(59)

Loulie was ill. I should have liked to talk with Mr. Root who was one of the guests. He looked very fit after his illness of last year.

I tried to impress upon Cecil the necessity of the present British
Government, of which he is a member, to continue Ramsay MacDonald's policy to-
ward the League of Nations and the United States. He asked me to write him a
letter embodying what I had said, stating he could use it to advantage with
his colleagues when he returned home. The talk I gave him was similar to
the one with MacDonald last summer at Chequers and need not be repeated here.

Instead of writing to Cecil I concluded to write A. G. Gardiner which is a
part of the record.

I have cancelled practically all our luncheon and dinner engagements
for the past three weeks on account of Loulie's illness and the embargo is
still on by the doctor's order.

Ferris Greenslet, of Houghton, Mifflin & Co. was a caller yesterday,
and I went over with him the manuscript which Dr. Seymour has recently sent.
My letter to Dr. Seymour is a part of the diary.

Mr. and Mrs. William Allen White lunched with us today. Among other
things they said he did not put in all he wanted to say concerning the present
Mrs. Wilson in his recent book on Woodrow Wilson. White eliminated; he told
me, what Tumulty had to say of Mrs. Wilson as it was critical and extremely
uncomplimentary. Both Mrs. White thought that if it had not been for Mrs.
Wilson the United States would now be in the League of Nations and White said
he had to restrain himself from saying so in his book.

January 18, 1925.

On Tuesday, January 8th, Hamilton Fish Armstrong gave a dinner at the
Knickerbocker Club in honor of Major Harold W. V. Temperley, who has been de-

(60)

signated by the British Foreign Office to write of the causes of the war. He
and I talked most of the time during dinner and exchanged ideas.

On Friday the 9th I gave a lunch to Hilton Young, Member of Parliament, Lloyd George Whip and a British war hero. He is a fine type of Englishman and I wanted my friends to meet him.

January 11th I sent a cable of congratulation to Ambassador Kellogg and a telegram to President Coolidge. On the 13th I wrote a letter to the Ambassador which is a part of the record. I wrote the letter in order to stimulate Kellogg to do some things as Secretary of State that I consider worth while. I am delighted that Mr. Hughes has relinquished the post for I disagree with the general estimate of him. There has been a singular unanimity in the paean of praise accorded him since he resigned which to me indicates how ill informed our people are. Sir William Wiseman and I were discussing this today and there was no disagreement between us that the best thing Coolidge has done so far was to get rid of Hughes. He has had an opportunity for service such as few Secretaries of State have had, and he has obtained the minimum results, and the standing and policy of the United States has grown steadily worse during his term of office.

Hughes' treatment of the Japanese situation was but little short of a disaster. When it got so bad, through his action in giving out the Hani-hara letter, he did what he could to offset the mistake he had made, and that is to his credit, but it must not be forgotten that he was responsible for creating the acute situation which arose.

The Washington Conference was conceived in a good spirit, but every
well informed person knows that this country obligated itself in a way which
might entangle us in the future much more seriously than it was ever proposed
to involve us in the League of Nations. Then, too, we gave away the advanta-

(61)

geous position we occupied with regard to our navy and without compensating
advantages.

Governor Gifford Pinchot came to see me on Wednesday January 14th. He considers the situation in our public life is apalling. He thinks it worse than during the McKinley Administration with Mark Hanna at the helm. He cannot understand how it is that the American people have become so indifferent to the things that Roosevelt and Wilson stood for. It looked as if we were in for a period of loose standards. My advice to him was to "sit tight" and to say nothing until the Autumn of 1925. I promised if he would call again then I would help formulate a policy along the lines which he and I would like to see inaugurated.

Arthur Howden Smith, the writer, came on the 15th to discuss the writing of another book about me. He said three publishers had asked him to do this. I told him frankly of the arrangement I had with Dr. Seymour and he was generous enough to admit that I had made the best decision possible.

I have seen a number of people of more or less importance like Edward Filene of Boston, Norman Davis, Chalmers Roberts of London, etc. etc.

January 25, 1925.

We are leaving today for a few weeks visit to Texas and the South.
Loulie is well enough to begin to take up her social duties and I think it
best for us to get away.

On the evening of the 21st I received the manuscript of Stanley High's new book, "Europe has Turned the Corner" with the request that I write an introduction. We were going out that evening and I only had a few minutes to look over the chapters, but Thursday morning I wrote a short introduction which is a part of the record.

(62)

We went to a very large dinner at the Cornelius Vanderbilt Friday given in honor of Ambassador and Madame Jusserand. I had some talk with him and with many others of the fifty guests who were there.

March 22, 1925.

I often think of Mussolini and compare him with Philip Dru. There is a parallel in their careers and I wonder whether Mussolini will rise to the heights of self abnegation as Dru did. I have thought to send Mussolini a copy of Philip Dru for if he read it he might see the parallel and it might influence him in some slight degree. The reason I have not sent it is because I do not admit its authorship and to send it to him anonymously would be useless as he would never read it.

William L. Chenery, Editor of Collier's called about two weeks ago to ask me to write an article for Collier's on world peace. I wrote it and a copy is appended to the diary.

One of recent interesting callers was Robert Wilberforce of the British Foreign Office, who has an office in New York. I outlined to him what I thought the British should do regarding the Protocol, the League of Nations and their relation to the United States. Wilberforce seemed impressed and insisted that I always had influenced the Foreign Office in their policies particularly regarding the United States. He said there was a growing tension between the British Government and the Dominions in foreign affairs as to policies of the Empire. The British Dominions want to be consulted as they were regarding the recent Protocol.

If carried out in full in every instance, this would deprive the Foreign Office of its power of immediate decision. When the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs is discussing policies with European governments he could not speak with authority as in former years

(63)

because he would have to consider the opinions of the Dominions. This attitude of the Dominions fulfils my prophesy at Paris when the Covenant and the League were in the making. This insistence of the Dominions for a voice in the direction of foreign affairs would be much stronger had the United States entered the League but, even so, it has developed to an extent to be embarrassing to the Foreign Office.

I told Wilberforce to suggest to Chamberlain to have the Cabinet make some such statement to the Dominions as this: "It is obviously impossible to conduct delicate and important negotiations with foreign countries when the decision is multiple and not single. On the other hand, we are conscious that if the Dominions are to furnish military forces in consequence of a foreign policy which the British Government might make without regard to them, they should have some voice in the making of that policy. Therefore, the British Government releases the Dominions from any obligation to furnish any of the forces of war in the event the British Government becomes involved with a foreign power. His Majesty's Government, however, will continue to protect the Dominions with all its resources in the event they are attacked."

This would be a great benefit but it would mean simply that the Foreign Office would have a free hand in the direction of its foreign policies which, indeed, is necessary in almost every instance, and yet it would not keep the Dominions from coming to the rescue of the Mother Country in time of peril. Whether anything will come of it.

Altogether the most interesting of recent happenings has been the discussions in Europe regarding the Protocol. The Baldwin Government has reversed the policy of the MacDonald Government and has struck the Protocol a serious blow. It seems as if the Fates were against the League.

(64)

The trouble began while the Covenant was in the making when Wilson unwisely defied the Senate by declaring that he would so entwine the Covenant and Treaty that they could not be segregated, and that not the crossing of an i or the dotting of an i should be changed. After that came his ill advised controversy with the Senate regarding the Treaty, and his refusal to accept the so called Lodge Reservations-- reservations which were timid, childish and unnecessary, but which the Senate had full right to make. When the vote on the Treaty came it was lost by only six votes with twenty odd Democratic Senators voting no under direction of Wilson.

If Governor Lowden had been nominated instead of Harding we would now be in the League, and he would have been nominated but for a curious mishap with which he had nothing to do. Even so, Senator Harding would have favored the League probably had not the Republican National Campaign Committee designated George Harvey and Richard Washburn Child to remain at his elbow to steer him through the campaign. Both of them were abler and stronger men than Harding and both were against the League.

Then came the death of Murray Crane, the ablest political mind in the Republican Party, and the close friend and adviser of Calvin Coolidge who was soon to become President. That with the defeat of John W. Davis last November completed the disasters to the League on this side of the world.

On the other side, the most serious blow was the recent Conservative victory in Great Britain. Had MacDonald carried on even for a twelve months longer the League would have been so strengthened that it would have been practically impregnable and the United States could not have remained aloof.

The main hope now lies in Herriot and Benes. They may yet force GT Britain to accept a modification of the Protocol and to use the League as the instrument for disarmament and security. The British undoubtedly are in-

(65)

fluenced by our action, as the Canadian Delegate at Geneva frankly stated.
So today, and for the last four years the United States has blocked the path
to disarmament and world peace. Were I President I could not sleep with the
guilt of inaction on my soul, for, after all, the responsibility is his. He
could change the whole situation within a month had he the will, the courage
and the understanding.

And this line of thought reminds me that I am often asked whether I am
a pacifist. I lunched with Edward S. Martin the other day and I outlined my
position in this way: I am a pacifist internationally but not a personal one.
I was reared in a community where personal encounters were frequent and fatal.
Usually they were not street or bar-room brawls but were often caused by
controversies not adjudicable, or by some exaggerated statement involving one's
honor or courage. The result of such encounters was not altogether unwholesome for they made for restrained and moderate statement of facts. No puerile
and indecent gossip went the rounds, and men were more gentle, courteous and
well mannered than now. I do not argue for a return of such times and practices, but I cannot think of individual homicide with the same indignation as I
do of the wholesale slaughter of innocent youth. In the one instance the participants share the danger alike, and the result of the dual leaves but few to
suffer whatever the outcome. In the other instance, those who send the youth
of a nation to death seldom share the danger. The individual quarrel is but
little different in essence from the larger quarrel between nations. The
statesmen involved in the larger affair are accustomed by the same passions and
by similar motives as the individuals in the lesser one. However, there is
less excuse for nations to go to war than for two individuals to fight, and
the result is so much more ghastly.

We lunched with Mr. and Mrs. George Arliss last week and I had

(66)

some talk with Brander Matthews. He was sparkling though bitter in his remarks particularly in his criticism of personalities. He excoriated Calsworthy whose play "Old English" Arliss is now presenting with so much distinction. He spoke of Woodrow Wilson with hardly less venom. He said Wilson belonged to the Round Table group but when he came, which was not often, he seldom entered into the conversation and for the reason, so Matthews thinks, that he realized that he was in a circle of his "intellectual superiors."

I know the Round Table group and I knew Woodrow Wilson, and if there is a member of the Round Table who has the charm, conversational brilliancy of Wilson I am a very poor judge. This is in line with the old charge that Wilson only had his intellectual inferiors around him because he did not want to be at a disadvantage. As a matter of fact, he could not have appointed anyone either in the Republican or Democratic Party who could have overshadowed him intellectually. In the second place, his opinion of himself was such that it was the last thought in his mind. The truth perhaps is that nearly all of the Round Table group are Republicans and were antagonistic in their views to those of Wilson and he naturally found nothing in common to discuss. Being a gentleman, and the affair being purely social, he kept quiet.

On Friday I lunched with Dr. V. Stefansson to meet the High Commissioner of Australia. I brought the discussion around to the Protocol and why the Dominions were antagonistic to it. I found it was largely because of the attitude of the United States. Australia, like the other Dominions, feels that the greatest protection they can have in the event of another war is the combination of Great Britain and the United States. He spoke of an alliance between the two countries as being the best security for world peace. I controverted this and told him there would be no surer way to bring the en-

(67)

tire world into an alliance against us than to have such a pact between the
English speaking people.

I found the Commissioner particularly unreasonable regarding the "dark races". He is as bad as the "sand lot orators" of San Francisco used to be. This seems to me to be a foolish attitude to take toward so powerful a neighbor as Japan.

Ray Stannard Baker came to see me some ten days ago to discuss the biography Maxi Mrs. Wilson has authorized him to write about Woodrow Wilson. My letter to Dr. Seymour on this interview tells what passed between us.

Dr. Canby of Yale and Harper Brothers also came and my letter to Dr. Seymour regarding his visit is also a part of the record.

Senator Walsh called yesterday and my letter to Franklin Roosevelt of today tells something of that interview. Our additional discussion was about the Warren appointment which the Senate refused to confirm. Walsh gave the inside reasons and facts which did not appear in the press. Warren seems to be a crease of the Sugar Trust and the Senate was quite right in not confirming him.

March 25, 1925.

Among my callers today was Mrs. Borden Harriman. She said, for the first time since the supposed rupture between Wilson and myself, Mrs. Wilson spoke of me to her the other day. She told Mrs. Harriman that she had always liked me and was sorry that she saw nothing of me now. She added that she had never known what the trouble was between Woodrow Wilson and me. This is an astonishing statement.

(68)

April 4, 1925.

One of the things I have been trying to do since I last recorded in the diary was to get Franklin Roosevelt out of what I considered a rather awkward position. He announced some months ago that a Democratic conference would be called to straighten out party finances and to plan a program for future campaigns. There has been so much opposition to it that even if it is called by Chairman Shaver, it will probably not meet with whole-hearted response and will be something of a failure. If it should meet and was a failure, it would hurt Roosevelt's prestige. I consider Roosevelt an asset to the Democratic Party and I should dislike to see his influence lessened. He stands for many things that are best in our public life.

I have been advising Mrs. Rumsey, née Mary Harriman, concerning a newspaper syndicate which she is forming, and we have had several conferences,

We dined on Wednesday the 25th with Mr. and Mrs. Richard Washburn Child where I had some talk with Owen Young and the new Federal District Attorney Buckner.

On March 27th, Burton J. Hendrick called to discuss his new book on Walter Page and the letters which the Pages have now gotten from Mrs. Wilson. It seems there are a good many letters still missing.

Arthur D. Howden Smith, author of *The Real Colonel House*, told me the other day that 25000 copies of that book had been sold in Japan, where it had been translated into Japanese. The reason for this he said was that the Japanese Liberals had been using it as a text-book to educate their countrymen in the direction of liberalism.

Congressman Oldfield, who has charge of the Democratic Congressional elections in 1926, called on the 31st and we went over the field pretty thoroughly. I found Oldfield a virile man with a decided flair for politics

(69)

though of the practical kind. I believe that his endeavors throughout the
country may prove of advantage to the party.

Benj. Griswold Exxxxx banker and Trustee of the Johns Hopkins University,
came from Baltimore Thursday to discuss with me his plan for the payment of
the French debt. He outlined rather an ingenuous plan which I advised him
to submit to those in authority both here and in France.

Henry White was a caller this morning. He told me that when George
Harvey was Ambassador to England he sent a case of whiskey in the British
pouch to President Harding. When the Ambassador, Sir Auckland Geddes, re-
ceived this unusual package he advised the State Department of its receipt and
asked what disposition should be made of it. I think Henry White got this
information from Hugh Wallace, our former Ambassador to France. White said
the amusing thing to him was that Wallace was very indignant that Geddes
should have been so undiplomatic as to mention the matter to the State De-
partment. He seemed to overlook the bad taste of the American Ambassador
to England using the British Embassy here for such a purpose.

In reminiscing White spoke of Sir Cecil Spring-Rice. When the
Lusitania was sunk he called at the British Embassy to express regret only
to have Sir Cecil jump from his chair in a rage, and shake a bundle of pa-
pers in his face and say: "I have no time to talk to you sir for I saw you
come out of the Austrian Embassy yesterday where you had been to lunch".
White said he had always liked Spring-Rice but the war, at times, threw him
off his balance.

(70)

May 10, 1925.

On April 6th I received a very interesting letter from Dr. Seymour which is
a part of the record.

We went that evening to the opera with Mrs. Cornelius Vanderbilt, Sr
and had an enjoyable time.

On Tuesday the 7th I wrote a letter to Henry White for the purpose
of having it shown to the President hoping that it might push him a little
further along the path of international cooperation.

On Wednesday, April 8, I received the Polish order "Polonia Restituta"
It came without any premonition and was accompanied by a very complimentary
letter from the Polish Minister at Washington which I tried to answer in
like manner on April 9th.

On the 11th, the advertising firm which the Woodrow Wilson Memorial Col-
lege is employing called for a conference and to submit what they proposed to
do for my criticism and advice. Some of it was good and some of it I advised
against.

On Sunday the 12th, the Sergent Crams gave a delightful dinner with some
music afterward.

We dined with Louis Wiley on Tuesday the 14th, and I had an inter-
esting talk with James W. Gerard concerning my papers and the book which Dr.
Seymour is writing around them. We agreed to meet in Paris with Dr. Seymour
for a further discussion.

I had many callers that day as, indeed, I have almost every day,
but what we talk about is so largely repetition that it is not worth while
to record.

Gregory lunched with me on the 17th and he had just seen John W.

(71)

Davis, and that he had told him he was much embarrassed as Ambassador in London when the Page book came out. The English would ask him if he did not consider it a great book. He usually replied that he thought Page was one of the best letter writers he had ever read after. He said he could not consciously say more because he did not think that Page had either represented American opinion or the President.

We lunched with Mr. and Mrs. John W. Davis at Locust Valler, Sunday April 19th, and we had an intimate talk afterward about the Party conference and what lies in the future for the United States. We did not disagree in the opinion that the time might come when there would be serious clash between capital and labor in this country. I thought it merely needed a pro- and per setting-- hard times, an arrogant administration at Washington, to hold labor in check. We both thought if anything akin to a revolution started here it would be of a serious and violent nature because our people are lawless and would probably throw restraint to the winds in such circumstances.

Wednesday the 22nd, I gave a luncheon to Governor Jas. M. Cox of Ohio. The other guests were Governor Silzer of New Jersey, Senator Copeland of New York, Judge Jas. W. Gerard, Frank L. Polk, Henry Morganthau, B. M. Baruch and Louis Wiley, Don Seitz, Judge George A. Carden and Norman Davis.

The conversation at the table was general, everyone doing some talking, having in view suggestions toward the rehabilitation of the Democratic Party for which purpose the lunch was given. I invited Governor Smith but he could not come because only three days were left him in which to sign and veto bills enacted by the last Assembly.

Consul General Ludwig of Hungary came to see me on the 27th, and my let-

(72.)

ter to him of April 28th indicates the purpose of his visit.

I wrote that day a short appreciation of Dr. V. Stefansson which is to be
printed in a book to be gotten out soon by MacMillan & Co.

Raphael Herman, the man who gave the $25,000 peace prize last year, was a caller on the 29th. He followed Jas. G. McDonald of the Foreign Policy Association, and I brought them together for a discussion of matters of interest to us all.

On May 8th I wrote another letter to Dr. Seymour in answer to some in-
teresting letters from him, all of which belong to the record.

That evening I dined with Miss Ruth Morgan. Mrs. Carrie Chapman Catt, Whitney and Mrs. Shepardson, Herbert Croly and a number of other interesting folk were the other guests. The purpose of the dinner was for a general discussion of what was best to be done regarding peace moves in this country.

The correspondence between Henry White and myself as of date April 28th and 29th speaks for itself. My letter to White declining to visit the President at the White House at this time was somewhat disingenuous. My real reason for not going was that I thought it inadvisable to visit the White House just before going to Europe. I feel that the newspaper *maxxnight* comment might be of such a nature as to cause embarrassment to the President and make it almost obligatory for him to make a statement denying that my visit had any political significance whatever. Then, too, I had nothing to say to him at this time. I should find it difficult to advise him today what to do for, at the moment, he can do nothing. In the Autumn, if the invitation is still open, I shall be glad to go, provided I feel that my going is worth while. I very much doubt whether anything I can say to the President will stir him to the kind of action that seems to me necessary. Nevertheless, I am willing to try when the time is propitious and it may be propitious in the

(73)

Autumn. Still another reason for not wanting to go now was the article I
~~wrote for Collier's Weekly, which is more or less a criticism of the~~
President's foreign policy. The article should be out next week, and I
did not want to go to the White House until after it had been published.
If, after reading it, he desires to see me in the Autumn I will go.

(74)

May 19, 1925.

Some very pleasant letters have come regarding my article in Collier's entitled "Are We Blocking the Way?" Newton Baker writes *XAM* "How can such a frank exposition of the facts fail to move our fellow countrymen. I am sure you have done the cause immense service, even if it does take the antidote of good sense a long time to materialize the poison Lodge administered to the public mind."

William Allen White writes:

"I am glad to have you say just exactly that. It will do two things: refresh a lot of wilting democrats who are slipping on the give League and CAUSE intelligent to a few aspiring republicans who want justification for their faith. It was a fine article and if you do not mind my saying so, it added tremendous strength in its brevity."

Josephus Daniels wrote among other things:

"I entirely agree with your position."

R. W. Woolley:

"It is admirable. The World Court is only a gesture and any courageous President can start a movement calculated to deprive the Senate of its present power of obstruction-- but this particular President won't do it".

Whitney Shepardson: writes of the article "most appreciatively and adds: "Sometimes I wonder how you can keep everlastingly at it quietly but with an underlying confidence derived from somewhere."

We are sailing Saturday the 23rd on the S. S. Minnewaska to be gone until September 26th.

(75)

May 30, 1925.

Judge R. W. Bingham of the Louisville Courier Journal sent me a copy of his paper of May 20th containing my article from Collier's printed in full with a complimentary editorial of a column.

On shipboard I find many of the passengers have read it. The Pursur spoke to me almost immediately commending it, and so have several of the passengers. Lord Aberdeen was good enough to say that it was a statesmanlike document and he hoped measures would be taken to give it the widest possible circulation. He hoped, too, that our public men, like Senator Root and others, would endorse the suggestion of an associate membership.

Before leaving New York I received a letter from Chalmers Roberts of the English magazine, "The World of Today" saying: "I presided at a big English speaking luncheon today at which Wickham Steed was orator. We both talked of you. Your name was greeted with such roars of applause from the 500 people present that Evelyn Wrench, the founder of the Union, asked why we could not have you as a guest of honor when you arrive here. He said they would engage the largest hall in London and would have Lords Grey and Balfour and Winston Churchill to preside. Steed and I pledged you to do so it only remains for you to fix a day and let us know as soon as possible."

Another interesting occurrence before I left was a letter from Henry White of May 19th telling me he sent my article to the President with an accompanying letter of his own, to which he had

(76)

had no reply. While I was reading his letter he called me over
the long-distance telephone to say that the White House had just
telephoned him to say that the President wished me to come to
Washington that week to pay him a visit. He had read the article
and evidently was not displeased with its contents. White ex-
plained in his note to the President that the reason I did not ac-
cept his invitation of some two weeks ago was really because I did
not wish to accept his hospitality until he had read the article--
not knowing whether after reading it he would care to have me as
his guest. It was then the President sent the urgent invitation,

I told White how impossible it was for me to go since we
were to sail on Saturday and I wrote the President on the 21st
stating much the same thing. All these letters are a part of the
record.

Burton Hendrick sent to the boat the first four chapters
of the third volume to be of the Walter H. Page Life and Letters.
I have read them with interest and returned them by this ship to
Hendrick. He has done the thing well as usual making the most of
the material at hand. Some of these letters to the President con-
tain four or five thousand words and are merely descriptive of
London Court and social life. They are charmingly written, but
how Page could expect a busy President to read them is more than
I can fathom.

A day or two before sailing, Mr. Wheeler, Editor in Chief of
Liberty, asked me to write an article for him, suggested, I suppose
by my article in Collier's. I gave him no definite answer but I
have no notion of complying with his request.

(77)

We hope to land tomorrow at 7.30 at Cherbourg and reach Paris in the afternoon. It has been a delightful trip although the seas and winds have been unusually heavy for this time of year, but our immediate company composed of ourselves, Miss Denton, Mrs. Wilmot my old friend Allen Olmsted and Prof. G. E. Woodberry of Columbia has made the voyage a pleasant one.

June 4, 1925.

We arrived in Paris Sunday afternoon, May 31st. Early the next morning I had word from Clemenceau that he would like to see me and I went with Stephen Bonsal at 10.30 to 8 Rue Franklin. The old man looked well and was in great spirits. He thought Europe and France in particular was in a sad way, largely from a lack of sense and courage of those in office. He was much concerned about the American demand that France should pay her debts. I took occasion to remind him that I had tried to get them to come to some agreement during and after the Peace Conference, but without success. I also called his attention to the fact that finally in the Autumn of 1919 he and Lloyd George agreed to the plan I had worked out. I submitted this plan to Wilson but it reached him after he had his stroke so nothing came of it.

Clemenceau was concerned about my memoirs. He thought it would be little less than a crime if I did not write them. I asked what about his own? He said it was impossible for him to write without offending America and Great Britain, which was the reason he had refrained. He spoke of my suggestion of his going to Germany last year, and seemed to regret that he had not done so. He said

(78)

that he had to make up his mind so quickly after receiving my let-
ter that he hesitated to undertake the trip. He said, "It is now
too late for the opportunity has passed?" To which I agreed. Bon-
sal urged him to meet Hindenburg at Karlsbad if it could be arrang-
ed but this did not seem to appeal to him. He spoke of Poincaré
as having been a curse to France, to which I gave a fervent amen.

I have had the usual stirring time with newspaper reporters,
photographers and what not. The New York Times and some French
paper sent photographers to Clemenceau's home and they were
waiting when I arrived to take our pictures, which they did a num-
ber of times.

Paderewski arrived from Switzerland almost as soon as we
reached Paris and a delegation from the University of Poznan, con-
sisting of the Rector, Dean of the Faculty and the Professor of
the Chair of Physics, reached here this morning to give me the
diploma for the degree of doctor of philosophy which they confer-
red upon me last winter. They wished to have a large and formal
presentation at the Polish Embassy and invite the American Ambassa-
dor and his entire staff together with a number of Poles and news-
paper people. I objected to this and we compromised by the Polish
Ambassador coming to this hotel at 11.30 this morning with Pader-
ewski and the delegation from the University. The ceremony last-
ed about an hour. Pictures were taken, the Rector made an address
in French, the Professor one in English and when the diploma was
handed me I made the address which is attached to the record.
Each of us wrote what we had to say and read it. A photographer
was in the background taking pictures every now and then, much to

(79)

my amusement. After the ceremony was over, Paderewski gave a luncheon to the party and drank to my health saying among other things that he had known me for a long while and had discovered that I had but two objects in life. One was to serve my country and the world at large. The other was to carefully conceal my activities in this direction. He then said some very nice things about me. In answering him I said "I want to drink to the health of the President of Poland, the University of Poznan and to the world's foremost citizens and Poland's greatest son, living or dead, Ignace Paderewski." Tears came in his eyes and Madame Paderewska, who was present, caught my hand and held it for a moment or two, saying how devoted they both were to me.

June 10, 1925.

The weather has been warm and I have limited our luncheon and dinner engagements to a minimum.

Cailloux invited me to dine with him tomorrow night but I declined. It was to be a fairly large dinner with Bertelot and other members of the French Government. I knew that it would be without results as far as an intimate talk with Cailloux was concerned.

Briand called on the 5th and I returned it on the 6th. Neither of us made any effort to see the other. However, Louis Loucheur called yesterday morning and asked me if I would lunch or dine with Briand during the next few days. I compromised by saying I would be glad to call at the Quai d'Orsay Monday at six o'clock if that would be convenient to Briand. He is to let me know.

In talking with Loucheur about French affairs he was insistent

(80)

that I give him an opinion regarding French action toward the American debt. I declined to do this, stating that the American Ambassador was quite sympathetic to France and he was the one with whom he should discuss the matter. I said that outside of the American President Ambassador, President Coolidge and Secretaries Kellogg, and Mellon were the only three who need be considered. It was my opinion that the American and British debt question were not the basis of the French troubles; that the crux of the European situation was, and had been since the Armistice, the security of France. That until France was secured she could not disarm, and she would have great difficulty in balancing her budget.

I hoped the Pact which Briand and Chamberlain agreed upon at Geneva would become a reality and that Germany would accept it. Then one of the main difficulties would be overcome. If it did not go through, if I were directing the destinies of France, I should say to Great Britain and other European States in the gentlest, most affectionate and most regretful way that France would soon have two alternatives left her. One was to reduce her army, balance her budget and sink quietly into a second class power and be at the mercy of Germany. The second alternative was to have a last throw of the dice and go in and smash Germany and pull the European temple down. I would say that if I took this action it would not be the fault of France but that of Great Britain and the United States who had refused to live up to the agreements made by their representatives at the Peace Conference.

In other words, I would put the fear of God into the hearts of all and let them see that French disaster would mean, more or less, the disaster of all. It would then become clear to Germany that

(81)

that French security and the stabilization of French credit were problems in which Germany was more vitally interested than the French themselves.

Yesterday, Comte de la Touches, Chef de Cabinet of the Minister of Finance, and Paul Destournelles de Constant, his Private Secretary, called to invite me to the Cailloux dinner. I made practically the same talk to them as I did to Loucheur. I made it clear to all of them that I had no intention of discussing the American debt question either with them or M. Cailloux or other members of the Government.

I had an interesting talk with Ambassador Herrick at the dinner which the Hugh Wallaces gave Saturday. It was a large and formal affair with a superabundance of food and wine, with many courses served by some ten or twelve butlers. After dinner there were several artists from the Opera Comique and different theaters of Paris who performed in various ways. These feasts depress me by their luxury and useless waste.

One of the pleasant happenings of the week has been the visits of Kathleen Young and D. N. Heineman. They are both stars in their own particular orbits.

Princess Lusinge gave us a delightful dinner Monday at which she had some interesting French people and some of the best of the American Colony here, such as the Harjes, Carters and Scotts.

June 14, 1925.

I called on Dr. Henri Bergson on the 11th. The poor fellow has been sick for many months and I saw him in his bedroom. Of all my friends there are none more complimentary in their estimate of my services. He embarrasses me almost as much as Paderewski when he

(83)

June 19, 1925.

The day before we left Paris I had a final talk with Clemenceau. He told me about his book which is to be in three volumes of 500 pages each. I take it, it will be rather a dull affair since he treats of the universe and speculates upon it and of man's place in the general scheme of things.

I told him of the article I had in mind to write about France and the danger that the whole of Europe ran in not giving her security from German aggression so that she might reduce her thought army and air fleet and make her budget meet; I had no intention to say that in my opinion when she was confronted with the alternative of reducing armaments, making which would mean sinking herself to a second rate power, or of keeping the army and using it to smash Germany completely, she would choose the latter.

Clemenceau replied, "If I were at the head of the Government in France I should certainly smash Germany." He urged me to write the article. He thought I was correct in my opinion that the French had not thought of these two alternatives but that someday it would stare them in the face unless security was obtained and their finances placed on a substantial basis. He spoke of the utter incompetency not only of the present Government but of those gone before, and excoriated Poincaré.

After leaving Clemenceau it occurred to me that if I did write the article I should make the effort to get him to endorse it as his own view. I am wondering whether he would do it or whether he would evade it as politicians usually do in such instances.

(85)

We dined with the King and Queen at Laeken _en famille_ Wednesday evening at 7.30. There was no one present other than the American Ambassador and his wife and the Household. I had a pleasant talk with the Queen during dinner and the King, Phillips and I had a talk of an hour and a half after dinner. The conversation ranged from war days to the present. The King was good enough to tell Phillips that Belgium owed me much and that if it had not been for me, his country could never have obtained the two and a half milliard of francs priority claim for indemnity from Germany.

While we were talking, an aide came in and handed the King a note and he went into another room for a few minutes. When he returned he told us that he had just signed the commissions for the new Government. Phillips remarked "that makes this an historic evening", to which the King replied "It was already an historic evening because of the presence of our illustrious guest Colonel House".

The dinner was an early one but the King did not rise to leave until 10.15, an unusually late hour for him.

Mr. and Mrs. Heineman gave a lunch at which there were the British Ambassador, the American Ambassador, Brand and Mrs. Whitlock, the head of the Federal Bank of Brussels, the Marquis Ferondo of Spain and several other distinguished guests. There was nothing of importance to record.

Last night we attended a reception given to the King and Queen by the Spanish Ambassador. I did not intend meeting either the King or Queen as it seemed rather an anti climax after the long talks I had had with them at Laeken. However, the King sent for me

(86)

and I sat on a sofa with him and talked with him and Mr. Heineman for some twenty minutes. I was amused at the curiosity and interest displayed by the other guests looking in through the doors at the end of the room we were in. I think they were especially interested in the attention paid Heineman who afterwards talked to the Queen for nearly three quarters of an hour. It was certainly Heineman's night since it was the first time he had met either the King or Queen.

There has been some feeling against Heineman in Brussels during and since the war because of his supposed German connections-- a suspicion entirely unjust. I have never known a more unprejudiced man and he was born and bred in the United States as I believe his father was before him. Nothing has pleased me more than since I have been in Brussels this attention shown him for he deserves it all.

In talking to the King remarked that I knew Europe so well that it was a pleasure to discuss affairs with me. In turn I replied that I received much of my information from Heineman. The King then said to Heineman "the Colonel not only knows history but what will be history." The King dislikes parties of this sort as much as I do. He said he did not dance and never went to such affairs if it could be avoided. He said a rather curious thing and that was that when he was nervous he turned to mathematics to quiet himself. For instance, he has been worried because of the failure of Parliament to form a Government during the past six weeks-- an unprecedented condition in Belgium. He said he was so worried day

(87)

before yesterday before the Government was formed that he took to
Calculus as a means of soothing his frazzled nerves.

The more I see of King Albert the better I like him. He is
diffident, he is modest and genuine, and while he is not a bril-
liant figure, he never says anything foolish and he has a mind bot-
tomed on good sound common sense.

Hotel Connaught,
London, W.

June 24, 1925.

On Friday before we left Brussels the British Ambassador gave in
our honor a dinner at which the Prime Minister (Vicomte Poullet)
M. Van de Vyvere, who is the most important man in the Cabinet
with the possible exception of Vandevelde, Minister of Foreign Af-
fairs, when I was for a few minutes at the Danish Ambassador's
reception.

Rudyard Kipling's daughter, Mrs. Bambridge, was at the dinner
but I found her difficult to talk to. Van de Vyvere and I had a
long discussion about the American debt. I declined to make any
suggestions saying that I did not want to inject myself into that
controversy. He was so insistent that we were presently
discussing it whether or no. He said that just before the Belgian
Loan of $50,000,000. arranged for in New York was announced word
came from the American Government that the loan would not be coun-
tenanced unless the Belgian Government agreed to the American terms
of discussion of Belgium's debt to the United States. Re-

(89)

tary all the way to the Hook, and the Dutch Minister arranged for
our baggage to pass without examination. The British Foreign Office
also arranged for it to come in at Harwich and everything was
done for our comfort that was possible.

The day we arrived in London, Sunday June 21st, I had a
quiet day with only Norman Hapgood as a caller. Monday night Mr-
and Mrs. Hilton Young gave us a dinner at the House of Commons in
order for me to have a private talk with the Prime Minister and
Mr. Chamberlain. She arranged it admirably and I had separate
talks with each. The Prime Minister is much more alert than
Chamberlain and is a better listener, therefore, I finished with him
in twenty minutes and with better results than with Chamberlain in
double the time. I had no difficulty in persuading them of the
danger regarding France. They both saw it and were eager for me
to write an article presenting my views. They thought it would
be of service not only in Great Britain but in Germany, in the Do-
minions and perhaps in the United States.

Chamberlain wanted me to give the article to an American paper
and have an understanding with the London Times that they would pub-
lish it here simultaneously. He was afraid if it were published
exclusively in the London Times that Continental Europe might
think it was written at the suggestion of the British Government.

I told Baldwin that I had tried to touch President Coolidge's
conscience and by impressing the Puritan streak in him stir him to
some action, in my article in Collier's Weekly of May 16th. He
was interested in this and said if that conscience could once be
aroused, nothing would stop him and that he would go through any

(90)

obstacle. He thought there was no more powerful force in the world
than the conscience of a man of the Coolidge type.

Baldwin said he would like to go to America and have a talk
with the President himself hoping he might influence him. He asked
me to send him the article which I shall do today.

After I had outlined to him my views as to the danger of the
situation if France does not get a satisfactory security pact, and
if her finances should become even more demoralized than now, Cham-
berlain said, "That is what I have been trying to impress upon my
colleagues but without much success. I am glad to have you confirm
my opinion for, after all, you have had more experience in foreign a
affairs than I have, and it is reassuring to know that we have reach
ed the same conclusion."

I have not made any effort to publish my views for the reason
that some mischievous articles have appeared in the London Press
stating that my visit to Europe is a mission from the President and
that when I return I will report to him concerning European condi-
tions and, perhaps, a disarmament conference would be the result.
Sir Horace Plunkett was here when the Evening Standard was delivered.
It contained an even more mischievous article than had yet
appeared. Sir Horace was disturbed and made several suggestions
as to righting the matter. I finally called up the Manager of the
Associated Press and had him give out through the A. P. a complete
denial. I did the same thing this morning with the United Press,
dictating the statement myself.

Sir Horace made the remark that it was worth while seeing
me get into trouble in order to see me get out of it. I have had

(92)

Sir George Graham called on the 25th and we had a delightful hour together. He has much charm and is a diplomat to his finger tips. He very much wants to be Ambassador at Paris as successor to Lord Crewe when it is thought that Crew has been there as long as courtesy demands. I am forwarding this ambition when and where I can for I believe I could be of service there.

I lunched with Mr. and Mrs. Hilton Young. There were no other guests but Megan Lloyd George and Lady Gladstone, who was good enough to ask us to her home in the country for a week-end. This is one of our difficulties in England-- evading week-end parties. The houses are cold and we find ourselves much more comfortable in London, where we can control our own comfort, and I am not so disturbed as is turned by people.

Paderewski called twice Thursday. The first time I was not in but I had a long talk with him afterwards. He had just come from the Palace where he had had an audience with the King. He said the King in discussing labor troubles here said that "luckily English people did not like foreigners, therefore, he did not expect the Russian propaganda to make much impression. Paderewski smiled at what he termed this "tactful remark". However, he likes the King, as indeed I do, for he is always genuine.

This afternoon Eugene Meyer called. He is one of the ablest Jews I know and he has, I believe, the broadest European outlook, any American capitalist. He deprecates the American policy of pushing Europe on the debt question at this time and excuses them by saving it from ignorance. They cannot realize what harm it is doing us and the kind of reputation we are acquiring throughout the

(95)

be a candidate Grey declined to allow his name to be used although he had received double the votes of Asquith. Asquith was approached and told of Grey's decision and of the vote of preference for him and yet he persists in being a candidate. The result is that the Conservatives may put in a new man, but he is to be hoped that Gave will win because of Asquith's selfishness. Grey has been Asquith's supporter and friend for thirty years or more, and it was a rare opportunity for Asquith to show his appreciation.

In talking to Grey today about his book he said if his eyes had permitted his reading the proofs himself in stead of having them read to him, he would probably have made many corrections but fix as it is he would have to let it go. He said that Lady Grey had helped to better the English.

I told him of Clemenceau's book and he remarked that he supposed he wrote it to please himself; that what Clemenceau really needed was a Boswell to record his epigrams and caustic witticisms.

Tyrrell told me he was offered the Berlin Ambassadorship but at the last moment, when about to accept it, Sir Eyre Crowe died and he was made Permanent Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs in stead. It is a pity that Tyrrell cannot be in two places at once for he is capable and has a grasp of foreign affairs.

He told me of Robert Cecil and of his desire to have a desk in the Foreign Office in order to assist Chamberlain. Chamberlain refused to make the concession. We discussed Cecil and wondered what was lacking in his make-up that prevented the success his abilities would warrant. I thought he had no political flair, to which

(96)

Tyrrell agreed. Tyrrell said Cecil was much criticized for going to the United States and taking the Wilson Foundation Prize. I asked on what ground the criticism was made, and he said in the first place the award should have gone to Grey; that he had done more for the League and the cause of peace than it had ever been possible for Cecil to do and that, as a matter of fact, Cecil had done the League harm rather than good by his excessive zeal. The other criticism was that he had spoken of Wilson very freely over here and in an uncomplimentary way, and that it was bad taste to accept the prize and praise him as he did in his speech of acceptance. Still another criticism was that he had accepted the money for his personal uses and had not given it either to the League or the League of Nations Union in Great Britain. In other words given it to some cause which would have furthered the League.

Some of these criticisms may be valid, others I am inclined to question.

I asked Tyrrell what was the advantage objection to having the Vatican send a representative to the League without voting power and merely as an observer. I thought it a mistaken policy and expressed the intention of seeing if I could not obtain this concession. It would help us in America and it would strengthen the League in all Latin and Catholic countries. Tyrrell was heartily in favor of this and said it seemed absurd that the Catholic Church, the most conservative organization now in the world, should not be recognized in this way when there was a constant appeal to the Bolsheviks to come into the League and send representatives there. He thought the main objection came from the Italian Government. Of this I am not sure.

(97)

July 2, 1925.

On June 28th we had a pleasant day in the country with Mr. and Mrs. Bendix.

On the 29th we lunched with Lord Balfour. It was a small party with ourselves, Mr and Mrs. Lloyd George and members of the family present. I was delighted to find Balfour looking so much better than last year. He looks quite himself again and talked in his old time good form. We discussed international politics at some length.

I told of the last word I had with Clemenceau and of his agreement with my conclusions that under certain conditions France might make an excursion into Germany. George thought it would be a most foolish thing for it could accomplish nothing; that the Germans would merely say "Come in and stay as long as you like." And that would be the end of it excepting that France would have the bill to pay since Germany would have nothing to pay with.

This reminds me somewhat of some of the pacifists at home who thought we should not go into the war, and that if the Germans later made war on us we should let them come in and stay as long as they liked and do what they would. George is not usually a foolish, but he has argued so long against Poincare's policy that I suppose he actually believes something akin to what he said. He does not realize that the French might "loot" Germany, and when I suggested this he said "loot them of what? They have nothing more that could be taken away."

Balfour said that if the French embarked on such a monstrous adventure, public opinion in England would not tolerate it. I thought that public opinion throughout the world would con-

(99)

what he did and not to risk the Grand Fleet among German mines in an
attempt to smash the German Fleet and gain for himself imperishable
glory.

Spender told of his plans to write about the war period and I
urged him to do so. There are few men who had a more intimate
knowledge of what was going on, unless he was actually in the Govern-
ment itself.

Yesterday my most interesting visitor was Wickham Steed. It is
always a pleasure to talk with this broadminded, versatile Englishman
who works constantly for a better England and a better world. He
told me that the George-Clemenceau incident, which he mentioned in his
book and which George denied and Clemenceau evaded, was absolutely
true and that Clemenceau had told him afterwards it was true and had
also told the French Ambassador to Italy, through whom Steed first
received the information.

From what Steed tells me, George was justified in taking
hold of the lapels of the Tiger's coat and threatening him, for the
old Tiger had said: "You have already lied to me five times, and
this is the sixth time". I have never seen Clemenceau and George
come to actual blows, but I readily credit the incident as told by Steed.

We dined last night with the American Ambassador. I had
some talk afterward with the French Ambassador who expressed a de-
sire to talk with me further. He asked if I would call on him or
whether he should call on me. I preferred the latter. Since it is
my place to call first I shall send cards around to the French Em-
bassy today.

(100)

London, July 8, 1925.

On July 2nd we lunched with Sir Philip and Lady Cunliffe-Lister. There were some interesting people including the Duke of Atholl, Mr. and Mrs. Winston Churchill and the Master of Elibank.

On Friday the 3rd I had some talk with Sir Horace Plunkett who asked for my photograph. I sent it to him and received one of the most delightful letters I have in my collection, a copy of which is a part of the record.

I lunched with Lady Arthur Colefax and met there Bernard and Mrs. Shaw. I like Shaw and we get along very well together. Lady Colefax insists upon calling me "Mr. House" to which Shaw objected saying that she might as well call him "B. S. Shaw" since no one would know whom she meant in other cases.

I told them I was like Moliere's doctor: "Le Colonel malgré lui".

On Saturday the 4th and Sunday the 5th we spent a delightful week-end at Warwick Castle which in my estimation is one of the most superlatively beautiful places in all of the world.

Monday we motored to Bexhill to lunch with the Dowager Lady Wiseman, mother of my dear friend Sir William Wiseman. She has a charming garden and I revelled in its beauty.

We lunched with Lord and Lady Asquith. Lloyd George and I had some talk after lunch. In my efforts to help the French in the solution of their troubles and in trying to get the Pact through, I brought up the possibility of France crashing if something were not done to help her. Asquith said that our social structure was a great bluff and easily might be overthrown should circumstances be propitious and the hour and the man ready. George said that if the labor leaders had had a man with the force and imagination they could have seized the Government just after the war by using the troops that were very much disgruntled. He did not know of a man who could have done it un-

(101)

less, indeed, it was Bob Smillie and he was a little too old.

We spoke of Allenby and I was surprised to find that George had reversed
his opinion of 1919 when he told me he considered him, perhaps, the greatest
General of the war, other than Foch. Both George and Asquith said that while
Allenby was a good cavalry leader he was not much more. George compared him
to Forrest of our Civil War which let me to tell them of Sir Frederick Mau-
rice's estimate of General Lee who places him along with Hannibal, Caesar and
Napoleon. Neither of them differed from Sir Frederick's opinion that there
was no General in the Great War comparable to Lee. George, however, thought
that Stonewall Jackson was the equal of Lee but he was alone in this opinion.

The French Ambassador called at 6.30 and we had an hour's intimate talk.
I told him in detail of what I had tried to do and was trying to do to help
France. I shall not repeat the conversation since it has been told several
times in the diary within the last two or three weeks. He seemed deeply ap-
preciative and thanked me warmly. I told him to warn his Government to "sit
still" and say nothing if they were asked for an opinion about my prophesy of
what might happen in certain circumstances. I thought it important that they
should not undo what I had done. All that was necessary was to say nothing
further than that the Present Government had no such intention, but that dur-
ing these troublous times God alone could tell what might happen in the near
future. I thought that would be the right touch.

Last night we dined with Lady Harcourt and I had considerable talk with
Sir Robert Horne. I told him pretty much what I had said to the Prime Minis-
ter, Chamberlain, Balfour and others. He seemed impressed and said that France
took such a step it would make of Europe a shambles.

Lord Birkenhead was also at the dinner and it saddened me to see what
havoc heavy drinking had wrought in him. He was a fine specimen of manhood

(102)

a few years ago, but he is now a sort of his former self. He was good enough to ask us for lunch or dinner and he made me promise to let him know when we return from Scotland.

At Lord Grey's this afternoon where I went for tea, I met Walter Runciman and Sir Eric Drummond, neither of whom I had seen for several years. I was surprised to hear Lloyd George and Asquith criticise so frankly Austen Chamberlain, who is a friend of both although of a different party. They said they liked him and he was a fine fellow but that "he had a wooden head, a crooked bend, and rode a wooden horse." They both contributed to this description.

London, July 31, 1925.

We left London the night of the 14th for Scotland. The days leading up to our departure were hectic in the extreme. I gave a luncheon on the 14th to Paderewski. Among the guests were the Viceroy of India, Lord Reading, Lords Asquith and Grey, Sir Philip Cunliffe-Lister, president of the Board of Trade, Hilton Young, Harry Marsh, Harry Selfridge, Boyleton Beale, Marten Bailey, Senator Walsh of Montana, Wickham Steed and Sidney Mezes.

We went direct from London to Inverness and from there we visited Mrs. Andrew Carnegie at Skibo Castle. The weather was delightful, the hospitality charming and we had a pleasant time. The visit was reminiscent of Woodrow Wilson for I recalled his telling me of a visit he made there during Carnegie's life, and while he, Wilson, was at Princeton. If I remember rightly, he was not altogether pleased with his reception and never quite forgave Carnegie.

The only other visit made before our return to London was to Lord and Lady Grey at Fallodon. That was something to be remembered for there were no other guests and Grey and I were together continuously during our stay. Our conversation touched upon almost every phase of human thought and endeavor.

(103)

I was interested in his estimate of what constituted a great man, and he made it clear that he did not believe any man could be great who was selfish or lacking in high purpose. The conversation started by my telling him of having seen the bust of Caesar in the British Museum and I asked his estimate of him. G rayxhakiaexdixthatxuasasex He placed Caesar very high among great men of the world, but he refused to give Napoleon a place among them. Washington and Lincoln he readily conceded, but he thought that Philip of Macedon was even greater than Alexander for the reason he had made possible Alexander's career, and further because Alexander was selfish and self centered.

Of the moderns, he placed Bismarck high as a statesman, although he thought he lacked some essential qualities. He rated Lincoln high because he said he was steadfast of purpose and self abnegating and apparently without egotism. He evidently thought that Wilson failed to reach the highest rank and largely for the reason that he was unyielding and dictatorial and lacked an understanding of his fellow man. Grey repeated the old charge that Wilson could, not stand having men of great ability around him. I refuted this and I think he accepted my explanation. I told him that Wilson had tried to get the biggest men in the Party associated with him in his administration. I cited Charles W. Eliot, a Richard Olney and others who had refused to take office. I told him further that it never occurred to Wilson to be afraid of the ability of any of his contemporaries; that he had a contempt for Roosevelt's ability and that Root and others like him thought so differently from what the President did that they were not congenial for him to work with, but it was not at all that he feared comparison of ability with them. He thought too well of himself for any such thought to enter his mind. Why this fable continues to be repeated I do not know. It must be remembered that Wilson did appoint Root as the head of the Russian Mission which was a failure. Wilson disliked people who differ-

(104)

ed from him politically so much that he could not be brought to make appoint-
ments from them. I had great difficulty in getting Root appointed and did not
consider it a good appointment. I suggested Roosevelt instead and he would
have made an admirable head for the Russian Missian. On the other hand, I
should have appointed Root and Taft as Peace Commissioners.

We talked of Lord Curzon's papers and of what he is supposed to have
said in them concerning Lloyd George. I thought if the papers were published
Lloyd George would mind least of all for the reason that he would say that
Curzon held office under him and that if he did not like his interference in
the affairs of the Foreign Office, it was always his privilege to resign
which he failed to do. Grey said that he thought the thing that would please
George most if he knew Curzon's estimate of him was published would be
that some newspaper would offer him five hundred pounds to make a reply. This
gives in a sentence Grey's opinion of Lloyd George.

I asked Grey if he thought there was a conscious hereafter. He believed
the chances were that there was, giving it as an opinion that even from the
theory of evolution man had evolved to a point of spirituality where it was
easy to believe that the spirit could go on consciously.

On the 30th, Grey lunched with me in London in order to meet and talk
with Dr. Seymour. It was an interesting meeting in as much as Grey admitted
that he had no notes of the period of which he writes in his book "Twenty Five
Years" and of which Seymour is writing around my papers. He said that he was
willing to stand upon my recollection of what was said and done. This touched
me deeply coming from such a man as Grey. He expressed the desire to take a
trip to some distant place when the book was published. I sympathized with
him in this for I have much that feeling myself and have often thought of the
South Seas as a haven of refuge when Seymour's book is published. Grey said

(105)

he thought he would make no rnpk comments upon his book but would say
"Colonel House's book will be published soon and will treat of the same
period. Then the public will have all the facts and comment, if any, can
better be made then than now."

Dr. Seymour came over from Paris primarily to talk with Sir Horace Plunkett. I wanted him to get the feeling of his personality for he is one of my best friends during the trying period of the war. Sir Horace told Seymour that our friendship was one of the sweetest that had come into his life during his mature years.

We had a pleasant luncheon at Sir William Tyrrell's on the 31st, and I had some talk with the French Ambassador who thanked me for what I had tried to do toward helping in the Security Pact negotiations.

Sir William Tyrrell made his usual last hour visit before I left Lon-
don for Paris in order to orient me regarding foreign affairs. This has
been his practice for years--and a courtesy I much appreciate.

We discussed the coal strike and the Security Pact Mainly, but covered
other points of pressing moment.

Evian-les-Bains, Haute Savoie.

August 14th, 1925.

We left London for Paris August 2nd where we remained for a week.
the
I had a quiet and restful time that I can remember in that Capital. There
was no mention of our arrival in the papers therefore no one knew we were
there and I had an uninterrupted week spent mostly with Dr. Seymour in dis-
cussing his forthcoming books.

On Sunday the 9th we came to Evian-les-Bains where Loulie is taking
the cure.

(106)

Evian-les-Bains,

August 25, 1925.

The Paderewskis came over and lunched with us on Wednesday of last week, and we, in turn, lunched with them at Morges on Saturday. Our other guests were Mr. and Mrs. Walker Hines, Dr. Kast and Miss Fanny. The Paderewskis guests, in addition to ourselves, were Dr. and Mrs. Mezes, Dr. Kast, Marcel Knecht and Miss Denton. They are insistent upon our visiting them, which we may <u>not</u> do after we spend a few days in Geneva with the Arthur Sweetsers.

I never saw a household so filled with interesting souvenirs and gifts indicating the regard and affection in which Paderewski is held throughout the world.

I have a letter from the Editor of Harper's Magazine asking me to write an article for that magazine on Paderewski which I may or may not do.

Dr. Mantoux was at Evian on Sunday and we had an interesting talk. We reminiscent over the Peace Conference. I was amused at his explanation of the trouble he got into by the publication of his correspondence with me in 1920. regarding Marechal Foch's conversation with me at the Armistice Proceedings. Mantoux has evidently forgotten that he wrote the letter at my instance with the understanding that it should be published, and he revised the letter accordingly before giving it out.

I asked him which he considered the greater man, Clemenceau or Foch. He thought Clemenceau had much more ability and had a broader outlook and that history would credit him as the bigger man of the two. He thought Lloyd George had gone down the scale so much since the Paris Peace Conference that it was doubtful where history would place him, but if he had been killed during the Conference, he would have been listed among the greatest of Englishmen. I have my doubts about this.

(107)

Wilson, he thought, would rank high, mainly because he stood for things like the League of Nations which were of world importance and well might be of lasting advantage to mankind.

We motored over to Geneva on Thursday of last week. It was my first visit since the War. I was there for five hours and every moment was occupied in seeing the Secretariat and others who knew of my presence in Geneva. Among them were Hugh Gibson, Minister to Switzerland, and our Consul General at Geneva.

Last night I received a telegram from Ambassador Houghton saying: "Very important message being mailed to you care American Consul at Geneva where I understand you will arrive Wednesday." I am wondering what the message is about.

Buchy, Switzerland.
September 5, 1925.

We went to Geneva from Evian on August 26th and remained until August 31st with Arthur and Mrs. Sweetser. It was one succession of dinners, luncheons and teas, and I saw everybody in Geneva who was worth while. There were literally hundreds of people with whom I talked in order to satisfy the enthusiasm of the Secretariat of the League of Nations.

Sir Eric Drummond, who was one of my hosts, said in reminiscing about war days, that I was the only foreigner in the history of the British Foreign Office who ever had one of their confidential codes. It is to be remembered that they gave me a special code used between the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs and the Viceroy of India. There were only three copies in existence, the Foreign Secretary having one copy, the Viceroy and I the others. This enabled me to keep in close contact with the British Government so that Wilson, through me, was practically speaking to them direct, over the heads of

(108)

our State Department and of our Ambassador at London who knew, indeed, but
little of what was going on. It was irregular but effective and it must be
remembered that it was war.

I was pleased with the Secretariat and organization of the League working
forces. They are an intelligent and enthusiastic lot, and if the League can
be made a success, they will do it. I have a feeling that the League will pull
through despite the efforts of our Government to kill it, and I have a further
feeling that we will come into the League when the balance of the world will
care but little whether we are in or not. I notice already a slackening of
interest and this will grow as Europe recovers her economic equilibrium and
comes back to normal.

We motored from Geneva to the Villa Rond Bosson, at Morges, to
visit the Paderewski, where we were entertained in the most hospitable Pader-
eski way, which means much. The park, the surroundings of the villa and the
view of Mont Blanc and other peaks across the Lake was of entrancing beauty.
It is one of the most superlatively beautiful situations in all the world.
Paderewski and I talked a great deal of the past, of the present and of the
future. The entire household made me feel humble by their extreme deference
and by their demonstrations of admiration and affection. What I think of
Paderewski I shall perhaps say in the article which Harper's Magazine has asked
me to write about him.

We came to Ouchy two days ago in order to meet my friend Heineman of Brus-
sels and Dr. Schacht, President of the Reichbank, who came all the way from
Berlin, 22 hours by rail, in order to advise with me. Our conference lasted
until nearly twelve o'clock last night and during the morning today. I feel
that it has been well worth while for I have given him my point of view con-
cerning the danger Germany runs so long as France has no security, and also

["(109)", "because I was able to give him conclusive reasons why Germany should come into\nthe League of Nations. Dr. Schacht sits with the Cabinet and is, without\ndoubt, one of the most influential men in Germany at the present moment.", "We discussed every phase of the German situation including her hopes\nfor a mandate over some of the late German African Colonies, and of raw mater-\nials. As to raw materials, I told him of a conversation which ArthODOLOGY and\nSir Arthur Salter and I had at Geneva in which we planned to start a campaign\nto try to make the raw materials of the world available to all nations and not\nto the privileged few that now hold them. Schacht was initially interested\nin this, and I gave it to him as an another incentive for Germany to become a\nmember of the League. It was a fruitful conversation and I trust it will have\nthe effect of helping to bring about a ratification of the Security Pact and\nGermany's entrance into the League of Nations.", "We leave tonight for Lido-Venice.", "Grand Hotel des Bains,\nLido-Venice.\nSeptember 10, 1925.", "We travelled from Switzerland to Venice via the Simplon on the night\nof September 5th and reached here in a most glorious spell of Autumn weather.\nTwo launches were placed at our disposal, one by the Prefect of this Province,\nand the other by the Bancaazzjienaxakais company here which my friend Heineman\nof Brussels operates through the Banca Commerciale of Milan.", "Conte Volpi, Minister of Finance in the Mussolini Cabinet, xhhxxxxx\nxXaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxaxax

(110)

This is not saying a great deal for the men in power in Europe today are large-
ly mediocre.

Conte Volpi is a forceful man and I look to see him go far in Italian pub-
lic life.

The many photographers and newspaper men have made their usual demands
upon me. While I have been in Venice several times before its beauty has never appealed to me more than now.

I had a delightful letter from Signor Orlando, a copy of which is a part
of the record.

Our Consul here, Mr. James B. Young, has been more than kind to us and
has taken us under his wing in a very pleasant way. He and his charming wife
lunched with us yesterday.

Hotel Miremare,
Genoa.

September 14, 1925.

We spent two days in Milan and through the kind offices of our friend Heineman the City was at our disposal as, indeed, was Venice and is Genoa. His arm is very long and no trouble is too great for him to take to make our visit to Italy pleasant. Yesterday we lunched at the Villa Veresa with Signor and Signore Toeplitz. They had an exceedingly interesting and distinguished company to meet us, Princes, ex-Cabinet Ministers, Financiers and what not. Northern Italy was combed to get them together, some of them coming from long distances. Signor who is to accompany Conte Volpi on his mission to America to settle Italy's debt told me that he had recently received a letter from Lord Bradberry, the great English economist. It seems that Lloyd George and his Loucheur have had a dispute in public print and Lord Bradberry remarked that those who knew Lloyd George and did not know Loucheur would be certain to think Loucheur right. Those who knew Loucheur

(111)

and did not know Lloyd George would be certain to think that Lloyd George was
right. Those who knew them both would be completely at a loss to know the
right of the controversy.

104 East 68th Street,
New York City.
Oct. 6, 1925.

Unhappily, I caught cold in Milan which developed into fever at Genoa and
it was uncertain for two days whether we would be able to embark on the Duilio,
September 16th. I went from my bed to the ship and steadily improved during
the voyage. We picked up Randolph and Mona at Naples. Ambassador Fletcher
also joined the ship at Naples and we had many talks on our journey home. He
desires to run for United States Senate in Pepper's place and I agreed to help
him where I could in developing the situation. I am not sure that Fletcher's
views on domestic and foreign affairs are much nearer mine than those of Sen-
ator Pepper but, at least, it is an advantage to get rid of one man even though
it results in having another of like views. In other words, Pepper deserves
defeat, and if Fletcher follows in his footsteps for six years I shall hope
for a similar fate to overcome him.

The other passengers were not interesting other than Anne Parrish,
Mrs. Corliss, the author of *The Perennial Rnakahkxax Bachelor*.

The usual number of reporters and photographers met us upon our arrival and
the statement I gave is a part of the record.

During the voyage I wrote a sketch of Paderewski for Harper's Magazine.
that, too, is a part of the record. Our home coming was unusually pleasant
the weather being delightful and many friends to greet us. The Duilio's
staff and Custom officers all vied in getting our baggage out quickly and ex-
amined with as little trouble as possible.

I went to lunch with the newly appointed American Ambassador to

(112)

Japan, Charles MacVeigh, and I have written letters to Count Chinda and Baron Makino.

Sunday we lunched with Mary Rumsey and she had an interesting number of people, among them were Jo Davison, Ethel Barimore, Louis Wiley, etc. etc.

October 17, 1925.

Edward Hurley, member of the Debt Commission, called me and gave me the complete story of the recent meeting of the Debt Commission with Cailloux and the other French commissioners. He said they would have reached a conclusion had it not been for Hoover and Senator Smoot. Senator Smoot was influenced by the opposition of Senator Borah who, as has more political weight in Utah than Smoot himself, and since Borah, in Hurley's opinion, is playing for the German vote, he finds it popular among the Germans to make the French pay as much as possible. Hoover, he said, still has the Presidential bee in his bonnet and he, too, is actuated by a desire to please the Germans.

Hurley and I agreed to put out some newspaper propaganda to the effect that every dollar France paid to the United States would be pipe-lined from Germany through France to the United States, and the more France paid the more she would insist that Germany pay her, therefore, it was to the German's interest for France to be let off easy. I have put out a good deal of this already through different ones. Martin has written an editorial for *Life* on the subject.

Hurley told me, too, that the men running the Coolidge Administration were Mellon, Hoover and Dwight Morrow of Morgan & Co. He said the three of them thought pretty much alike on all subjects therefore Coolidge was hedged in by one particular line of advice and that largely of a conservative nature. He said Coolidge had no opinions on the debt question other than those furnished by the three named.

I notice that Coolidge is flying a kite to see how a proposal for an-

(113)

Other disarmament conference at Washington would be received. If I were advising him I think I could suggest a plan by which he might bring this about. What I would do would be to propose a conference of the powers on the question of China with a private understanding that when that business was finished the conference would go into the question of disarmament. Great Britain, France and the other countries are so eager to have the United States take the initiative in China that they probably would consent to holding a disarmament conference at Washington. However, I disapprove wholly of holding it at Washington under the auspices of this Government. It should be held at Geneva under the direction of the League of Nations and will be unless the present British Government continues its policy of truckling to our Government and consents to its being held at Washington.

I have been exceedingly busy for the past few weeks. Manuscript is coming in from Charles Seymour of the forthcoming book, *The Intimate Papers of Colonel House*. The Encyclopaedia Britannica are not satisfied with the third volumeS they issued since the war and they propose reediting them. They have asked me to write on the Versailles Peace Conference which they intend to substitute for the article written by Professor Davis of the Manchester University and I have agreed to do so.

I am delighted beyond measure at the signing of the Security Pact at Locarno.
I feel that I have had some influence in bringing this about for it will be remembered that when I went to Europe last spring May I began immediately a campaign to frighten Gt Britain, Belgium and France and Germany into the necessity of giving France security. My talks with the Belgians and with the Prime Minister and Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, and others in authority in Great Britain, will be recalled, as well as my talks and messages sent to Germany through D. N. Heineman and others, and the final talk I had before leaving Europe with Dr. Schacht when he came to Ouchy to see me. I have never felt any

(114)

doubt as to the Pact going through since it was evident that those mentioned had not deep into their consciousness and they fully realized how imminent the danger was.

Some of the interesting people I have talked with since the last entry in the diary have been Chas. MacVeigh, Professor Mizell of the proposed Woodrow Wilson Memorial College at Valdosta, Colonel Alvin Owsley, representative of the American Legion, who came upon the subject of that College, Chas. R. Crane, the Swedish Minister, Curtis of the Round Table etc. I met Curtis at a dinner given by Mr. and Mrs. Whitney Shepardson, and he, Whitney and I discussed in detail the formation of the League of Nations Covenant. Since all three of us were conversant with the subject we were able to cover some material points. I wrote the first draft of the Covenant in July, 1918, while at Magnolia, Mass. at the request of President Wilson for a memorandum to be used by him in answer to the Phillemore Report. Then came Wilson's rearrangement of my draft. Later, at Paris, we almost immediately after his arrival, there in December, 1918, Wilson and I made another draft for the purpose of using it as a basis for discussion before the League of Nations Commission. What we added at Paris was the Mandate idea and but little else. That copy was the one that William Bullitt sat up all night to have printed so as to be ready by the morning of the next day. For that service he asked me to give him the draft as a souvenir, which I did. The corrections are made in Wilson's handwriting--Wilson having one copy and I the other. My copy I gave to Bullitt.

Lord Robert Cecil, representing the British, was insistent that the version of the Covenant which Wilson and I had prepared should be put into legal phraseology. The President did not want this done declaring that if lawyers got their hands on it they probably would destroy it. I persuaded him to allow it to be done, therefore, we selected David Hunter Miller, our legal adviser, and Sir Francis First, the British legal adviser, and together we went to Washington to discuss the draft.

(115)

or they made the necessary changes. This is the true history of the draft of
the Covenant which was the basis of the Commission's discussions.

November 8, 1925.

I find from my calendar notes that among my callers on October 17th was Prof. William E. Dodd of the University of Chicago. He told me that when he and Ray Stannard Baker were compiling the Wilson papers he found them in much confusion. He thought if they were not more carefully handled many of them would be lost. He was surprised to hear me say that Dr. Seymour practically has finished his first two volumes written around my papers.

downstairs //
On Wednesday, October 21st, word came up from Washington that the Governor of New Hampshire was calling on Colonel House. I had never met Gov. Winert and I was surprised to find him such an attractive personality. We talked for more than an hour largely on the League of Nations, of which he is an ardent supporter, and of the forthcoming Senatorial contest in his state. He said it had not yet been determined whether he or Mr. BASS should oppose the present incumbent, Senator Moses, but they were working in harmony and the one having the best chance to win the fight would be the one to make it.

Governor Winert has had an interesting career. He was in the Aviation Corps during the war and was in active service in France, when one of his companions saved his life. This man afterward went to Texas and located a piece of land in the Mexia Oil Field. He had no money with which to exploit it and appealed to Winert for funds. Winert went to his limit and gave him what he had and borrowed from his friends. The result was a 15000 barrel gusher, and gratitude was rewarded by a fortune for both of them.

Governor Jas. M. Cox of Ohio was here during the week and I saw much of him. He is a courageous fellow and has much more ability than he is commonly

(116)

credited with. My friend, Judge R. W. Bingham of Louisville was also here at
the same time and we gave a tea for them and Mr. and Mrs. John Drinkwater, the
dramatist.

Norman Davis was a caller on October 25th and I suggested to him that the
Wilson Foundation give their peace prize this year to Austen Chamberlain, Aristide
Briand and Gustavus Stresemann for their work at Locarno. Davis was enthused
over the suggestion but was afraid that the award was committed to another pur-
pose. However, I saw him later and he told me that the thing was being arranged
and he thought without a doubt the award would be given as I had suggested.

Meanwhile, he had seen some people of wealth and they had tentatively agreed
to raise sufficient funds to give each of the three the full amount of $25,000.
As I understand it, the only hitch now is whether the three Foreign Secretaries
can come to the United States to accept the prize. I urged Davis not to make
this a hard and fast condition; to get them here if he could but if not to give
them the prize in any event.

In speaking of this yesterday to Henry White, who was a caller, he thought
that it was one of the most useful suggestions that I could have made for he
thought it would do much to bring about good feeling in Europe and would cause
the Germans in this country to feel that the war was at last over.

I have been working hard over the manuscript which Dr. Seymour is sending
in. I have written articles for the Yale News, the Women's Democratic News,
the United Press
and a foreword for our forthcoming book. I have had no time to reach the
article on the Versailles Peace Treaty for the Encyclopaedia Britannica. Some
of the days have been as crowded as in wartime. On October 27th,
Mr. Henry Morgenthau, Mr. Wilson, Judge Bingham, Mrs. Bourke, Mrs. Stane and
Mr.exporters and a number of others called on Mrs. Stane.

We went to dinner that evening with Mr. Crane to meet Lady Galway and Miss
Weiss, Editor of New Europe.

(117)

Miss Esther Lape called on the 29th to report on the American Peace Award activities. I convinced her that my plan for getting the United States into the League of Nations without subscribing to the Covenant was the most feasible one to work on. She was enthusiastic and went over to Philadelphia the next day to lay it before Mr. Bok who is furnishing the money for her activities. She was not altogether successful but we are to have a meeting later. My suggestion, however, is gaining ground and many people are committing themselves to it. For example, I had two letters yesterday seemingly for it, one from Congressman Piatt Andrew of Gloucester, Mass. and the other from Samuel Colcord the publicist. I also talked about it to Mr. Henry White when he called yesterday and he is to take it directly to the President this week.

Breckenridge Long, James W. Gerard, William C. Bullitt, Edward S. Martin, John Bass, Jas. G. McDonald, Sir Campbell Stuart and Albert Bigelow Paine have been among my interesting callers. Paine came to lunch and to discuss his new book *Joan of Arc*. My letter to him and his reply, and my letters of introduction to Clemenceau and Ambassador Herrick and Marcel Knecht tell their own story.

Gerard came for a conference with Dr. Seymour about the *Intimate Papers of Colonel House* in which he plays an important part.

Ambassador Fletcher came to discuss his Senatorial prospects in Pennsylvania, and the Italian Deby Commission which was arriving the next day.

Breckenridge Long discussed writing a sketch of Robert Lansing and to tell me how difficult it was because his diary was so critical of Lansing at the time of the Wilson break.

Bill Bullitt discussed Woodrow Wilson whom he admires not at all and who is a very noble act he cheerfully credits to me.

Sir Campbell Stuart was in New York to assist in dedicating St John the Divine. He has had a new thought about which he wished my opinion, that is the

(118)

bringing together of North and South America into a league similar to that of
the League of Nations and to have its seat at Jamaica, mid-way between the two
Continents. He was surprised and interested to learn that Wilson and I had
threshed this out in our endeavour to bring about the Pan-American Pact, and
I advised him to drop it as being impracticable and merely to the hurt of the
League of Nations.

He then suggested a great university aided by both the Americas, the seat
to be located at Jamaica. I approved this although I feel that he will have an
impossible task in bringing it about. We are to talk of it further before he
goes home. I told him in confidence of my suggestion to Davis regarding the
Woodrow Wilson Foundation prize. Since he knows Austen Chamberlain intimately
I shall suggest to Norman Davis to use him as a medium to persuade Chamberlain
to come to New York December 28th to receive the prize.

W. G. McAdoo lunched with me yesterday alone and we had one of our
old time intimate talks. He has so much charm, so much courage, so much vigor
that it is always a pleasure to be with him, and I constantly regret that cir-
cumstances have made it impossible for him to become President of the United
States. In my opinion, he would give this country a shaking up which it needs,
and his administration would be a present day counterpart of that of Andrew Jack-
son's.

I was pleased to read in the Treaty of Locarno the following paragraph:
"The present treaty imposes no obligation upon any of the British Dominions or
upon India unless the Government of such Dominions or India suggest its accept-
ance thereof". It will be recalled that I made this suggestion to the British
Foreign Office more than a year ago, first through Robert Wilberforce and later
through Sir William Tyrrell and others. It seemed to me then, and it seems to
me now, that it is impossible for the British Government to carry on successful
and consecutive foreign policies and have to submit every move to the governments

(1)

January 30, 1926.

On January 2nd an interesting letter came from J. St Loe Strachey
which is a part of the record.

I am amused to see in the W. J. Bryan book just out numerous
letters from President Wilson--some of them facsimile's. I learn from
Norman Davis that these were published without Mrs. Wilson's consent
and that she is being advised by Baruch to take some legal action.
Davis, himself, is advising to the contrary.

The Kaiser has been giving out some interviews and in one of
them he suggests that if Sir Edward Grey had received the proposals
for peace, which I made in 1914 to both the Kaiser and Sir Edward,
THREE with as much favor as he did that the war would probably have
been averted.

Bainbridge Colby has been calling me over the telephone recently
and today he did so again. He made the remark that when he was Secre-
tary of State he refused to act through Mrs. Wilson or Grayson; that
he did not recognize either one as President of the United States and
when he could not communicate directly with the President he refused
to act at all.

On January 4th I attended a dinner at the University Club given
by Herbert Hoover to the Academy of Science of which I am a Trustee.
There were interesting talks made by General John J. Carty, Henry S.
Ptitchett, Dr. Millican, Dr. Welsh, Mr. Elihu Root and others. It
is seldom I have ever heard such excellent speeches both as to matter
and delivery.

On Tuesday the 5th, Houghton Mifflin Company sent 750 sheets
for the special edition of The Intimate Papers for my signature. I

(2)

succeeded in carrying on the day's work without interruption and signed the entire 750 sheets during the afternoon and mailed them to Dr. Seymour who is also to sign them.

On the 6th we had a dinner and went to the opera. Our guests were Mr. and Mrs. Percy Pine and Dr. and Mrs. Martin.

On the 7th Mrs. Ogden Reid called to discuss the publication of the Intimate Papers in serial form. She presented me with compliments.

about

Henry Stoddard telephoned Mrs. Roosevelt's attitude regarding Colonel Roosevelt's letters. She said she was delighted to have them published because she considered it a compliment to her husband; that her only restriction was that they first be referred to Scribner & Company the publishers of Roosevelt's books.

Hamilton Fish Armstrong called on the 7th to ask me to let Walter Lippmann have a copy of the *Intimate Papers* early in January in order that he might review it for *Foreign Affairs*. that evening we went to a dinner of about sixty at Mrs. Whitelaw Reid's.

On Friday the 8th David F. Houston called to show me some correspondence he had had with Mrs. Woodrow Wilson concerning the publication of the President's letters in his forthcoming book. He was very indignant that she should have written him forbidding him to publish any letters before he asked for the privilege.

We had an interesting dinner that evening with Mrs. Douglas Robinson, Mr. Fulton Cutting and Mr. and Mrs. Moreitz as guests.

I have frequent requests to write for papers and periodicals the latest being from the *Tribune* and from the *London Morning Post*. I declined both.

(4)

ing I wrote in the guestbook:

"Two happy weeks in this lovely corner of the South leaves us with abiding memories of peaceful days and restful nights, and of the kindly hospitality of our generous hosts."

The only disagreeable incident while there was the publication of a sensational *letter* article in the New York World claiming that Mrs. Wilson had discriminated against me in her refusal to permit the publication of her husband's letters in the Intimate Papers. The New York Tribune telegraphed me Ⓟ�x̂️�x̂̅x̂̅x̂̅x̂̅x̂̅x̂̅x̅x̅x̅x̅x̅x̅x̅x̅x̅x̅x̅x̅ the article in full and the World itself telegraphed asking me to comment as, indeed, did several local papers. I declined to do so although I telegraphed to Gordon telling him how to advise the Tribune. This article and the Tribune's reply are a part of the record.

Hotel des Anglais,
Cannes, France.

March 28, 1926.

When I was in Texas Gregory told me that he spoke to Burleson regarding what Tumulty had said about the President asking for his Burleson's, resignation and that he, Tumulty, had gotten the President to withdraw the letter. Tumulty said that when he spoke to Burleson about the matter Burleson wept. Burleson gives an entirely different version. He says that he told Tumulty that if he received any such letter as Tumulty indicated the President had written, that he would resign in a letter which would make the President sorry he had ever written him. I never had much faith in the weeping story because Burleson does not come of a weeping family.

On February 17th we embarked on the S. S. Mauretania for Madeira, Gibraltar, Algiers, Villefranche, Naples, Athens, Haifa,

(5)

Alexandria and back to Villefranche where we arrived on March 19th.
The Governor of Madiera came immediately but I missed him since we
went ashore as soon as the ship anchored. Our representatives at
the different ports, particularly in Naples, Alexandria and Cairo,
were very courteous and showed our party every attention. At Haifa
I was met by a Committee of Zionists and urged to go to Jerusalem. We
did not go further afield than Nazereth and it was there that I had
one of the most enjoyable days of the entire trip. It stirs the emotions
to walk through the streets and to look upon the hills and fields
which was the environment of the Christ.

I had some such feeling in Athens, particularly on the Acropolis,
and I almost felt the presence of the throng of great philosophers,
soldiers, statesmen, orators, artists who made Greece live in song and
story.

In Egypt I was not so impressed for there I felt merely the ant-
tiquity of the Pyramids, the tombs and the Sphinx. I met some inter-
esting Egyptians, among them Prince Mahomet Ali Pasha whose beautiful
palace and gardens I enjoyed I was afraid more than I did his conver-
sation. My visit to Egypt inspired the article I have written for
McCall's Magazine entitled: "The Awakening of the East."

McCall's Magazine offered me $1000. each for a number of arti-
cles of from 900 to 1000 words, I to choose my own subjects. I had
thought not to write again, but the freedom they gave me and the hono-
rarium caused me to assent. The first article I wrote I called
"Peace or Isolation", the second "Russia" and the third "The Awakening
of the East".

We met any number of friends in Egypt, among
them, Cora, Countess of Strafford who was in Cairo. She told me she

(6)

had met Robert Hitchins in the upper reaches of the Nile and he said
he had been reading "The Intimate Papers" and that he was struck by
two things: one the direct style of my writing and the other the ori-
ginality of my diplomacy which he thought was entirely new and in every
way praiseworthy.

I have seen many interesting people on our travels, but made no
entries in the diary and I am so overwhelmed here with accumulated mail
that I cannot tell of them in detail.

We lunched the other day to meet the King of Sweden and I had a long
talk with Lord Balfour who was there. He fell to talking of the "In-
timate Papers" and said he understood the necessity I was under to pub-
lish the book. I explained more in detail how necessary it was be-
cause of the small bedside group that had brought about the separation
between the President Wilson and me, and who had since endeavored to
belittle in every way everything I had tried to do. Their purpose was
to make me out a mere messenger without initiation or authority.

Balfour, after mature deliberation, said he had come to the con-
clusion that the break between the President and me was one of the dis-
asters of history. He said that this sounded like a foolish remark
to say that a difference between any two individuals should be of such
consequence as to affect the welfare of the entire world, but that the
conjunction of circumstances which made it so. He had reference to our
failure to ratify the Versailles Treaty and become a member of the
League of Nations. I think he further referred to our attitude upon
the question of Allied debts. He took occasion to remark that it sad-
dened him to think of the noble opportunity we had lost. We might well
have been the most potent power that the world had ever seen. That we

(7)

had thrown it away lightly and that such an opportunity could never
come twice.

A day or two ago we lunched with Valentine Williams to meet
Rudyard Kipling and W. J. Locke. The lunch was at Cap Ferrer and
we motored over with Locke and his daughter. This gave me an un-
usual opportunity to talk with him and to form an estimate of him.
He is odd-looking, but genuine and wholsome and I liked him much.
I can understand now his stories of "Vagabondia" and the charming
way he depicts life.

The Intimate Papers have created a sensation throughout Europe and America, and I congratulate myself upon having the good sense to take a Mediterranean cruise. Most of the reviews have been favorable, but some of the criticism has been bitter. In Europe the Liberal reviews have been wholly favorable. The New Statesman, Westminster Gazette, The Daily News, the Manchester Guardian and Review of Reviews were so complimentary as to seem to me extravagant. My friends too, like St Loe Strachey, Wickham Steed, Chalmers Roberts and many others have been more than generous. Hugh C. Wallace seems to be the only discordant note among my friends. The diary will show that I almost lost the confidence of Woodrow Wilson in pushing the Wallace's claim for recognition upon him. Wilson seems to have known him better than I.

Hotel Ritz,
Paris, April 15, 1926.

I saw Clemenceau today and had one of our intimate talks. He
was never more pessimistic. He thought the situation had become so

(8)

bad that it was hopeless and that even he, if called upon to direct
the fortunes of France again, would not know how to move in order to
right matters. The French have determined, he thought, not to pay
taxes. He did not believe there was a man in England or France cap-
able of righting the situation, but he thought that Germany's af-
fairs were being well directed. Mussolini, too, he thought, al-
though having many limitations, was accomplished much. He spoke of
Austen Chamberlain as being nothing but a name and a monocle. This,
I think, is unjust as, in fact, are most of the cynical observations
made by the Old Tiger. We agreed that the present unhappy condi-
tion of Europe was largely due to the United States because of her
failure to ratify the Versailles and Franco-American Treaties, and
thereby refusing to help Europe regain her equilibrium. He thought
there would be a grave indictment made against us by future histo-
rians.

May 7, 1926.

It has been a long while since I have seen so many interesting
French people as upon this visit, and seldom, if ever, have been
more generously entertained. Those I have seen range from the
Old Tiger, Clemenceau, Poincaré, Briand and down through his Cab-
inet to the lesser folk in the Senate and Chamber of Deputies.

Poincaré tells me he is writing his memoirs and that he expects
them to cover some twelve volumes. Dr. B. Fay mentioned them and
thought they would be of little value since he was sure from what
had already appeared, they would be in the nature of an apologia.

(9)

kind of criticism than our own people. A distinguished American said to me not long ago that our principal occupation was "man-hunting"; then that in Great Britain if one succeeded in doing a public service he was knighted and given every honor, but in America the chances were that he would be indicted. There is this peculiarity however about Americans and that is while they criticise and often villify the living they glorify and idealize the dead more than other nations.

One of the interesting incidents of the past week was my visit to Belgium. The King asked my friend Heineman to request me to come to Brussels for a talk with him. Heineman told him he thought I could not come, that my engagements were many and that my time was limited. The King then sent his Equerry to Heineman and he urged him to come. The Equerry told the King that I could not come, and upon a telegram and letter from Heineman I decided to go.

The first evening I had a long talk with the British Ambassador, Sir George Grahame, for whom I have a warm admiration and affection. The next day I lunched with our Ambassador, William Phillips and his family, and in the afternoon of Monday, May 3rd, I enjoyed an hour's talk with the King. I found him more conversant with the Intimate Papers than I. He quoted passage after passage from the book and declared that it would be of great service in guiding the youth of many nations. He urged that the other volume be forthcoming as soon as possible.

The range of our conversation covered Europe, Asia and America, and included social, political and economic problems. The more I see of this monarch the more fortunate I consider Belgium. If there

(10)

were more like him in power in every land the world would be the better for it. Modest, wise, moderate in thought and in statement, he is all that a ruler should be.

I have received some interesting letters during my stay in Paris. Two or three from Lord Grey, one or two from Lord Reading, and many from America among them being letters from Ellery Sedgwick, T. W. Gregory, Breckenridge Long, R. W. Woolley, W. G. McAdoo, David Starr Jordan and others. They relate almost wholly to the *Intimate Papers*.

Connaught Hotel, London.

June 5, 1926.

Tuesday the 19th of May we left Paris for London. We never had a pleasanter crossing and in spite of the aftermath of the General Strike. We found London happy and somewhat exhilarated over the result and it reminded me of wartimes when no one discussed anything except that subject. Only a few of our friends knew we were here during the first week and I had a delightful time. Then our arrival was published in *The newspapers* and I have had no peace since. It has been very hectic socially. The trouble is that it is cumulative. The more you go the more you are compelled to go in order to satisfy one's generous and hospitable friends.

It has been a pleasure to see much of Lord Grey. He called again yesterday and we walked together from our hotel through Green Park to St James Park and leaned over the swinging bridge enjoying the beauties of that lovely spot. We talked of things past and present and of the future.

The other night at the Reform Club when a dinner was given me to

(11)

meet a group of literary and Liberal friends such as A. J. Spender,
H. G. Wells, G. P. Gooch, Dr. John Hobson and ten or twelve others, I
was asked many questions among them one by Dr. Gooch. It was
whether Grey had ever told me of the Secret Treaties at the time he
and I were negotiating for American intervention. I had to reply
in the negative. Gooch was critical of Grey for not having told me,
saying he must have known that he could not go forward with such a
peace as Wilson and I had in mind and fulfil the obligations the
Allies had with Russia and Italy.

Wickham Steed came to the defence of Grey by saying that Grey
did not, at this first realize the importance of those treaties, and
that he thought they might be modified later. Dr. Gooch replied
that this made the indictment against Grey even heavier for if he
thought they could be modified he was not sincere with Italy and
Russia when making the promise.

I asked Grey yesterday about this and he gave an answer which
seems to me an explanation. He said that our negotiations were mere-
ly tentative and had the memorandum which he and I drew up met with
the approval of the Allies as a whole, before our intervention or do-
ing anything further, he would have told us of the Secret Treaties.
He thought it useless to go into that matter when the whole thing was
in such a nebulous state and he thought he was justified in his reti-
cence by the fact that nothing final came of the negotiations. He
thought it would have been a breach of confidence if he had told me
about these matters when we were negotiating and before a final con-
clusion had been reached.

(12)

Although I hear discussion on every hand of the *Intimate Papers*
I have been fortunate in being in London when the strike and the
rupture in the Liberal Party are going on otherwise I am afraid that
my visit would have been a bore rather than a pleasure.

During the summer while at Bar Harbor I discontinued the diary and have not taken it up since. It has lately been a chore to both Miss Denton and me. My interest began to sag after the signing of the Peace at Versailles on that memorable day in June of the Year 1919, and as the world began to assume the normal there was less and less reason for recording the comparatively unimportant events of the day.

As life's shadows lengthen I sometimes wonder whether my activities in behalf of the things lying near my heart were worth while. Who knows? Who really cares? I am sure that working for the general welfare has made my life fuller and happier than if I had devoted myself to the furthering of my personal fortunes. The one truth which came to me early and for which I am grateful, that that the surbordination of self, as far as it is possible in the struggle for existence, is the wisest policy and the one most conducive to an interesting and happy life. But with it all I have never taken myself seriously, nor, indeed, have I taken others more so. How can one think of himself other than as an inconsequential atom in the generalcosmos? The earth itself bears such a tiny relative position to the universe that if it exploded and its gaseous vapors passed into space and disappeared in the ether, it would cause no more disturabnce than the discharge of a sixteen inch gun in the middle of the Pacific Ocean. That being true, why should anyone of the billion and a half human beings on the Earth think he was of the slightest importance? The living or dying of the entire human race would make as little difference to the universe as the stamping out of an individual ant hill would to this Globe.

(2)

Nothing in life has appealed to my sense of humor so much as the display of human vanity in its multitudinous forms. If I were giving a formula to those seeking trouble I would recommend pricking the vanity of men. The higher he considers himself in the social, financial, professional or official scale, the more violent becomes the reaction.

It has always been my greatest delight to always given me keen amusement to laugh not only at others but oftentimes at myself. I have known for a long time not to take myself seriously, but so impregnated are we with that particular virus, that I often momentarily have lapses and find myself peeved or caring because I have been criticized or abused. The longer I live the less frequently these lapses occur and the shorter they are.

While the ego of man is one of the comic phases of his existence, I am not sure that it does not serve a useful purpose. It holds him in check and stimulates his energies and talents. In significant and negligible as he may be in the general scheme of the universe he bears a relative importance to his race and its temporal environment. It may be that the same absurd ego-centric complex runs down through the animal and insect world, and even permeates the myriads of microbes which live and die within our bodies. We know nothing, even though it pleases our vanity to believe we know much. God alone knows what it is all about. What the Universe is and what infinitesimal part, if any, we play in it.

I started on this quiet Thanksgiving day merely to tell why I discontinued my diary, and I find myself far afield. I shall

(3)

come back to realities and close by giving thanks for the many mercies vouchsafed me. While I have had sickness and sorrow, most of it came when I was young and reckless and did not know the philosophy of living. Now that the end cannot be far distant, I have learned to live serenely and happily. Each day brings with it certain joys, and I find myself eager to live, but contented to die when my hour has come.

New York,

November 25th, 1926.