Aiding the Jews of Europe, 1946

Today’s post is written by Alan Walker, Archivist at the National Archives at College Park.

Although the war was over, the agony of its survivors continued unabated. The United Jewish Appeal, established in 1939, now in the aftermath called upon the federal government to solicit support for its efforts overseas to help Jewish victims of the carnage.

In response, Archivist Solon J. Buck issued this circular to employees of the National Archives:

RG 64, A1 9C - Letter to All Employees, May 17, 1946 - United Jewish Appeal, Lewinson and Kahn

Letter From Solon J. Buck to All Employees, Issuances Entitled “Letter to All Employees,” 1938-1958 (NAID 3951627) RG 64, Records of the National Archives and Records Administration

Philip M. Klutznick with Nicola Guili, 1945

Public Housing Authority (PHA) Commissioner Philip M. Klutznick (Left) with Nicola Giulii, Chairman of the PHA of Los Angeles, 1945, from the Southern California Library for Social Studies and Research.

 

Images of staff are from Identification Cards for Employees, 1941-1942 (NAID 7563237) RG 64, Records of the National Archives and Records Administration.

And the staff rose to the occasion, donating the equivalent of $3,300 in 2016 dollars. Here is the mention of it, in the employee newsletter Archiviews, in July 1946:

Success of UJA Drive - Archiviews, July 1946, p. 2

From Records Relating to Staff Organizations, 1935-1966 (NAID 7839999), RG 64, Records of the National Archives and Records Administration

Posted in Archives II, Civil Records | Tagged , , , , | 2 Comments

IRELAND: THE EASTER RISING, 1916: FOLLOW-UP ON EAMON DE VALERA

Today’s post is written by David Langbart, Archivist at the National Archives at College Park.

Ambassador (ret.) Peter Bridges was good enough to post a link to an interesting article by Robert Schmuhl in a comment on the earlier post about the Easter Rising in Ireland. In his article, Professor Schmuhl describes how Eamon de Valera changed his story about the reason behind receiving a reprieve from a death sentence for participation in the Easter Rising. Schmuhl recounts that in 1963, de Valera told a visiting President John F. Kennedy that he credited his American citizenship for saving him. In 1969, however, de Valera wrote that his U.S. citizenship did not save him, adding that “I know of nothing in international law which could be cited in my defence or made an excuse for American intervention, except, perhaps, to see that I got a fair trial.”

Intrigued by the changed story, I went back to the files to see what the contemporary documents say. This is what I found.

THE U.S. CONSULATE IN DUBLIN[1]

The files of the U.S. consulate in Dublin include a few documents relating to de Valera. In a May 5, 1916, memorandum, Consul Edward Adams reported the visit of a Maura Dixon on behalf of Mrs. De Valera. She brought with her a copy of a certificate of baptism for “Edward De Valera” (as he was then known) signed by Rev. T.J. Donlon, Assistant Rector of the Church of St. Agnes in New York City that stated that he was born on October 14, 1882, and baptized in that church. Adams concluded, “no evidence to the contrary obtainable at this time,” that de Valera was a U.S. citizen and I respectfully request that action in his case be delayed until definite knowledge thereof may be secured.”

On June 12, Adams wrote to General Sir John Maxwell, commander of British forces in Ireland after the Rising, and requested a written report on the disposition of the case of “Edward De Valera, American Citizen . . . arrested in connection with the recent rebellion.” He noted that he was making the request under instruction from the Department of State. On the following day, Adams received the following letter from Major I.H. Price of the General Staff:

. . . . I am directed by the General Officer Commanding-in-Chief to inform you that this man was “Adjutant” of the Dublin Brigade of Rebel forces, and was in command of a body of rebels which held the premises of Messrs. Boland’s, Ringsend, Dublin.

He was tried by Courtmartial and sentenced to death, but the sentence was commuted to Penal Servitude for life.

Adams reported the exchange verbatim to the Department.[2]

On October 2, Adams received an August 31 letter of gratitude from the Rev. Thomas Wheelwright, de Valera’s half-brother. It read, in part:

. . . . After the surrender he was sentenced to be shot, but this sentence was, I am told, at your intervention commuted to life-imprisonment.

Permit to express my gratitude to you for this favor, as well as for the great kindness you have shown his afflicted wife on various occasions. . . . .

Adams responded on February 2, 1917. His letter read, in part:

         As to the part taken by me in your brother’s case, I can only say that, beyond telephone messages, report on Mrs. De Valera’s statements, a request for information, etc., in his case, there is nothing for which you owe me any special gratitude. I simply did all I could in the trying conditions, under restrictions of Martial Law, -just as I did for others. Mrs. De Valera appeared grateful and came here to thank us for our interventions. . . .

In the meantime, in his November report, in the only positive statement of American intervention and its outcome, Consul Adams wrote:

In another instance, by intervention on the plea of Citizenship, made at the request of the wife of Edward DeValera who had been an officer in the revolutionary movement, a sentence of death was commuted to imprisonment for life. Mrs. DeValera afterward called at the Consulate to express her gratitude.[3]

THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE

The story reflected in the central files of the Department of State is somewhat different. There is no documentation to indicate that American officials in Washington made any approach or representations to British officials there. Nor are there any reports indicating that the U.S. consulate in Dublin or the embassy in London did the same. Those offices did make efforts to gather information, though, and that is reflected in the files.

The records show a considerable amount of Congressional and public interest in 1916. For the most part, the Department’s responses to those letters included language along the lines of:

It seems proper to add that the fact that Mr. De Valera may be an American citizen constitutes no reason for clemency in his case, or for a request by this Government for clemency on the part of the British Government. There appears to be nothing to indicate that his trial was not fair or that he was in any way discriminated against, and there would, therefore, appear to be no reason for action by this Department on behalf of Mr. De Valera.[4]

In 1923/1924, when de Valera was once again in prison and facing a death sentence, his mother, Catherine Wheelwright wrote to President Coolidge asking him to save her son as President Wilson had.[5] The records do not contain a response to Mrs. Wheelwright. When members of congress and other public officials wrote, the Department generally responded as follows:

. . . I beg to inform you that no evidence has been submitted to the Department which would substantiate the statement made that Mr. de Valera is entitled to the protection of this Government. The Department has no record of his ever having applied for an American passport. . . .[6]

A background memorandum from the Office of the Solicitor states:

. . . . If it is true, as alleged, that he was born in the State of New York, and if he has never obtained naturalization in a foreign state or taken a foreign oath of allegiance, he may still be regarded as a citizen of the United States, although by his political agitation in Ireland, he has undoubtedly placed himself in a position where he is not entitled to the protection of this government.[7]

CONCLUSION

Neither the files of the consulate in Dublin nor the Department of State include documentation that definitively demonstrate U.S. intervention based on de Valera’s U.S. citizenship. Clearly, however, people at the time believed that to be the case: Consul Adams, his half-brother, his mother, and perhaps others. Enough that it became accepted wisdom.


Footnotes:

[1] Unless otherwise indicated, all documents discussing the work of the consulate come from the files of Consulate in Dublin, 1916 General Correspondence, Volume V, RG 84: Records of Foreign Service Posts of the Department of State.

[2] Consulate Dublin to Department of State, Unnumbered Despatch, June 14, 1916, file 341D.1121 Valera, Eamon De/5, 1910-29 Central Decimal File, RG 59: General Records of the Department of State.

[3] Consulate Dublin to Department of State, Despatch 182, November 29, 1916, file 841.00/33, 1910-29 Central Decimal File, RG 59: General Records of the Department of State.

[4] Assistant Secretary of State Frank L. Polk to Rep. George Holden Tinkham, Letter, July 20, 1916, file 341D.1121 Valera, Eamon De/5A, 1910-29 Central Decimal File, RG 59: General Records of the Department of State.

[5] Catherine Wheelwright to President Calvin Coolidge, Letter, September 22, 1923, file 341D.1121 Valera, Eamon De/45, 1910-29 Central Decimal File, RG 59: General Records of the Department of State.

[6] Secretary of State Charles Evans Hughes to Senator David I. Walsh, March 10, 1924, file 341D.1121 Valera, Eamon De/55, 1910-29 Central Decimal File, RG 59: General Records of the Department of State.

[7] Office of the Solicitor Memorandum to Division of Western European Affairs, March 4, 1924, file 341D.1121 Valera, Eamon De/55, 1910-29 Central Decimal File, RG 59: General Records of the Department of State.

 

Posted in Archives II, Civil Records | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

50 Years of the Pull Slip

Today’s post was written by Alan Walker, Archivist at the National Archives at College Park.

Can you believe it? April of 1966 saw the introduction of NAR Form 1, the “Reference Service Slip.” This paper (commonly referred to as a “pull slip”) is used to request records and is just as important to researchers and Archives staff as the records themselves.

The only change to it over the years came when the National Archives became an independent agency in 1985, and it became NA Form 14001.

Each pull slip will have four copies that are used in the course of pulling the record from a shelf, serving it to a researcher, identifying the record, and logging that records were pulled. That created a need for easily identifiable color-coded copies. They even come in carboned and carbonless versions:

Carbonless Pull Slip, from Marene Baker

But NAR Form 1 didn’t appear out of nowhere.

64-NA-340 Edith Houbert Retrieves Request from Pneumatic Tube, 1940 - cropped

Edith L. Houbert retrieves a reference request from a pneumatic tube, 1940 (NAID 12168920)

From the beginning the Archives has used some sort of a pull slip for its reference operations. The very first one we used, Form K-3, dates from May 1936. In January 1939, the form was revised, now given the title “Records Requisition.” Both are found in the series Official Forms, 1935-1968 (NAID 4486913), in RG 64 – Records of the National Archives.

By this time, researchers were requesting records not only in the Central Search Room, but in the search rooms of the various records divisions that had been set up starting in 1937.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

In 1943, and again in 1947, the form was modified. This is the 1947 version of NA Form 1, along with its instructions, known as a “handling scheme”:

By 1950, under the aegis of the General Services Administration, we rolled out a new form to more clearly indicate the desired information in its own separate text blocks, a layout that endures in our current pull slip.

Here is a view of pull slips being logged at the desk in the research room, from the film Your National Archives from 1953:

archive vid

The pull slip figured prominently a decade later, when the repeated thefts of archival records by Samuel Matz (AKA Robert Murphy)  and his wife were discovered.

RG 64, P 67, file 1962 - Matz Theft Case from NA, Nov.

Sunday Star, Nov 10, 1963 (NAID 26879151)

The Murphys stole hundreds of documents from the Archives, and in the investigation that followed, every aspect of reference procedures was put under the microscope.

Below is a sample of the pull slips found on records that were in the search room at the time of the Murphy’s visits. The reverse side of form NAR 1, from another sample in the Murphy case file, shows the incorporation of a “record of chargeouts”, which endures in the present version of the pull slip (from the series Planning and Control Case Files, 1943-1976 (NAID 7518524)).

Edwin C. Fishel proved an important witness in the case; he had photographed several of the missing documents before the Murphys stole them from his cart of requested records.

It’s quite probable that the difficulty faced by the Archives staff in identifying those missing records is what led to one of the last major changes to the pull slip as we know of it today: the addition of a specific stack and shelf location.

image of current NA Form 14001

NA Form 14001, 1985

Currently an update to this form is in the works, which will merge elements of the Form 14066 used by the presidential libraries with the Form 14001. Our quest for the best possible holdings security continues.

Posted in Archives II, Civil Records, History, Policy and Procedures, Reference | Tagged , , , , , , | 5 Comments

Ireland: The Easter Rising, 1916

Today’s post is written by David Langbart, Archivist at the National Archives at College Park.

The Easter Rising of April 24-29, 1916 is one of the most momentous events in modern Ireland’s history. The Rising, which took place in Dublin, was an effort by the Irish to throw off the yoke of British rule and establish an independent Ireland. It was timed to take place while Great Britain was preoccupied with the ongoing World War I fighting on the Continent. The rebellion was crushed after only a few days, but an independent Ireland emerged in 1922.

At the time of the Rising Ireland was not independent so the official United States presence consisted only of three consulates. One of those offices was in Dublin and thus had a front-row view of events. While consular officers dealt primarily with consular matters (trade promotion; issuing passports and visas; handling matters involving births, marriages, and deaths of Americans abroad; and the like), when something on an order of magnitude such as the Rising took place they were expected to report to both the Department of State and the nearest U.S. embassy.

The consulate in Dublin, however, sent no reports on the Easter events. The two other consulates in Ireland, located in Belfast and in Cork, sent no reports bearing directly on the Rising and related events either. As a result, on August 22, 1916, 115 days after the end of the Rising, the Department of State sent the following instruction (and admonition) to the consulate in Dublin with similarly worded communications to the consulates in Belfast and Cork:

An inspection of the Department’s files fails to reveal any reports from your office in regard to the political disturbances and general conditions in Ireland during the past few months and it is learned from an inquiry of the Embassy in London that practically no information on the subject has been supplied by your office to the Ambassador. Inasmuch as the interest of the Embassy and of the Department in an accurate account from time to time of the occurrences in your district is so obvious, the Department is at a loss to understand its failure and that of the Embassy to receive detailed reports from you. It is, therefore, desired that you will report at once the date such reports were made and, if not, the reason therefore.

841.00[26a

Department of State to Consulate Dublin #140, August 22, 1916, File 841.00/26a, 1910-29 Central Decimal File, RG 59: General Records of the Department of State

Ironically, this instruction to Dublin crossed paths with that consulate’s Despatch #160, dated August 21, 1916, which forwarded the “Sinn Fein Rebellion Handbook.” That 244-page publication, compiled by the “Weekly Irish Times”, had gone on sale beginning August 19.

Ultimately, the three consulates responded to their instructions as follows:

  • Belfast, Despatch #207, September 22, 1916: A 6-page report “Political Conditions in Ireland”
  • Cork, Despatch #230, October 14, 1916: An 84-page report “Political Disturbances and General Conditions in Ireland”
  • Dublin, Despatch #182, November 29, 1916: A 34-page report “The Sinn Fein Rebellion in Ireland, Easter Week, 1916”

These documents are filed in the 1910-29 segment of the Department of State Central Decimal File under the following file numbers: 841.00/31, 841.00/32, and 841.00/33 respectively. They are reproduced on National Archives Microfilm Publication M580, roll 6.

 

Posted in Archives II | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment

Miriam and Me: The Beginnings of an Archival Adventure and Friendship in 1996

Today’s post is written by Dr. Greg Bradsher, Archivist at the National Archives at College Park.

For the past twelve years most people who have had dealings with Miriam Kleiman at the National Archives know that she is a public affairs specialist. It is probable that they do not know that her association with the National Archives began twenty years ago, in March 1996 as a researcher. Her early involvement helped to launch a quest for justice regarding Holocaust-Era Assets and would impact many institutions and lives, including the National Archives and Records Administration and mine.

GB and MK for WP 1998

The author and Miriam Kleiman (Washington Post, 1998)

The story begins in early 1996 when:

WJC [World Jewish Congress] President Edgar Bronfman asked [Senate Banking Committee Chairman Senator] D’Amato to apply pressure on Switzerland to open its banking files. Bronfman…was trying to jump-start talks that collapsed in 1995 after Swiss bankers told Jewish leaders that a new search of bank records netted only 774 missing accounts. The bankers offered $32 million to settle all old claims, but Bronfman spurned the offer, convinced that there were more accounts.

D’Amato asked the CIA, the State Department and the Treasury Department for all files pertinent to Jewish holdings in Switzerland. The agencies said the files were in the National Archives. (The Los Angeles Times (Washington Edition, November 25, 1996) in a Stephen Braun piece entitled “Bitter Secrets and a Cache of Gold.”)

Let’s continue by letting Miriam tell the story of what happened next in her own words, written in remarks prepared for the annual Society of American Archivists meeting in 1999:

Frustrated by unproductive talks with Swiss banking officials, the World Jewish Congress turned to Senate Banking Committee Chairman Alfonse D’Amato for assistance. On February 23, 1996 Senator D’Amato wrote US Archivist John Carlin, requesting archival information on dormant assets from the Holocaust in Swiss banks.

Assistant Archivist Dr. Michael Kurtz responded three weeks later, writing: “We regret that we cannot undertake the extensive research necessary to identify the exact documents which interest you. We will be pleased to assist your representatives in using our finding aids and to make pertinent records available in our College Park research room.” The Senator’s office suggested that the World Jewish Congress pursue this lead. Not having a Washington office, the WJC needed a local researcher.

This is where my role comes in… I was called and asked if I had time to do a short research project at the National Archives — expected to last two days to one week. I accepted, and was sent to meet with Gregg Rickman on March 21. Gregg gave me the letter from Dr. Kurtz, and offered the tip: “Safehaven, explore Safehaven…”

[Bradsher: The Safehaven Program, begun in 1944, was a United States-led effort to investigate German assets that had found a “safehaven” in the neutral countries and Latin America]

Miriam, at the time she met with Gregg Rickman in Senator D’Amato’s office, had been in Washington, D.C., since June 1989. She had just earned a bachelor’s degree in political science from the University of Michigan and had found employment in the office of Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich. Later she worked at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee and then joined the American Jewish Committee. In February 1996 she left her job with the latter organization and was now unemployed.

Jane Schapiro in her book Inside a Class Action: The Holocaust and the Swiss Banks (Madison, Wisconsin: The University of Wisconsin Press, 2003) continues Miriam’s story at this point:

Kleiman was twenty-eight and single. Originally from Cleveland, she had been drawn to Washington. She believed in the power of politics and the ‘rightness’ of certain causes. Washington was the political vortex, and she had wanted to be swept into it.

When she first arrived in Washington, she had gotten a job with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee as a research analyst. The idea of combining Jewish issues and politics had excited her. After six years of working with that combination she had become disillusioned with the politics, and she promised herself that her next job would involve ‘nothing Jewish’ and ‘nothing with Capitol Hill.’ Other than those two conditions she was open to anything.

Although she had told herself that she was done with Capitol Hill she couldn’t rid herself of it in her personal life. She had been dating a legislative aide for several months, and the relationship was becoming more serious. While she wanted to stay in Washington, she was confused as to what she would do.

Extremely friendly, she was an attractive brunette with a sarcastic wit. Packed with nervous energy, she talked incessantly, flitting from one story to another in rapid succession. People were entertained by her humor and enthusiasm, as well as by her idealism. Unlike many young arrivals to Washington, she had not yet lost her sense of mission. She just didn’t know what her next one would be.

In March, just one month after leaving her job, she received a call from Doug Bloomfield, another former Clevelander. Bloomfield was a Washington consultant to the WJC. He had heard that she was looking for a job and thought that he might be able to offer her something very temporary. Was she aware of the Swiss banks and the Holocaust dormant accounts? Senator D’Amato wanted to try to find more documentation on the topic and had written to the U.S. National Archives in College Park, Maryland. The WJC was also interested in researching the topic. The organization could hire her as a researcher for two days. He suggested that she meet with D’Amato’s legislative director, Gregg Rickman. He was the one in charge of D’Amato’s bank inquiry.

Although she was skeptical about reentering the world of Capitol Hill, she went to Rickman’s office. She immediately felt at home with the senator’s young assistant. Not only was he Jewish, he was a former Clevelander.

During the past few months, Rickman had been listening to survivors’ stories. His own father-in-law was a survivor. He had come to believe that the Swiss bankers were criminals who must be brought to justice. D’Amato and the WJC could make that happen. All they needed were the proper weapons.

He showed her a letter that he had received from Dr. Michael Kurtz, assistant archivist at the U.S. National Archives. Kurtz was responding to Richman’s inquiry as to whether the archives might have information about Swiss Holocaust dormant accounts….Kurtz wasn’t sure what there was exactly, but he offered one suggestion: Rickman should begin by researching Operation Safehaven.

….Kurtz told Rickman that researching Operation Safehaven would take only a few days. To Rickman, a few days seemed a small price to pay for a smoking gun.

Kleiman could not resist Rickman’s idealistic enthusiasm. This wasn’t a job but an historic opportunity. Two days later, they entered the…National Archives facility at College Park. Although Rickman was researching for Senator D’Amato, and Kleiman for the WJC, they both believed that they were working toward the same objective: to find evidence of Holocaust-era dormant accounts held by Swiss banks.

Miriam continues with her 1999 version of events:

My first day of work at the National Archives II was on March 23, 1996. Although I had research experience, I had never set foot in an archive. I met with a few archivists and started with a cart of 13 boxes from the Office of the Judge Advocate General, War Crimes Branch. On my second day of research, I found a 1945 US intelligence report from Switzerland, on the Societe General de Surveillance, which served in a banking capacity during the war. Noting that the main depositors were Jews, the report listed accounts of 182 depositors from 9 countries, people with names such as Leopold Lustig, Arion Samuel, Isaac Feldstein, Solomon Shapiro, and Maurice Moishe Rothman.

Fold3_Page_81_Safehaven_Reports_of_the_War_Crimes_Branch_19441945 cropped

Savehaven Report, July 12, 1945 (https://www.fold3.com/image/312769657

A Cleveland newspaper (Tom Brazaitis, “Digging for Gold,” The Plain Dealer, June 1, 1997) reported what happened next:

Kleiman couldn’t afford a car on her researcher salary, so she boarded a shuttle bus to the main archives in downtown Washington. After a 45-minute ride, she took a cab to Rickmann’s office. All the while she was thinking about the documents she had found that day. Could they be important?

Almost an hour after leaving the archives complex in Maryland, Kleiman rushed into Rickmann’s office to show him the documents [Bradsher: needless to say, copies she had made at College Park].

‘Oh my God,’ Rickman said as he leafed through a half-dozen pages of names, listing accounts in various currencies.

To determine the worth of the various currencies listed in today’s dollars, he sent the document to the Congressional Research Service of the Library of Congress. Experts there estimated the Jewish accounts in this single document would be worth $20 million. Up to that point the Swiss were insisting they could find no more than $32 million dormant accounts, and not all belonged to Holocaust victims or survivors. Yet here was $20 million in a single document. There had to be more, Rickmann suspected.

‘We had no idea we’d find something so significant in the first week,’ he says. D’Amato’s office leaked the news of the document to the media and called for congressional hearings on April 23, just one month after the search had begun.

Excited by Kleiman’s discovery, Rickman rushed to assign an intern to work full time with her at the archives complex. Rickman, too, began to drive out to the complex to help go through the documents.

‘We realized we were on to something and it became very, very exciting,’ Kleiman says. ‘It was like a spy novel unfolding before us.’

Miriam continues with her 1999 story:

I immediately rushed to Capitol Hill to share this information with Gregg Rickman. Added and adjusted for interest and inflation, the amount totaled over $25 million dollars — and these accounts were as yet unclaimed, the report stated. This was at a time when the Swiss Bank Association said that only $32 million dollars existed in ALL dormant accounts from the war. This report showed that such information — historical proof of unclaimed assets in Switzerland — could be found in US archival records.

Our search continued. One month later, in April, 1996, the Senate Banking Committee held its first hearing on this issue. Research teams from law firms representing the Swiss banks showed up at Archives, and the press followed. To insure equal access and information to all, Greg Bradsher issued a Safehaven “finding aid” — under 10 pages long. Now, this finding aid is a collector’s item, as the latest version is 1,166 pages!

Now that my name is mentioned, it might be worthwhile to explain how I met Miriam and how I became involved. In early April, when I was an assistant chief of the Reference Branch at the National Archives at College Park (Archives II), a colleague came into my office and asked whether I knew anything about the records of the Foreign Funds Control, as a researcher was asking about their availability. I answered that I did, as a decade earlier I had appraised them when they were located in the Washington National Records Center. We went to our finding aids and found that the records had been recently accessioned and they, as I remembered, contained a wealth about the Swiss banks and the Safehaven Program. After this I went back to work, little thinking about who the researcher was and why the records were wanted. But I became curious and decided to talk to the researcher about the records.

Schapiro, in her Inside a Class Action, continues the story:

Bradsher, a fast talker himself met his match with Kleiman. She explained what she was doing and how this was going to be a big issue because she had found a document that she had let D’Amato know about and that he was going to have hearings and the press was very interested and Bradsher had better get prepared for an onslaught of researchers.

What she had told me I really did not want to hear, particularly if she was correct about an onslaught of researchers. At the time I had more than enough to do in my regular job, as well as being a member of The Archivist’s Strategic Directions Team, a member of the Information Products Working Group, chair of the Archives II Reference Study Group, and the Contractor’s Officer Technical Representative for Reproduction Orders, to have to deal with the press and researchers involved in complex archival, historical, legal, and moral issues.

My first inkling that Miriam was correct about public interest in the issue of Jewish-owned dormant accounts in Swiss banks came with the April 15, 1996 issue of U.S. News & World Report in an article entitled “D’Amato: Awash in secret documents.” An abstract of this article reads: “A secret cache of US intelligence documents may hold the answers to the location of what could be billions of dollars deposited in Swiss banks by victims of the Holocaust or stolen from them by the Nazis.”

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

To be pro-active to the possibility of increased researcher interest in the issues Miriam was explaining to me, I produced a 10-page finding aid to relevant records, including those involving the Safehaven Program. I figured if I had most everything listed, that every time someone asked us about the subject, we could just give them a copy of the finding aid, and be done with it. As it turns out, I greatly miscalculated the quantity of pertinent records, the scope of the inquiries into Holocaust-Era assets issues, and the number of researchers and the media asking for information and records.

The researchers, and the media after them, began, as Miriam predicted, coming to Archives II.  As the Cleveland newspaper mentioned above observed:

After the first Senate hearing revealed the existence of numerous unexamined documents, the archives hummed with activity. The [Rickman-Kleiman] team of researchers expanded to include an expert on the German archives and a dozen interns from the U.S. Holocaust Museum in Washington.

The Swiss government, embarrassed by the publicity the documents were receiving, sent its own researchers to examine the archive trail. So did Swiss bankers and researchers from Sweden and other countries named in the documents.

‘Banking is the mainstay of Switzerland’s economy and their reputation was on the line,’ Kleiman says. ‘They wanted to see firsthand what people were finding.’

In 1997, in writing about the researcher interest, I observed:

The trickle of researchers that began in March became a small stream after the Senate Banking Committee held hearings on Nazi looted assets and the Swiss bank accounts of the victims of the Holocaust in April 1996. It was not too long afterwards that researchers representing Senator D’Amato, the World Jewish Congress, and the Swiss Bankers Association had found a home at College Park. And others followed, so that by mid-summer the small stream had become a river. On any given day during the summer of 1996 the College Park research room had between 15 and 25 researchers doing research in, what the staff termed: the “Nazi Gold” records. And what had actually begun as a quest for information on Jewish Assets in Swiss banks quickly broadened to include Nazi looted gold in Switzerland, Sweden, Spain, Portugal, Argentina, and Turkey. (from Searching for Records Relating to Nazi Gold Part I)

During the summer I constantly went into the research room to see Miriam and the other researchers. I was interested in what records they were using and what information they were uncovering. Then, every week or two, I would produce a new finding aid, go to the bulk copier and make six sets, and then pass them out to the researchers. Month by month the size of the finding aid increased. Miriam and I would constantly discuss our latest discoveries. In a way for both of us, it was a treasure hunt. But, we also knew the story of the Swiss banks was one that involved victims of the Holocaust; so it was more than a treasure hunt; it was a case of turning history into justice, and the holdings of the National Archives were paramount to justice being achieved.

Kleiman continues:

Using this finding aid as a guide, we explored the records of OMGUS, OSS, Treasury, State Department, and Foreign Funds Control. As we tackled box after box, it was fascinating to read more about Safehaven, and to see the myth of Swiss neutrality unravel. We learned that Switzerland supplied the Nazi regime with foreign exchange and war materials, and continued this trade long after any real threat of invasion. In the words of a 1945 Treasury Department memo, “as late as April 1945, the Swiss were in cahoots with the Germans.”

In the summer of 1996, the German magazine Der Spiegel noted the importance of our discoveries and our College Park research efforts: “The avalanche of slime from the archives is threatening to bring the entire Swiss banking center, today number one in the world, into lasting disrepute.”

At the National Archives, we learned about West Virginia Senator Harley Kilgore, who chaired the Senate Military Affairs Committee in 1945. We found that his Committee, the so-called “Kilgore Committee” discovered that Swiss banks had purchased looted gold from Germany, and concluded that “These moves were made possible by the willingness of the Swiss government and banking officials… to make a secret deal with the Nazis.” While it may sound cliche to cite this phrase to a group of archivists, “What is past is prologue.” 50 years later, there were similar hearings, investigations, and even similar Swiss press reports.

The Los Angeles Times (Washington Edition, November 25, 1996) in a Stephen Braun piece entitled “Bitter Secrets and a Cache of Gold,” noted:

Every morning researchers troop into the sun-puddled reading rooms of Washington’s National Archives [College Park]. They trudge out hours later briefcases clogged with gray photocopies of old letters, position papers, internal memorandums from so long ago,

The researchers wage a quiet war for information, a competition that shapes legal maneuvers and publicity battles in New York and Washington. Brussels and Bern. Germany.

World Jewish Congress volunteers and aides to Senate Banking…Chairman Alfonse M. D’Amato (R-N.Y.) spread out over several carrels [Bradsher: now the consultation rooms]. Swiss bank researchers sit at another table. Nearby State Department historians, lawyers and [Professor Richard] Brietman’s students plumb the files

‘Almost everything we’ve learned comes from the documents,’ said Gregg J. Rickman, a D’Amato aide.

….The files, depicted as bombshells each time they are made public by D’Amato and WJC officials have had a devastating impact. Swiss bankers have hired a public relations team to counter each broadside. And the files are energizing Holocaust survivors and relatives. More than 1,000 have written the Swiss, claiming missing accounts.

‘Even if all we’re left with is questions,’ said Kleiman, ‘at least they’re finally being asked.’

Jane Schapiro, in Inside a Class Action, describes Miriam as the summer of 1996 was ending:

By September 1996 Kleiman was a nervous wreck. She was working day and night and was still getting paid only hourly. She loved what she was doing, but she wanted more stability. What she thought would be a day or two of research had turned into six months’ work. With little money and no job security, she found herself in the same position she had been in six months earlier.

Miriam finally told Rickman that she could not keep going and would have to leave. Rickman offered a lead that would have Miriam going to work as a researcher with a Washington, D.C. law firm that was bringing a class action lawsuit against the Swiss bankers.

In October 1996, President Bill Clinton appointed Stuart E. Eizenstat, then Under Secretary of Commerce for International Trade, to head an eleven-member Interagency Group on Nazi Assets. The group, which I joined on October 31, was tasked with writing a report about what the United States government knew and did during and after the war about Nazi looted assets. I was asked by Dr. William Z. Slany, the Department of State’s Chief Historian, who was to draft the group’s report, to compile an exhaustive finding aid.

Despite both Miriam and I having new roles to play, I knew that for at least the foreseeable future our fates were linked. I could not help but to think of the last scene of the movie Casablanca where Rick says to Louis “I think this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship.”

 

P.S. In August 1998, a historic, unprecedented $1.25 billion settlement was reached in the Swiss Banks case.


Resources:

Holocaust-Era Assets Main Page at the National Archives with link to the Holocaust-Era Assets Finding Aid.

Safehaven Reports, 1944-1945 (NAID 595386) War Department. Office of the Judge Advocate General. War Crimes Office. Record Group 153.

 

 

Posted in Archives II, World War II | Tagged , , , , , , | 14 Comments

The Misadventures of a Soldier and His Bounty-Land Warrant

Heather Jager was a 2015 summer intern in the Archives 1 Reference Section in Washington, DC.

During my summer internship, I came across an orphan document – a document that has been separated from its file. It was made of parchment that was dry and slightly rigid; its bottom half had been torn off at some point before it was transferred to the National Archives, and the remaining piece had lines indicating that it had once been folded. The print on the document was in decent condition despite being covered in inkblots, but the handwriting was illegible. Any identifiable personal information, such as a name, was barely discernible. I noticed that President James Monroe’s name was clearly visible, but his signature was nowhere to be found. What sparked my interest, however, was what appeared to be a file number, #12336, on the document. Could this file number give me a clue about the identity of the document? With only that number to go on, I decided to try to find out more about the document.

Parchment orphan records

Orphan record from RG 49

I discovered that the document in question was a land patent (a document akin to a property title) that was issued to James Oneal, who enlisted in the United States Army during the War of 1812. A Congressional Act of 1812 gave men the incentive to serve in the U.S. Army in exchange for land. After one year of service as a Private in the 23rd U.S. Infantry, Oneal applied to the Army for a tract of land (“bounty” land) and was granted 160 acres of land in the Illinois Territory. Once approved, he was then issued a warrant that he presented to a regional branch of the General Land Office (GLO). After he surrendered said warrant, he was assigned land; however, he would not have received the land patent document at that time. The actual land patent was created by the GLO in Washington, DC. As soon as the patent was generated, it was then sent back to the local GLO office. At this point, Oneal was required to present himself at this office in person in order to obtain the patent, which he did.

While the original patent was given to the applicant, the information contained within said patent was transcribed into a ledger at the GLO headquarters in Washington, DC. The pages in the ledger were essentially a facsimile of the patent given to the land owner. If this was the normal procedure the GLO followed, what was an original land patent – or a portion of one – doing in James Oneal’s file?

After consulting with one of the archivists on staff who specializes in land records, I used the patent number on the document (12336) to track down Oneal’s file. In it was a letter, dated 29 December 1824, that helps to explain the condition of the warrant. In this letter, Oneal writes that while traveling to Illinois, his saddle bags, which contained the patent and vials of ink, were “knocked over board,” and the ink and water almost obliterated the writing from the parchment. Oneal’s letter also provides insight into the missing bottom half of the patent, and alludes not only to James Madison’s signature, but that of Josiah Meigs, who was the Commissioner of the United States General Land Office at the time this patent was recorded.

I then went a bit further and used Oneal’s patent number to search the Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM) website. (Please note that when the GLO merged with the Bureau of Reclamation, it was hence known as the Bureau of Land Management.) There I found a government copy of Oneal’s land warrant, and a map indicating the precise piece of land that was allotted to him. Upon further investigation, it appeared that Oneal’s land was located within Sangamon County, the location from which his letter to the Bureau of Land Management was sent. So, it appears that Oneal made it safely to his 160 acres, even though his land patent was a little worse for wear.

For researchers interested in bounty land warrant applications files before 1855—including those for the War of 1812 era—please consult Record Group 15 (Records of the Department of Veterans Affairs). For information about land entry files, researchers may want to check Reference Information Paper 114, Research in the Land Entry Files of the General Land Office .

Documents relating to the transaction of land from the government to an applicant should look at the series, “Land Entry Case Files” (NAID 7541372), which is in Record Group 49 (Records of the Bureau of Land Management). Surrendered bounty land patent files can be found in a subset of the above referenced series, specifically “Military Bounty-Land Warrants Under the Act of 1812, #1-28085” (NAID 4923870), which is also part of Record Group 49.

As for the orphaned document itself, it will be safely returned to its original file in the series, “Military Bounty-Land Warrants Under the Act of 1812, #1-28085” (NAID 4923870) mentioned above.

Posted in Archives I, Civil Records, The Process | Tagged , , | 5 Comments

The President Goes to Cuba: 1928

Today’s post was written by David Langbart, Archivist at the National Archives at College Park.

President Obama will visit Cuba later this month.  It will be only the second time an incumbent President visits that island nation.  The first presidential visitor was Calvin Coolidge in 1928, when he attended the Sixth International Conference of American States in Havana during January 1928.

A major difference between the two visits is that President Coolidge traveled to Cuba to attend an inter-American conference that just happened to take place in that country.  If the conference had been elsewhere, Cuba would not have received his visit.  President Obama, on the other hand, is going to Cuba to parley with Cuban leaders.  Another difference is that the trip to Cuba was President Coolidge’s only foreign trip as President.  By contrast, President Obama has traveled all over the World.

The Sixth International Conference of American States came at a time when U.S. relations with the countries in Central and South America were in a parlous state.  The United States had every expectation of facing brutal criticism at the meeting.  As American planning for the meeting, Secretary of State Frank B. Kellogg sent the following letter to President Coolidge suggesting that his presence would help the American cause:

It is not clear when the President agreed to go to Cuba.   The only document located in the files is the following note from the President:

short letter thanking the Secretary of State for information about the Pan American conference

Letter from President Calvin Coolidge to Secretary of State Frank B. Kellogg, Aug 29, 1927

Despite the heavy criticism received during the conference, American officials concluded that the outcome, and the President’s visit, was a success.


Source: Secretary of State Frank B. Kellogg to President Calvin Coolidge, August 19, 1927, file 710.F/42a, and President Calvin Coolidge to the Secretary of State, August 29, 1927, file 710.F/43, both in 1910-29 Central Decimal Files (NAID 302021), RG 59: General Records of the Department of State.

Posted in Archives II, Civil Records, History, News | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Setting up the Federal Register, 1935

Today’s post was written by Alan Walker, Archivist at the National Archives in College Park.

Today we celebrate the 80th anniversary of the Federal Register. On that day long ago, the press ballyhooed its arrival.

Official Washington had long lamented the lack of any kind of up-to-date guide to the mind-boggling mass of rules, regulations, and notices which federal agencies issue.

RG 64, P 67, file 1936 - First Issue of Federal Register, March 15 1

First Issue of New Journal, Federal Register, Published, NAID 7582964

RG 64, P 67, file 1936 - First Issue of Federal Register, March 15 2

New Government Publication Comes off Press, NAID 7582964

One person who had bemoaned this situation was John G. Laylin, the Assistant General Counsel of the Treasury Department.

John Gallup Laylin, 1943 portrait - from ancestry

Assistant General Consul of the Treasury Department, John G. Laylin, 1943. Provided from Ancestry.com

In this March 5, 1934 memo, Laylin laid out his vision for such a guide:

The number of proclamations, executive orders, regulations, and rulings which are daily supplementing the statutory law suggests the necessity of establishing a Federal publication similar to the official gazette of most foreign nations.

A month later, Laylin refined his idea and addressed the issues of production and distribution.

RG 64, A1 61, file 8 - John Laylin - Laylin Memo Reasons for Official Gazette, April 13, 1934 - page 4

Memo regarding Reasons for an Official Gazette, April 13, 1934, p4 NAID 12011779

By that December, Laylin’s “Official Gazette” was well on its way to fruition. President Franklin D. Roosevelt had appointed a committee of the National Emergency Council to investigate the publication of such a guide, and Edwin Griswold had published an article in the December 11 issue of the Harvard Law Review entitled “Government in Ignorance of the Law – A Plea for Better Publication of Executive Legislation.”

64-NA-281 R. D. W. Connor, ca. 1935

R. D. W. Connor, Archivist of the United States, ca. 1935 NAID 12168816

By the summer of 1935, the Archivist of the United States, R. D. W. Connor, was laying the groundwork for the administrative and functional organization of the National Archives, the National Historical Publications Commission, and the Federal Register. He was inundated with recommendations for candidates to fill positions.

In a June 25, 1935 letter to Connor, Laylin put forth his suggestions, too. Here is an excerpt:

RG 64, A1 61, file 8 - John Laylin - Laylin Letter to Connor, June 1935, page 2A

Letter from John Laylin to R. D. W. Connor, June 25, 1935 NAID 21925841

Bernard Kennedy was ultimately chosen to be the director of the Federal Register (at a salary of $4,800 USD a year), but it is intriguing to imagine “what might have been” had Alger Hiss been interviewed and agreed to take that cut in pay.

Alger Hiss ID Card - Photo Illustration

This is a photo illustration of Alger Hiss Identification Card by the author, not an actual record


Sources:

  • File: 8 – John Laylin (NAID 21925841), Activities Files, 1935-1968 (NAID 12011779), RG 64 – Records of the National Archives and Records Administration
  • Photograph of R. D. W. Connor, Archivist of the United States (NAID 12168816), Historic Photograph File of National Archives Events and Personnel, 1935-1975 (NAID 518146), RG 64
  • File: 1936, Press Clippings, 1935-1963 (NAID 7582964), RG 64
Posted in Archives II, Civil Records, History, The Process | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Fur Warden Sketches Map of Fortymile River Basin in Alaska

Today’s post was written by Laurie Moyer, who volunteers on education and archival projects at the National Archives at College Park.

Throughout December of 1917, the thermometer in Chicken, Alaska, a village about 40 miles west of the Canadian border, repeatedly plunged to 56 degrees below zero Fahrenheit. All activities were “practically at a standstill,” Christian L. Larson, Special Fur Warden with the Commission of Fisheries, reported from his headquarters in that village (now part of the series Records Concerning Fox Farming and the Protection of Fur-Bearing Animals, 1911-1928 (NAID 6109988)).

During one of these frigid nights, Larson spent about two hours, according to his estimate, sketching a highly detailed map of the approximately 190 mile swath of the Fortymile River Basin.

pencil sketch of fortymile river basin, showing bodies of water

Fortymile River Basin Map, sketched by C. L. Larson (NAID 26053347)

The 2-foot by 1-foot map, which documents the courses of more than 30 creeks and locations of Native American encampments, dozens of trappers’ cabins and beaver dams, is a testimony to Larson’s remarkable memory. The warden had traversed the basin, he wrote, “numerous times, traveling in summertime with a pack on my back and a dog or 2 following.” During winter months he explored the territory with “Dogteam, Snowshoes, Sleigh or Toboggan.”

In June, after surviving one of the coldest winters on record, Larson sent his sketch off to H. F. Moore, acting Commissioner of Fisheries, along with a letter. In Larson’s letter, he noted that his hurried pencil drawing was made without use of a ruler or compass which, he added, “I would not have understood how to use if I had tried.” Still, Larson believed that “it is more correct than any map from this part of Alaska seen so far.”

Larson letter to Commissioner

Letter from Christian L. Larson to the Commissioner of Fisheries, June 25, 1918 (NAID 26053347)

Larson transcription of letter

The United States Commission of Fish and Fisheries was formed in 1871 to investigate diminishing fish populations, regulate the fishing industry, and advance the science of fish breeding.  By 1917, the Commission was overseen by the Department of Commerce and its responsibilities included the oversight of fur-bearing animals. Wardens, stationed in field locations, were primarily charged with enforcing laws and regulations.

Chicken, Alaska, was first populated in 1886 when gold was discovered and later, in its heyday from 1910-20, was home to 100 people.  Larson had worked as a game warden in Chicken, Alaska, since July 11, 1911. His appointment was noted in the Report of the Governor of Alaska to the Secretary of the Interior of that year.

While we do not know exactly from Larson what his daily work routine was, the box of records also included 1921 correspondence from another fur warden, M. J. O’Connor, detailing his investigation into illegal muskrat trapping. Larson’s experiences may very well have included this type of inquiry.

Letter from MB in response to report sent by Ernest Walker from Warden O'Connor

Letter from MB to Ernest Walker, in response to report on illegal trapping of muskrats

O’Connor, in a report to his supervisor, Ernest P. Walker, Chief Fur and U.S. Game Warden in Juneau, describes a visitor who arrived at his house at 11 p.m. one May evening and carrying a trap bearing a dead muskrat. The visitor, Arthur Jennings, had traveled 16 miles to accuse Charles Hanley of illegally trapping muskrats and had brought the dead animal as evidence.

Three days later, the fur warden and the accuser traveled by boat to the site and found “evidences of trapping and skinning.” O’Connor reported that he “also found four or five stakes freshly cut to which evidently muskrat traps had been tied….We also found 52 stretching boards for muskrat skins, and found the carcass of a land otter…”

As a result of the investigation, Hanley was arrested. Before the trial, O’Connor reported that “a number of Indians … had spoken to me about the case and they seemed to be very angry because a white man was allowed to trap and nothing had been done to him. I told those at Klukwan that the man was going to be tried… and that seemed to satisfy them to think that a white man would not be allowed to trap any more than they were.”

Hanley was tried but found not guilty. In his report, O’Connor concluded that even though the verdict was not as hoped, “it has had a very good effect on the community for they know that violators of the law will be promptly taken up.”

Wardens like O’Connor and Larson, whose duties included enforcing laws against illegal trapping, may have felt they were fighting an uphill battle. As Larson concluded in his letter to his boss, he noted:

“The Fortymile basin, that is from within 16 mile of the Tanana to the boundary on the Fortymile river with all its tributaries comprises at least 25,000 square miles and is an ideal country for all fur animals but the few that is now left will not long survive as the prices is higher than ever before. Marten [a weasel-like mammal] is on the increase in the outlying parts where there has been no trappers in the last 2-3 years, but as the Marten gets more numerous more of them will be caught in traps set for mink, weasel, foxes and lynx, and Wardens will not be able to save them, at least not in this part along the boundary.”


 

Many thanks to the NARA volunteers who were involved in the process for this post. Renee Jaussaud discovered the records during a volunteer processing project; Harry Kidd scanned the textual records; and Roger Walke collaborated with Renee in transcribing Larson’s letter. Much appreciation to NARA staff Andrew Knight who scanned the sketch map, Judy Luis-Watson for collaborating on this post, and Patrick Osborn and Suzanne Isaacs who ensured the items are described correctly and now available in NARA’s online catalog.

 Sources

Records Concerning Fox Farming and the Protection of Fur-Bearing Animals, 1911-1928 (NAID 6109988); File: Larson, C. L. – Special Fur Warden, General Correspondence (NAID 6167414), Record Group 22, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Smith, Hugh.  “Report of the United States Commissioner of Fisheries Fiscal Year 1916.” Government Printing Office: Washington, D.C. 1912.

“Reports of the Department of the Interior for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1912, Volume II.” Government Printing Office: Washington, D.C. 1913.

 

Posted in Civil Records, History | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Major League Baseball, President Franklin D. Roosevelt, and World War II, 1941-1942

Today’s post is written by Dr. Greg Bradsher and Dr. Sylvia Naylor, Archivists at the National Archives at College Park.

During the summer of 1940, as German military forces overran France, many Americans began to support the need for compulsory military training in the event that the United States entered the war in Europe. In September, Congress adopted the Selective Training and Service Act of 1940. This law established the Selective Service System and required registration of all men between ages 21 and 45, with selection for one year’s service by a national lottery. The term of service was extended by one year in August 1941. After Pearl Harbor, the law was further amended to extend the term of service for the duration of the war and six months and required the registration of all men 18 to 64 years of age.

At the 1940 Major League Baseball annual winter meeting in Chicago, discussions were held about the relationship between baseball and the national defense. In mid-January 1941, Ford Frick, the President of the National League, came to Washington and, among other things, met with General George C. Marshall, Chief of Staff of the Army on January 15 to offer the services of the National League to the national defense.

Baseball001

Marshall memorandum of January 15, 1941

Frick made several suggestions regarding how Major League Baseball might be of service to the nation. After the meeting, General Marshall wrote Maj. Gen. E.S. Adams, Adjutant General for the Army, about the visit and suggested steps the Army should consider taking. A week later, Adams wrote Frick acknowledging his offer of cooperation, explaining the military situation and possibilities of cooperation, and expressing the War Department’s appreciation of his offer.

Not long after, Clark Calvin Griffith, President of the Washington Base Ball Club since 1920 and previously the manager of the Washington Senators from 1912 to 1920, stopped by General Adams’ office to offer the cooperation of his team in providing for the recreation of soldiers. Adams was not present, but wrote to Griffith as soon as he learned about his visit.

Baseball004

Adams letter January 28, 1941

At the annual dinner of the New York Chapter of the Baseball Writers Association held in New York City on February 2, 1941, a letter from President Roosevelt, identified by The New York Times as the “Nation’s No. 1 Fan,” was read.  He wrote:

It is a fortunate thing for this country that there is no lessening of interest in the great American sport, baseball. That was apparent a couple of years ago when we celebrated the centenary of the game.

We should be more grateful than ever this year to General Doubleday for giving us baseball. Of course, the national defense is the paramount issue today. All else is subordinate to the test whether it contributes in the final analysis to the strengthening of the defensive forces of the nation.

The country is witnessing an unprecedented expansion in its armed forces on land, on sea and in the air. And in building up of morale-whether in the armed forces or in the civilian population-we all know the part that recreation always has played and of necessity must continue to play. That is where baseball comes into its own. Whether we follow a world series, watch the fortunes of a minor league or look in on a sandlot team in our back yard, all of us want to know what the sports writer thinks about it.

With a quickened sense of the importance of your mission I send greeting to my friends of the New York Chapter, Baseball Writers Association of America. I hope the success of the dinner will be in keeping with the importance of the work you are doing.  The best of luck to all.[1]

President Roosevelt attended the opening day game at Griffith Stadium between the New York Yankees and Washington Nationals on April 14, 1941. He threw out the ceremonial first pitch, as he had every year since 1933 (except 1939 when, because of the press of business, he sent Vice President John Nance Garner).

The First Ball

1941: US president Franklin D Roosevelt (1882 – 1945) prepares to throw the first ball of baseball season while gripping the arm of his Presidential Secretary, General Edwin M Watson (R), for support. (Photo by American Stock/Getty Images)

He also threw out the first pitch for the 1937 All Star Game at Griffith Stadium. Earlier, in 1918 and 1919, Roosevelt, then Assistant Secretary of the Navy, accompanied Vice President Thomas R. Marshall, to the season opener in place of President Woodrow Wilson. This annual tradition began when President William H. Taft threw out the first pitch at Nationals Park to start the 1910 season.

Joe DiMaggio, the 1940 American League’s batting champion, in the first inning of the 1941 opening game, tripled against the center field fence to drive in the first run of the game, which the Yankees won 3-0. Thus began a record breaking year for baseball. During the year DiMaggio hit in 56 consecutive games. After being hitless in the 57th game, he hit safely in 16 more consecutive games for a streak of 72 of 73 games. Ted Williams of the Boston Red Sox ended the season with a .406 batting average. Since this 1941 season, no professional baseball player (qualifying for the batting title) has hit over .400. On June 1 Mel Ott of the New York Giants hit his 400th home run and on July 25, Lefty Grove of the Boston Red Sox, earned his 300th career win, which was also his last.

The 1941 season also witnessed ball players entering military service. Even before the season began, on March 8, Philadelphia Phillies pitcher Hugh Mulcahy became the first big leaguer drafted into the Armed Forces for World War II. Detroit Slugger Hank Greenberg, the American League’s Most Valuable Player in 1940, received his draft call on May 7. He would soon be giving up his $55,000 yearly salary for $21 per month Army pay.

On June 5, The Major League Advisory Council, composed of Commissioner Judge Kenesaw Mountain Landis, President Will Harridge of the American League and Ford C. Frick of the National League decided that proceeds from the ninth annual All-Star baseball game to be played at Detroit on July 8 would be donated to the United Service Organizations (USO) for National Defense, Inc., which was sponsored by the government to raise funds for Army and Navy recreational activities. The game netted $53,226.27 for the USO. [2]

During 1941 the size of the American armed forces increased from 458,365 to 1,801,101 soldiers. After the United States entered World War II in December 1941, Americans rushed to the recruiting offices to join the war effort. Among them was the Cleveland Indians’ 23-year old pitching sensation, Bob Feller, who went to the Navy recruiting office in Chicago on December 9 and enlisted in the Navy.

The annual winter baseball meeting began in Chicago on December 8, 1941, the day after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. Baseball Commissioner Landis, when asked that day what would war do to baseball, he replied “No one can even guess. I would be going way out on the limb if I ventured a prediction.” Will Harridge, the president of the American League, said “The Nation’s welfare is, of course, our first concern and we will do whatever is desired by the Government, but I’m sure that baseball will carry on its schedule as it always has.” Mel Ott, recently appointed manager of the New York Giants, in a similar vein, said “This is a serious business, this attack on us by Japan, and the first thought of everybody is the defense of our country.” “But,” he continued, “as soon as things get back into their normal stride I am sure baseball will do its part in the program and I am equally certain that whatever the government wants baseball men to do, they will do it.” At the meeting, some of the baseball leaders thought the war might halt night baseball in some section if blackouts should become necessary and the clubs which had arranged to train the following spring on the Pacific Coast were somewhat disturbed. Some thought the war would curtail baseball activities and shorten the playing season as it had in 1918.[3]

In mid-December, Frick and Griffith met with Maj. Theodore Banks, chief of the Army’s athletics and recreation branch to put in motion plans to distribute $25,000 in baseball equipment among the soldiers and sailors as soon as possible. The money had been raised at the baseball meeting in Chicago earlier in December.[4] Major League Baseball launched its balls-and-bats-for-service-men campaign in Washington, D.C. on December 30 by placing an initial order for 18,000 baseballs and 4,500 bats to be distributed to men in the armed forces. Griffith, who led the drive to supply Army camps with baseball equipment during World War I and played a major role in keeping major league baseball going in 1917-1918, formally placed the equipment order after a conference with Ford, Capt. Frederick H. Weston of the Army morale division and representatives of three sporting goods manufacturing firms. He informed the press that the conference dealt only with the equipment campaign and that no discussions were held regarding any possible blackout of night baseball during the 1942 season or of curtailing next season’s major league schedule. Griffith said he was confident that a “full 154-game schedule” would be played in 1942, but he emphasized that his immediate interest was “supplying the boys in the service with bats and balls.” He was also quoted as saying that orders up to $42,000 would be placed for “service baseball kits” and later they may total as much as $100,000. He added that most of the funds would come from proceeds of the 1942 All-Star game. Griffith also noted that the equipment would be supplied throughout the war and would be distributed by the joint Army and Navy Committee on Welfare and Recreation. [5]

Will Harridge, President of American League, wrote a piece for the press the first week of January 1942, in which he stated that all baseball stood ready to do its part in the crisis which faced the nation. He wrote:

No one can foresee what that part may be. But regardless of what this war year may bring, the American League enters 1942 confidently hopeful it will be able to perform an important role in the recreational and morale portion of our national defense program.

Sports-and particularly baseball-long have been an important part of the lives of millions of our people. Now baseball may be approaching the finest opportunity for service to our country that the game has ever had-the opportunity for providing a recreational outlet for millions of fans who will be working harder than ever to help achieve our common cause of victory. [6]

Judge Landis wrote President Roosevelt on January 14, asking him what he had in mind as to whether professional baseball should continue to operate. “Of course,” he wrote, “my inquiry does not relate at all to individual members of this organization, whose status, in the emergency, is fixed by law operating upon all citizens.” He concluded his letter “Health and strength to you-and whatever else it takes to do this job.”

Baseball006

Landis letter January 14, 1942

Roosevelt responded the next day:

As you will, of course, realize the final decision about the baseball season must rest with you and the Baseball Club owners—so what I am going to say is solely a personal and not an official point of view.

I honestly feel that it would be best for the country to keep baseball going. There will be fewer people unemployed and everybody will work longer hours and harder than ever before.

And that means that they ought to have a chance for recreation and for taking their minds off their work even more than before.

Baseball provides a recreation which does not last over two hours or two hours and a half, and which can be got for very little cost. And, incidentally, I hope that night games can be extended because it gives an opportunity to the day shift to see a game occasionally.

As to the players themselves, I know you agree with me that individual players who are of active military or naval age should go, without question, into the services. Even if the actual quality of the teams is lowered by the greater use of older players, this will not dampen the popularity of the sport….

Here is another way of looking at it—if 300 teams use 5,000 or 6,000 players, these players are a definite recreation asset to at least 20,000,000 of their fellow citizens—and that in my judgment is thoroughly worthwhile.

On January 16 Landis made public the president’s letter. Of particular interest to the major league executives was the President’s expressed desire that more night games than the seven then permitted each club be scheduled. Griffith said that in view of the President’s letter, he would write Landis asking permission to schedule more night games. One of the most outspoken opponents to playing more than seven night games when the question came up at the December meeting was President Alvah Bradley of the Cleveland Indians. But he recanted, stating that in view of President Roosevelt’s letter he had reconsidered his opposition. At this point, all the major league clubs except the Chicago Cubs, New York Yankees, Detroit Tigers, and Boston Red Sox were equipped with lights. For these teams to host night games, they would need lights, and getting such lighting would be a difficult proposition, given wartime priorities. The International News Service observed “But regardless of the question of baseball under the lights, baseball men accepted the President’s letter as giving the national game ‘the green light’ for 1942, at least.” Landis issued a statement from his Chicago office stating “I hope that our performance will be such as to justify the President’s faith.” “The President’s letter,” Harridge said, “confirms the conviction held by all baseball men that the national pastime has a definite place in the welfare of our country, particularly during times of stress.” [7]

On January 20, Landis called a joint meeting of major league club owners to be held in New York on February 3 to consider expansion of night baseball. At the meeting, Owner Phil Wrigley of the Chicago Cubs said that he was in the process of equipping Wrigley Field for night baseball when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor and that all preparations were stopped. He said that 165 tons of steel, 35,000 feet of copper wire and other items of equipment were immediately turned over to the Government. “We felt,” he said, “that this material could be more useful in lighting flying fields, munition plants or other war defense plants under construction.” [8]

During the February 3 meeting, the owners, acting in accordance with what they considered to be the wishes of President Roosevelt, voted to allow each ball club to schedule 14 night games, except for the Washington Senators, who could play 21 such games. They also decided to play two All-Star games. The first would be on July 6 in a National League city with increased price of admission and the second on July 7 in an American league city. At the latter there would no increased admission price but fans would be required to purchase $1 worth of war savings stamps for themselves. All the club owners and Landis also committed themselves to investing 10 percent of their salary for the year to defense bonds and expressed the hope that all their players and other employees would take similar action. [9]

The 1942 baseball season began in April. During the year hundreds of major league ball players would be drafted or would enlist in the armed forces. By end of the year there were 3,915,507 individuals in military service.

On April 15, just as the season was beginning, Horace Stoneham and Larry MacPhil, the presidents of the New York Giants and Brooklyn Dodgers announced that all the proceeds of two games played between the two teams would go to the Army Emergency Relief and the Navy Relief Society. MacPhil said the “entire proceeds means just that. Every member of the press will be asked to pay. There will be no passes of any kind at either game, and that goes for the umpires, too.” That same day the Major League Advisory Council (Landis, Frick, and Harridge) announced that the two All-Star games would be played at night at the Polo Grounds and Cleveland’s Municipal Stadium and all the proceeds would go to the Baseball Equipment Fund, commonly referred to as the Bat and Ball Fund, which furnished bats, balls, and paraphernalia to Army bases and Navy camps.[10]

On May 8, baseball’s first benefit-game contribution to the war effort was played at Ebbets Field between the Giants and Dodgers. This was scheduled to be the first of sixteen war-relief engagements involving every major league club. Everyone who entered the park had to pay. This included the players, umpires, sports writers, ushers, and, peanut-vendors. The crowd for the game, one of the largest in the park’s history, included several thousand service members whose tickets of admission were paid by patriotic citizens and organizations. The game raised $59,859 for the Navy Relief Society. [11]

The 1942 All-Star game was scheduled to be played in the Polo Grounds in New York on July 6; to be followed on July 8 by a game between the All-Stars of the winning league and an all-star team composed of service personnel. On July 1, Ford Frick, the National League president, told the press that it was estimated that baseball would contribute to various war service funds about three-quarters of a million dollars by the end of the 1942 season. He said they hoped to raise $200,000 from the double all-star games for the benefit of the Baseball Equipment Fund and the Army and Navy relief funds. In addition, they expected to raise about $200,000 from each major league for Army and Navy relief from games which each club was playing for those funds. He noted that the National League had already raised $161,000 from six games and two more were to be played. Frick explained that the first $100,000 realized from the two all-star games would be turned over to the Baseball Equipment Fund, commonly referred to as the Ball and Bat Fund.  $44,300 had already been spent by the fund, at an operating cost of only $62.67. He noted that a shipment of baseball equipment had already been sent to Iceland and another to Africa and that any surplus (beyond the first $100,000) from the all-star games would go to Army-Navy relief. [12]

The two early July all-star games turned out to be successful fund raisers for Army-Navy relief funds and for the Baseball Equipment fund, as 33,694 attended the annual All-Star game and 62,094 attended the game between the American League all-stars and a service team of all-stars. Together the two games raised some $160,000 for relief work and the Ball and Bat Fund. [13]

As the season progressed, more funds would be accumulated and donated to the Army and Navy relief organizations. On August 25, the Army Emergency Relief and Major League Baseball Equipment Funds increased by $162,890.40 when checks for that amount were presented by Horace Stoneham, president of the Giants, to Colonel John Thomas Taylor, of Washington, director of Army Relief. The money represented the proceeds of the major leagues’ All-Star game at the Polo Grounds in July and the benefit game between the Dodgers and the Giants on August 3. Of the $89,314.58 raised by the All-Star game, $50,000 went into the fund to buy baseball equipment for service men and the remainder to Army Relief. All of the $73,575.82 raised by the Brooklyn-New York contest went to Army Relief.[14]

Major League baseball’s largest single financial contribution of the year was made on October 31 when $362,926.65 was turned over to the United Service Organization. The sum represented the USO’s portion of the receipts from the St. Louis Cardinals-New York Yankees World Series. Accepting the monies were Walter Hoving, chairman of the USO board of directors and Prescott S. Bush, national campaign chairman. By the way, Bush’s son, George H.W. Bush, after his military service during World War II, became captain of the Yale University baseball team and played in the first two College World Series. [15]

For the 1942 season, baseball contributed $1,314,825 to war relief and recreation activities. This included $238,205 from the American League; $267,895 from the National League; $89,314 from the All-Star game; $71,611 from the All-Service game (American League all-star team versus a military team played at Cleveland; $24,000 from the Baseball Equipment Fund; $1,000 from the Baseball Writers’ Association); $362,926 from World Series proceeds; and $259,871 from the National Association of Professional Baseball Leagues (the minors). The Army and Navy Relief Societies together received $567,026, which included funds from benefit games as well as the All-Star contests in New York and Cleveland. [16]

During the remainder of the war, Major League Baseball would survive, with fewer star players and decreased attendance. But it continued to contribute to the war effort, raising monies for service personnel and families and providing a recreational outlet for the public and military personnel.

President Roosevelt would continue to support baseball during the war years, though with the understanding the war effort came first. On March 12, 1945, Clark Griffith made his annual call at the White House with season passes for the President and Mrs. Roosevelt. Griffith, who scheduled as many games as he could under the lights for his Washington Senators, described Roosevelt as “a night baseball man.” Griffith recalled the President telling him: “You got to give me credit for night baseball.” Griffith said he agreed with that, remembering a Presidential statement a year or so ago that games after dark would provide recreation for day shifts in war plants. Roosevelt told Griffith that it was possible he would be able to toss out the first ball when the Senators started their schedule on April 16. The next day, at a news conference, Roosevelt said he was all in favor of baseball so long as it did not require perfectly healthy people who could be doing more useful war work. A reporter quickly asked if the President thought it possible, under that theory, for the leagues to operate in 1945. Roosevelt, asked right back, “Why not?” He added that, while baseball under wartime condition might not be quite so good, he for one even would be willing to go out and watch sandlot teams. A story in The Washington Post the next day noted that baseball people were elated over the President’s remarks. It was the third time, it reported, that Roosevelt had gone to bat for the game during wartime. [17]

President Roosevelt, who would not live to see the 1945 season, died just days before the season began.


Sources:

The 1941 documents are from file 353.85 Baseball 1-1-40—2-28-41; the 1942 documents are from file 353.85 Baseball 3-1-41—2-3-45, Central Decimal Correspondence Files, 1940-1945, NAID 895294, Records of the Adjutant General, 1917-, Record Group 407

Readers may enjoy these two articles in Prologue:

“Beyond the Box Score: Baseball Records in the National Archives” by David A. Pfeiffer and John Vernon and “When FDR said ‘Play Ball’” by Gerald Bazer and Steven Culbertson 


Footnotes:

[1] John Drebinger, “Writers at Frolic Twit Baseball Executives Over Season’s Misadventures,” The New York Times, February 3, 1941, p. 22.

[2] “All-Star Game Proceeds Will Go to Army-Navy Recreation Fund,” The New York Times, June 6, 1941, p. 27; Associated Press, “All-Star Game Netted $53,226,” The New York Times, July 31, 1941, p. 20

[3] Judson Bailey, “Baseball Heads Pause To Ponder War News,” The Washington Post, December 9, 1941, p. 26; John Drebinger, Support Pledged by Major Leagues,” The New York Times, December 9, 1941, p. 49.

[4] “Baseball Heads Give $25,000 for Army Sport,” The Washington Post, December 18, 1941, p. 26.

[5] “1500 Baseball Orders Made for Service Men,” The Washington Post, December 31, 1941, p. 19.

[6] Will Harridge, “Harridge Defines Baseball’s Role,” The New York Times, January 8, 1942, p. 30.

[7] International News Service, “Baseball Men Hail Request of President,” The Washington Post, January 17, 1942, p. 18.

[8] Associated Press, “Landis Calls Meeting on Night Ball,” The Washington Post, January 21, 1942, p. 18.

[9] John Drebinger, “Majors Raise Limit of Home Night Games to 14, Except for 21 at Washington,” The New York Times, February 4, 1942, p. 24.

[10] Louis Effrat, “Plans Set for Four Major League Games to Aid War Effort,” The New York Times, April 16, 1942, p. 27.

[11] Arthur Daily, “Baseball’s War Benefit Program Starts Today in Brooklyn Game, The New York Times, May 8, 1942, p. 28; John Drebinger, “Dodgers Defeat Gaints in Twilight Game Raising $59,859 for Navy Relief,” The New York Times, May 9, 1942, p. 16.

[12] Louis Effrat, “Baseball’s Gift to Service Funds in 1942 Put at $750,000 by Frick,” The New York Times, July 2, 1942, p. 27; John Kieran, “Sports of the Times: Baseball Beyond the Stars,” The New York Times, July 2, 1942, p. 28.

[13] John Drebinger, “American League All-Stars Win on Homers by Boudreau and York in First,” The New York Times, July 7, 1942, p. 23; Associated Press, “Service All-Star Game a Success But Not Likely to Be Repeated, The New York Times, July 9, 1942, p. 25; Judson Bailey, “Future of All-Star Service Game Doubted,” The Washington Post, July 9, 1942, p. 20.

[14] “Baseball Contributes $162,890 for Army Relief and Play,” The New York Times, August 26, 1942, p. 25.

[15] John Drebinger, “$362,926 Series Cut Presented to USO,” The New York Times, November 1, 1942, p. S7.

[16] Associated Press, “Baseball Donated $1,314,825 to War Charities in Year,” The Washington Post, December 18, 1942, p. 14; Associated Press, “Baseball Gave $1,314,825,” The New York Times, December 18, 1942, p. 41.

[17] Associated Press, “President Is for Night Baseball, Griffith of the Senators Reports,” The New York Times, March 13, 1945, p. 26; Associated Press, “Roosevelt Wants Baseball To Go On,” The Washington Post, March 14, 1945, p. 24.

Posted in Archives II, History, Military Records, World War II | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment