Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
183390584
label
Memorandum of Telephone Conversation with Secretary of State Dean Acheson and Senator Tom Connally
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
183390584
contentType
document
title
Memorandum of Telephone Conversation with Secretary of State Dean Acheson and Senator Tom Connally
citationUrl
collections
Dean Acheson Papers
Secretary of State Files
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
183390584
levelOfDescription
item
productionDates
day
24
logicalDate
1949-06-24
month
6
year
1949
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
photo
mediaId
da395c7377b327a2
ocrText
<.
"MATIONAL
DECLASSIFIED
168
RECORDE
E. O. 11652, Sec. 3(E) and 5(D) or (E)
=
SERVICE*
Dept. of State letter, AUG-9,1973 7-65-35
SECRET
219
NLT. HC : NARS Date 4.23.26
June 24, 1949 restricted
Memorandum of Conversation
I telephoned Senator Connally this morning to ask him whether he
had any further thoughts on the question of whether to introduce the
Military Assistance Bill in the House and begin hearings upon it prior
to final ratification of the North Atlantic Treaty.
Senator Connally said that he reaffirmed his attitude, as expressed
at the Committee hearing. This was, as he repeated it this morning,
first, that if it were not necessary on account of the time element to in-
troduce the Military Assistance Bill at this time, that would be the
preferable course. He thought that the introduction of the Bill would
be used in the debate on the treaty and might cause some difficulty.
He did not rate this difficulty very high. He said that it would be a
fictitious issue because in the first place everyone knew that the Mili-
tary Assistance Bill would immediately follow the Treaty and in the
second place the Military Assistance Bill was necessary regardless of
the Treaty. He said that Senator Capehart had told him that he would
vote for the Treaty and that he thought he could persuade Senator
Jenner to vote for it. His conclusion was, therefore, that while he was
not enthusiastic about the idea he would not interpose objection.
After talking to Senator Connally, I talked to Senator Vandenborg ,
first thanking him for his public statement after the hearing on Wednesday.
He said that he did not wish to take any responsibility for the course
which might be chosen by the Administration on the introduction of the
Military Assistance Bill. He thought primarily the Administration had
to decide what legislation was essential and press that vigorously. He
felt that time was being wasted on the repeal of Taft-Hartley, and that
if that were pressed or set aside it would not be necessary to introduce
the Military Assistance Bill prior to the ratification of the Treaty. He
felt that the introduction of the Military Assistance Bill prior to ratifi-
cation would present the Treaty in the wrong light to the country. By
this he said that he meant that the Treaty would appoar to be a mere
prelude to the creation of forces in being in Europe which could resist
Soviet aggression, whereas in his opinion the Treaty would be enthu-
siastically accepted by the country if it were presented as dealing with
potentialities and with the determination of this country itself to resist
aggression if that should start. He reiterated that he was merely ex-
pressing his views for my private information, that he did not think this
was an occasion for bi-partisan advice, and again stated, first, that he
took no responsibility, and, second, that he thought introduction prior
to ratification was a mistake.
S DA:ma
SECRET