Office of the Historian

Lot 60–D 224, Box 59: Stettinius Diary

Extracts From the Personal Diary of the Under Secretary of State (Stettinius)

Ninth Day, Thursday, August 31, 1944.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

5:00 P.M. Meeting with the President.

I called at 5 o’clock on the President at the White House and presented to him the memorandum outlining the day’s developments.

The President seemed very much pleased with the Chinese plan and said he wished to study it carefully over the weekend at Hyde Park.

He inquired why Gromyko did not like the sentence he had added to the joint press release.45 I said I could not tell but apparently the Soviets wished the release to be as brief as possible and probably [Page 759] wished that it say as little as possible. I then presented to the President the proposed wire for him to send to Marshal Stalin on the “X” matter.46 The President seemed very pleased with the message and signed it while I was there. He added one sentence, “This would not prejudice later discussion of the question after the organization has been formed and the Assembly would have full authority to deal with the question at that time”.

I handed the President the memorandum on Brazil, which had been prepared by Pasvolsky and Dunn. The President read this very carefully and I had quite a struggle with him on the matter. At first he was not impressed but finally swung around and said it would be satisfactory for us to go ahead along those lines. (The memorandum recommended that we not press at this time for a permanent seat for Brazil.) I told the President that the Secretary had a great personal interest in this matter and might wish to review it with him further next week. The President said this was very important as some day he might wish to propose a seat for a Moslem country on a permanent basis. Finally he said the Brazilian matter was a card up his sleeve.

I then presented to him the memorandum on France, recommending in effect that a seat be reserved for France which she could take on a permanent basis at the appropriate time. He immediately approved this procedure but stated that he wanted it to be thoroughly understood that any one of the Big Four would have a veto power in the matter, and that France could not take this seat at the Council unless and until the United States approved. I stated that was my understanding of the proposed procedure.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Telephone Conversation with Mr. Hull.

I then went into the old cabinet room to receive a phone call from Mr. Hull, and had a long talk with him. I apologized for not being able to review with him the memorandum on France and Brazil before I went to the White House. I reviewed both with him on the phone and he did not seem to understand thoroughly the memorandum on Brazil. After he has had an opportunity to study the memorandum I must ask him whether or not he is satisfied to leave the matter on that basis.

He seemed very satisfied with the memorandum on France.47

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

  1. For statement by the Heads of the American, British, and Soviet Delegations, and statement by the Under Secretary of State, released to the press on August 29, see Department of State Bulletin, September 3, 1944, p. 233.

    Reviewing for the American Group the two releases before the joint press conference on the morning of August 29, Mr. Stettinius explained that the Soviets did not approve the addition which the President had made which was to point out that the number of non-permanent members of the Council would be greater than the number of permanent seats. (Diary, August 29, p. 2.) This addition was omitted from the press release.

    ↩
  2. For the telegram as sent, see infra.↩
  3. Mr. Stettinius noted in his Diary of September 1, with reference to his meeting with the Secretary: “At noon I called on the Secretary with Mr. Hackworth present. I read aloud to him our memos to the President on Brazil and France, which I had discussed with the White House yesterday. He approved both and commented specifically on the memo on Brazil as follows: ‘That is sound reasoning and it is entirely satisfactory for you to proceed on that formula.’”↩