his condition than I do. He said there one or two very important matters about which it would be necessary to see him soon and he was wondering how it could be brought about. One matter was in reference to European finance as it touched our Government. He hoped I would come to Washington and discuss it with him. If not, he indicated his intention to return here to see me. Houston does not like Meredith, his successor in the Department of Agriculture. He considers Alexander, the new Secretary of Commerce, totally unfit for that place. He has an even stronger feeling as to the unfitness of Colby. He thought the President did not appoint Frank Polk as Secretary of State because he could not write an acceptable note. I think this is a shrewd guess.

Charles R. Crane came in for a moment Saturday. He seems unconcerned regarding his confirmation as Minister to China by the Senate.

Ray Stannard Baker was a Sunday caller. Whitney Shepardson also called. Without asking Baker, I extracted from him "the unpleasant incident" to which he referred in speaking to Frazier and which he thought was one of the causes of the coolness of the White House toward me. It was because I returned home in advance of the other Commissioners. I have gone into this subject so thoroughly that there is nothing further to state.

I postponed my home-coming for nearly a month at the President's request. I should have come in September with Lord Grey but he asked me to remain until October which I did. When I finally came I was very ill and the President was lying at the point of death, and I should have come in any event then on his account more than my own. He was in no condition to advise and our Ambassador and my fellow Commissioners at Paris all advised the course I pursued.

Baker agreed that the President was damaging himself by his stubborn attitude in regard to the Treaty. He went to Washington yesterday and I suggested that he see Mrs. Wilson and tell her something of our conversation and his agreement with my conclusions and, even at the expence of giving offence, to urge her to use her influence with the President to have him accept whatever amendments the Senate pass and allow the Treaty to be ratified. Baker promised to do this.

Last evening we dined with Mr. and Mrs. Jas. A. Burden. Among the guests was George Barr Baker. Baker and I got together with coffee and cigars and had a heart to heart talk about the present distressing situation regarding the Treaty and our standing throughout the world. He was astonished when I told him that in getting the Fourteen Points accepted by the Armistice Commission I had each point interpreted, cabled to the President and had the interpretations lying on the table in my discussions with the Prime Ministers in order that there might be no question as to vagueness or to their meaning. He thought this the most interesting statement he had heard about the negotiations in Paris. He agreed that if the President had stood firmly upon the Fourteen Points and had declared that the skeleton of the Treaty had already been agreed to, he might have compelled acquiescence by the Entente. Baker asked to see me within a few days to discuss this further and also the question of Herbert Hoover's candidacy.

(25)

Sunday evening we dined with Mr. and Mrs. John Pratt and afterward went to an entertainment at the Hippodrome given for the benefit of the American Legion. Pershing was there sitting in a box next to ours and I had some conversation with him. Lloyd Griscom, who is directing his campaign for the republican nomination, told me they were having astounding success. Personally, I do not feel that Pershing has any chance worth mentioning but this, of course, will develop later.

March 7, 1920.

Of the many I have seen since I last made any record McAdoo was the most interesting. We discussed the campaign and every candidate both on the democratic and republican side. He believes as I do that Hoover will try to force the republicans to nominate him. If Hoover is nominated, McAdoo outlined his arguments against him which were fairly convincing but were based almost wholly on the fact that he had lived in England the better part of his life; that his interests were all British and that the next President would have the settlement of some of the most important questions that had ever arisen between Great Britain and the United States.

Some of the Hoover people have been trying to get me to give out for publication a letter Hoover wrote me on March 11, 1919 when we were in Paris. Hoover evidently wrote the letter for record since we were both in the Crillon Hotel at the time and he was seeing me constantly. I doubt whether anyone, unless it was General Bliss, wrote more letters for record than Hoover. The idea was for me to give the letter out so as to help Hoover in his campaign propaganda. I declined to do so. They then wanted me to say I had no objections to its publi-

cation. I even declined to do this. I would only say that the letter was
Hoover's and therefore it was not for me to say whether it should be published.
Further than this I would not go. The letter came out this morning.

General and Mrs. Robert Lee Bullard dined with us Saturday evening and we took them to the opera with Mr. and Mrs. Henry Whitehouse. Mrs. Goelet gave us her box. General Bliss' name was mentioned and Bullard while thinking well of his intellectual qualities regarded him as a poor soldier. He declared that as far as he knew the only active service Bliss ever had was the parading of some troops in San Diego some years ago.

Bullard and I exchanged views regarding the campaigns in France.

Mrs. Douglas gave us a dinner during the week. She had some interesting people among them the Abbe _______. Mrs. Robinson is a characteristic Roosevelt. We had a delightful evening and remained later than usual.

The Wilmerdings also gave us a dinner during the week. There we met "Old New York".

Last night Mrs. Alfred Belo gave us a dinner at the Ritz and took us to a play.

March 10, 1920.

My letter to the President dated March 8th, and a letter to Mrs.
Wilson enclosing it, is a part of the record. I have written in a way that
does not require an answer unless they desire to do so.

Gregory came to dinner last night. He said the Cabinet members are
becoming restless because the President is seeing outsiders from time to time
and has not seen them. He said no one could conceive the low estate to which
things have fallen in administration circles. He believes we are both fortu-

(27)

nate to be out of it all, for he does not think it improbable that some embar-
rassing situation may develop. After comparing notes we concluded perhaps the
President was taking advantage of his illness not to see members of his Cabinet
or others of his official family. We both know his intense dislike for confer-
ences of any nature. Gregory believes this might lead to serious results.

Robert Underwood Johnson, who is just back from Washington, tells me he was
with the President twenty-five minutes and that he looked almost robust. His
last letter to Senator Hitchcock indicates that his mental condition is normal
for he has seldom written a better letter. I disagree wholly with the action
he takes although agreeing entirely with the righteousness of the cause he so
ably and eloquently advocates. He has not a single friend, so far as I know,
who approves his action.

Frank Polk's letter to me of yesterday indicates his feeling in regard
to this.

Governor Lowden of Illinois called this morning. The engagement was
for eleven o'clock but he did not arrive until twenty minutes after, conse-
quently we only had a very few minutes together. He is a bluff, wholesome,
Western type politician and I liked him. He told Kohlsaat that he shared my
feeling. Kohlsaat said he wished to invite me to Illinois to visit him at his
farm, but Kohlsaat discouraged the idea knowing that I would not accept.

During the visitors of the past few days were Dr. Thos. Jesse Jones and
Willis Abbott. Jones is going to Africa for a year in order to advise in Negro
educational matters, and came to ask my advice and for information. Willis Abbott
is on the eve of making a general tour of the country for the McClure Syndicate
in order to write a series of articles on the political outlook. He also wished
to take counsel. I am trying to help Bainbridge Colby's confirmation with the
Foreign Relations Committee and am using Kohlsaat as an instrument.

(28)

March 11, 1920.

Mr. and Mrs. Hampson Gary, our new Minister to Switzerland, lunched
with us yesterday. I like them and I am glad he received the appointment.

Bainbridge Colby called last night after dinner to discuss his chances for
confirmation as Secretary of State. He had a good many letters of endorsement,
copies of which he left with me. He reiterated his invitation to make free
of the State Department and said he wished to lean heavily upon me, all of which
was merely to make himself pleasant.

I lunched with the New York Times Editorial Staff today. I sat between
Miller and Louis Wiley and they plied me with questions while the others listened.
I told them something of Paris and the Treaty and of my opinion of it. Jas. W.
Gerard was also a guest.

At five o'clock this afternoon Raymond Carroll of the Philadelphia
Public Ledger called at the direction of Mr. Spurgeon in order that I might give
him a resume of the situation

March 14, 1920.

On Friday the 12th I received a letter from the President in answer to the
one I wrote him the day before. He answered promptly and gave the letter a
slight personal touch. It is more what he refrains from saying than what he
says that strikes me. His signature is fairly normal, although I do not see
why it should not be entirely so since it is his left side that is affected. I
shall accept the letter as the end of our relations or, at least, the end of our
official relations.

Fred Ferguson writes, to me, an interesting article in Collier's of
March 13th entitled, "Edward M. House": It will hardly please the White House.

McAdoo came this afternoon for a general review of the political situation.

(29)

He is discouraged over the lack of help the Democratic Party is receiving from administration circles. We both believe a good case might be made against the Republican Party if we had intelligent leadership from the Administration.

We lunched today with Mr. and Mrs. Adrian Iselin to meet General Pershing. The General and I did not have much opportunity for an intimate talk and he is coming tomorrow to see me.

Major Arthur Little was an afternoon caller. He is writing a book of his war experiences and wished to discuss it with me.

March 16, 1920.

General Pershing came yesterday at ten o'clock and remained for more than an hour. We went over his political prospects. He asked advice as to whether he should permit his name to remain on the Nebraska ballot. I inquired as to whether he was certain of winning. His friends assure him he will, and I advised letting matters remain as they were but to do nothing himself to put him in the attitude of a candidate. I thought pressure would be brought by his friends for him to come to Nebraska before the primaries in order to further his political fortunes, and I advised strongly against any such movement. I thought there was a distinct feeling throughout the country against a military candidate and I advised his making a startling statement against militarism, provided it could be done in a way not to seem like political propaganda. I advised against Hoover's methods, that is stating he did not want the nomination because he was not seeking it, and yet making an unquestioned bid for the nomination every few days. Pershing asked me to write out something for his consideration and I have an engagement with him tomorrow.

March 17, 1920.

I have had an interesting and amusing day. It is a problem to keep the

(30)

various presidential candidates from meeting as they come and go. Pershing and Hoover almost collided this afternoon. I fixed up a statement for Pershing to make, telling how strongly he disapproved of militarism. He read it with much interest and I could see how surprised he was to find himself so vehemently against his own profession. However, he saw the virtue of necessity and expressed himself as being willing to publish the statement as written except to use Pershing verbiage. He returns to Washington tonight and will send a messenger with the statement to reach me Friday morning. I have arranged with the Associated Press to give it the widest publicity. The trouble now is the revolution in Germany has collapsed and the military party is less in control than formerly. I called Pershing's attention to this but he seemed to think he could give it out anyway. I shall have to determine myself Friday whether it is advisable in the circumstances as I do not desire him to do something inappropriate. In my opinion, he has but the slightest chance of the nomination at Chicago, but this petition against militarism may strengthen his chances. I am urging him to make the statement largely for the public good as I see it, but I would not use him unless I thought it very much to his advantage.

Hoover telephoned he would like to see me and he followed Pershing closely. I told the General he was coming which accelerated his departure. Hoover was full of trouble. He said he had never had such a day. While he was in Paris he, Bliss and Lansing in their spare moments busied themselves writing letters to the President as records. It appeared to be a safe pastime for if things turned out contrary to their predictions the letters would never see the light of day, but if they prophesied correctly, they could be published. It was "heads I win and tails you lose" so far as the poor President was concerned. Evidently none of them thought of the possibility of these letters

(31)

coming to light at inopportune moments and without their sanction, but this is
what happened to the letter Hoover wrote the President in April 1919 concerning
the League of Nations, the Treaty, and our non-participation in European affairs.

Bliss and Lansing were more careful in distributing their documents, but
Hoover was so pleased with his literary efforts that copies were sent out without
discrimination, and they are now coming home to haunt him. I advised Hoover
to give out a statement showing his change of mind and how heartily he now was
now in favor of the League and the obligations it implied. He thereupon fished
in his pocket and, much to my surprise, brought out a statement he had already
prepared. It was written before the unfortunate letter was published at the
request of the League to Enforce Peace and was to have been given out in a few
days. I suggested that he give it out at once as an answer to the letter.
He pointed out however the inconsistency between the letter and his present posi-
tion. I replied that a very wise man had said that "consistency is the virtue
of fools". He then thought he would give it out immediately but complained that
the newspapers would not give him the front page. It was a saddened Hoover and
I tried to cheer him by saying it was only a two or three day sensation and that
next week the people would have forgotten all about his letter and his seeming
inconsistency.

He complained of conditions at Washington saying no one knew how bad they
were unless they had occasion to deal direction with administration circles. He
thought the President had made it impossible for anyone to win on the democratic
ticket. He believed a democrat might have been elected even with all the mis-
takes recently made if a change of front had been brought about. In this he takes
much the same attitude as McAdoo and I take. However, he thought it utterly im-
possible for the Democratic Party to pull itself together without some guidance.
He said Palmer was permitted to do all sorts of foolish things; no department

(32)

head could reach the President and in consequence no policy could be agreed upon. Then, too, he thought the appointment of Colby, Alexander and Robert Underwood Johnson and others of that character were simply making success impossible.

We agreed that the republicans were as lacking in leadership and constructive statesmanship, but the democrats were completely demoralized and were so far behind the republicans in the way of mistakes that there was no chance for the republicans to overtake them.

We gave a dinner tonight to the Charles Dana Gibsons, partially to say good bye to Mrs. Gibson who sails for England in a few days to visit her sister, Lady Astor, and partly to celebrate the purchase of "Life" by Gibson.

March 21, 1920.

Among my visitors of the past few days was Prof. Dodd, Professor of History at the University of Chicago. He talked much of the President and about the book he, himself, is writing and which Doubleday, Page & Co. will published under the title, "Woodrow Wilson and his Work". Dodd feels keenly the tragedy which has befallen the President. We agreed that he was very near being the foremost figure in history and that now, as A. G. Gardiner said in a recent article, it is "a question of how far he has fallen".

Ellery Sedgwick was another caller. He came to discuss Herbert Hoover and his candidacy for the Presidency and also to talk of Bainbridge Colby who married Sedgwick's foster sister. He thinks Bainbridge is a man largely influenced by his environment.

Herman Bernstein came to say goodbye before going to Europe and to get a letter of general introduction from me.

General Pershing telephoned yesterday from Washington stating that since the Treaty had been killed and the German revolution was practically over,

(33)

the article I prepared for him could not be issued. I agreed and told him I
had already dismissed it from my mind because of changed conditions.

March 25, 1920.

On Monday Don Seitz called for the purpose of obtaining more funds to
run his Maine newspaper. He has not yet paid the money he borrowed several years
ago for this purpose. I told him I had no one here whom I could ask but would
try in Boston where the people were more interested in Maine. General tells me
that Seitz tries to borrow for everybody.

Dr. William Short was another caller Monday. He came to ask advice concerning the League to Enforce Peace but, in the circumstances, I counseled doing nothing for the moment and to wait and see what the President had in mind. Short wishes to force the President to do something and thought it could be done by calling representatives of fifty million people to Washington in order to demand action upon the Treaty. I expressed doubt whether any kind of pressure would move the President to action.

We dined with Mr. and Mrs. J. P. Morgan Monday evening. There were none of the usual society crowd there. The Morgans live in a somewhat old-fashioned manner.

On Tuesday the 23rd Burton Hendrick called to get Walter Page's letters
I had collected for him. He agreed not to use any part of them without first
obtaining my permission. I do not wish any criticism directed by Page at the
President to be used.

I am sitting for two portraits at present, one by Kenneth Frazier and the
other by Wayman Adams, neither of which is good.

Wednesday evening we dined with Mr. and Mrs. Bertron and went to a play.

(34)

Mrs. Bertron surprised me by saying that in her opinion if Hoover is elected
President, he will have his party by the ears, and that he would be more arbitrary
and dictatorial than Wilson. I wondered whether this was her own idea or whether
she got it from someone else.

Harry Marsh came today among others. He is still delving in mysteries. He
said he has kept the dictograph record in which Baruch figures. Among other
things, Baruch tells his companion that he expects to rank in history as the
greatest of all Jews. In Baruch's opinion, Disraeli was the greatest, but times
were so different then and opportunities now were so much wider to do big things
that he felt certain he could eclipse him. He thought the President the greatest
man in the world today and he intended to be the next greatest.

March 28, 1920.

On Friday the 26th I saw several newspaper men, Lincoln Colcord and Frederick
Wile among others. We gave a small dinner in the evening and went to the opera.
Henry White, Mr. and Mrs. Wilmerding and Mrs. Alfed Belo were our guests.

Yesterday was an interesting day. Hoover, Dr. Young of Cornell and Frank
Polk called. Polk remained nearly all the afternoon. He unburdened himself of
the things he has had on his mind since we last talked. It is evident he feels
some bitterness because he was not appointed to succeed Lansing as Secretary of
State. The fact that he has been in the State Department so long and has been
acting Secretary so much of the time during Lansing's absence makes the President's
action more marked. It would seem that he does not consider Polk has made good.
Polk lays a lot of it to Tumulty, although he said the President was very much out
with Tumulty at present. According to him, Tumulty has been overplaying his hand; has been giving
out secret information and has been doing other things to make the President angry.
However, Polk said that the two or three people around the President could at any

(35)

time poison his mind against his real friends and well wishers. He thinks this
was done to Newton Baker. The President at one time had Baker in mind for Secre-
tary of State but those around the President shelved him. It is to be remembered
that Baruch and Baker have never liked one another and that Baker has seen the dic-
tograph record about Baruch and has refused to either destroy it or to give it to
him. The President was told that Baker approved Lansing's action in calling the
Cabinet together. It is evident that the President was angry with Lansing because
when he first called the Cabinet together he had it in mind to thresh out the dis-
ability of the President. Polk confirmed my opinion that Lansing had this more in
mind than the interchange of ideas on departmental matters. He said the rumor that
Lansing had told Jusserand of this purpose in calling the Cabinet meeting, and that
Jusserand had told Forster of the Executive Offices, was quite true. Jusserand de-
nied having told Forster but Forster declares he did. The truth probably is that
Jusserand in his eagerness to send his Government the first news of this sensational
denouement led him into an indiscretion.

Polk said the President had not written any of the recent notes to the European
Powers. Douglas Johnson wrote the now celebrated Adriatic note in which the threat
was made to withdraw the Treaty. Polk, himself, wrote one or two, and Dr. Bowman
wrote one. The President has scarcely written anything recently. The only thing
I am certain of, is his letter to Senator Hitchcock. That, I think, is Wilsonesque.
However, I have heard Tumulty say time and again that he could imitate the President's
style until the President himself could scarcely notice the difference.

Rakk The President is seeing practically no one, although now and then a
person like Robert Underwood Johnson is received. This causes much friction. The
several Ambassadors waiting to present their credentials feel if he could see John-
son he might also see them. All of this indicates the low state of the President's
health and the frightful condition into which public affairs have fallen. I

(36)

feel that those around him have assumed a terrible responsibility in persuading the President to continue in office when it is so manifestly impossible for him to perform his duties. All the statements given out from the White House and by Dr. Grayson regarding the President are most moonshine. I have heard for months past that within a few days Cabinet meetings would begin, and again that the President was about ready to play golf. It is stupid to mislead the public in this way for people soon come to believe nothing, and they start sensational rumors that are worse than the real situation, bad as that is.

I asked Polk how Henry Morganthau secured the appointment to Mexico. He said Morganthau wrote the President telling him how well he could fill the place and the President took him at his word and gave him the appointment. As far as Polk knows, no one was back of the appointment and no one was consulted. Polk said, as McAdoo and others, that Morganthau has only recently talked disagreeably of the President and the administration. This is also said of Bainbridge Colby. The President is so isolated that he does not know what is happening in the outside world.

The first day Colby took office his principal visitors were Tumulty, Jimmie Regan, Ray Stannard Baker and ex-Senator O'Gorman. O'Gorman desired something which Colby was inclined to grant until Polk told him how the President felt toward him.

We discussed the Treaty and what was best to do. Polk thinks the President would have pocketed the Treaty if it had come to him with the Lodge Amendments, and this is what Hitchcock and the democratic senators *xaraxpxatatingxhixxagainaxxhix* who voted against its ratification were protecting him against.

Polk looked better than the last time I saw him and he said it was because the responsibility had been shifted from his shoulders to Colby's. He mentioned several incidents which were enough to turn a man's hair gray. One was a let-

(37)

ter written by an obscure person in the State Department when he, Polk, was in New York attending the bedside of a sick relative. The President approved the letter and it would have been sent if Polk had not seen it in time to stop it. It was to Balfour and the tone was exceedingly offensive.

Again, I wish to express deep sorrow over the President's unhappy condition. He deserved a better fate than to have been stricken so sorely, and to be surrounded by a lot of incompetents who are day by day wrecking his reputation and influence.

Hoover's trouble, and he only comes when he is in trouble, was concerning the political situation as it relates to his candidacy for President. He had written two letters, one to the Republican-Hoover Committee of California, and another to a democratic committee in Oregon. I advised him to tone down the one to the democrats and to exclude reference to Bryan. He has already made an enemy of Bryan by the statements he has given out and he has done the same with Penrose. I thought it unwise and unnecessary to mention names and deal in personalities.

He said the Ford Republicans in Michigan wanted assurances from him that he would accept the Republican nomination if it came to him. I advised giving it to them. Both of us deprecated the fact that neither party was likely to nominate a man at all adequate to meet the situation as it exists today. He expressed great admiration for the President and thought he would be the one to lead if he were the Woodrow Wilson of two years ago. He deplored the President's great loss of prestige while in Europe and since and thought it a pity he ever made that venture. We went over again the Armistice provisions and both wondered why he did not take advantage of the Fourteen Points having been accepted, thereby giving him the framework of a treaty.

Hoover was with me for an hour or more. He said his record was being looked up from beginning to end; that they had gotten a story of his having been sued for fraud in the English courts. It is true and he gave an account of what happen-

(38)

ed. He said they would bring everything like that to the fore in the event he was nominated. I thought he should look with philosophy upon such attacks. In the end they would not hurt him. I cited instances where such stories had proved boomerangs.

Mrs. Borden Harriman was another caller yesterday. She asked Margaret Wilson the direct question whether there was a break between the President and me and Margaret gave an evasive answer expressing her own affection for me. Mrs. Harriman gave as an excuse for her question the criticism made of the President on account of the supposed break.

She said General Pershing asked her if I had ever expressed myself as to his chances for the Presidency. She replied that I believed he had a possible chance in the event of a deadlock. The General's face fell and he said "then he does not think I have much chance".

April 2, 1920.

On Monday the 27th we dined with Mrs. Twombley and went to the opera. I had a long talk with Lloyd Griscom, who is one of the party, about General Pershing and his Presidential prospects.

McAdoo has telephoned several times to read statements he was about to put out in regard to the presidential race.

start
Carl Vrooman was also interesting. He desired to undertake to raikaxmancy
forx Hoover democratic cluks. I discouraged him saying I would let him know when I
thought this advisable. The letters Hoover put out in regard to California and Oregon
which he submitted to me have created a sensation, particularly the one announcing
he would permit the use of his name in the republican primaries in California. The
papers have been full of it for the past few days.

H. B. Brougham is trying to persuade me to go to Russia and write of po-
litical and economic conditions there. He has a publisher whom he says is eager to

(39)

publish what I would write, and he believes it would bring me in not less than
$100,000. Brougham's idea is that I should head an expedition into Russia, taking
a great medical man like General Gorcas with an economic expert of equal standing,
and investigate and write an impartial view of conditions as they are. He said when
Roosevelt left the Presidency he took an expedition to Africa and he thought it
would be equally spectacular and more useful if I should head an expedition into
Russia. The thought appeals to me but I gave him no encouragement, for I do not
believe I am physically able to undergo the hardships such a journey would entail.

I have a clipping from the Chicago Tribune sent me by Kohlseat in which
it shows that Lowden followed my advice in regard to his campaign in Illinois as it
relates to the Wood campaign in that state.

April 11, 1920.

William Phillips came to say goodbye before sailing for his new post in
Holland.

We dined with Mr. James Epxar Speyer. Among others Fritz Kreisler was
there.

Sunday evening we went to Judge Pendleton's for dinner and I had a long talk with Murray Butler about the Treaty, European conditions and politics in general. Mrs. Douglas Robinson was one of the guests and she stopped me as we came out of the smoking room to discuss the Wood campaign. She asked if I did not think he made a mistake in not resigning from the Army before going out on the stump. I thought perhaps he had but that it was too late to do anything about it now. I thought his most serious mistake was going into Illinois and Ohio and antagonizing both Lowden and Harding, his two principal competitors. It seemed to me certain that no one could enter the Convention with a majority, therefore, whoever was nominated would be by the votes instructed for other candidates and to antagonize those candidates would seriously mitigate against success.

(40)

Mrs. Abby Scott Baker called Monday to advise with me regarding the campaign
for the ratification of the amendment for women's suffrage.

Mrs. Mary Fels was a Tuesday caller, and in the evening I went to dinner
with the staff of the New Republic at their business home 421 West 21st Street.
They gave an excellent dinner and I talked to them for about an hour afterward.

Thursday a dinner was given to me by James J. Lyons at the Union League
Club. Some of the other guests were Governor Odell, Senator Burton of Ohio,
Generals Bullard and Weigand, Herman Kohlsaat, Judge Meyer, Frank Hillis, Prince
Cantacuzene etc. We sat down promptly at half past seven and it was well after
midnight before I left. Each one told something of his personal experience much
of which will make history. Admiral Usher told of the rescue of the Greely Expe-
dition, General Bullard of his campaign in France, Meyer of the recent exportation
of the "Reds", Cantacuzene of his trials in Russia where he was a General in the
Russian Army before the Revolution. Hillis told some interesting stories of the
Taft Administration, and I was drawn into talking about things I had seen during
my many trips to Europe.

Friday we dined with Mrs. Child and went to the opera. Yesterday we
lunched with Mr. and Mrs. Schuyler Warren to meet Mr. Wilberforce who is connected
with the British Service. In the afternoon, Lowell Mallett, Managing Editor of
Collier's Weekly came to invite me to write an outline of what the Democratic Party
should do at their Convention in San Francisco and afterward. They inviting Sen-
ator Root to write for the Republican Party and they wish his article to be pub-
lished just prior to the meeting of the Republican Convention. I took the mat-
ter under consideration.

Senator Burton was an interesting caller yesterday. He asked Kohlsaat if
I would take lunch with him at the Metropolitan Club. Kohlsaat advised him not to
ask me but to do as others and make an appointment to call. He was with me for

(41)

an hour and we talked almost wholly of the Treaty and the best means to get it ratified. I advised him to see Senator Lodge ostensibly to talk of the Far East from where Burton has recently returned, and to bring up the Treaty as an after-thought. I also suggested that he try to see Mrs. Wilson.

April 16, 1920.

On April 11th we lunched with Mrs. George Vanderbilt. Myron Herrick and a number of interesting people were there.

McAdoo rang me up in the late afternoon to ask if I would not come up to see him since he could not leave home on account of the illness of his wife. We went over the political situation in detail.

On the 12th we dined with de Casenave at the Ritz. It was a large dinner of forty. I found a congenial after-dinner companion in Conelius Bliss, republican though he is, and we discovered much of mutual interest to discuss both in politics and Red Cross work in which he is active.

Albert Bigelow Paine and Henry P. Davison called on the 13th. Paine discussed the writing of a series of articles for Harpers. He asked permission to bring Mr. Wells, Managing Editor of Harpers, to lunch and they are coming today.

Harry Davison has just returned from Europe where he has been on Red Cross matters. The organization had a great and successful meeting in Geneva. The story he tells of famine and distress in Eastern Europe is heartbreaking. I urged him to give the story to the public in such a way as to influence the people and Government. He believes it would take five hundred millions of dollars to accomplish adequate relief.

We dined with Mr. and Mrs. Gordon King. On Wednesday the 14th we gave a dinner to the new firm of Parker, Marshall, Miller & Auchincloss and their wives. The only outside guest was Mrs. George Vanderbilt whom we invited

(42)

as a partner to Judge Parker who is a widower.

Yesterday, Baron Rosen, ex-Russian Ambassador, was perhaps my most interest-
ing caller. He told of Russia during the critical days of the war and of the re-
volution afterward. He claims that he knew Russia would go to pieces unless she
made peace, and he urged his Government to respond favorably to the President's
offer of mediation in December 1916, but he could get no one to listen.

We went to Carnegie Hall last night to witness the presentation of a medal
by the Civic Forum to General Pershing. There were a number of speeches mostly
bad. Whenever I go to such functions, which is seldom or never, I am entirely
reconciled to my lifelong decision never to speak in public except when absolutely
unavoidable as it was in Paris when I closed the Interallied Conference in December
1917.

April 25, 1920.

My notes tell me that on Friday April 16th, Mr. Wells, Managing Editor of Harper's Magazine and Albert Bigelow Paine lunched with me. They came to ask me to write some articles for Harper's. I made no promises.

I went to tea at Mrs. Cornelius Vanderbilt's to meet an English lady whose
name I have now forgotten.

On Saturday the 17th McAdoo telephoned that he had lumbago and asked
me to come up and sit with him awhile in order to advise me concerning some matters
he had in hand.

Monday, the 19th, Frederick Allen walked with me to discuss his candidacy for Governor and other matters. Mrs. Fels also came for advice, and Norman Hapgood was still another caller. He said on Wednesday he was invited to lunch with the New Republic group to meet Pulitzer and Cobb of the World to determine what to do about the Hoover candidacy now that he has gone over to the republicans.

(43)

The callers on Tuesday were unimportant. Major Douglas Johnson, one of our
Inquiry experts in Paris, came on Wednesday. He wished advice concerning a lecture
he was to make at the Century Club on Saturday on the Peace Treaty.

Thursday the 22nd, Eugene Meyer, Chairman of the War Finance Board, was
my principal visitor. He wished advice as to the best way to make the corpora-
tion function usefully, both for this country and Europe.

Friday the 23rd, I had an exceedingly busy day but relatively unimportant.
R. W. Woolley of the Interstate Commerce Commission, and Mellett, Managing Editor
of Collier's, were among those who called. Woolley had much political gossip and
Mellett wished to again urge me to write for Collier's.

Saturday the 24th, Hugh Gibson and Stephen Bonsal were morning callers.
Gibson who has just landed from our Legation in Poland was full of news of that
Republic.

Governor Edwards of New Jersey and Walker Vick lunched with me. Edwards
stayed an unconscionable time. Vick finally intervened and took him away shortly
before four o'clock. He made a fair impression for the first hour and a half, but
after that he talked too much, particularly about what he had accomplished. He
asked me directly as he left to advise him regard-
ing his campaign for President. I was not at all embarrassed by remaining silent
and smiling and merely told him what a friend his Manager, Walker Vick, was
of mine. Fortunately, the elevator arrived in time to stop further discussion.

We have been going out practically every evening to social functions.

May 5, 1920.

My memoranda reminds me that on Monday, April 26th I had B. M. Baruch,
George Foster Peabody and Dr. Andrews as my guests. Baruch and I went to see
my
portrait at the Fifth Avenue Galeries painted by McClure Hamilton. I consider

(44)

it poor as, indeed, everyone else does. The only portrait that has been painted
of me that is a good likeness is the one done by Philip de Laszlo. That is a
striking likeness. So, indeed, is the best done by Jo Davison.

to
April 28th, Frank N. Doubleday called to try and persuade me to do some
writing. Charles Ferguson also called that day to get me to take up the leader-
ship of the group which plans a new school of economics.

On the 29th, Peter Brady, the labor leader, asked advice as to their action
on labor conditions in Porto Rica and San Domingo.

Sir William Wiseman came for a long conference. April 30th Henry P.
Davison was my principal caller of the day. He wished advice on how to proceed
as to
to educate the American people of the necessity of helping Eastern Europe. He
thinks it will take five hundred million dollars and he wondered whether it would
be worth while for him to adopt a suggestion made him to give greater publicity to
an address he made at the dinner given in his honor some ten days ago. I advised
him to get in touch with Melville Stone. He made a tentative engagement to call
with Stone, last Monday.

Saturday, May 1st, Mr. Chambers of Bobbs, Merrill & Co. of Indianapolis
called to urge that I write a book about my experiences and allow them to pub-
lish it.

I gave a luncheon that day. The guests were, Herman H. Kohlsaat, James
W. Lyons, John J. Carty, Dr. Henry Pritchett, Dr. Albert Shaw, Hamilton Holt, John
J. Spurgeon, Edward S. Martin, S. E. Mezes, Louis Wiley and George H. Doran.

Monday, Harry P. Davison and Melville Stone made their promised visit for
a conference on what was best to do to relieve the situation in famine stricken
Europe. We came to no definite conclusion. Neither Stone nor I thought Davi-
son's plan for a big splash in the New York papers would be effective. Stone sug-
gested that he write a statement and let him, Stone, send it out by mail to the

(45)

1200 or more newspapers served by the Associated Press, and let them release it as telegraphic news on a certain day. Even this I thought would be ineffective. I felt it was fairly certain that no dent could be made on Congress unless political pressure was brought to bear. My suggestion was to get Murray Crane, Elihu Root on the one side, and the President, perhaps, on the other, and have them enlist the Protestant and Catholic Churches to bring pressure on Congress for immediate action.

The General Methodist Conference of Bishops is in session now and it was the consensus of opinion that Davison would do well to go out and address them with the hope of getting that powerful organization enlisted on our side. It was also agreed that he should see Cardinal Gibbons whom we all thought would be sympathetic. I told Davison that the work could be accomplished but it must be done by action and not by talk.

I have had a busy day with Frank Doubleday on the one hand, who came in the morning, and with Curtis, on the other, who came in the afternoon. They both want me to write for them. Doubleday wants my war experiences but Curtis was more interested in present day international affairs. Doubleday offered me two thirds of whatever profit Doubleday, Page & Co. might make out of the venture. He also offered Burton Hendrick's services to help in the compilation. I understood that he also offered me the entire profit which they might make from syndicated articles in advance. He said he would make a definite offer in writing within a few days.

Curtis said I would hear from him in a few days after he discussed the matter with Spurgeon. As a matter of fact, I do not take kindly to the Curtis idea of writing on current affairs.

May 11, 1920.

The people I have seen since I last wrote in the diary are unimportant.

Bainbridge Colby called over the telephone yesterday and among other things asked

(46)

if I did not think things were going pretty well. This I consider the acme of optimism. Everything is going from bad to worse. The President's letter of yesterday to the Oregon Democrats put the finishing touch to the situation. It makes it practically impossible for him to accept the Treaty with such reservations as it is possible to get.

I have a letter this morning from Bob Woolley in which he says he saw Grayson and they agreed to enlist Carter Glass and try to carry out my advice not to give when he was here last week. As a matter of fact, Woolley did not get my position straight and what he advised the President and Grayson to do is wholly different from what I had in mind. I find it difficult to get even such intelligent men as McAdoo, Woolley and others, who are greatly interested in the Treaty, to understand what should be done. They agree with me while we are talking and within a few days you find that they totally misunderstood what I meant. This is caused largely by their not understanding the Treaty itself. It indicates how perfectly hopeless it would be to make the Treaty a campaign issue in the form it will certainly assume. If people like them cannot understand it, it is not to be expected that the man in the street will.

I wrote the President Saturday thinking perhaps I might make a final plea. I kept the letter over until Monday and found in the morning papers his letter to the Oregon Democrats. That, of course, killed all possibility of a change of front so I did not mail the letter.

In Woolley's letter of yesterday he intimates that Grayson told that even if the Treaty is ratified with the Lodge Amendments, the President would pigeonhole it declaring that the Treaty had been rejected. In other words, it goes back to his intense hatred of Lodge which is fully reciprocated. What a tragedy it is that two such men should be in positions where personal antagonism can work such harm. The President would take reservations fully as drastic as those prepared

(47)

by the so-called Lodge Committee if they were given another name, and Lodge would
have taken the Treaty as it came from Versailles if anyone but Wilson had been its
sponsor.

I am doing every day all I can to help out, but I have to work through
others. No one I think ever had any influence with the President excepting my
self, and now that those near him have succeeded in removing me, he listens to
no one. Even those who have brought about the estrangement now feel alarmed, and
I believe would welcome the old order of things. The President is evidently running
true to form and I wonder every day how I influenced him so many years and yet re-
tained his friendship and affection.

I called Woolley over the telephone today and explained my true po-
sition which he totally misunderstood. He promised to see Glass, Hitchcock, Un-
derwood and others at once and see what could be done.

May 27, 1920.

It has been sometime since I have made any record, although many things have
happened and I have seen a number of people of influence and interest. Politicians,
jurists, financiers, educators, suffragists and foreigners have been represented.

Major General Townsend, who surrendered at Kut, was one of those I have seen.
We fell to talking of my old friend Captain Bill McDonald of the Texas Rangers.
The General seemed perfectly fascinated with the description I gave of Captain Bill
and with the stories of adventure I told. He finally said that it seemed to him
that he, Townsend, was the Bill McDonald of the British Army; that whenever the
Governor of Texas had an impossible task, he sent Bill to do it, and without ade-
quate assistance. I did not tell him but I thought the difference between himself
and Bill was that Bill always accomplished the impossible. I also thought of the
heroic Texans at the Alamo. Surrounded by the armies of Mexico who demanded that

(48)

they surrender, they refused to make any terms whatsoever and each man died fighting to the last. There is a saying in Texas that "Thermopylae had her messenger of defeat, the Alamo had none".

Frank Doubleday has been at me again about the publication of my papers. He offers me two thirds of the profits and 90% of syndicate profits, both domestic and foreign.

The most interesting happening, however, since I last wrote has been my arrangement with Cyrus H. K. Curtis of Philadelphia. He has been here once or twice with John J. Spurgeon and yesterday came alone and we arranged terms. Both he and Spurgeon wish me to go to Europe and send back cables from there under my own name. They had a carefully prepared memorandum which I did not even look at. I told them I would not consent to do anything of that character, but I would consider advising the Public Ledger or even the Curtis Publications on foreign and domestic affairs. They seemed eager to have me on any terms and I outlined my own plan which was accepted.

I am to go where I please, when I please, and do what I please. In other words, I insisted upon not being hampered. I also declined to make any contract. If I like the work and if it is worth while I shall continue it for awhile. If I do not like it I shall drop it. As to the announcement, I would agree only to their saying that "Colonel House has associated himself with the Public Ledger in an advisory capacity." Simply that and nothing more.

They are to give me $2500. per month, a letter of credit for $10,000. and our passage to and from Europe. All our plans for the summer have been turned about and instead of going to our little farm cottage at Coolidge Point on the North Shore of Massachusetts, we will sail for Europe on the Lapland, June 12th.

I have had all kinds of offers during the winter but have not considered any of them. After I outlined my plan to Curtis I consulted my friends in whom I had

(49)

confidence and they were unanimous in approving it. I am somewhat skeptical myself as to the wisdom of doing even this, but I am alone in the feeling among those with whom I have talked.

We have been to several house parties since I last recorded. One week-end we spent with Mrs. Twombley at "Florham" and one with Mr. and Mrs. Burden at Syosset. My time has been rather strenuously occupied. I have been endeavoring to advise the President through Senator Glass and Admiral Grayson. I am wondering whether they mention to him that it is my counsel. My letters to Woolley tell of the advice I have offered so I shall not go into it here. So far, the President has followed it by sending his veto message to the Knox resolution after returning the Treaty. Of course, if there was any chance of getting him to accept such reservations as the Senate would pass, I should advise differently, but since that is impossible, I have thus advised the next best thing.

Secretary Lane was with me yesterday and I asked him why the President sent the Armenian Message to Congress when he knew there was not a chance of the United States accepting a mandate no matter how much it was to be desired. Lane replied, "The President is not thinking of his party or of anyone excepting his own place in history. He is simply making a record regardless of whether it wrecks his friends and the Democratic Party". I was surprised to find Lane so bitter.

June 9, 1920.

My memoranda indicates that during the last ten days my most important callers were Edwin Webster, of Stone & Webster, David Starr Jordan and David Lawrence. Webster was on the eve of sailing for Europe and wished advice as to whether his firm should continue their European office in Paris, or whether it would be wise to discontinue it. I advised keeping it open until after the elections in order to see what would happen. He said they were doing no business at

(50)

present.

David Starr Jordan merely wished to thank me for my services at Paris and express regret that "you did not have complete control so as to have accomplished what I know you had in mind".

David Lawrence gave all the Washington gossip, and said if I should write anything about the Peace Conference his syndicate would like to use it.

Saturday night we left for Boston and remained for a week at Chestnut Hill with Mona. I saw some people there like Thos. Nelson Page, Frederick Dixon and others. Page was anxious for me to go to Washington and see the President. I explained the situation to prove how impossible it was for me to do other than I have done.

We returned from Boston June fifth. On Sunday we lunched with Mr. and Mrs. and Mrs. Cleveland H. Dodge at Riverdale. Dodge and I discussed the President, his relations with me, and everything incident thereto. He regrets the severance of our relations.

General Pershing called that afternoon to ask advice about going on the retired list of the Army and engaging in some business. From a very close friend of his I had learned that he intended taking this step but that he would not do so until after conferring with me. My advice was to do it if he so desired but to be exceedingly careful as to the nature of the business he went into. I cautioned him to be certain not to do anything that might even remotely reflect upon him. His reputation I thought was secure and history would not be interested in what he did after he returned from France unless he did something that would reflect upon his personal character.

Daniel Roper has just left me. He is to have charge of McAdoo's fortune at San Francisco and came for advice. He also wanted me to write some parts of the Democratic Platform. I tentatively promised to do this and he is to call

(51)

Friday for another conference.

I am busy with preparations to get away and I shall not resume the diary
until we reach England.

June 10, 1920.

It was my intention not to make further entries in the diary until we reached
unexpectedly
England but Justice McReynolds of the Supreme Court called this morning. He had a
woeful tale to tell of conditions at Washington. He sees a good deal of Grayson
and is a warm friend of Vice President Marshall. Marshall, he thinks, should
have demanded a medical opinion under oath from the President's physicians as to
his true condition. He should then have taken it to Congress and asked advice. In
McReynolds' opinion, Congress would have declared the President disabled and Mar-
shall could have functioned and the world and the United States might have been
saved the disastrous months which have followed the President's stroke at the end
of September. McReynolds said Admiral Grayson wished to let Marshall act, but
Mrs. Wilson was the objector. Grayson thought the President would have been will-
ing if Mrs. Wilson had not influenced him to the contrary. I, myself, believe if
the matter had been presented to the President he might have consented, but I have
my doubts about Grayson having advised him to do so. If he had resigned, the entire
current of recent history might have been changed. And even if he had not resigned,
he would have saved the day had he not been so stubborn. My main regret is the
failure of the Versailles Treaty carrying with it the League of Nations. While
I agree with Wilson that the United States should have accepted the Covenant without
change, as other nations have done, I differ from him in not taking the best terms
he could get from an ignorant, prejudiced and partisan Senate.

(52)

LONDON, ENGLAND.

June 25, 1920.

I do not believe I have ever been so busy in London as I have during the past three days that we have been here. My engagements began Monday afternoon upon arrival and they have continued without interruption since. We have more invitations, social and political, than we can possibly accept. The most important conferences have been with Lord Northcliffe, Sir William Tyrrell, Col. Arthur Murray, M. Paderewski, Paul Mantoux, Viscount Grey, Lord Robert Cecil and Admirals Hall and Browning. I am gradually getting a picture of European affairs and it is not altogether a pleasant one.

I dined with Lord Grey last night at Brooks and afterward we walked across St James Park to Lord Glenconnor's house in Queen Anne's Gate and had a conference there which not only included Grey, Glenconnor, and myself but Cecil, Tyrrell and Wiseman. Tyrrell had told me that in his opinion the situation between the United States and Great Britain was dangerous and we ought to be prepared with both Grey and Cecil to do it. We did this and so effectively that Grey is to see Austen Chamberlain, Chancellor of the Exchequer, today or Monday and try to persuade the Government through him not to do some of the things they have in mind to do.

There has been a tentative arrangement made between our two Treasuries regarding the British debt to us. When Lloyd George and his colleagues heard of it they got Chamberlain to nullify it because of their purpose to try to get the United States to cancel the British debt since the British had in mind to cancel all the debts owed to her by the Allies. It is George's intention to write a letter direct to the President and present the matter to him. I expressed the opinion that it was hard to believe that anyone with sufficient maturity to be a member of the British Cabinet would follow so foolish a procedure.

(53)

In the first place the President would have no right to cancel the debt without the consent of Congress, and the well known antagonism between the President and Congress is in itself sufficient reason for not taking this course. Then, too, Congress will not reconvene until December, therefore nothing could be done until then, and the folly of injecting such a matter into the Presidential campaign at this moment is beyond belief. Both political parties would pledge themselves against it so that any future understanding would be impossible.

What is probably in the back of George's mind is to make a splendid gesture of generosity toward the Allies and have them feel that Great Britain is willing to remit everything due her provided the United States will do likewise. This, I suppose, he thinks will make friends for England and enemies for the United States.

I called Grey's and Cecil's attention to the fact that the United States could easily show that it was not generous on the part of Great Britain, but selfish for the reason that the debts owed her were of but little value, while the debt Great Britain owes the United States is good and Great Britain would be the gainer by just so much of the debt she could cancel with the United States. The United States, owing no one, would have no reciprocal benefits.

I am to see Grey again Monday afternoon after he has seen Chamberlain whom he is to tell of his conversation with me.

Paderewski called this afternoon. He is just from Poland and gave a gloomy account of the situation there. We are to dine with them Monday and go to the opera and I am looking forward to having another talk with him. He seems even more than ever my devoted friend.

I have a letter from Brand Whitlock in which he reminds me of a prophesy I made to him four years ago that Senator Harding would be the republican nominee for President.

(54)

Paul Mantoux and I had a very interesting discussion in regard to the League of Nations and to the Peace Conference. He asked if I remembered asking Foch during the Armistice proceedings whether he thought it well to make peace with the Germans at that time or whether it should be delayed. Foch was emphatic in deciding in favor of peace, provided it could be made upon the terms which we had in mind to lay down and which we later did lay down and were accepted.
Mantoux's point and mine was this: those of us who sat in at the Armistice proceedings and even the President himself have been criticized for ending the war too soon. It has been said that if the war had continued two months longer Germany would have been completely crushed and the Allied armies could have marched to Berlin. Mantoux was wondering whether he could not in some way put this information out. I advised him to do it, though we did not agree upon a plan.

I recalled to Mantoux that Foch also made the remark on another occasion when we were discussing naval terms, in which he indicated a desire to modify the terms because he was afraid the Germans would not accept the armistice if they were as severe as was suggested by the British Admiralty. On this occasion, Foch declared that the life of a single French soldier had a higher value, to his mind, than all the German ships.

Mantoux and I thought that in putting out the statement he should say it was the noblest moment in Marechal Foch's life, for he was renouncing a triumphant entry into Berlin in order to spare the lives of the Allied Forces.

I lunched with Mr. Balfour today. No one other than ourselves were present excepting Sir Maurice Hankey and Sir William Wiseman. I did most of the talking and gave them my views on the American political situation. I told Balfour, as I am telling everyone, the actual situation in regard to the President and myself, that is, I am not in touch with him although we have

(55)

never quarreled; that I have ceased to act in an advisory capacity and have not seen him since he left Paris.

Henkey said the Prime Minister wished me to lunch with him this week. I replied that it was impossible; that every day was filled. He then asked me for dinner on the 28th which I also declined since we are booked up with the Paderewskis. I promised to take breakfast with him some morning.

June 30, 1920.

Invitations continue to pour in. We have had to decline many attractive ones. The Salisburys wanted us to lunch on the sixth but we could not go. Lord Curzon has asked me several times but I was unable to accept.

I have a letter from Sir Horace Plunkett in which he says there is a movement among a section of Sinn Feiners to suggest me as mediator between England and Ireland. I wish I might do this for I have a clear idea as to what I should do if I were placed in a position to act.

Much to my surprise, when I breakfasted with Lloyd George yesterday morning he brought up the Irish question. I gave an outline of what I would do if I were in his place which was about this: I would set a date, say one year, or perhaps two, from July first, upon which the British Government would relinquish all control over Ireland in every way excepting where it affected the Army, Navy and foreign affairs. All British officials would be withdrawn; Ireland would be expected to take over all functions of government, such as customs, postoffices, etc. etc. and she would be free of any obligation as to the national debt. She would start afresh, and under any form of government the people desired. England would not collect any taxes, either directly or indirectly, from her, or ask her to contribute either money or men to the army, navy or the maintenance of their foreign affairs. On the other hand, England would make no further grants of any sort whatever, such as old age pensions etc.

(56)

While Ireland could not have an army or navy, she would be fully protected against invasion by Great Britain and at no expense to herself. She would be in much the same position to Great Britain as Cuba is to the United States. Ireland would have a consular service in order to protect her commercial rights. The basis of this plan was suggested to me by Grey.

Lloyd George was interested in the plan and did not seem averse to it except as it affects Ulster. He thought the English people would never be willing to turn Protestant Ireland over to Catholic Ireland. He also spoke of there being some 200,000 Protestants in Ireland outside of Ulster who would need protection. I thought the Nationalists would probably treat the Protestants fairly and, if they did not, they could go elsewhere. As for Ulster I was sure she was amply able to care for herself.

We were breakfasting alone and could talk with the utmost freedom, which he appeared entirely willing to do. The main thing he wished to discuss was the advisability of writing a letter to the President telling him that Great Britain had in mind the cancellation of the debts owed her by the Allies and that he hoped the United States would, in turn, cancel the debt Great Britain owed her. I advised strongly against this, giving the same reasons I had already given Grey and Cecil. Much to my surprise, he said he was committed to writing the letter. I take it he has promised the French he would do so. Some sort of letter, he said, he would be compelled to write in order to fulfil his promise. I then counselled writing the President a personal and confidential letter, stating it was in no way official. This was to avoid having the President publish it or his answer.

I thought there were two difficulties: one was the President was not in good humor with Europe; he was not well and was in an irritable

(57)

state of mind and in all probability if George wrote him an official letter
he would receive a reply through the press which would cause bad feeling. I
thought, too, the situation exceedingly dangerous and advised him to be care-
ful what he said or did with Washington at this time. George said he under-
stood the situation to be that there was practically no government at Washing-
ton, and I had to admit it. I thought it best to admit this and to make it
as strong, or stronger, than he thought in order to keep him and Curzon from
making a bad situation worse.

I told George, as I had Balfour, of my relations with the President and
spoke of him in affectionate terms. He reciprocated and said he thought a
great deal of the President, a statement I took with due allowance. He cri-
ticized him for the Adriatic settlement. He referred to Nitti as being the one
Prime Minister having ideals nearest the President's, and said that Wilson's
action had overthrown the Nitti Government. He could not understand why the
President made an uncompromising stand on Fiume when he had permitted 300 000
Germans in the Tyrol to go to Italy without question. I thought this one of
the reasons he had adopted so uncompromising an attitude on Fiume, for he saw
his mistake as to the Tyrol.

I asked George if he recalled the conference that Clemenceau, he and
I had about the Tyrol before the President came to Europe and the conclusions
we reached then, which was that thaxximaxda that part of the line designated by
the Treaty of London should be changed. He remembered quite well and said
that neither he nor Clemenceau ever understood why the President acquiesced so
readily in the other view.

I made a move to go but George insisted that we go indoors and see
Bonar Law who was waiting for him. Law, George and I talked for another half

(58)

hour. While we were talking, Sir Eric Geddes was announced, but the mes-
senger was told, somewhat brusquely I thought, that "we are having a conference
with Colonel House and we cannot see him".

The morning was raw, but George had the table out of doors under the
trees. We had to wear overcoats. A little Welsh maid served us and George
used their native language in speaking to her. It was a queer breakfast--
salmon, sausage, broiled ham, griddle cakes, tea and jam.

Among others, George spoke of Hoover, and not in a very complimentary
manner. He had particular reference to Hoover's statement in the American
press replying to Sir George Paish in which Hoover said Europe was amply able
to pay her debts and that it would be best for her to do so. George thought
this an election dodge, and George ought to know one when he sees it. Both
George and Bonar Law were interested in my delineation of the political situa-
tion in the United States. My suggestion as to an Irish settlement was large-
ly the result of a conversation I had with Grey on Monday when I went to tea
with him at Lord Glenconnor's house in Queen Anne's Gate, and were Grey's views
rather than mine. Grey and I are always talking of the problems of the Bri-
tish Empire and when he had finished he indicated that sometime in the near
future he might put forth some such statement as I outlined to George.

There was no one present at this tea excepting Grey and myself and we
had a confidential talk as to his future political activities. I urged him
to enter the arena again. I thought the world needed a man of his character
at this time, and I assured him he of all men would come nearer taking Wilson's
place as a world leader. In fact, I knew of no other man who could do so. I
think this impressed him and it was tentatively agreed that from time to time he
should make political statements which might grow into his assuming the leader-

(59)

ship of the Liberal Party.

Monday, Lord Cowdray sent his car for us and we motored to his beautiful country place for lunch. I was sorry that I could not remain longer but I had an engagement with Grey for tea which I could not break. Grey had been unable to see Austen Chamberlain as planned, but he wrote him a letter which he advised with me about sending. It seemed to me admirable in every way and was sent as he wrote it. However, the letter was unnecessary for I had already settled the matter with the Prime Minister.

Saturday we lunched with Sir Arthur and Lady Colfax. Lord Milner, Lord and Lady Reading, Lord Cave and Sir Robert Horne were the other guests. As usual, they drew me to talking of American political affairs.

On Sunday we lunched with the Readings. The other guests were Lord and Lady Sandhurst and several others whose names I have forgotten. Reading spoke about Lloyd George's intention of writing the President upon the international debt question and urged me to see him at the earliest opportunity in order to persuade him from making such a mistake.

We went from the Readings to call on the Earl and Countess of Lindsey, and we had Mrs. Sidney Porter and her niece for dinner.

We dined with the Paderewskis Monday evening and went with them to Covent Garden. Paderewski said, in no circumstances would he ever play for the public again but he might do some composing. We discussed Poland and European affairs in general.

Tuesday was the busiest day I have had since it began with breakfast with the Prime Minister and ended with a musical at Lord Northcliffe's. We lunched that day with Wickham Steed, of the Times, had several conferences during the afternoon, notably one with George Paish on the international financial situation, and we dined with Lord and Lady Beatty at Mall House. There were

(60)

twenty-five or thirty guests at dinner. I was placed between the Honorable Mrs. Beckett and Lady Kitty Somerset. The one was a confirmed Tory and the other an extreme Liberal. When the ladies left the table, Beatty and I had a long talk on naval affairs in general and the war in particular. He told of how distressed he was over the Simms-Daniels controversy in America and how unfair he thought it was to the American Navy. We discussed von Tirpitz' book. The first volume he thought admirable but the second not worth while. He agrees with me that Tirpitz is a forceful man but that when the war began his work was finished and his usefulness ended in the creation of the modern German Navy. He told some stories of the Battle of Jutland, one in particular of the destroyer "Shark". It is a stirring tale and one which, in Beatty's opinion, ranks with Richard Grenville's fight with the Spanish Armada some four hundred years ago. We both thought that such resistance as that made by Grenville and the Captain of the "Shark" were of great value to a nation. While apparently nothing is gained by fighting against such odds, yet the spirit of the fight lives and puts the fear of God in the hearts of would be enemies for generations after.

Yesterday we lunched with Mr. and Mrs. Asquith. The Ambassador and Mrs. Davis and two others were the only others present besides the family. Mrs. Asquith, much to my surprise, received me with open arms. She has had it in the back of her mind that I saved the Lloyd George Government in 1917 when I was in London on the House Mission, and I have not been in her good graces since. I enjoyed talking to her daughter, the Princess Bibesco, who is a clever young woman.

Monnet came in the afternoon for tea and to discuss the League of Nations. I advised them to proceed with caution and to do nothing that critics in the United States could take exception to. If they did this, I thought it

(61)

only a question of time when we would enter the League.

July 12, 1920.

I am not keeping my diary closely. I have been very busy and have little enthusiasm for keeping a record. I have made notes each day and find that on July first we lunched with Ambassador and Mrs. Davis alone and I had an intimate talk with them about their plans for the future.

The Bulgarian Chargé was an afternoon caller and we dined with Lord and Lady Swathling where a large company had been asked to meet us. The Norwegian Minister brought us home and during the evening I had some conversation with him as well as with the Swedish Minister who was also present.

On July second we lunch with Lord and Lady Bryce. Some of the other guests were Lord and Lady Beatty and General and Lady Lyttleton. We dined with Mr. and Mrs. St Loe Strachey in Queen Anne's Gate.

Paderewski was an afternoon caller and we planned for him to say something about Poland for the American public.

On Saturday we motored to Lanier Winslow's country home for the Fourth of July celebration of what he termed "our victory over the Red Coats". The Ambassador and Mrs. Davis and most of the Embassy staff, the Consul General and his wife were there. We motored back to London Sunday afternoon with the Ambassador.

The press associations telephoned frequently to give news of the San Francisco Convention and we did not go to bed Saturday night until after twelve o'clock. The Davis family were hoping that "lightning would strike them". Mrs. Davis hoped for this more than the Ambassador. His chances appeared good as a dark horse. I do not know Cox well enough to make an estimate of his

(62)

abilities. I cabled congratulations and received a pleasant cabled reply. I
also wrote him today, a copy of which is attached to the record.

On Monday the fifth we dined with Mr. and Mrs. Sidney Webb. No one else was present because they wished a private talk. I found myself only in partial agreement with their views. They are writing a book outlining what they consider the ideal socialistic government, and they promised to send me a copy as soon as it is printed. I liked Mrs. Webb more than her husband.

Herbert Kaufman was an interesting visitor that day. He is recently back from Austria and Germany and was full of his trip.

On the sixth we lunched with Sir William and Lady Tyrrell, and in the evening we dined with Mr. and Mrs. James E. Dunning. They had an interesting group of bankers to meet us, including Lord and Lady Ashfield and Mr. and Mrs. Robert Fleming.

I had many callers during the day.

On the seventh the Ambassador asked for a conference. We went over the situation at home, the advisability of his not returning to his post when he goes home on leave of absence during this campaign. He desires to make a few speeches during the campaign and I promised to see that he gets a proper setting for them. I advised him to start to speak until after the first of October and to hold himself aloof until then. I also advised him to resign from the service before he made any campaign speeches.

We lunched with the Sanfores. Among the many guests were Lord Northcliffe and Lord Queenborough with both of whom I had some intimate talk.

That evening we gave a dinner to Viscount Grey of Fallodon, the other guests being Ambassador and Mrs. Davis, Prince and Princess Bibesco, Lord Sandwich, Princess Sapieha and eight or ten others.

(63)

On Thursday the 8th we lunched with Bernard Shaw. He had the German Chargé and his wife who is of American descent. I had little or no conversation with the Chargé and felt rather unhappy during the lunch.

Lord Northcliffe was an afternoon caller. I tried to convince him that the Allies were headed for trouble in their insistent demands upon Germany for the impossible.

On the tenth I lunched with Lord Haldane in order to discuss the political situation. He is anxious for me to meet some of the Labor leaders, for he tells me it is merely a question of time when they will be in charge of the Government. He gave me a copy of his last book entitled "Before the War" and wrote a pleasant inscription in it.

Grey has also given me his latest book "Recreation" in which he wrote on the flyleaf, "To Edward House from Edward Grey".

We spent the week-end with Mr. Balfour's sister, Lady Rayleigh at her lovely country estate. The most interesting guest there was Lord Finley with whom I had many delightful talks.

One of my callers this afternoon was J. Howard Whitehouse. He talked of the differences between Great Britain and the United States. He tells me it is not uncommon to hear the remark that the next war will be between the two nations. He believes the situation is critical and will be until the present Government is replaced by Liberals or Laborites. He said he wanted me to know that nothing had happened during the past year to lessen in any way the regard which all classes in England felt for me.

This reminds me that Charles Grasty told me today that he knew in Paris when the trouble began with the President. He was at that time stopping with the Wilsons. He said while they said nothing about me themselves, he could see I was piqueing the President's vanity to a dangerous degree. I quite

(64)

agree with this and I realized at the time I was doing it, but I could not avoid it and do my work effectively.

July 15, 1920.

I gave a luncheon today at which Bernard Shaw, Sir Horace Plunkett and Sir William Wiseman were present. Shaw was at his best. I have never listened to such a voluminous talker as he is. He talks so well that one does not mind it for awhile. He was telling about his new book and play "Back to Methuselah". When he had finished, I remarked it was a pity he lacked imagination. He was pleased, for of all the imagination he has displayed in the past this play will top the list.

Before luncheon, Plunkett and I had a talk on the Irish situation and we tried to formulate some plan by which we could bring it to a focus. We first thought of going to Balfour, but later changed to Reading, and before the day was done it was considered best to halt proceedings for the moment.

I had tea with Lord Grey in the afternoon at the home of Lord Glenconnor where he is stopping. We went over several phases of the world's troubles, among them the Irish problem. I told Grey that I had been mentioned in some quarters as mediator. He thought Lloyd George would not take kindly to it because he would make want the credit of settling it himself. In reply to this I suggested that George would, in any event, appropriate the credit for whatever was done if, indeed, I was able to do anything. Grey smilingly agreed. We both thought I should not move in the matter unless invited by the Government, Sinn Fein and Ulster. Plunkett, too, to whom I later told of the conversation, thought that Grey and I were the only two who could at this time bring about an adjustment.

Grey thought there had never been an instance in history where a

(65)

man had stood for so great a cause as Woodrow Wilson and then destroyed it him-
self for, after all, the President is the real wrecker of the League of Nations.
While he was right and the Senate wrong in their controversy, yet it cannot be
forgotten that in the beginning and even at the very end, the Senate was willing
to accept the League of Nations with certain reservations which did not in the
opinion of its friends nullify its provisions. In bringing about the "solemn
referendum" Wilson placed the Republican Party in an attitude of absolute an-
tagonism to the League and all it stands for. Should they win, the President
must be held responsible for the disaster.

at
President Lowell of Harvard who is here told me yesterday that any
time up to the first of September, before the President went on his speaking
tour, that he, the President, might have written the reservations himself and
the Senate would have accepted them. I believe this is true. The world is
astonished at the fall of Wilson, but it was inevitable. I had seen for a
long while that he lacked many of the essentials of leadership, but I had come
to believe that my fears regarding him were more or less groundless. He often
said to me or to some of the family in my presence, "House is afraid of me. He
thinks I will sometime do the things I say I will'. He does not know that I
am merely relieving my mind in his presence."

Yesterday was an unhappy day with me. I received a cable telling of our
dear friend Frank Trumbull's death in California. He was one of the finest
spirits I have known. His life had been hard, but he had at last reached
success and a position where he could enjoy it. He leaves a host of friends to
mourn his loss.

We lunched with Lord and Lady Beatty at Hanover House. Mr. Balfour,
Lord Hugh Cecil, a duchess or two and many other notable people were there.
After lunch Mrs. Ronald Greville offered to take us home. Someone else also

(66)

asked us and there was some discussion about it, but it was finally decided we
should go with Mrs. Greville as she was to make a call at Claridge's on Mrs.
Cornelius Vanderbilt.
We started and had not gone more than a few hundred
yards from the gates when two men attempted to cross the road in front of us.
One stopped to pick up a cigar he had dropped; became confused; hesitated and
was struck and killed by our motor. It was a sickening sight. Balfour and
Beatty were just behind us, and brought us home in their car. The man was not
quite dead and was taken to the hospital where he died in a few minutes. We
were not running rapidly and it was as nearly an unavoidable accident as could
be.

I have been thinking how almost every event in life is determined perhaps
ages before. If the discussion had not arisen about which motor we were to
take, the accident could not have occurred since we would have passed the spot
in advance of the man who was killed. We took Mrs. Greville's car because
she was coming to Claridge's, and so the chain goes back indefinitely.

I dined last night at the Reform Club to meet the Liberal Editors of
England. Among those present were Spender, Gardiner, Massingham, Wallace,
Scott, Archer, Paish and a number of others. There was also Sir Donald McLean
the Asquith leader in the House of Commons. They wished me to make a speech
but I asked them to put any questions upon any subject about which they thought
I might give information and I would answer them. This is more difficult than
a set speech, but in many ways it is more satisfactory to an audience. When
a man makes a speech he says what it pleases upon subjects about which he
desires to talk. The other way, he talks of the things about which his lis-
teners desire information. I talked for nearly two hours and we did not break
up until eleven o'clock. Paish, Gardiner and I walked home together in the
quiet of the evening.

(67)

July 19, 1920.

I have had a busy time in the past few days with the League of Nations, the Irish question and kindred matters. I have been approached from several different directions in regard to Ireland. It looks at the moment as if Sinn Fein might ask for me. It is within the range of possibility that the Prime Minister may also desire me to go to Ireland and from an interview I have just had with Moneignor Kelly, it is not impossible that the Church will also work in the same direction. Wiseman is to have a conference tomorrow with Philip Kerr, who is now the most influential person near the Prime Minister. Dr. Kelly assured me of his warm cooperation in the event I should undertake to mediate. This means the cooperation of the Roman Catholic Church with its powerful influence in Ireland. I am not seeking the honor of mediation gladly, for I realize what it would mean. It would be like getting into a hornet's nest. Nevertheless I would willingly give my life to bring about a settlement of this ancient quarrel.

With the League of Nations, I have been doing what I could to bring pressure to bear upon Senator Harding. I have been directing my efforts through the press and Arthur Sweetser, at my request, went to Holland Saturday night to see Senator Root in order to try and persuade him to cable Harding before he is irrevocably committed against the League by his speech of acceptance at the nomination for President.

I had an interesting conference with Sir William Tyrrell of the Foreign Office on Saturday the 17th. He is very frank and tells me practically all that goes on, relying upon my discretion. The most astounding information was that the British Ambassador at Washington had just sent a cable to the Foreign

(68)

Office stating that all the anti-British in Washington were supporting Governor Cox, and that if Cox was elected he would be largely dominated by Tammany which he said was entirely anti-British. Not satisfied with giving this false and altogether unwarranted advice, he advised the Prime Minister to send a despatch during the Democratic Convention to someone in San Francisco, giving his views upon the Irish question. Even Downing Street, little as they know of American affairs, knew better than to do this. The third astonishing suggestion was made sometime ago which was to the effect that a statement should be made by the British Government that it was their intention to place an embargo on certain raw materials produced in the British Empire as a matter of reprisal in the event the United States undertook to put an embargo on raw materials. Geddes thought this would have a good effect and stop action by the United States.

We are still going out to luncheons and dinners. On Saturday we lunched with Mrs. Higgins who had a very interesting group of people to meet us, and Saturday evening we went to Lord and Lady Curzon's for dinner to meet the King and Queen of Spain. The guests were mostly of the fashionable set. I found but one man whom I cared to talk with and that was Austen Chamberlain, Chancellor of the Exchequer. There were five tables in all. I sat at the Queen's table between the Duchess of San Carlos and the Duke of Portland.

July 23, 1920

On Tuesday I lunched with Sir James Barrie alone. We had a delightful talk about many subjects of mutual interest.

In the afternoon, among my visitors was Mr. Phillips of the Foreign Office. He had a plan for Ireland which he wished to submit for my criticism. In the evening we dined with Lord Moulton. It was a large party mostly of

(69)

the legal fraternity. Charles Dickens' son was one of the guests.

On Wednesday the 21st, I had several important engagements. Professor William Rappard had come from Switzerland and we discussed what action should be taken by the Swiss in view of the controversy as to where the first Assembly should be called.

In the afternoon I had tea with Dr. John Hobson to meet some of the labor group, and later with Mrs. Herbert Asquith. The most interesting person Hobson had was Mrs. Philip Snowdon who is just back from Russia and Germany.

We dined with the Lionel Guests in the evening. Lord and Lady Pirie and Lord and Lady Sandhurst were among the guests.

On Thursday, Mr. Hedlam-Morley of the Foreign Office called. Morley is writing a history of the Peace Conference and he thought I could give him some needed information. He particularly wanted to know why a preliminary peace was not made, and where the fault lay. Strangely enough, at that moment, the Paris Edition of the New York Herald was brought in and I noticed in large headlines that Senator Harding had made a statement concerning what I had published upon this same subject. That is, I made a statement Tuesday for the syndicated newspapers, and Harding twisted what I said into criticism of the President. He leaves himself open to an attack which I may or may not avail myself of later, provided the President does not rush in himself. I gave Morley an outline of what occurred and told him if he would write me when I reached home I would go through my papers and give him further and more accurate information.

We lunched with Lord and Lady Bryce alone in order to have an intimate talk. In the afternoon we went to the Garden Party at Buckingham Palace. There were several thousand people there and I was surprised at the number I knew. I did not realize I had so many acquaintances in London. I avoided

(70)

say
the King and Queen until Butler Wright, our Counsellor of Embassy, came to visit
they had asked for me. Loulie and I first spoke to the Queen and then to the
King. I expected to do no more than shake hands with him but we talked for ten
or fifteen minutes, much to the interest of the crowd. We covered a wide range
of subjects, from the President's health to the Peace Treaty, the League of Na-
tions, Russia, Poland and Germany. He said he recalled with pleasure our many
conversations during the war. When we had finished I immediately left for an
engagement I had with Philip Kerr, the Prime Minister's Private Secretary. Kerr
remained for an hour or more and again there was a wide range of subjects discuss-
ed.

He talked with extreme frankness. He said at the Spa Conference, from which
he and the Prime Minister have just returned, there came near being a rupture
between France and Great Britain. France was insistent upon pushing Germany
to the extreme, and George was resisting. Kerr said "the Prime Minister used
every trick he had until there were none left in the box". He threatened, he
left the Conference for thirty-six hours at one time and finally Millerand com-
promised. The feeling between the British and French is not good and grows
worse rather than better. It is as I predicted last year in Paris, the feeling
between Germany and England grows closer. I hear every day that the only worth
while alliances in the future are between the United States, England and Germany.

Kerr and I took up the Irish question. I told him I had no notion of go-
ing to Ireland unless the Prime Minister wished me to do so in order to bring
about a point of contact between Sinn Fein and the British Government. We dis-
cussed the matter in great detail and finally came to the conclusion that if
mediation was to be used the best means at the moment would be the Labor Party
who have offered their good offices. I did not wish to press the matter be-
cause, while I am willing to serve, I am not anxious to do so. I have a feel-

(71)

ing that I might have done it better than the Laborites the Labor Party in
Ireland is not in touch with the inner circles of Sinn Fein.

There was an oil agreement made at San Remo between the British and the
French of which I have known sometime. Yesterday morning Ivy Lee showed me
that he said was a draft of the agreement. I did not read it because I did not
care to do so, but he showed me enough for me to know it was inaccurate. I
spoke to Philip Kerr about it and he said it must have been one of the first
drafts and not the final one. I urged him to have the Prime Minister or some
other member of the Government make a statement in regard to this secret agree-
ment. The agreement divided the oil in the Near East between Great Britain and
France in the proportion of three to one. It will create a profoundly un-
pleasant situation in the United States.

Why they continue to make these secret agreements when the whole world
is so antagonistic to them and they are pledged not to do so, I do not know. It
is a question how the matter can be handled without creating much prejudice. It
is not only the United States but Italy, Japan and other great users of oil that
will be shocked at the disclosures.

Kerr and I are to meet again at Cliveden, Lord and Lady Astor's country
seat where we both go for the week-end. Ambassador and Mrs. Davis are also to
be there. We shall probably talk the matter out more fully the

Kerr wished to discuss with me the Anglo-Japanese Treaty. The British
Government show signs of being worried about it. He suggested, on his own in-
itiative, emphasizing that he was in no way committing the Prime Minister, that
the United States and China should also be taken into the pact for the purpose
of preserving peace and the open door in the Pacific and Far East. I thought
the idea an excellent one and we agreed to discuss it further.

(72)

We gave a luncheon today. Among the guests were Lord and Lady Salisbury, Lord and Lady Harcourt, Lord Robert Cecil, Mrs. Ronald Greville, Mr. and Mrs. Lionel Guest, Colonel and Mrs. George Keppel, Sir Alan and Lady Johnstone. It seemed to go off with a good deal of *verve*, much more so than our dinner to Lord Grey of a few days ago.

I am dining tonight with Eric Drummond, Wiseman and the Ambassador to discuss matters relating to the League of Nations.

July 26, 1920.

Saturday morning Grey came at half past nine o'clock and we decided that he should put out a letter in regard to the Prime Minister's statement in the House of Commons as to the necessity of England, as a member of the League of Nation, going to the aid of Poland. This statement of the Prime Minister's we thought would be used everywhere by the opponents of the League to justify their criticisms.

Grey showed me a draft of what we agreed during his visit here. He had prepared this since his last visit to Ireland. I thought it very well done but advised eliminating about one third of what he had written.

It was my intention to go to Cliveden but since Grey wished to have another conference on Sunday, I sent regrets to Lady Astor by Loulie.

In the afternoon Saturday I wrote my weekly statement for the Public Ledger which will be published Monday morning. This time it is about Poland, Germany and Russia.

Sunday morning Lord Grey called bringing with him the draft of the letter he is writing about the League of Nations, and Poland. I have the original

(73)

manuscript. I later went to lunch with him at the home of Lord Glenconnor. He had redrafted the letter and, later still, Carl Ackerman rewrote a part of it which Lord Robert Cecil, who came today for a conference on the same subject, agreed was better than Grey's. We therefore sent Grey a telegram to his home in Northumberland asking his permission to make the change. Ackerman sent the telegram in Cecil's name.

I enjoyed my luncheon. Grey, Lord and Lady Glenconnor were quite alone and we had an intimate talk about many things. Afterward I called on Lord Haldane, who lives close by in Queen Anne's Gate.

Sir Horace Plunkett called Sunday. It was the eternal Irish question with him, but we got but little further than we were when I last saw him. He still urges me to come to Ireland.

The Chilean Minister called today. He has a new plan concerning the League of Nations and wished to submit it for my consideration. He suggests forming something in the nature of a duel league, the Western Hemisphere having an association for the purpose of working out questions relating to the Americas and, if there should be serious disagreement, the questions must be submitted to the League of Nations.

Mr. Applestone, labor leaders and President of the International Labor Union, was another caller. Cecil and I arranged to meet again Friday for a final conference before I go to Holland. He was somewhat peaved that Grey left London at this time when there are so many important questions pending. Cecil is anxious for me to persuade Grey to get back into active politics. He would like to see him Prime Minister with himself as Foreign Secretary. They tell me I have much influence with Grey.

A large part of the day has been taken up with the Polish delegations and the Polish Chargé here. They seem to be more disturbed over the settlement

(74)

of Teschen than they are over the Russian invasion. They left with me maps and
memoranda galore. I wish I might serve Poland better than now seems possible.
Paderewski sent me word that he would reach London tonight and would call tomor-
row.

I am beginning to get some reaction on my articles. The Republican Press,
I am sorry to see, are praising me and criticising the President. I suppose
this will continue until the campaign is over.

Grey and I were talking yesterday of how impossible it was to write or
say anything that could not be perverted. The republicans are using my state-
ments for their own purposes, misconstruing them entirely, while the democrats
stupidly allow them to do so. They are not taking advantage of the misstate-
ments of the republicans. Senator Knox, of all men, is loud in his praise of
me, and Hearst's American has a double leaded editorial in the same strain with
abuse of the President.

July 30, 1920.

Tuesday the 27th, the order of the day was a lunch at Lord and Lady Astor's
at which the Ambassador and Mrs. Davis and several others were present. I had
to leave almost at once to keep other engagements.

Sir Charles Cunningham, British Chargé at Vienna, came to tell about
that unhappy city. He wishes me to visit it in order to look into hospital
conditions which he says are very bad. They need money, and he thought I might
be able to help in getting it if I could see for myself just what they needed.

Paderewski was another important caller. He took up the Teschen situation
and explained Poland's condition. He said Poland's affairs had gone badly since
my hand was no longer felt in her behalf. He hoped I would try to do indirectly
what I have previously done directly. He said he did not realize until now

(75)

what a friend I had been to Poland.

We gave a dinner to Lord and Lady Beatty. Among the guests were Lord and Lady Sandhurst, the King's Chamberlain, and some ten others. Lady Sandhurst is a daughter of Matthew Arnold and is one of the most delightful women I know in London.

On the 28th, Colonel Arthur Murray, Paderewski, Hirst, of Common Sense, Arthur Sweetser, and many others made up the list of callers.

Paderewski came to report the substance of his conference with the Prime Minister. It was a rather stormy session and Paderewski felt that nothing of benefit to Poland would come of it. He believes that Lloyd George is being influenced by the Jews, whom he says are the principal owners of the coal mines, iron plants, etc. etc. in that part of Poland which the recent decision gives to Czechoslovakia. He is very bitter over the outcome and predicts as much trouble in that section of Europe as is now going on in Ireland.

The sensation of the hour is the letter Lord Grey wrote on Friday of last week for the London Times, and which was cabled over in full to the New York Times and Public Ledger. The entire press without exception gave it not only the front page of the news columns but for several days have written editorials commenting on it.

Arthur Sweetser asked my opinion as to the advisability of the Assembly, when it meets in November, striking out Article 10 from the Covenant. He thought this would remove all opposition in the United States. I thought such a move would be a vital blow at the President. I declined to advise further than to say I thought it would be a hopeless move at this time. I suggested they postpone all discussion until after our elections in November. I cannot imagine anything that would depress the President more or cause him as much unhappiness.

(76)

Lord Queenborough gave us a large dinner Wednesday evening. I took out Lady Salisbury and Mrs. Ronald Greville sat on the other side. She told me a lot of Palace gossip. I was interested in her advice not to praise the Prince of Wales to the King. She said she had made that mistake herself and that there was an embarrassing silence. Just how a father could be jealous of his son I cannot see.

We lunched that day with General Sir Ian and Lady Hamilton. There were a number of interesting guests among them the Belgian Ambassador and General Brancker.

Yesterday was one of the most interesting days of my stay here because of developments in the Irish situation. On Tuesday, Sir Basil Thompson, head of Scotland Yard, suggested to Ackerman that it might be a good idea to feel out the Irish in regard to my acting as mediator. Ackerman went to Ireland that night and returned Thursday morning. He saw some of the Sinn Fein and they were to hold a meeting of the "Cabinet" last night to discuss the question and determine whether to send me an invitation. They desired me to come to Ireland without an invitation, which Ackerman assured them I would not do. He said he related the incident of Lloyd George wanting me to lunch or dine with him and putting it on the ground that he had heard I wanted to see him. This amused the Irish and they saw the point.

Yesterday Philip Kerr came from Lloyd George with a direct request that I go to Ireland and ascertain whether I could bring about a point of contact between Sinn Fein and the British Government. I told Kerr the story of Carl Ackerman's visit to Ireland and said, as much as I would like to do what the Prime Minister desires, I could not go unless I received an invitation from the Irish. Kerr said some complimentary things as to my ability to handle such a situation because of my experience and knowledge of governmental

(77)

affairs.

This morning Ackerman called to tell me that Sir Basil Thompson sent for him to tell him that he had talked to Lloyd George about the advisability of the British Government asking me to go to Ireland and that George acquiesced; therefore Philip Kerr's visit to me. I feel complimented that the British Government has asked me to serve in such a matter and, even if nothing further comes of it, it will be something to remember with pleasure.

We dined last night with Viscount Chinda. It was a large dinner and afterward a great many people were invited in to a musical. I had conversations with Imperiali, the Italian Ambassador, Sir Eyre Crowe and Dr. Miliukoff, former Russian Minister for Foreign Affairs. I got much useful information from the latter. There was a notable gathering during the evening including practically all the diplomatic corps here and many of the society folk. I took out Lady Fitzwilliam, whose husband is Master of the King's Mews. I found her a charming companion.

August 1, 1920.

On Friday, Wickham Steed, Wiseman and Col. Thwaites launched with me. I let them do most of the talking since I was tired and not interested in the conversation.

Lord Robert Cecil came to tea. I told him about the Prime Minister having asked me to take up the Irish matter, and I asked him his advice as my friend as to how he thought I should handle it as far as the Prime Minister was concerned. He agreed that I should have something in writing from George in addition to the letter Sir Basil Thompson wrote Ackerman. He said he would be sorry to see me undertake such a disagreeable task, but that it was a great opportunity to serve and he hoped I would do it. He did not think

(78)

it improbable that both the Government and Sinn Fein would accept me as arbitrator giving me full power to act. I disagree wholly with this conclusion. Cecil also thought, if I got into it, it was certain that I would have to be the go-between and, inevitably, be the arbitrator in that way. However, since the Burke and other murders which have occurred in the last twenty-four hours, I can see no profit in remaining in England and we are leaving tomorrow night for Holland as planned. Feeling has been so aroused in England because of these murders that I do not believe George would dare carry out his intentions with me.

An article in this morning's Express, which is a part of the record, shows how high the feeling runs. It must be remembered that this is Lord Beaverbrook's paper and that it has been a supporter of Lloyd George.

The French Chargé followed Cecil. He came to talk over the general situation and about Mantoux's letter to me which has been so widely published. He said Millerand and some Government officials were exceedingly peaved about the matter. I asked if Foch or Clemenceau objected. He said no, but the Government had been asked questions in the Senate regarding it. As a matter of fact, the Government have been using the Armistice as a club to hamper Clemenceau and their predecessors. That is one of the reasons I wanted the facts published. The Chargé intimated that there was criticism of Mantoux because he had written of something which he should have held in confidence. I do not agree with this.

The Swedish Minister followed Fleurer. He wished to talk about the general European situation. I was very busy and had to hurry his visit to a close. I am getting together odds and end preparatory to leaving.

Today we motored to the country place of Mrs. Ronald Greville. It was

(79)

rather a large house party. Those with whom I talked most were Merry del Val, the Spanish Ambassador, and the Marchioness of Carisbrooke who is a very intelligent woman. Merry del Val and I had a long talk and compared views upon the general situation, and about France and Spain and the Tangier controversy.

I have much difficulty in finding time to write my articles for the syndicate. They are written very hastily. It is unusual for me to spend more than an hour upon one.

The Hague, Holland.

August 8, 1920.

We left London on the night of August 2nd and after a pleasant voyage via Harwich and the Hook of Holland we reached this quiet and delightful Dutch town. It has been a joy to be out of the turmoil of a great capital and to have time to read and think.

Our Minister, William Phillips, has shown us every courtesy. He sent his car to the Hook to meet us and also an attaché of the Legation to see that we were expedited and everything done for our comfort. Phillips had Karnebeck Minister for Foreign Affairs, to lunch the second day of our arrival. Because of the death of Mrs. Phillips' mother, they left for London Wednesday night and have not yet returned. I am sorry to miss his society, but it has given me more real rest than I would probably have had if he had been here.

The Polish Chargé has been among my visitors. The Poles seem to be the first to greet me wherever I go. The Spanish Minister has asked for an interview tomorrow.

The outlook on the political horizon is dark. It is a critical hour for Europe and for the United States as well. I wish our people could realize that our destinies are more or less interwoven. We have left Europe to flounder

(80)

alone
in the after-war morass when we should have helped her as we have never helped
before. The President was the leader of the world and as such might have
saved the situation if he had been less rigid, and if he had had the human
touch which he seems to lack. Intelligent he is, and doubtless an abler man
than Lincoln, but Lincoln had the qualities essential at such a time. Wilson
desires to accomplish things by pure reason; Lincoln knew better. He was con-
scious of human frailties and was willing to make allowance for them, and to
subordinate his own pride and feeling when necessary. While the Senate Ma-
jority have acted in an unspeakable, partisan way, nevertheless, nothing better
was expected of them and it was to the President that the world turned for
leadership. While the President is hated in Europe and America as public men
are seldom hated, still that is a matter of no consequence as any strong man
is likely to bring this upon himself. The thing that hurts is that he has
failed at the critical moment and has largely wrecked the hopes of mankind.

I have a letter from Brand Whitlock which is a part of the record.
He indicates that the King of the Belgians would like to see me. I was hoping
that I might slip in and out of Belgium without notice for I am tired of it all.

Among my last visitors in London was Trumbic, Jugo-Slav leader. He is
worried over the Adriatic settlement. If the Nitti Government had not fallen
he thinks they might have come to an understanding. Geolitti is putting him
off from week to week. I suggested that this might be for the purpose of
seeing how our elections went. If they go democratic the Italians would be
more inclined to a settlement favorable to the Jugo-Slavs than if they go
republican. Trumbic had not thought of this and showed some concern.

(el)

Brussels, Belgium.

August 15, 1920.

We left the Hague August 12th and came directly through to Brussels. Phillips sent Commander Bagley, our Naval Attaché, to the frontier in order to facilitate our passage and to avoid inconvenience with the baggage.

We dined with the Whitlocks the first night and lunched with them the following day. We dined with the King and Queen at Laekin on Friday the 13th. I asked the Whitlocks not to let anyone know of my coming but he said the King had requested that he be informed when I came and Whitlock had done so hoping I would approve. The dinner was _en famille_, no one being present as guests other than the Whitlocks. The Queen took me out and we were so engaged in conversation toward the end of the dinner that we found we were keeping everyone waiting. We went to the drawing room and continued our talk for a full half hour before the King joined us, and then the three of us talked together for another half hour when Whitlock came into the circle. Altogether I had almost two hour hours of intimate talk with them. Our conversation was almost wholly about European conditions and, at their insistence, I did practically all the talking.

Before we went into dinner the King moved a large chair from one side of the room to the other which he offered me. It reminded me of the President when he first went to the White House and refused to pass out of a door before me saying: "I insist upon the privilege of being a gentleman in my own house".

When the King and Queen left, the Crown Prince, his brother and sister, who had been in the next room, came to bid us goodnight, Leopold following us to the outer door.

The Whitlocks have shown us every courtesy and a Belgian friend has given us the use of his motor day or night. De Cartier called today. He invited us to dine with them but we had already accepted an invitation to the

(82)

Whitlocks. We are leaving tomorrow for Paris.

August 16, 1920.

We dined with the Whitlocks again last night and he and I had one of our intimate talks. He told of his plans and desires for the future. He would like to have the Ambassadorship at London offered him but he is not certain whether he would be able to accept because of the expense. If Cox is elected I shall try to help him. He knows it would be impossible for him to be contented again in Toledo, and he has not sufficient funds to live in one of the large capitals as he would like. We talked a very long time about the President and his work. I asked what estimate he thought history would make of Woodrow Wilson. To my surprise he replied that he would be considered a great orator but not a great statesman. The reason, in Whitlock's opinion, is that he has failed as a statesman in not being able to put things over. He said Lincoln had a great task and succeeded in doing it therefore his place in history was secure. Wilson had undertaken the same thing and failed.

I did not go into any argument with him, but I disagreed with the latter part of his conclusions. Wilson has put things over. There is no President in all our history who has accomplished so much as Woodrow Wilson. There is no need to go into the Federal Reserve Act, the repeal of the Panama tolls, the revision of the Tariff, the Farm Loan Act, and innumerable others, for they stand as a monument to him, to say nothing of his great achievements in foreign affairs, one of which was the lifting international morals onto a higher plane.

The President was dictatorial from the beginning, but was able to coerce an unwilling Congress to do his will. The reason they allowed this was because they knew if they failed to support him, he would use his influence

(83)

with the people to defeat them at the elections. That was well enough with a democratic Congress and at the beginning of his first and second terms, but when the elections went against him and he tried to do the same thing with toward the end of his second term, and with a republican Congress, he signally failed. Democrats with grievances also took the opportunity to release their pent-up resentment and he suddenly found himself without friends or influence, and was utterly unable to carry through his purposes because he was unwilling to yield.

Both Whitlock and his wife feel that the greatest mistake the President has made in his entire career was his second marriage. They believe that most of his troubles date from that event. They consider Mrs. Wilson a jealous and ambitious woman, bent upon breaking up every friendship the President had and leaving her own influence supreme. They also think she has failed to use her position to make political friends for him. She has undoubted ability, but she was entirely untrained for public life and has had to deal with questions with which she was totally unfitted to cope, and those with whom she confers are equally so. Whitlock said that in 1915, when the President announced his engagement, Newton Baker who was not then in the Cabinet, but who was one of the President's staunchest admirers, said to him that the President had shattered the idol which the American people had made of him. They conceived him as a great, lonely figure, brooding over his domestic sorrows and filled with the troubles of mankind which he was trying to alleviate. Then came the announcement of his engagement and people realized their error.

I have a copy of Norman Hapgood's review in the Nation of Bernstorff's "My Three Years in America". Among other things he says this of me: "But the real full-length impressions are of President Wilson and Colonel House. Amazing objectivity, kindness, wisdom and unswerving determination at all times and

(84)

places to keep peace as the one most important consideration, are the highlights
in Colonel House; and this tribute from so well-informed an observer on the Ger-
man side does not differ from the impressions of highly competent men in France
and England. Modest and intelligent, Colonel House has been to America what
General Smuts and Lord Robert Cecil have been to England-- in the melee yet above
it".

Paris, France.

August 22, 1920.

We have delightful quarters at the Ritz overlooking the garden. We came to Paris on the sixteenth. It was very warm for the first two days, but it is colder now than we have had it at any time this summer. The City is empty except for Americans and other foreigners.

I have seen some people of importance, but not many. We dined with Gen-
eral Bridges the second night of our arrival. He is now British Adviser to the
Greek Army and has headquarters at Smyrna. It was interesting to hear what he
had to say about the situation in the Near East. He left for London the same
night we dined with him and we are to meet again before he returns to his post.

One of the most interesting things I have done was to visit Venizelos at
the hospital where he was taken after his attempted assassination. He looked
better than I expected to find him, and he seemed appreciative of my visit. In
talking of Greece he said his success in obtaining all he had for his country was
because of his insistence upon retaining a large army. Without that, he thought,
their jealous neighbors would have made it impossible for them to have reaped any
benefits from the war.

He has not been in Athens excepting for a day or two at a time for twenty-
two months and he was looking eagerly forward to getting back and taking up the
thread of domestic affairs. His wounds are healing nicely and it is God's mercy

he was not killed. Nearly ten shots were fired at him in all, which indicates unusually poor marksmanship.

I have seen a great deal of the Ambassador and have had intimate talks with him.

I lunched with Lord Derby and discussed the general situation with him before he left for his vacation.

I see on an average one Pole a day. One of the most interesting was Professor Askanazy who has been appointed Minister Plenepotentiary, and second to Paderewski, to sit at the meeting of the League Assembly at Geneva, November 15th.

We are dining with the Spanish Ambassador tomorrow evening and with the de Chambruns Wednesday to meet Marechal Petain.

August 28, 1920.

My memoranda shows that the Minister of Justice of Montenegro called to present the woes of his country. He could not speak a word of English and we got along indifferently with my bad French. However, it shows what one can do in case of necessity. I promised to help whenever the occasion offered itself. He presented an indictment against the Allies including the United States.

Andre Tardieu was another caller after the Montenegrin. He remained for an hour and told of the happenings since we were last together. He attributes Clemenceau's defeat for the Presidency to two things, one because he would not say he wanted the office, and the other because the Clericals were against him on account of his opposition to sending a Papal Delegate to Rome. He said Foch and Clemenceau were not on good terms and Foch did all he could to defeat him.

Tardieu spoke of the book he is writing and of his correspondence with Doubleday, Page & Co. and the Appletons. I promised to look into the publishing

(87)

business for him and see whether I can get better terms. He was leaving imme-
diately for the country where he expects to write another book, the basis of which
will be the articles he has already published in l'Illustration.

And this reminds me, the State Department, presumably under the direction
of the President, has instructed Ambassador Wallace to protest to the French Gov-
ernment against Tardieu's action in publishing the proceedings of the inner con-
ferences of last year. Wallace is much disturbed because he feels it will make
an enemy of Tardieu and his friends; yet he has no option and as soon as Miller and
returns he will tell him of his instructions from Washington. The President is
literally mad on the subject of secrecy. He and Lloyd George, the two supposedly
great Liberals, were constantly closing all the doors to the public, and it was
Clemenceau, the supposed reactionary, who was willing for the world to know what
was going on from within. I do not know what action Tardieu will take, but I
believe if I were in his place and should receive such a message from the Mille-
rand Government, I should publish it.

The Spanish Ambassador gave us a beautiful dinner on the evening of the
23rd. He had the flower of French and Spanish aristocracy.

Paderewski came on the 24th and I saw him many times while he was here.
He gave me an intimate view of Polish affairs which for the past ten days have
been acute. He asked advice about coming to America. I advised against it un-
til after the elections. He said the Poles in the United States would vote for
any candidate I desired, for there were three men whom they regard as their patron
saints-- Wilson, Hoover and House.

Another interesting person I have seen much of during the last week
is Ellis Loring Dresel, American Commissioner at Berlin. He has given me infor-
mation of the German situation-- information which I do not consider altogether

(88)

accurate because it reflects too much the view of the present German Government.

The Wallaces have treated us with great kindness. He has been to see me as often as I was free, and they have had us to the house as often as we would go. They offered to give us a large dinner, but there are no Government officials in this town at this time and I did not think it worth while.

London, England.

September 4, 1920.

We had a delightful trip from Paris to London on the 29th. Wiseman, Leland Harrison, Lanier Winslow and his wife and a courier from the Embassy to look after things for us made up the party. We have never travelled in Europe with less inconvenience than on this trip, thanks to the courtesies shown by our embassies, legations and the governments whose countries we have visited.

On Monday the 30th, the Brazilian Ambassador and his wife had us to dinner and the theater. We have done some entertaining ourselves in a small way, but London is as deserted as Paris. I have seen a few interesting people but not many and the conversations are not worth recording. We are sailing on the S. S. Olympic, Wednesday September 8th and I may not make any further entries until after we arrive in New York.

New York.

October 5, 1920.

The diary has gone into "inoccuous desuetude". It is not that things are not happening with me, but they are of so much less consequence than what occurred during the war that they seem scarcely worth recording.

in London

We arrived in New York with great comfort. The Embassy arranged everything for our comfort in the minutest detail. The voyage, however, was

(89)

an unhappy one. The weather was bad all the way; and most of the time I suffered from a cold which confined me to my room. The passenger list was not interesting one, although we had many friends and acquaintances on board. Our landing was made with little inconvenience.

I was not on shore two hours before I saw how entirely hopeless Cox's chances were. Each day confirms my first conclusion that he has no more than a gambler's chance. It is not that the campaign is being wrechedly run and without money, but even with as much money as we could legitimately spend, and with the best management that could be brought to bear, Cox could not win. It is not the League of Nations, it is not prohibition; it is the unreasonable and unreasoning desire for a change. The Administration gets credit for none of its great accomplishments, and has to bear all the odium attached to the general upset conditions in the world.

The President is blamed, and justly so, for our not having made peace with the Germans after a lapse of nearly two years since the war closed. One cannot tell the people that the fault lies with the Senate because the Senate is on record as wanting peace with certain reservations which the President refused to countenance.

The League has gone from bad to worse since I have been away, and it is now a question whether we are to have any when Harding becomes President. No one is enthusiastic over Harding's election, because he seems to have no mind of his own upon any subject, and refrains from making any positive statements concerning the issues before the people.

Almost immediately upon my arrival, most of the Campaign Committee called. This included Chairman White, Senator Harrison and Congressman Cantrell. They are three delightful men, honest I think and reasonably able, but they are entirely without experience and not the kind of men to cope with the situation confronting us. They wanted me to go to Ohio for a conference with Cox. If

["(90)", "If there was anything that could be done I should go, although such a journey\nwould be against the rule of a lifetime.", "Among the many who have come to see me, Hoover was one of the most interesting.\nHe tries to excuse himself for being for Harding, whom he knows is against the\nLeague of Nations, by saying that the only hope for the League is to bring as\nmuch influence as possible to bear upon him after the election. He claims that\nHaqdângîban soplü bəndən kîm xan xan xan xan xan xan xan xan x

(91)

ident returned to Paris from the United States; he found a plan in motion to se-
gregate the League from the Treaty and that it took him sometime to undo this.
White wondered whether something could not be done to contradict this false state-
ment, declaring that all the Commissioners knew that no such attempt was ever made.
I shall get Creel's book and I may do something in that direction.

November 13, 1920.

My secretary has been absent in Texas for a month and there has been
a hiatus in the diary for that length of time. From my notes I find that I
have seen many people and have done much work. I shall not recite in detail
those who have called.

One thing that has pleased me was a cable from Paris in the press say-
ing that Clemenceau had sent for an American correspondent by writing him this
note: "I shall be very glad if you can come to see me on Tuesday at eleven. I
want all the news of Colonel House for I so regret not seeing him when he was re-
cently in France. Cordially, G. Clemenceau."

The correspondent writes of his interview and, among other things, says
quotes Clemenceau as saying: "Yes, yes, of course, I am feeling great, but I
want to know about Colonel House". He demanded why he had not been informed of
Colonel House's recent presence in Paris. "Why, he continued, "I would have re-
turned here to see him had I known. I would go almost anywhere to see him for I
love him. Yes, it is a case of love".

Among the many I saw John W. Davis, our Ambassador in London. He asked
Secretary Colby if it would be agreeable to the Department for him to return to
London at the end of October and remain until the first of January and then re-
sign. Colby said he would speak to the President. When he had done so he
told Davis that the President wished him to either resign now, or to continue

(92)

at his post until the fourth of March. Davis and I both construe this as a desire to have him resign now in order that he may appoint either Baruch or Chadbourne. Davis therefore determined to return and finish his term. I think, however, at the turn of the year, he will apply for leave of absence which may or may not be granted. He was unable to see the President before he left, and was much chagrined over it, because it will be embarrassing when he returns to England and is asked about the President and cannot speak from personal knowledge. He talked to me at some length and advised regarding his future.

I am supervising a series of lectures to be given in the Foyer of the Academy of Music in Philadelphia during the winter. The speakers are to tell the story of the Paris Conference. It has been an interminable job. Everyone has accepted excepting Admiral Benson. His letter to me of the fifth of November and my reply of November seventh are explanatory.

I have begun to write again for the Public Ledger. My first article was published November fourth and was a diagnosis of the elections. My second article on November 11th was on the Armistice. I have a letter from Mr. Curtis, dated November 3rd, and replied under date of November 11th. This correspondence relates to the series of lectures mentioned.

Two or three days before the election I wrote the President a short letter and received a reply on the day of the election. These speak for themselves. I did not mean to even express a thought that the democrats would win. I meant to convey the thought that no matter who won there would soon be ratification of the Treaty in some form.

During the month I have been sitting for a statuette which Lady Scott has been making.

On October 17th, I wrote Viscount Grey a letter which is a part of the record.

I have been keeping in fairly close touch with the Mexican situation