MAN OF CONSCIENCE AWARD DINNER

12/11/73

APPEAL OF CONSCIENCE FOUNDATION

119 West 57th Street • New York, N. Y. 10019 • 582-7878

Rabbi Arthur Schneier
President

Hon. Kenneth B. Keating
Chairman
Board of Trustees

Dr. Harold A. Bosley
Vice President

Hon. Francis E. Dorn
Secretary-Treasurer

Board of Trustees

Donald R. Campion, S. J.
Rev. Eugene K. Culhane, S. J.
Hon. Angier Biddle Duke
Aristedes Duzoglou
Bernard Goldberg
J. Peter Grace
Hon. Orrin G. Judd
Charles Mayer
Myron A. Minskoff
John Mosler
Dr. David H. C. Read
Charles Taubman
Joseph P. Williams

November 16, 1973

Hon. Dr. Henry A. Kissinger
Secretary of State
Washington, D. C.

Dear Dr. Kissinger:

Because of your friendship with Governor Nelson A. Rockefeller, I extend to you a cordial invitation to join us in tribute to him at the "Man of Conscience" Award dinner on Tuesday evening, December 11, 1973, at the Hotel Pierre.

Our Foundation represents a coalition of Catholic, Protestant, Jewish and Greek Orthodox religious and lay leaders who are committed to the strengthening of bonds with all religious denominations abroad. We have been particularly successful in developing and maintaining ongoing contact with our religious brethren in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, as well as Spain and Northern Ireland.

We have had the full support of your predecessors in successive administrations and look forward to the pleasure of working with you in furthering your aims for a global detente.

To all of us who are committed to this principle and because of your association with Governor Rockefeller, we would consider it an honor and a privilege if you will join us on December 11. My colleagues and I hope you will be able to accept this invitation.

Department of State

TELEGRAM

UNCLASSIFIED 0373

PAGE 01 STATE 253947

71
ORIGIN EUR-12

INFO OCT-01 ISO-00 SS-15 CPR-01 NSC-05 PA-02 USIA-15

PRS-01 /052 R

DRAFTED BY EUR:SOV:MLEVITSKY:REH

APPROVED BY SECRETARY

S/S - RGAMBLE

EUR - AAHARTMAN

C - HSONNENFELDT

R 132330Z OCT 76
FM SECSTATE WASHDC
TO MR HARRIS SCHOENBERG
ACADEMIC COMMITTEE ON SOVIET JEWRY 315
LEXINGTON AVE
NEW YORK NEW YORK 10016

UNCLAS STATE 253947

E.O. 11652:

TAGS:

SUBJECT:

AS YOUR COMMITTEE HONORS MY GOOD FRIEND HANS MORGENTHAU
FOR HIS WORK ON BEHALF OF SOVIET JEWRY, I AM PROUD TO SEND
MY WARM CONGRATULATIONS AND BEST WISHES TO A MAN WHO HAS
MADE A MAJOR CONTRIBUTION TO THE CAUSE OF HUMAN RIGHTS
AND OF POLITICAL THOUGHT. BY RAISING THE CONSCIOUSNESS OF
THE ACADEMIC COMMUNITY IN THIS IMPORTANT AREA, HANS HAS
PLAYED A SIGNIFICANT ROLE IN THE EFFORT TO ENCOURAGE
RESPECT FOR BASIC FREEDOMS THROUGHOUT THE WORLD, A TASK
WHICH IS SECOND TO NONE ON OUR NATIONAL AGENDA. THROUGH
HIS INTELLECTUAL BRILLIANCE, HARD WORK AND PERSERVERENCE,
HANS HAS MADE US ALL AWARE OF OUR OBLIGATIONS TO PROMOTE
THE EXTENSION OF THOSE LIBERTIES WE ENJOY AS AMERICANS TO
OTHERS IN LESS FORTUNATE SITUATIONS. WE HAS DONE SO FROM

UNCLASSIFIED

Federal Republic of Germany.
Hans Soelling,
548 Rolandaeck,
Mr. Peter Schoenwaldt,

Personal Assistant
Suzanne B. McFarlane

Sincerely,

I hope he will have the opportunity to do
next best thing to seeing it in person, which he certain-
catalogue of "Humpolitans at Harvard." It is the
how very much he appreciated your sending him the
The Secretary has asked me to let you know

Dear Mr. Schoenwaldt:

April 19, 1976

100 UNIVERSAL CITY PLAZA
UNIVERSAL CITY, CALIFORNIA 91608

PHONE 985-4321

EXECUTIVE OFFICES

November 13, 1973

The Honorable Henry Kissinger
Secretary of State
Washington, D.C.

Dear Henry:

Your friends are filled with pride over your great
accomplishments. In the last few days even the press
says that you have succeeded in the impossible. This
is almost beyond belief and I pray that nothing happens
to upset the very fragile and delicate balance that
must be held until the peace treaty is reality.

Sunday when it was announced on radio the Egyptians
and Israelis had actually signed the treaty, I was
euphoric.

Congratulations and all our best wishes and prayers
for your continued health while our affection and
admiration continues.

We know how busy you continue to be, but we are awaiting
the time when you say let's celebrate so that we can do
it in great style and make it the party of the year.

Rita and I will be in Washington December 7th for the
National Symphony Ball and then off to New York on the
8th for a few days. An invitation is being sent you
for the Ball. If you'd enjoy this event please join
as our guests. Our table would be changed if you do
decide to come, so please let me know.

TBS:eb

THE SECRETARY OF STATE
WASHINGTON

June 30, 1974

Dear Taft:

Thank you for your kind words regarding
the disengagement between Israel and Syria.
We have a long way to go to achieving a last-
ing peace, but at least this is another step
closer.

Your ideas about my personal situation
are very kind. I would welcome a chance to
discuss them with you.

Mr. Taft B. Schreiber,
100 Universal City Plaza,
Universal City, California.

PHONE 985-4321

EXECUTIVE OFFICES

May 30, 1974

Dear Henry:

You have done it again! It seemed to all who
followed the tortuous thirty-one days that it
just was not possible.

When Gromyko arrived in Syria the settlement
seemed to us out of reach.

Finally you succeeded. There are no rewards,
medals or way to express the gratitude owed,
for no statesman has ever accomplished so much.

Your writings and books will probably be the
most in demand published at that time.

At this time in my life I would like to give
more of myself than before. I therefore
volunteer to help you set up your own publishing
operation, publishing company, and even that
which would be your platform for the frequent
dissemination of your views on world affairs.

PHONE 985-4321

EXECUTIVE OFFICES

August 6, 1974

Dear Henry:

The attached is a great deal of information
including a memo as to who has been honored
by the Entertainment Section of the National
Conference of Christians and Jews which will
honor Herb Schlosser on September 23rd. I
thought that your writers might use this to
help save time for you for the few minutes
that you want to devote to the awarding of
the honor to Herb on that night.

If you are in town and can come out and do it
in person, we then would present to Herb the
film version as a momento of this great honor.

Herb Steinberg will probably be doing the film
of you in Washington and will be in touch with
Bonnie Andrews as to some suggested information
on what you might want to say. This of course
would mean an official screen test at which
time we might have you double in spades with a
script that we will try to dig out from Warner
Bros. played by George Arlis in DISRAELI.

I am sure we will be talking soon.

GUILFORD GLAZER

1901 AVENUE OF THE STARS • CENTURY CITY
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90067

September 30, 1974

Dear Taft,

Following my conversation with you this morning, I outline
below in this letter the matter you and I discussed. The
thinking you expressed would expand greatly what is set out
below and make what is suggested feasible. I am certain that
when your fertile mind gives more thought to this matter that
you will add much more to the thinking.

At the outset I must say that the thoughts set out below are
so simple as to suggest that the Government probably has already
considered it. On the outside chance that the Government may
not have considered it, I hope you will do what is necessary
to bring these ideas to the attention of the proper persons.
Please note the following:

1. It is quite obvious that the administration is frustrated at the actions of the major oil exporting nations. The United States is unhappy at the oil prices and at the ability and willingness of these oil exporting nations to reduce production at their will and at the continuing threat of some of these nations to invoke embargoes.

2. Major American corporations (such as the owners of Aramco) still have huge ownership interests in this foreign oil.

3. In nearly all cases these oil nations are either national-
izing (or expropriating) the oil or these oil nations are
forcing the American companies to sell out.

4. President Ford and Secretary of State Kissinger have alluded to military action being a possible very last resort if the oil nations continue in a direction which causes the economic collapse of many of the world's countries and economic chaos throughout the Free World.

5. No one wants to even think of military action. Least of all the United States does not ever want to be the nation to initiate military action.

Cont'd. . .Page 2

Taft Schreiber

-2-

September 30, 1974

6. I do not believe the United States will ever send armed forces into any country to save the investments of any private United States corporation. That type of "diplomacy" went out years ago.

7. I SUGGEST THAT THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT SELECTIVELY BUY OUT THE INTERESTS UNITED STATES OIL CORPORATIONS HAVE IN THE OIL IN CERTAIN OF THESE FOREIGN OIL EXPORTING NATIONS. THIS PURCHASE MUST BE DONE QUICKLY, AND AT A FAIR PRICE AND BEFORE THE OIL NATIONS EXPROPRIATES OR FORCES THESE UNITED STATES CORPORATIONS TO SELL.

8. Once the United States Government owns these oil interests, then I do not think these oil nations will consider nationalizing or expropriating these assets. The United States Government will not agree to a taking of oil owned by the United States Government. The oil nation that tries it will know that taking legally-owned United States Government assets might constitute good cause for the United States Government to protect these assets. If any such taking is threatened, the initiator would be the oil nation, not the United States Government.

9. The United States Government should carefully select in which of these situations it should act. Saudi Arabia might even welcome such action as it would take the heat other oil nations are placing on Saudi Arabia to keep prices high. Also, the present Saudi Arabian Government would, with the United States Government directly owning important oil, have the United States Government to assist the Saudis should radical Arab governments or elements attack Saudi Arabia - which, in my opinion, will happen before too long. Also if the United States Government was tied in directly as set out above, our foreign policy vis-a-vis Israel could no longer be swayed by the threat of another oil embargo, as the United States Government could demand and take its share of the oil and do with it what it pleases. (The Saudis could avoid the pressure of other Arab nations which might be demanding an oil embargo by pointing out that a major part of the oil was owned by the United States.) With the United States Government in direct ownership position, the matter of an embargo might be moot. Also the United States Government might, with its share of the oil, be able to combat the artificially high prices now being obtained by the major oil exporting nations.

Cont'd. Page 3

Taft Schreiber

-3-

September 30, 1974

10. The same procedure outlined above (that is, the United States to acquire the stock of United States corporations) might be applied selectively in connection with other critical minerals in foreign countries such as uranium, bauxite, etc.

11. To reiterate, I believe the American people will support any Government action to protect critical supplies needed by America. But the American people would not support the same action if those critical supplies are owned by United States corporations. Also, no foreign power is likely to seriously oppose action by the United States Government to protect supplies vital to the life of the United States.

12. There are many precedents for the United States to own stock in domestic and foreign corporations and to hold assets in hostile countries. The Panama Canal (and the Panama Railway), and Guantanamo in Cuba are good examples of the latter. However, we do not really need precedents. What is happening in the world today which causes me to write you is unprecedented. Strong, swift and creative action by our Government to meet these critical unprecedented issues is needed now!

I realize the ideas set forth above may be unacceptable to conventional thinkers. Mr. Ford, Mr. Kissinger and men such as you must save our country from disaster and that requires unconventional approaches where necessary.

If the ideas I have set forth herein have value, I hope you will move resolutely toward implementation.

I would appreciate hearing from you at your convenience. I have additional thoughts on this same subject and would be glad to come to Washington to discuss these or to do anything to serve my country.

Mr. Taft Schreiber
1160 Tower Road
Beverly Hills, Calif.92010

March 19, 1975

The Editor
Jerusalem Post
Jerusalem, Israel

Dear Sir:

We American Jews work hard for Israel as to do so means we work hard for ourselves. American Jews, however, must not try in any way whatsoever to influence Israel as to what to do in regard to settling with the Arabs. Whatever land Israel gives back must be Israel's decision and Israel's decision alone. Every square foot of land returned increases the life and death risk to every man, woman and child in Israel. It is Israel's risk. Therefore, it must be Israel's decision.

To those Israelis and American Jews who are so vocal in criticizing Henry Kissinger, I do ask that you pause and think a bit. For over 25 years every Jew has hoped that one day one Jew would emerge who could talk with the Arabs. We finally have that Jew and he is doing more talking with Arabs than we ever dreamed could occur. Kissinger may not be an observant Jew, but he is a good Jew. Kissinger has deep and good feelings for Israel. The Arabs know how Kissinger feels for Israel and the Jewish people. Under Kissinger's auspices the best deal possible for Israel will be made. If we did not have Kissinger, who would we have? If Kissinger was not the intermediary who would be the intermediary? Instead of criticizing Kissinger we should be praying that he keeps in good health.

We are all concerned as to whether or not the Arabs will stick by such agreement as may be finally resolved. No one can answer that. We hope Sadat and Assad will stick by any agreement made. But what happens if they die or are overthrown? What happens if they make agreements and then break them? No one can answer those questions. These are simply the risks that cannot be avoided and in the end, no matter how many U.N. Troops are stationed in between Israel and its enemies and no matter how many "guarantees" Israel gets from the big powers, we will all have to live with those risks and hope for the best.

GUILFORD GLAZER

September 10, 1975

Dear Taft,

As I mentioned to you last week on the golf course, I
believe it would be one of the greatest events of the century
if President Ford could be the catalyst for getting Sadat to
shake hands with Rabin. It would be wonderful if this could
take place in the White House when Sadat visits Ford in October.
I believe Kissinger and Ford can pull this off with the follow-
ing logic and precedent:

1. Some loud voices (Libya, Arafat and Assad) are screaming at Sadat for last week's Egypt-Israel settlement.

2. If Sadat is ever going to shake hands with Rabin, he (Sadat) might as well do so now as his (Sadat's) shaking hands with Rabin would not be such a monumental action when hooked on to the tail-end of last week's agreement. The timing is perfect. Sadat is due to visit Washington in October. The shorter the time period between last week's agreement and the handshake, the easier the handshake will be digested by the Arab world. All criticism withers away with time which is a strong case for getting all acts subject to criticism done and finished.

3. Sadat has much to gain for Egypt by such action. The very act of shaking hands with Rabin would, I believe, open the door for a flood of Western investment in Egypt. Also President Ford and Congress might be able to promise additional aid to Egypt (possibly aid that Ford plans to give regardless) if the symbolic act of shaking hands took place which suggests to Congress real prospects for a permanent peace and stability - not just three years.

Additional very important points: Sadat has stated many
times that he will do what is necessary to regain Egyptian land.
The Israelis are properly cautious about giving up land without
promises of peace. If Sadat engages in the symbolic act of shaking
hands with Rabin, that act certainly will constitute a huge step
toward permanent peace in the eyes of Israel. Also Sadat has
stated that he wants to help Syria and Jordan regain their land.
Kissinger and Ford can only do so much as intermediaries. Ford
could lose the election next year and the man who does become

Cont'd. . .

Taft Schreiber

-2-

Sept. 10, 1975

President might not be capable or as willing as Ford. Also, of course, Kissinger could depart from the scene whether or not Ford is re-elected. This means that Sadat and the other Arab countries and Israel could find future Arab-Israel problems without an effective "broker". If, however, Sadat breaks the ice with Israel now (by shaking hands) it is not out of the realm of reason for Sadat himself to become the future broker between Israel and the other Arab states - with Sadat gaining world-wide prestige. It is also not out of the realm of reason for Sadat to become the broker between Israel and the PLO. In fact Sadat could say to the world press -

> "I have stated previously that the State of Israel is a fact of life. The Arab world must live with that fact. I have stated that it is my sacred duty to regain Arab land. With the help of the good offices of the United States we have just regained Egyptian oil fields and Egyptian land without bloodshed. I will do what I can to help other Arab countries regain their land and I will help the Palestinian people attain reasonable aspirations. The Arabs cannot always depend upon the United States or any other country to be the intermediary. Therefore, I feel it is essential that the head of the State of Egypt and the head of the State of Israel begin a dialogue toward a full and final settlement. Upon earnest appeals from my friend President Ford I have agreed to meet with Prime Minister Rabin. I hope and expect that my meeting with Mr. Rabin will contribute toward restoring land to Syria and Jordan and will also contribute toward the establishment of a Palestinian homeland."

4. A good precedent to use to help convince Sadat to shake Rabin's hand would be Ford's brave and unpopular act of pardoning Nixon. President Ford was a genius to pardon Nixon very early after Ford took office. Ford would have had to pardon Nixon eventually just as eventually an Egyptian President must someday shake hands with the Prime Minister of Israel. If a brave man knows that someday he must do an unpleasant task, he is wise to take a deep breath and get it over with early. Many Americans screamed and villified Ford for his action. However, all the criticism for the pardon died very soon thereafter. Had Ford waited until now to consider pardoning Nixon, he (Ford) simply might not have been able to do it. I am repeating myself, but I reiterate that Sadat must shake hands someday with Rabin. The

Cont'd...

Taft Schreiber

-3-

Sept. 10, 1975

quicker Sadat does so the quicker the entire Arab world will accept it. America benefitted by the Nixon pardon and has accepted it. Egypt and all the Arabs will benefit by a Sadat-Rabin handshake and accept it.

If this handshake is possible, the prestige, weight and personal influence of President Ford can bring it about. There is nothing to lose by trying.

The entire world would benefit by the handshake. The picture of such a handshake - with Ford beaming as it takes place - would be a fantastic and pleasant surprise for the world (and the world can use a few pleasant surprises) and would result in an image for President Ford that will make him a hero to all of us.

This entire idea may be quite foolish. Therefore, feel free to toss this letter in the wastebasket and I will not feel at all bad about it. I expunged myself of the idea by writing you this letter and I am rewarded for my effort adequately by the knowledge that you will have taken your valuable time to read it.

Mr. Taft Schreiber
1160 Tower Road
Beverly Hills, California 90210

Los Angeles Herald-Examiner, Sunday, September 7, 1975

PATRICK J. BUCHANAN

Ford's Pardoning of Richard Nixon

WASHINGTON — It was just a year ago that President Ford, a month in office, stunned the nation by announcing a full and absolute pardon for his predecessor, Richard M. Nixon, for any offenses the latter may have committed during the Nixon years.

If the Ford announcement triggered a media firestorm that rivaled in intensity the outrage over the firing of Archibald Cox. It terminated the President's honeymoon with Congress. It drove Mr. Ford's approval rating down further in a matter of weeks than Mr. Nixon's had fallen in almost four years. It cost the Republicans seats in the Congressional election of 1974. Politically, the pardon was a disaster for President and party. But what about the country?

Having served Richard Nixon for almost nine years, this writer is anything but an objective observer. But surely, time will show though the first fateful decision of the Ford presidency was controversial and costly — it was also courageous, magnanimous and wise.

How would America's interests have been served by dragging Richard Nixon back to Washington to stand trial? What benefit would have accrued to this or future generations to compensate for dragging the whole sordid Watergate mess out another year?

Some argue that, at last, the country would know the "full story" of Watergate. This is nonsense. Did anyone seriously believe that Richard Nixon, indicted by Jaworski's obedient Grand Jury, would have taken the stand, contradicted everything he told the country, and confessed at length to his involvement in the Watergate cover-up? What the trial would have produced is another dreary re-hearing of the tapes of June 23, Sept. 15 and March 21, etc., and another dreary recitation of their stories by Messrs.

Dean, Haldeman, Ehrlichman and Mitchell.

Others insist that forcing Nixon to stand trial would have shown our children and the world that no man is above the law—that the law is blind and deals equally with great and small.

But this is simply not true. Presidents are above the law. They have rights and privileges no citizen enjoys. They have the power to do everything from run stoplights to ordering the army to fire on civilians to sending American soldiers into combat abroad. Unlike other citizens, we have learned, they can sit in their office and plot with impunity the assassination of foreign leaders. Presidents are not subordinate to the courts; they are the equal of the judiciary. Before a President can be indicted, he must first, through an elaborate, painstaking and lengthy process, be impeached and removed from office.

As for the contention that pardoning Nixon was a travesty of justice, one would be more impressed with this argument were it not advanced most enthusiastically by the same individuals who applauded most heartily when Ford granted limited amnesty to the thousands of law-breakers who fled to Canada and Sweden rather than do their duty in Vietnam.

The Forefathers knew well that there would be occasions when the sanction of law should be lifted. Thus, governors can commute sentences, and Presidents can pardon those whom the judiciary has condemned.

Everyday, prosecutors do what Gerald Ford did — i.e., determine not to proceed with prosecution against individuals against whom they have sufficient evidence. Their motives are varied.

The individual against whom the charge

is to be made may have diplomatic immunity. Perhaps the prosecutor wants to "cut a deal" for his testimony; perhaps he wishes to protect his sources in the criminal community, or keep a wiretap secret. Perhaps, at the behest of the Department of State, he declines to prosecute to avoid embarrassing a foreign government.

Prosecuting the former President would have added nothing to the existing body of evidence or information on Watergate. It would have ground in the dirt the faces of those millions of Americans who still supported Mr. Nixon — after the revelation of the tape of June 23. It would have created an international spectacle, drawing from the four corners of the earth gawking journalists to see their arch-enemy in disgrace. It would have assisted the Democratic Party by dragging the nation once more through the mire and muck from break-in to resignation. It would have boosted the sales of newspapers and pumped up the network ratings to new Watergate highs.

But, again, what would it have done for the country? It was to the anticipated howls of rage and protest, that Gerald Ford walked on stage, and himself rang down the curtain on this X-rated horror show that had been running for two years and in which the national media was so happily engrossed, and had so large an investment. It was a politically costly decision.

But is there any doubt but that, a generation hence, historians will look back and applaud the generosity of spirit and decisiveness of action of the President who ended the "long national nightmare" at enormous personal sacrifice, and turned the nation's attention toward the future again?

Office of the Secretary

EYJ

?

Thru S/S

Direct

2/12/76

FAH

Per Conversation

FYI

Translation

76C3037

ACTION

S/S -I

INFO

Prepare Reply for S

Prepare Recommendation for S

Prepare Reply for

Reply Directly On Behalf of

Clear with

Return to Originating Office

Retype ____ Redraft ____ Copy back to S

Check with this Office

Remarks:

Paul Barbian

x 29572

(Return to Index for Action if necessary - A-4)

PHONE 985-4321

EXECUTIVE OFFICES

April 23, 1976

The Honorable Henry Kissinger
Secretary of State
Washington, DC 20500

Dear Henry:

If you have the time you might read the attached which
is a reprint from Fortune Magazine on Irving Shapiro,
who is the chief executive of du Pont.

You will remember our conversation which had to do with
the foreign leadership who might be approached by someone
from our community with the ultimate hope and aim to
remove limitations on immigration.

This man's leadership of one of the largest chemical
companies of America which is one of the industries
that is so lacking in that certain country's needs might
warrant an invitation to him to visit for business
purposes and as an individual make the appeal rather
than doing it as a group effort.

I know you are now in Africa and I do hope your trip
is most successful.

Warm personal regards.

IRVING SHAPIRO
TAKES CHARGE
AT DU PONT

by Peter Vanderwicken

The new chief
executive has lived
a story Horatio Alger
might have written.

As a boy of five, Irving Shapiro faced a future that seemed bleak indeed. His parents were impoverished immigrants from Lithuania. His father worked as a pants presser in a dry-cleaning shop in Minneapolis. At home there was barely enough food or heat, and young Irving wore shoes with soles of cardboard. He suffered intensely from asthma and allergies. And his youthful entry into the world of affairs was not auspicious. He flunked kindergarten.

But that was about the last failure Irving Shapiro ever knew. Last month, at fifty-seven, he was elected chairman of the board and chief executive officer of E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., the twenty-third-largest industrial enterprise in the world and possessor of one of the most famous names in American business. This month he takes formal command of an organization with 113,000 employees, 224 plants in twenty-seven countries, worldwide sales in 1973 of more than $5 billion, and assets of more than $4 billion.

In several respects, Shapiro seems a wildly improbable choice to head Du Pont. It is one of the most science-minded of companies and spends $250 million a year on research, but Shapiro is a lawyer who is baffled by any technology more complex than a screwdriver. What is most astonishing of all is that the son of a poor Jewish shopkeeper should move to the top of the most family-

dominated of the nation's major corporations. In all its century and three-quarters of existence, Shapiro is only the second chairman who is not related to the du Pont family. (Charles B. McCoy, whom he succeeds, was the first.)

Transforming a fiefdom

Shapiro is clearly bucking a lot of tradition. But Du Pont itself is undergoing some fairly wrenching changes, and a dramatically new viewpoint at the top may help the company to get through them. Its isolated location in Wilmington and its history of family management had not prepared it for dealing with the pressures now bearing with full force on all multinational corporations, or the complex domestic "public policy" issues—e.g., environmental controls, fair-employment practices, and a heightened concern about antitrust—that demand so much attention from chief executives. In the past Du Pont's top men have customarily been scientists, whose training and interests provided them with little background in these areas. Shapiro, who spent the first third of his career in Washington, is well informed about all of them. He will accelerate the transformation of Du Pont, begun by McCoy, from a private family fiefdom to a professionally managed public institution.

In part, it was Shapiro's professional achievements that carried him over the

Research associate: Sydney L. Stern

hurdles of tradition and into the chairman's office. He has been, in the term's broadest sense, a "counsel" to Du Pont, not only in legal matters but also in business affairs. In particular, his reputation within the company rests on his management, in its final stages, of the extraordinarily complex divestiture of Du Pont's stock in General Motors in the early Sixties, on his counsel in such difficult decisions as the abandonment of Corfam, and on his negotiation of the still-pending merger of Christiania Securities Co. into Du Pont. No one else in Du Pont's top management has his ability to analyze risks, to comprehend complex issues of law and politics, to negotiate, and to devise solutions that the company—and those watching it—can accept.

Perhaps even more important in getting him the job were his personal qualities of character. He combines toughness of mind with personal kindness. He holds strong opinions but listens carefully to others. He is cautious but willing, if he judges that the odds are right, to take big risks. "Brel" McCoy, who chose Shapiro as his successor, says that "he is a quick study and he knows how to make decisions."

A pants presser with seven languages

You would never hear such descriptions from Shapiro himself, of course, for he is also a charmingly quiet and modest man. And the fact that he has overcome so many obstacles and risen to head one of the country's largest companies is a triumph not only of his own ability but also of the classic American dream—a 1970's updating of Horatio Alger (whose works, incidentally, Shapiro has never read). In a time of

Du Pont's ornate boardroom is a long way from the down-at-heel neighborhood in Minneapolis where Irving Shapiro grew up. He is only the second chief executive to be chosen from outside the du Pont family, but he has been known and liked for years by the nine family members who still sit on the twenty-seven-man board.

Arnold Newman

FORTUNE January 1974 79

[1c]

widespread doubt about whether the ideals of the "American system" are still operative, the journey of Irving Shapiro from a childhood of poverty in Minneapolis to the elegant new executive suite of Du Pont in Wilmington affirms that the American dream is alive and well. Shapiro's life reads like the script of a joyful American musical, a New World sequel to *Fiddler on the Roof*.

His father, Sam, fled from a harsh life in Lithuania and, while wandering through Europe around the turn of the century, picked up seven languages and a passion for the law. He eventually settled in Minneapolis and, unable to afford law school, found work as a pants presser. His wife, Frieda, whom he met while she was visiting relatives in Minneapolis, was an orphan who, at the age of twelve, had made her way from Lithuania to New York City. There for the next twenty years she had worked a dozen hours a day in a sweatshop in the garment district.

Settling down to married life in Minneapolis, the Shapiros had to take in

four boarders to help pay the bills. Three sons arrived in six years: first Irving, then Leonard and Jonas. When Irving was eight years old, his father borrowed $500 and opened his own dry-cleaning shop five miles from their home; Jonas still runs it today.

## They walked to save a nickel

The business was hand-to-mouth, and the boys all worked in the shop after school until 8:00 P.M. They walked there to save the 5-cent carfare, and in the evening they carried coal home from the dry-cleaning plant to heat the house. At the shop, Irving Shapiro remembers, "a big order was to reline a woman's fur coat and the charge for that was seven or eight dollars. The coat would be brought home and my mother would do it in the evening. I can remember days when my family was quite excited because we got two or three orders like that at one time." His mother, now an enchanting lady of ninety-two, says, "We were very poor, but we had a lot of respect, and so we'd forget that we had no money."

Sam Shapiro, something of a Hebraic scholar, was the unquestioned patriarch of the family. He was determined that his eldest son should become a lawyer, and although Irving found that he had a way with figures and leaned toward becoming an accountant, he bowed to his father's wishes. He took a prelaw course across town at the University of Minnesota, then went on to its law school (class of '41), where he was an editor of the law review and graduated fourth in his class. Odd jobs, a little family money, and $200-a-year loans from the law school helped to pay for his education, but poker helped a lot too. Every Saturday afternoon he joined several students for a game, often in the Shapiro living room. One of the regulars was a wealthy student who rarely won. Shapiro seldom lost, and to this day he is canny at poker and gin rummy.

Law school opened a new world for the boy. The university medical service had cleared up his allergies, and for the first time he felt healthy. By the time he made the law review, he perceived

The Shapiro family firm, where Irving labored after school, is now run by his youngest brother, Jonas. The middle brother, Leonard, owns a carpet store next door. The dry-cleaning business is not so good, Jonas says, partly because of all those wrinkle-free clothes made from the synthetic fabrics produced from Du Pont's fibers.

that he would actually succeed in escap-
ing the dry-cleaning shop and could excel
in his profession. "I really got a taste of
what quality performance could mean,"
he recalls, "and I realized that this was
the only way I could do it."

He hung up his shingle with a tax
lawyer who gave him office space in ex-
change for services. But within months
the U.S. entered World War II, and
Shapiro soon received a telegram from
the fledgling Office of Price Administra-
tion, which needed lawyers quickly to
develop the pricing and rationing rules.
Four days after he was hired by OPA he
was in Washington. Unable to pass his
Army physical examination because of
his asthma history, he wound up spend-
ing the war there.

"You're selling yourself short"

He returned briefly to Minneapolis to
marry the girl he'd been dating since
high school. Charlotte Shapiro recalls
that their dates had been something less
than glamorous. Irving had a dog, Bob-
by, and as they walked around a local
lake, he would buy two ice-cream cones,
one for her and one for Bobby; he
couldn't afford three. On some of their
walks, she remembers, he talked about
his aspirations. He wanted only to prac-
tice law, he said, and if he could earn as
much as $5,000 a year for the rest of his
life, he would be delighted. "Oh, honey,"
Charlotte replied, "you're selling your-
self short. I think you're worth $7,000."

In Washington the couple settled into
a one-room apartment, equipped with a
Murphy bed, while Shapiro helped set up

rationing systems for sugar, automo-
biles, and bicycles. After a while he
grew bored with OPA and moved over
to the Criminal Division of the Justice
Department. There he shared an office
for several years with Beatrice Rosen-
berg, who is now a lawyer at the Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission.
"He was fun, and a great tease in a
kindly way," she remembers. "He was
what the kids today say, 'together.'"

Shapiro quickly earned a reputation at
Justice as a superb writer of briefs,
with an ability to grasp the critical is-
sue in a case, clarify it, and argue con-
vincingly in support of the government's
position. The department was then di-
vided into two factions, and both con-
sidered him a member; he was smart
enough to debate the intellectuals and
practical enough to satisfy the activists.
By the time Shapiro reached thirty he
had argued his first case before the
Supreme Court.

In 1948 he joined the five-man prose-
cution team for the famous "Dennis
trial" of eleven Communist leaders be-
fore Federal Judge Harold Medina in
New York. The trial was one of the most
highly publicized events of the time, and
for its entire nine months Shapiro was
under intense pressures. At one point
Judith Coplon, a government employee

who was on trial in a separate case as a
Communist spy, was accused of having
an affair with a Justice Department em-
ployee named Harold Shapiro. Somehow
the first name got lost in the furor. When
the story broke, Shapiro could see the
seven women on the Dennis jury nudg-
ing each other and giving him dark
looks. Charlotte, who had two young
children at home in Washington, recalls
that "the whole neighborhood felt sorry
for me. They thought it was Irv."

Shapiro directed the government's
case on appeal, and successfully de-
fended the Communists' conviction be-
fore the Supreme Court. By this time
he was executive assistant to the assist-
ant attorney general for the Criminal
Division—one of the highest career jobs
in the department—and was aware that
he could go no further without a polit-
ical appointment. His former chief at
Justice, Oscar Provost, had become one
of Du Pont's senior lawyers, and during
the Dennis trial he talked to Shapiro
about coming to the company. There was
some opposition at Du Pont to hiring a
Jewish lawyer, but in 1951 a firm job
offer, at $12,000 a year, was finally made
and accepted, and Shapiro moved his
family to Wilmington.

If Du Pont's legal department were
independent, it would rank, with its 130

*continued page 152*

FORTUNE January 1974 **81**

**Shapiro** continued from page 81

lawyers, as one of the largest law firms in the country. In fact, it does operate much as an outside law firm would, with teams assigned to provide general legal advice to each operating department and groups of specialists available when needed. Shapiro was assigned to the antitrust section. "I had never had any contact with the antitrust law or trade regulation or anything like that," he recalls. "So when I came up here I had to start from scratch. Before anybody knew I was around I spent about six weeks just reading the literature so I had some idea what the Sherman Act was."

## A job with visibility

Although he didn't realize it at the time, Shapiro was in a highly visible job. Antitrust was (and is) one of the principal concerns of the top management. Crawford Greenewalt, Du Pont's president in the Fifties, says that he never saw most of Du Pont's lawyers. "The contact we always had at my level on antitrust suits was Irv Shapiro. A great many people at the executive level got to know him."

He soon became heavily involved in the government antitrust suit charging Du Pont, and many members of the du Pont family, with conspiring to control General Motors and to influence G.M. to do business with Du Pont. The government was out to make Du Pont divest itself of its 23 percent holding of G.M.'s stock. The case was a massive affair involving truckloads of documents, battalions of lawyers at the trial, and a series of appeals. For months Shapiro lived in Chicago, where the trial was held, and for a decade he spent much of his time on the case (one stockholder suit stemming from it is still going on). At the beginning, Shapiro was only one of many Du Pont lawyers on the case, but he was a principal architect of the final settlement.

Although the defendants were acquitted of any wrongdoing, the Supreme Court held the interlocking ownership to be a violation of antitrust law and ordered Du Pont to divest. This was not an easy directive to comply with. A public offering would have swamped the

market with G.M. stock, while the Internal Revenue Service had ruled that a direct distribution to stockholders would be considered a dividend, taxable as ordinary income.

In one of the most successful corporate lobbying efforts in history, Du Pont got a bill through Congress in 1962 that saved the individual stockholders an estimated $1 billion by permitting them to account for the G.M. stock they received as a return of capital, taxable at capital-gains rates. Shapiro directed the company's campaign in Congress and designed the divestiture plan.

More than anything else, Shapiro's performance on the G.M. case won him the admiration of the du Ponts. They came to respect his judgment and rely on his advice. As a result, Shapiro for years now has had a good deal more influence within the company than his position would have indicated.

## A "can do" lawyer

During lulls in his antitrust cases, Shapiro provided legal advice to the executives of the company's operating departments. He explained to the divisional sales managers, for example, how to avoid antitrust violations. In doing so, he got to know their businesses well, and they got to know him. He became known as a "can do" lawyer, who instead of putting up legal roadblocks suggested ways his "clients" could accomplish their objectives legally.

Gradually Shapiro's contemporaries began to come to him for general business advice as well. Shapiro became, as he puts it, "the quiet man in the corner," who knew everybody and quite a bit about everything. In 1965 he was jumped over several seniors and named assistant general counsel, the second man in the legal department.

Shapiro's associates at Du Pont say that one of his greatest gifts is his ability to put complex and often emotional issues into simple, practical terms. During the 1960's, one of the most emotional subjects of all at Du Pont was Corfam, the substitute for shoe leather. Management had great hopes that it would enrich the company the way nylon once had. Perhaps inevitably, the product

came to seem a test of Du Pont's scientific and marketing prowess.

Long after Corfam had flopped in the marketplace, Du Pont's executives could not bring themselves to abandon it and write off their $100-million investment. As he has on similar occasions, Shapiro used a homely metaphor. "What would Wilmington Dry Goods do with a losing item?" he asked. "Wouldn't they get rid of it?" In retrospect, says Shapiro, "we should have put the knife to it sooner. It was a good product, and we made it well. But the market wasn't there."

## Visit from the raiders

Shapiro in recent years has managed two especially delicate matters for Du Pont. When Ralph Nader, with much fanfare, sent a team of raiders to do a book-length report on how well Delaware's most powerful corporation had been behaving, Shapiro directed Du Pont's response. Although Nader's intentions were clearly hostile, Shapiro decided to cooperate. He insisted, however, that all interviews be tape-recorded and conducted with a Du Pont lawyer present. The Nader report, which purported to prove both that the corporation dominated Delaware and that it didn't contribute enough to the state, was so naive and so riddled with errors and misperceptions that it sank with hardly a ripple.

The other touchy matter was the merger into Du Pont of the family holding company, Christiana Securities, which owns 28 percent of Du Pont's stock. By diluting the family's voting power, the deal will make Du Pont a more fully public corporation, but it will also benefit the family members since Christiana has a market value lower than the value of the Du Pont stock it owns. The challenge for McCoy and Shapiro, who negotiated for Du Pont, was to come up with terms that were fair to both sides. They proposed a tax-free exchange of 1.123 shares of Du Pont for each share of Christiana common. That will leave the family with all its Du Pont stock and will eliminate the danger that Christiana might some day become the vehicle for an unfriendly take-over of Du Pont. Several federal agencies and stockholders must still okay the merger terms, but

continued page 154

152 FORTUNE January 1974

it has been approved by both boards, and
the family is pleased.

Most of Shapiro's friends think his
ultimate ambition was to become Du
Pont's general counsel. His wife thought
he would make it after the promotion to
assistant general counsel in 1965. But in
1970, he leapfrogged that job and was
elected a senior vice president, director,
and member of the executive committee.
He assumed supervisory responsibility
for the legal, treasurer's, and econom-
ics departments. Last July, in a move
clearly designed to herald the succession,
Shapiro became vice chairman and Ed-
ward R. Kane, fifty-five, a chemist and
also a senior vice president, was elected
president.

"A wise old owl"

The news of Shapiro's promotion, says
his son, Stuart, hit the family like "an
absolute bombshell. A lawyer doesn't
become chairman of Du Pont. A Jew
doesn't become chairman of Du Pont."
But to many people in the company and
the community it wasn't such a surprise.
Nearly everybody in Wilmington who
knows Shapiro—and a great many peo-
ple do—describes him in the same words.
For example, Howard Handelman, a
lawyer whom Shapiro helped get started,
and William G. Copeland, president of
Continental American Life Insurance
Co., both call Shapiro "a wise old owl."

Others who have worked with him on
civic projects remark upon his patient
effectiveness. He will sit quietly through
a long meeting, listen to everyone say his
piece, and then at precisely the right
psychological moment, when everyone is
weary of the discussion, propose a solu-
tion acceptable to all.

Shapiro is, in fact, a sort of benign
Jewish godfather to all and sundry. He
is accessible to almost anyone. William
Copeland (who is unrelated to the Cope-
lands of Du Pont) once had a personnel
problem in his company and, unable to
resolve it himself, phoned Shapiro at
home one afternoon. Shapiro immediate-
ly invited him out for a drink. "I laid out
the three alternatives," says Copeland,
"and after we'd talked for fifteen min-
utes I couldn't imagine why there'd ever
been a two or three."

One friend says that Shapiro has been
Du Pont's "first unofficial vice president
of the people's interest." Recently a local
school superintendent phoned to see
him. The official's district is riven by
racial tension, politically fragmented,
and is largely off the tax rolls. He wanted
to know if Shapiro could help find some
way to raise the district's revenues. The
call was diverted to Du Pont's public-
affairs department, a decision with
which Shapiro vigorously disagreed as
soon as he heard about it. He insisted
that he wanted to see the man person-
ally, and his staff is now at work explor-
ing ways to help.

Shapiro spends an enormous amount
of his time on the nitty-gritty of just
such civic problems, many of them seem-
ingly small bore. As head of a budget
committee of the Wilmington United
Fund—the sort of job that in most com-
panies would be delegated several rungs
down the ladder—he spends long hours
listening to often confused budget re-
quests from spokesmen for local charities.

Almost single-handedly, he is keeping
the city's Urban Coalition alive. For sev-
eral years he served as president of a
Jewish old-age home and raised funds
for the United Jewish Appeal. If he can-
not take on a project himself, he finds
someone else who can. He justifies his
time on these activities by arguing that
"either responsible people will do it or
irresponsible people will." Moreover, he
adds, "it's a great education that gets
you back to the reality of this world."

Time out for thieves

Until a few years ago, Delaware had
no paid public defenders for indigents
accused of crimes, so Shapiro and other
corporate lawyers in Wilmington spent
a great many hours in court as volunteer
attorneys for assorted thieves, vandals,
and forgers. He still knows his way
around a courthouse and still retrieves
people from jail. At 2:30 one morning
recently, for example, Charles E. Welch,
Du Pont's assistant general counsel, was
asleep when the vice chairman phoned.

"Chuck? It's Irv. How much money do
you have lying around the house?"

"How much do you need?" asked
Welch.

"Oh, about $350 more. John Doe [a
Du Pont employee] has been jailed on a
drunk-driving charge and I'm trying to
bail him out."

Welch and others collected enough
money and met Shapiro at the county
courthouse. "We got the guy out of jail,"
says Welch, "walked him across the
street, rented him a room at the hotel,
and put him to bed. First thing in the
morning, Irv got him a lawyer."

Pulling the wrong vine

Along with all his extracurricular ac-
tivities, Shapiro also puts in a nine- or
ten-hour day at the office and only gets
home for dinner once or twice a week. He
is proud of the pleasant house he built
some years ago in Greenville, a Wilming-
ton suburb where many Du Pont execu-
tives live. But he is not much of a handy-
man, and in fact suspects that he may
have flunked kindergarten because of a
lack of dexterity at block building. His
neighbor Edwin A. Gee, who is a Du
Pont senior vice president, recalls that
soon after the Shapiros moved in, he saw
Irving pulling some vines from trees.
Gee asked if he knew what the vines
were, and Shapiro confessed that he
didn't. "Poison ivy," said Gee. "I didn't
see Irv outdoors again for a year."

Now that he is one of the most influ-
ential of local citizens, Shapiro has been
proposed for membership in the Wil-
mington Club, the downtown bastion of
the local establishment, and he may not
have to wait the usual eight years to get
in. He and Charlotte play golf fairly fre-
quently in the late afternoons at the mod-
est Brandywine Country Club near their
home (but he seldom breaks 100). He
and his closest friend, Bernard Isaacson,
a partner in the J.K. Lasser accounting
firm, own a farm together, and their
wives are partners in the Old Granddads
Stable, which consists of two trotting
horses. Every Thursday morning, as he
has done for thirty years, Shapiro writes
a letter to his mother.

His real interests are his work and
the law. He has little interest in material
possessions or in a grand life style—
even though his salary as chairman will
be around $250,000 a year, a far cry
from the $5,000 he once hoped to earn.

*continued page 156*

154 FORTUNE January 1974

this new palm-sized
machine may be
the greatest
breakthrough
in dictating
equipment since
the invention of
magnetic tape

only
$99.95

We don't have to sell you on the convenience or necessity of dictating equipment. But, most so-called "portable" machines are often cumbersome, have bad reproduction, use non-standard tapes and are limited in features and performance.

But Murac Micromatic is different and better. It is a complete breakthrough in design and engineering and has features and performance never before seen in any portable equipment.

First, the Murac is light and small. It weighs 20 oz. and measures 5½x3½x1½". It fits in your palm and you can comfortably carry it in your pocket or on your wrist.

It has the clarity and fidelity that you'd expect in a fine concert recorder. This performance is assured by its built-in condenser microphone, wow/flare of less than 0.3%, frequency response of 150 to 8,000 Hz., and dynamic speaker with 400 mW output.

And here is the operational breakthrough that distinguishes the Murac: it is a one-button instrument. Yes, one button does it all—recording, playback, fast forward or rewind. Even to pause/recording or playback is done with a hold button and with just one finger.

Naturally, the Murac Micromatic uses standard 1 or 2 hr. tape cassettes available anywhere. It's great for taping lectures and conferences. Its built-in 3-digit counter lets you locate any segment of the tape fast and accurately.

With the Murac Micromatic you may use any standard cassette tape player for transcription. No need to tie up the machine itself or use specialized transcribing equipment. When traveling, just dictate and mail your tape. Naturally, if you prefer, you can use the Murac Micromatic itself for transcribing.

This remarkable instrument is loaded with features. Here are some others: ■ Built-in IC line amplifier for perfect recording ■ Easy-load pop-up cassette door ■ Built-in battery strength meter ■ Built-in recording level guide. Input jack for remote control mike. Output jack for earphones or speaker ■ Adapter for playing through AC outlets ■ Uses four standard batteries.

The best surprise, perhaps, about the Murac Micromatic is the price: it's just $99.95. Compare this value with other recorders selling for $150 or more.

Standard equipment for the Murac Micromatic is: ■ the AC adapter ■ earphone ■ set of four batteries ■ one blank cassette ■ vinyl carry case with lanyard.

The Recording Accessory Kit contains: deluxe fitted carry case with hand/shoulder strap, remote microphone, 12V. adapter for car use, six blank cassettes with index cards.

The Transcribing Accessory Kit contains: foot pedal, twin ear set and telephone pick-up.

Order the Murac Micromatic system in full confidence and add hours of efficiency to your every workday. We give you a two-week unquestioned return privilege and one-year guarantee for parts and workmanship (we repair free, only charge for postage and insurance).

Please send me:

☐ Standard Murac Micromatic $99.95

FO-0-174

☐ Recording Accessory Kit $29.95

☐ Transcribing Kit $19.95

☐ My check for this amount (Calif. deliv. add tax) plus $2 for post. and insur. is enclosed.

Charge my ☐ BA, ☐ MC, ☐ HaverCharge, #__________. Expires ____________

Signature ____________________ (for charge orders only)

Name ____________________
haverhill's

Address ____________________
584 Washington Street
San Francisco, Calif. 94111

Zip ____________________

NOTE: If you have any of the above cards, please call toll free for super-speedy service (800) 227-0272. [In California call collect (415) 871-8645].

351-3

Shapiro continued

Shapiro takes charge of Du Pont at what suddenly looks like a difficult time. The company has enjoyed a remarkable renaissance under McCoy. Sales and earnings set records last year, and as recently as October, Du Pont was forecasting a growth rate of 10 percent in earnings for the rest of the decade. But the energy crisis has thrown all the forecasts out the window. Du Pont is a prodigious consumer of petroleum. Seventy percent of its products use petroleum derivatives as raw materials, and by early December the company was forced to cut back production of Dacron and nylon by as much as 10 percent for lack of petroleum feedstocks.

Just like the OPA

It seems likely that Du Pont will reduce its capital-spending plans, and before long it may have to close some of its plants, which have been operating at their capacity limits. The situation is ironic in an industry that for much of the Sixties suffered from overcapacity. Shapiro, who began his career setting up rationing rules, may end it trying to live with a whole new set of them.

He also faces the task of broadening Du Pont's view of the world. For a company of such size and spread, Du Pont still retains to a surprising degree the aura and attitudes of a small-town family business. Last September, Shapiro testified before a United Nations group considering whether the U.N. should regulate multinational corporations. He supported the concept of "a common code of behavior" for the multinationals, perhaps administered under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade.

Irving Shapiro could be just the man for the times. His own background is a sharp break with Du Pont's tradition, and his experience of hard times might well help Du Pont through its own hard times ahead. As for his remarkable career, Shapiro says: "It's the American system that has paid off. The opportunity was there, and my family said, 'Get an education.' There is plenty of benefit in the way the system operates if we use it the way it is supposed to be used." END

156 FORTUNE January 1974