Ask the Scholar
Page 4 of 4
I can add historical knowledge about this page.
Page image
OCR
Wheaties W
February 5, 1955
Dear Mr. Pusey:
My apologies for this long delayed reply to your January 19th
letter, but unfortunately I have been out of town so much that
my correspondence has suffered badly.
Here are the answers to your specific questions:
Library
0 148/mg The
Where did the plan originate?
The plan of an atomic pool for peaceful purposes originated
in a memorandum by the President to Levis Strauss in August
1953. The President vas then in Denver.
How long was it under discussion before the President made his
famous speech to the General Assembly!
The idea of the President's making a major speech on the
general subject of the atomic age started as far back as
early April 1953. However, the "pool" idea vas not injected
until August.
Why did he decide to make the speech to the United Nations?
Because it seemed to be the perfect world audience before
which this plan could be launched. There had been a certain
amount of discussion as to when and where the speech should
be made, but when the intimation came that he might be invited
to address the closing session of the UN 8th General Assembly,
everyone agreed that that was it. As a matter of fact, it
turned out not to be the actual closing day because of & pile-up
On the UN agenda, but as I remember, it was within 48 to 72
hours of the actual close.
Had other countries approved the plan before the President made the
public announcement?
No countries were asked for "approval". However, a draft was
shown to the French and the British at Bermuda as a matter of
courtesy. It would have been embarrassingly rude after having
- 2 -
sat with Churchill, Eden, Laniel, and Bidault for
three days, to have flown direct to the United Nations
and delivered a speech of this import without having
told them something about it.
They were shown the draft informatively and comments
Library
were invited. The French had no comments. Churchill,
who had Lord Cherwell, Britain's number one atomic
scientist, with him, made a couple of points which we
0 1481mg The
felt actually improved the speech -- but contrary to
some press reports at the time, Churchill did no editing,
did not propose any language. His comments were simply
directed at the "tone" of certain sections of the draft.
How much weight should it be given in the record thus far of the
President's work for peace?
This is of necessity the only subjective answer to your
list of questions.
I think that great weight should be given to this speech
and to the concept it outlined and the plan it proposed.
Its impact outside the U.S. was tremendous. In the U.S.
it was considerable at the time, but because we are so
accustomed to international generosity it was much more
"matter of course" here than abroad.
The debate at this last session of the UN General Assembly,
culminating in our specifically setting aside 100 kilograms
of fissionable material for this purpose, indicated how
much power this original proposal had in the minds of the
other nations. In fact, this speech and the proposal it
contained were used by Vishinsky in his last-ditch effort
to block UN action 48 hours before he died. At that time
Vishinsky criticized the Lodge-Dulles proposals by saying
that the President's grand proposal of December 1953 had
been whittled down by the Americans to tracer isotopes,
fertilizer, and scientific libraries.
I was sitting not more than three feet away from Vishinsky
when Ambassador Lodge made his final speech which had as
its surprise last paragraph the offer of the 100 kilograms
of fissionable material. All through Lodge's speech,
Vishinsky had been, as usual, furiously scribbling notes
for his rebuttal. When Lodge pulled out the 100 kilograms,
there was absolute silence in the hall. Vishinsky looked
up, shrugged his shoulders, reached for his briefcase,
threw in his notes, put down his briefcase, and sat back
in his chair. He had had it.
- 3 -
During the entire debate both in the Committee and
before the General Assembly, none of the scores of
speakers ever failed to refer to President Eisenhower's
proposal of last December.
Personally, I think this will be a "sleeper" as far as
this country is concerned -- but one of these days when
the deserts do bloom, and atomic reactors are turning
out electricity where there was no fuel before, and
when millions of people are eating who never really
ate before, etc., etc., the President's December 1953
speech and proposal will be remembered as the starting
point of it all.
Do you know of any criticism of the Plan?
The only criticism of the original plan came from the
Soviet bloc. However, we ourselves amended the original
plan and the atomic pool this year by allocating a
specific quantity of fissionable material, followed by
the British, without any allocation from the Russians,
which had been a requirement specifically made in the
original speech.
Also, in order to simplify and speed up the work, the
original idea of having the physical custody of the
material in the hands of a special UN Authority, which
would have had the responsibility of guarding it and
distributing it, was changed to the current Lodge-Dulles
proposal.
I hope this will answer your questions. Again my apologies
for the delay.
Sincerely yours,
Lubrary
OUL
C. D. Jackson
Mr. Merlo J. Pusey
The Washington Post
1515 L. Street N.W.
Washington 5, D.C.
bc: Mr. James Hagerty
Page data
- Page
- 4
- Source index
- 0
- Type
- document
- Media ID
- a7b1f4782b61736c
- Size
- unknown
Document data
- ID
- 12022916
- Core
- doc
- Type
- document
DTO data
{
"id": "12022916",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/12022916",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "Letter, C. D. Jackson to Merlo Pusey of the Washington Post",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/12022916",
"collections": [
"C. D. Jackson Papers",
"Time Inc., Non-Profit Organization, and Campaign Files"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/eisenhower/dde-1002/582658/582658_0011_01.jpg",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/eisenhower/dde-1002/582658/582658_0011_01.jpg",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/eisenhower/dde-1002/582658/582658_0011_01.jpg",
"imageCount": 4,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Context sent to Scholar
Document identity
{
"localId": "12022916",
"label": "Letter, C. D. Jackson to Merlo Pusey of the Washington Post",
"core": "doc",
"dtoType": "document",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/12022916"
}
Document source metadata
{
"id": "12022916",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/12022916",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "Letter, C. D. Jackson to Merlo Pusey of the Washington Post",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/12022916",
"collections": [
"C. D. Jackson Papers",
"Time Inc., Non-Profit Organization, and Campaign Files"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/eisenhower/dde-1002/582658/582658_0011_01.jpg",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/eisenhower/dde-1002/582658/582658_0011_01.jpg",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/eisenhower/dde-1002/582658/582658_0011_01.jpg",
"imageCount": 4,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Document source extras
{
"url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/12022916",
"naId": 12022916,
"levelOfDescription": "item",
"recordType": "description",
"ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}
Page context
{
"seq": 4,
"pageIndex": 0,
"type": "document",
"url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/eisenhower/dde-1002/582658/582658_0011.pdf",
"mediaId": "a7b1f4782b61736c",
"ocrText": "Wheaties W\nFebruary 5, 1955\nDear Mr. Pusey:\nMy apologies for this long delayed reply to your January 19th\nletter, but unfortunately I have been out of town so much that\nmy correspondence has suffered badly.\nHere are the answers to your specific questions:\nLibrary\n0 148/mg The\nWhere did the plan originate?\nThe plan of an atomic pool for peaceful purposes originated\nin a memorandum by the President to Levis Strauss in August\n1953. The President vas then in Denver.\nHow long was it under discussion before the President made his\nfamous speech to the General Assembly!\nThe idea of the President's making a major speech on the\ngeneral subject of the atomic age started as far back as\nearly April 1953. However, the \"pool\" idea vas not injected\nuntil August.\nWhy did he decide to make the speech to the United Nations?\nBecause it seemed to be the perfect world audience before\nwhich this plan could be launched. There had been a certain\namount of discussion as to when and where the speech should\nbe made, but when the intimation came that he might be invited\nto address the closing session of the UN 8th General Assembly,\neveryone agreed that that was it. As a matter of fact, it\nturned out not to be the actual closing day because of & pile-up\nOn the UN agenda, but as I remember, it was within 48 to 72\nhours of the actual close.\nHad other countries approved the plan before the President made the\npublic announcement?\nNo countries were asked for \"approval\". However, a draft was\nshown to the French and the British at Bermuda as a matter of\ncourtesy. It would have been embarrassingly rude after having\n- 2 -\nsat with Churchill, Eden, Laniel, and Bidault for\nthree days, to have flown direct to the United Nations\nand delivered a speech of this import without having\ntold them something about it.\nThey were shown the draft informatively and comments\nLibrary\nwere invited. The French had no comments. Churchill,\nwho had Lord Cherwell, Britain's number one atomic\nscientist, with him, made a couple of points which we\n0 1481mg The\nfelt actually improved the speech -- but contrary to\nsome press reports at the time, Churchill did no editing,\ndid not propose any language. His comments were simply\ndirected at the \"tone\" of certain sections of the draft.\nHow much weight should it be given in the record thus far of the\nPresident's work for peace?\nThis is of necessity the only subjective answer to your\nlist of questions.\nI think that great weight should be given to this speech\nand to the concept it outlined and the plan it proposed.\nIts impact outside the U.S. was tremendous. In the U.S.\nit was considerable at the time, but because we are so\naccustomed to international generosity it was much more\n\"matter of course\" here than abroad.\nThe debate at this last session of the UN General Assembly,\nculminating in our specifically setting aside 100 kilograms\nof fissionable material for this purpose, indicated how\nmuch power this original proposal had in the minds of the\nother nations. In fact, this speech and the proposal it\ncontained were used by Vishinsky in his last-ditch effort\nto block UN action 48 hours before he died. At that time\nVishinsky criticized the Lodge-Dulles proposals by saying\nthat the President's grand proposal of December 1953 had\nbeen whittled down by the Americans to tracer isotopes,\nfertilizer, and scientific libraries.\nI was sitting not more than three feet away from Vishinsky\nwhen Ambassador Lodge made his final speech which had as\nits surprise last paragraph the offer of the 100 kilograms\nof fissionable material. All through Lodge's speech,\nVishinsky had been, as usual, furiously scribbling notes\nfor his rebuttal. When Lodge pulled out the 100 kilograms,\nthere was absolute silence in the hall. Vishinsky looked\nup, shrugged his shoulders, reached for his briefcase,\nthrew in his notes, put down his briefcase, and sat back\nin his chair. He had had it.\n- 3 -\nDuring the entire debate both in the Committee and\nbefore the General Assembly, none of the scores of\nspeakers ever failed to refer to President Eisenhower's\nproposal of last December.\nPersonally, I think this will be a \"sleeper\" as far as\nthis country is concerned -- but one of these days when\nthe deserts do bloom, and atomic reactors are turning\nout electricity where there was no fuel before, and\nwhen millions of people are eating who never really\nate before, etc., etc., the President's December 1953\nspeech and proposal will be remembered as the starting\npoint of it all.\nDo you know of any criticism of the Plan?\nThe only criticism of the original plan came from the\nSoviet bloc. However, we ourselves amended the original\nplan and the atomic pool this year by allocating a\nspecific quantity of fissionable material, followed by\nthe British, without any allocation from the Russians,\nwhich had been a requirement specifically made in the\noriginal speech.\nAlso, in order to simplify and speed up the work, the\noriginal idea of having the physical custody of the\nmaterial in the hands of a special UN Authority, which\nwould have had the responsibility of guarding it and\ndistributing it, was changed to the current Lodge-Dulles\nproposal.\nI hope this will answer your questions. Again my apologies\nfor the delay.\nSincerely yours,\nLubrary\nOUL\nC. D. Jackson\nMr. Merlo J. Pusey\nThe Washington Post\n1515 L. Street N.W.\nWashington 5, D.C.\nbc: Mr. James Hagerty"
}