Secrets of World War II

Of all Luther Gulick’s memorable contributions to the life of the nation — leading the first training school for professional public servants, streamlining FDR’s chaotic executive branch, masterminding relief for up to half a billion war refugees, spearheading the campaign to fluoridate New York City’s water, besides much else — one of the most historic was his work on the United States Reparations Missions to Germany and Japan under Ambassador Edwin W. Pauley, an oil magnate and Roosevelt’s wartime petroleum manager. Pauley, who died at 78 in 1981, is a worthy subject in his own right. https://www.trumanlibrary.org/oralhist/pauleye.htm

So are the reparations missions. https://www.archives.gov/research/holocaust/finding-aid/civilian/rg-59-5.html

We have our own rich files on Gulick’s involvement in the Allied effort to bolster the postwar order by defanging the industrial might of their former Axis enemies and holding them financially accountable for their crimes. They’re part of Gulick’s World War II archive that is next in line for planned digitization.

Here’s Gulick (left) briefing Pauley (center) and Gen. Mark Clark, much-decorated commander in chief of US forces of occupation in Austria.

In June 1945, a month after the Nazi surrender, the Reparations Mission was in Moscow (Gulick saved his map as a keepsake) where the Soviets were demanding to receive half the roughly $20 billion (worth about $280 billion today) that the Allies discussed levying on Germany. But Pauley was cautious. https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1945Berlinv01/d356

Pauley’s team subsequently met with Stalin’s Foreign Minister Vyacheslav Molotov who pressed Soviet demands for $10 billion from Germany in industrial plants, machine tools, coal, textiles, chemicals and other resources. Soviet forces occupying eastern Germany ended up confiscating untold booty as compensation for razed cities and an estimated 20 million war dead.

On July 25, 1945, according to a Top Secret report in the files, Gulick and another team member, Howard Marshall, reconnoitered the industrial area around jointly-occupied Berlin, finding that “Swarms of workmen, mostly men in Russian Army uniforms are at work moving, stacking and loading this material on flatcars…” The report went on: “When machinery is removed, everything in the plant is taken with it. The process is wholesale, not retail.”

When the Reparations Mission reached the Far East, it documented similar Soviet seizures of former Japanese war plants in Manchuria, depriving war-ravaged China with its battling Communist and Nationalist armies of a badly-needed industrial base.

In a July 13 secret report, Gulick and a prominent banker serving as a U.S. accounting advisor, N. Loyall McLaren, proposed creation of a special single-use currency called “Repunits”, for Reparation Units, backed by German commodities due the Allies as war reparations. There is no sign the idea went anywhere.

Reparations talks continued in Paris in the summer of 1946.  The files include a working draft of an unsigned and undated letter letter that Gulick may have prepared for Pauley to his boss, Secretary of State James F. Byrnes, complaining that efforts to remove “German war potential” by eliminating excess industrial capacity were being thwarted by Allied disunity. In the same vein, another unsent letter Gulick may have drafted for Byrnes from Pauley urges that to prevent German re-militarization, the industrial Ruhr-Rhineland area be designated a “Free Province” and placed under United Nations trusteeship.

Gulick’s handwritten notes offer a fascinating window into their plans for “French Peace for the Ruhr” with France annexing the Saarland.

It became a French Protectorate but after a referendum rejoined the Federal Republic of Germany in 1957.

Gulick may also have drafted a bitter 1946 memo for Pauley depicting Germany as the victor of World War II, based on the failure of the Allies, divided by the advancing Cold War, to agree on how to curb their former adversary’s military and industrial potential.

One of the most striking documents in the file is a 1946 memorandum to Pauley from a member of the Reparations Mission with Jewish roots in Germany, Ernest L. Klein, offering a third approach to helping Jews who survived the German genocide, beyond fostering increased Jewish immigration into Palestine and easing quotes for immigration into the U.S. Klein noted that Jewish immigration into Palestine “is savagely opposed by the Moslem world in the Middle-East.” Similarly, he said, there was opposition to letting more Jews into the U.S.

Instead, he told Pauley, “a bright opportunity presents itself for you to propose a third and novel solution to the Jewish problem”– creating Jews as a class of belligerents “entitled on the basis of their contribution of six million dead” to reparations, just like Filipinos and other war victims. To anyone who would argue that they were ineligible as German nationals, Klein pointed to the 1935 Nuremberg Laws depriving Jews of German citizenship.

“The frame work of the plan is simple,” Klein wrote, “the details can be handled later.” Whether Klein’s proposal had any bearing, West Germany and its reunited successor state after 1990 paid restitution to Nazi survivors, mostly Jews, totaling about $90 billion over six decades. In 1951, Klein published a diplomatic memoir, “What of the Night?” The Baruch library turned out to have a copy.

There is one other eye-popping document on saving Jews in the Gulick files — a draft marked “SECRET” from someone Gulick rendered as “Joe Dubois.” Gulick’s handwritten note from Paris dated July 8, 1946 said “not used.”‘

But why not?

The answer, after some research, turns out to involve a grim but thrilling tale of wartime heroism. The writer was Josiah DuBois, a young (non-Jewish) Treasury Department lawyer who as early as January 1943  learned of the Nazi extermination campaign, thanks to a telegram to the State Department that U.S. diplomats long hostile to Jews were covering up. On Dec. 25, 1943, DuBois wrote his boss, Treasury Secretary Henry Morgenthau Jr. (who was Jewish) an 18-page memo called “Report to the Secretary on the Acquiescence of This Government in the Murder of the Jews” detailing how the anti-Semitic State Department was sabotaging courageous efforts to bring the genocide to light and save imperiled Jews. https://ww2db.com/doc.php?q=365

Morgenthau hesitated to deliver the report to President Roosevelt so DuBois condensed it to nine pages in a “Personal Report to the President.” The Government continued to dither (FDR’s role is still hotly debated by historians) but eventually created the War Refugee Board credited with saving many victims of the Nazis, although the American record of inaction is widely regarded as shameful. DuBois, who went on to lead the prosecution of I.G. Farben at Nuremberg (another grim but fascinating tale), was later celebrated for his heroism as a whistleblower.




The secret draft in the Gulick files shows that DuBois’s humanitarian efforts continued after the war, as he sought relief for pitiful Holocaust survivors confined in Displaced Persons camps — in some cases the same camps where they had been imprisoned by the Nazis. We cannot bring the dead to life, DuBois wrote, but we can save the living. “The time for talk has long passed — the time for action is long overdue.”

And so, he said, with the cooperation of some American generals, he was organizing a “caravan” of some 5,000 Jews from an unnamed D.P. camp in Germany to the frontiers of Italy. “There we shall knock at the door,” he wrote. “”We shall knock at the door not as a diplomatic mission, but a mission of mercy, and I am confident that the warm-hearted Italian people, who have already done so much to aid and comfort refugees from persecution and oppression, will greet us with open arms.” Their goal was southern Italy where they would make camp near some port until passage could be arranged to a more permanent refuge, probably Palestine.

The memo doesn’t say what happened — remember that Gulick noted it was “not used” — but the record of Italy’s hospitality to Jewish refugees is clear.


And so is the inspirational legacy of Josiah DuBois.



The Potsdam Ultimatum

Sounds dire.

It was.

The tale is told in a yellowing news release found in our Luther Gulick World War II files, with Gulick’s own underlined headline penned in ink at the top.

In July 1945, less than three months after the Nazis were vanquished and with Japan still fighting suicidally on, the Big Three (Truman, Churchill and Stalin) met in the Berlin suburb of Potsdam to decide the fate of Germany and divided Europe.


Truman confided that the U.S. had successfully tested an atomic bomb to Stalin (who knew about it anyway, thanks to his spies). With the Soviet Union still holding back on entering the war against Japan, the U.S., the U.K., and China on July 26, gave Tokyo an ultimatum: unconditional surrender or “prompt and utter destruction.”


We know the horrific end of that story. Hiroshima was obliterated on Aug. 6, Nagasaki three days later.

Read the historic document here and consider — what if Emperor Hirohito and his “self-willed militaristic advisors” had listened?


The Moses Bomb


Robert Moses and the Promised Land — NYC

Although they were classmates at the Bureau of Municipal Research’s pioneering Training School for Public Service in 1916, Luther Gulick and Robert Moses scarcely saw eye to eye. Moses was too much of a loner and far too ambitious to collaborate with the likes of a master government tactician like Gulick. No wonder Gulick later found time to share his insights with an upstart Moses biographer named Robert Caro.

Going for (Power) Broke(R)

And no wonder that in the throes of World War II, Gulick found time, in the middle of his demanding refugee relief efforts, to aim a barb at his onetime colleague. Considering how much damage Moses did to New York, Gulick suggested to Howard Brubaker, a longtime editor at The New Yorker, just think of the carnage he could inflict on Axis Italy.


Journalists vs Librarians

Tale of 2 polls: What do librarians have that journalists don’t?

America’s journalists, relentlessly attacked by President Trump, are also taking a beating in public opinion. However, their information-gathering cousins, librarians, are riding a cloud of popularity.

Is there something journalists can learn from librarians?

The Knight Foundation and Gallup gave the latest bad news to journalists on Wednesday, weighing in a mammoth poll showing only 33 percent of Americans have a positive view of the news media. Of 18- to 29-year-olds polled, only 22 percent trust the media.

By huge majorities, Americans see major problems with:

  • Owners of news outlets attempting to influence the ways stories are reported.
  • News organizations being too dramatic or too sensational in order to attract more readers or viewers.
  • Too much bias in the reporting of news stories that are supposed to be objective (only 44 percent can think of a news source that they believe reports the news objectively).

Contrast that with a Pew Research poll in August, in which 78 percent of Americans feel that public libraries help them find information that is trustworthy and reliable.Among 18- to 35-year-olds, that trust jumps to 87 percent, with 85 percent of Millennials saying librarians help them learn new things. Overall, 65 percent of U.S. adults say libraries help them grow as people.
The divergence in trust comes as some libraries have begun filling in the gaps left behind by shrinking traditional media, or gingerly taking over primary duties in areas abandoned by news outlets.

What explains the divide? Marilyn Johnson, author of  “This Book Is Overdue: How Librarians and Cybrarians Can Save Us All,” says librarians have a head start. “Their mission is not to exploit us or make money off us, so they’re ahead of the game right out of the gate,” she says.

At a time when journalists are encouraged to engage with the community, librarians have been doing that for years. In addition to their day jobs, Johnson says, librarians help citizens find tax forms, navigate benefits, build resumes and complete job applications. One librarian helped Johnson learn how to incorporate.

Americans have been conditioned since they were kids to trust libraries and librarians, says Laura Saunders, an associate professor in library science at Simmons College.

“Kids who were taken to the library from a young age, who enjoyed story hour and remember getting their own library cards and borrowing their own books, will have positive associations,” Saunders says. At the same time, Americans “are hearing lots of criticism of news and media outlets, which again can color their thinking on those outlets as sources of information.”

Another advantage of librarians: Hosting GED and ESL classes, community circle meet-ups and providing temporary shelter for the homeless. These acts help libraries build trust among marginalized groups. As part of their job, librarians “are taught to help people access and evaluate information, but not to judge people’s questions or motives, but rather to support their intellectual freedom,” Saunders says.

GraphJournalists may be able to learn something that librarians themselves have been struggling with for years: How to quantify their value.

“Everybody loves libraries, that’s not a problem. Whether they value them, it’s another question. We’re perceived as free. You used to pay for news; now you get it online for free. You folks are feeling some of our pain,’’ says Mike Sullivan, who runs the public library in Weare, New Hampshire.

Sullivan knows both libraries and journalists have to do more outreach — and explanation. He has taken the lead in his community in publicizing events and reporting news as editor of a weekly town newspaper he began in March.

On the value question, his library has begun printing the acquisition cost of materials that card-holders check out. That way, citizens see how much they “saved” by using the library for books and DVDs, both for the current item and a total for the year. It’s much like a CVS receipt for savings-to-date; or, seen another way, what some Sunday newspapers have done with the value of the coupons in each edition.

But journalism’s value is much greater than coupons, and broadcasting a community’s distinctiveness is only part of the mission. Libraries cannot bring down a president, or regularly push accountability of government officials who may help fund the institution.

One thing news outlets should do is work more closely with libraries, says Tom Huang, who has done just that in spearheading several partnerships as assistant managing editor for features and community engagement at the Dallas Morning News.

In get-togethers or classes with librarians and patrons, journalists can show the work they do to provide accurate information. They could encourage patrons to follow them to a community meeting. The Morning News has helped train scores of high-schoolers on journalism techniques, Huang says.

Moving closer to librarians might enhance journalism’s standing as well.

In areas not served by traditional news outlets, libraries, already trusted by the community, could become a hub for news collection, Huang says. There would have to be training on one-on-one interviewing techniques or how to be an assigner or “editor” for events or stories done by community members — as well as the understanding that these are beginning steps to journalism, not involved investigative pieces.

“Ultimately, we could train librarians to do some of this stuff,” Huang says. “It’s not like it’s rocket science.”

Know of other library-journalism collaborations? Please email the author at beardwrites@gmail.com with examples.


Welcome to your local library, which also happens to be a newsroom

Its paper closed, one paper bounced back — with a librarian in charge

Where the buffalo roam, an idea to keep local news alive

  • Profile picture for user David Beard

    David Beard

    David Beard is a research fellow at the Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy