Affection and Trust: The Personal Correspondence of Harry S. Truman and Dean Acheson, 1953-1971
Page 16
By the fall of 1955, with the presidential election about a year away, both Truman and Acheson were getting involved in politics. Acheson found himself thrust into the role of Democratic Party spokesman, largely because of the considerable success of his book A Democrat Looks at His Party, an excerpt from which was published in the press in September.
Aside from politics, many subjects found their way into the letters between the two men. Margaret Truman married in April 1956, and the Trumans traveled to Europe during most of May and June. Truman was awarded an honorary degree from Oxford University during that time. Acheson wrote a draft of an important address that Truman gave in London.
Acheson asked Truman to allow State Department historians to see Truman’s papers relating to the Potsdam Conference, where Truman had met with Winston Churchill, Clement Attlee, and Joseph Stalin in July 1945. Truman wanted to grant Acheson’s request, but he was, then and for the rest of his life, very reluctant to let anyone see what he regarded as his most sensitive White House papers.
· · ·
August 21, 1955
Dear Mr. President,
You sent us off with a real start. As soon as we reached our cabin we found the warm note from you and the flowers from Mrs. Truman and you which have kept us company all the way to the Irish coast. You gave us a warm glow of happiness.
You and Mrs. Truman must do this soon. And when you do, take one of these slow boats in the off season where you can poke along in comfort, have plenty of elbow room and find comparatively few autograph seekers and no jazzy life at all. Alice and I have never had such rest even on the beach at Antigua.
On my way through New York I found Harpers enthusiastic about my little book. It will come out about the middle of November under the title A Democrat Looks at His Party. It gives my ideas about the problems of our day and why the old Party is the only one equipped to deal with them. You will have your own specially inscribed copy.
Our most affectionate greetings to you and Mrs. Truman.
Most sincerely,
Dean
While visiting former adviser and now New York Governor Averell Harriman in Albany, New York, Truman made a statement to the press praising Harriman’s qualifications for the presidency and distancing himself from the 1952 Democratic nominee, Adlai Stevenson.
October 14, 1955
Dear Mr. President:
I was glad to see the Truman family reunited on the front page of the New York Times a few days ago. You all looked very well and very happy to be together again.
In your own phrase, you certainly “stirred the animals up” with the press conference in Albany. People can no longer complain that the pre-campaign period will be dull or cut-and-dried. I just hope that our boys don’t get into a throat-cutting competition and am counting on you to not let the rivalry go to lethal consequences.
I have had [a] telephone call and a letter from Arnold Heeney, the Canadian Ambassador, enclosing a copy of his letter to you of October 13 and his letter to the New York Times of October 12. These are the letters in which he refers to installment twelve of your Memoirs published in the New York Times of October 7, in which you refer to Canada as one of the countries whose soldiers were equipped by lend-lease means during World War II. This, of course, was an inadvertence which I should have caught and regret very much that I did not. I told the Ambassador that you were counting on me to pick up things like this and that to my great sorrow I failed you on this occasion. He is not at all worried about it; but, since the Canadians are, as you know, hypersensitive, he is anxious that this be corrected when the Memoirs are published in book form. I told him that you would be most insistent upon having errors corrected and that I was sure that this one would be in the definitive text. I don’t think there is anything that you need do about it now, except assure him directly that this is the case.
The advance copies of my own book should be coming along in the next week. I shall send you one as soon as I can get my hands on it.
Alice joins me in the most affectionate greetings to you and Mrs. Truman.
Sincerely yours,
Dean
Truman mentions his daughter Margaret’s debut hosting of a radio show in New York.
October 17, 1955
Dear Dean:
I certainly appreciated your letter of the fourteenth. It was my intention to stir up the animals when I went to New York, and I believe I succeeded.
Margaret and the “Boss” and I had the time of our lives together in New York. I tried my best to bring Margaret home with us, but her new contract was to start right away. She’ll be on the air four hours a day with her own show. Beat that if you can!
I hope that you and Alice are in the best of health and that everything is going as it should with you. The only thing we missed on our trip east was an opportunity to see you in Washington.
The error concerning Lend-Lease to Canada was found and corrected in the book galleys but was missed in the New York Times proofs. I am very sorry about it, and I will appreciate you telling the Ambassador that it was an unintentional slip.
I have found several errors in the book. It seems that no matter how closely you read and re-read and edit a publication of this kind, errors are bound to slip in. For instance, I had Sam Rayburn presiding at Roosevelt’s first meeting with Congress after his return from Yalta when, actually, it was John McCormack. All these will be corrected in the next edition. After you have had a chance to calm the Canadian Ambassador down, I will write him a letter of explanation.
I am most happy that you helped me with the editing; it gives me a wonderful chance to be a buck-passer.
Sincerely yours,
Harry Truman
[Handwritten postscript:] What’s this I hear about A Democrat Looks at His Party? I must see that.
A prepublication excerpt from Acheson’s book had appeared in Harper’s Magazine in November 1955. The article and the book helped make Acheson a Democratic Party spokesman in the upcoming presidential campaign.
Ivan Miller’s letter, which Truman mentions, invited Acheson to speak on December 7 at a dinner sponsored by the Cleveland Bar Association. Edward Hayes wrote Truman to ask his help in persuading Acheson to accept the invitation. Truman agreed to “go to work” on Acheson.
October 18, 1955
Dear Dean:
I am enclosing a copy of a letter I received from Edward J. Hayes. He also sent me a copy of that letter Ivan L. Miller wrote to you.
When I was in Cleveland for the library dinner, his organization was well represented at our meeting. I was asked by half a dozen people to urge you to be the speaker at their meeting in December.
As you know, I only want you to use your own judgment, but I believe you could do the country and the Democratic Party a lot of good if you found it possible to accept the invitation. As the fellow on radio says, “That’s one man’s opinion.”
Sincerely yours,
Harry S. Truman
Acheson sent Truman a copy of his new book, with an inscription on the inside front cover which read, “To Harry S. Truman, The first of living Democrats who will rank with the greatest of them all.”
November 9, 1955
Dear Mr. President:
I was delighted to be able to pass along to the Canadian Ambassador the information contained in your last letter that the error about lend-lease to Canada was found and corrected in the book galleys, although it was missed in the New York Times prints. He is most understanding and most happy that this is the case. He would appreciate a line from you so that he can officially report to Canada that you yourself told him that you had already found the error and were quick to correct it. It will make a good impression in Canada all around.
You ask me about A Democrat Looks at His Party. You remember that some time ago I told you that I was working on a book and this is it. The week before last I sent off to you a copy of it with a word from me to you in the front. When you find a few hours in your busy life to relax,
I think you will find some amusement, some interest, and perhaps some subjects for future talks in the book.
A chapter from it was published in this month’s Harper’s and seems to have stirred the Republican press into ecstasies of rage. I have editorials from the two Richmond papers which quite lost the power of coherent statement in their fury. If one chapter raises the Republican blood pressure to this extent, we may win the next election through the collapse of our opponents.
I believe that Dave Lloyd is working out a chance for me to see you next month, to which I am looking forward.
With warmest greetings to Mrs. Truman and yourself from Alice and me.
As ever,
Dean
Truman has some harsh words for “intellectual prostitutes,” including conservative journalists Raymond Moley, Frank R. Kent, David Lawrence, George E. Sokolsky, and Westbrook Pegler. Speaking in New Orleans in early November, Truman said he thought Southern Democrats who voted Republican in 1952 would return to their party in 1956, and he praised both Adlai Stevenson and Averell Harriman, saying he would not run himself. “Our old Snollygoster” is John Foster Dulles.
November 10, 1955
Dear Dean:
I have just finished reading your book on why you are a Democrat. It is the best treatise on politics, the why and wherefore of parties, and what a man ought to do when he comes to select his party, that I have ever read. And Dean, I’ve read a lot of them. The review of Elmer Davis in the Saturday Review says what I would say if I had the words and ability to put them together. I’m so glad you wrote the book that I can’t really express my feeling adequately on it.
My spasm seems to have stirred up the animals to some extent. Between us I’m sure we’ll leave a record that the so called analytical boys will have a hell of a time doing their analytical sob sister stuff. You’ve no idea what a kick I’ve had from the intellectual prostitutes, Moley, Kent, Dave Lawrence, Sokolsky, Pegler and the rest. I’ve always been of the opinion that a street whore who sold her body to make a living is far and away above an intellectual who sells his brain and ability to put words together logically for the same sort of a fee.
The Boss and I took a ride to New Orleans last week and what a grand time we had. Our train arrived at Alexandria, La. at 6:30 A.M. and there on the platform was Mrs. John Overton, her two daughters, a nephew and several other members of her family. We had a grand visit and Mrs. O. gave us a lot of homemade pralines. How good they were!
When we landed in New Orleans they mobbed us—with kindness of course. It was like wading in the Gulf at Key West only it was people to wade through.
I preached a sermon that night to 2000 Jews from all parts of the country, went to Biloxi on Sunday to see a couple of old people who took care of Margie in 1933, 35 and 38 when she was having throat and heart trouble. It was a grand visit.
But Dean what do you think of our old Snollygoster now “Mr. Dull, Duller, Dulles”? He’s lost us our friends in South America by trying to put Sullivan & Cromwell again in control of tin in Bolivia and copper in Chile. He fixed the eastern Mediterranean so that his friend Dewey can bleed Turkey for what the Turkish Ambassador should do and he has given Egypt and East Germany to Molotov. I don’t know what he’s doing in Spain but there’s some fee for somebody when he deals with that lousy totalitarian Franco.
An old lady in the Edgewater Gulf Hotel where Bess & I had lunch came up for an autograph and said she didn’t like to quarrel with God but he’d been a little slow in giving Ike a heart attack but it might yet save the country! Looks from yesterday’s elections that a lot of people are worried.
My best to Alice.
Sincerely,
Harry
That inscription you wrote in the copy of your book is too good to be true!
November 21, 1955
Dear Dean:
I wrote you a longhand letter commenting on your good book and this is in answer to yours of the ninth. I am sending a letter to the Canadian Ambassador along the line you suggest.
I don’t know when I have read a book I appreciated more and got more of a kick out of than A Democrat Looks at His Party. I read the Harper’s chapter after I had read the book and it really did impress me. Harper’s also had a good review on my spasm.
Dave [Lloyd] tells me that he is working out a program so we will get together in the not too distant future.
I am enclosing for you a copy of the letter I have written to the Canadian Ambassador.
Sincerely yours,
Harry S. Truman
The “new publication” mentioned here is William F. Buckley’s National Review. Acheson makes an early observation of what would become a remarkable rise in esteem for Truman among the American people in the years following the difficult last period of his presidency. President Eisenhower had suffered a massive heart attack on September 24, 1955, and Acheson assumes here that he will not run for re-election in 1956. (However, the President not only ran for re-election, but won, and therefore Acheson’s predictions were moot, and their hopes for a Democratic victory were dashed.)
November 23, 1955
Dear Mr. President:
You were very good to write me so warmly about A Democrat Looks at His Party. If you, with all your knowledge of and experience in politics, think what I have written about the political scene is good, I am very happy indeed.
I am pleased and excited at the reception which it has had. The reviews have been for the most part enthusiastic, though I, of course, expected and have received sarcastic criticism from such reviewers as John Chamberlain in the Wall Street Journal. I am told that our friend Senator McCarthy is going to review it for a new publication put out by Buckley. When asked what he thought about the book, he is said to have replied, “Hell! Of course, I wouldn’t read it.”
The article taken from the book, which appeared in the November Harper’s produced quite a barrage of criticism. In a way I think it was a mistake to publish one small part of it without the argument which built up to that part and the discussion that followed it. However, the publisher does not think so. He tells me that it is selling well.
The reception of your own book must have pleased you. It certainly did me. One of the nicest and most thoughtful reviews is the one in the November Harper’s in which they deal with Oppie Oppenheimer’s book [The Open Mind] and your book together, using his to discuss the conception of style in science and yours to illustrate style in politics. It seems to me far more thoughtful than any I have seen. I am looking forward to the second volume, which I, of course, read in manuscript, before you put the finishing touches on it.
In connection with the publication of my book there was the inevitable barrage of requests for appearances on television and radio. I insisted that these be cut down to two—one on the Dave Garroway show on NBC; the other on the Bill Leonard show on CBS. I thought that I had an understanding with both men that I would not go into personalities and discuss candidates for the Democratic nomination in ’56. However, Bill Leonard departed from this and asked me what I thought of Adlai’s announcement of his candidacy. I thought of—who was it?—Mark Twain’s? admonition that it was better to tell the truth because it was then easier to remember what you said. So I said that I had been for Adlai in ’52, had reiterated the view that he was the best candidate when asked in ’53, ’54, and so far in ’55, and I saw no reason for doubting that view now. I was sorry to be asked this, not because I have the slightest reluctance in saying what I think, but because, under the present circumstances, I thought it might unnecessarily wound Averell, to whom I am devoted. However, I am sure that he is broad enough and experienced enough to know that he cannot be involved in politics and harbor resentment for those who honestly believe that somebody else is a better candidate.
You know far more about these things than I do, but it would seem to me that Averell’s greatest usefulness now lies, not in the possibility that he will be nominated and elected, but in the effect that he can have on Adlai, k
eeping him pointed up close to the wind and not letting him fall off with phrases like “the relentless pursuit of peace.” With Eisenhower out of the picture, as I suppose he is, I should look with undisguised horror at any of the present Republican candidates being in the White House. ([Earl] Warren, I exclude, because he is a man of honor and of his word, and I believe would not accept the nomination whether drafted or not.) In that case a Democratic victory seems to me of the greatest importance to the welfare of the country, and Adlai seems to me the best person to achieve it. How do you feel about all of this?
The visit which you and Mrs. Truman paid to New Orleans sounds delightful, and I know that your hearts were touched by the reception you describe. I think that every day and every year the affection of the American people for you rises. You typify for them—and rightly—the healthy-minded, direct, generous, courageous, friendly person, who is Mr. American for them.
Dave Lloyd seems to be having a terrible time in getting the Library meeting set up in Kansas City. As I understand it, various meetings are now to take place over the 19th, 20th, and 21st of December. I have, unfortunately, been deeply committed here for the evening of the 19th, and so cannot arrive until the 20th, but Dave says that this is quite all right. I had hoped that I was going to be able to see you and talk with you in the week of December 6. Let’s now hope that it is only postponed for a couple of weeks.
Let me end up this rambling letter with an episode which illustrates my cold and frigid manner, which has been so often described in the press. Last Thursday morning I was walking east on 38th Street in New York from a friend’s house to the air terminal and was not quite sure that the terminal was on 38th Street. On Third Avenue there were four or five men with picks and shovels digging up a broken place in the pavement, surrounded by the yellow barricades with “Men Working” which give them a little island of safety. I stopped there and asked one of them whether I was on the right street for the air terminal. One of them looked up from his work, beamed broadly, and said, “For the love of God, if it ain’t Dean Acheson. I seen you on the Dave Garroway show on television yesterday morning.” At that point they all threw down their tools, shook hands with me, and we discussed for five minutes the prospects of a Democratic victory in 1956. None of them seemed to be dismayed by the cold exterior.