1. Well-known books that feature both sets of explanations to varying degrees include Divine, Robert A., Roosevelt and World War II (Baltimore, 1969)Google Scholar, Kimball, Warren F., The Juggler: Franklin Roosevelt as Wartime Statesman (Princeton, 1991)Google Scholar, and Dallek, Robert, Franklin D. Roosevelt and American Foreign Policy, 1932–1945 (New York, 1979)Google Scholar. See also the edited volume by Doenecke, Justus D. and Stoler, Mark A., Debating Franklin D. Roosevelt’s Foreign Policies, 1933–1945 (Lanham, Md., 2005)Google Scholar, and a recent article by Frank Costigliola that delves into the personal and emotional context of Roosevelt’s White House: “Broken Circle: The Isolation of Franklin D. Roosevelt in World War II,” Diplomatic History 32, no. 5 (November 2008): 677–718.

2. The most recent articulation of this view is Borgwardt’s, ElizabethA New Deal for the World: America’s Vision for Human Rights (Cambridge, Mass., 2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See esp. 14ff.

3. See, for example, Kennedy, Paul, The Parliament of Man: The Past, Present, and Future of the United Nations (New York, 2006)Google Scholar.

4. “Memorandum for the Record, April 8, 1963,” Herbert Feis Papers, Library of Congress, Box 23, folder 7; John Wesley Jones, “Miscellaneous Observations on ‘Post-War Planning,’” Records of Leo Pasvolsky 1938–45, National Archives, State Department Lot Files, Record Group 59, National Archives, College Park, Md. [hereafter NARA] Box 2, folder 2; Sumner Welles, who headed the effort until early 1943, later wrote that it was a “story of endless bickering … a depressing story at best, and a stale story now.” Welles, , Seven Decisions That Shaped History (New York, 1950), 182Google Scholar.

5. David Bruce diary 9/26/61, State Department Lot Files 64D327, NARA, Box 4, folder 2. The sad tale is told in detail in Welles, Benjamin, Sumner Welles: FDR’s Global Strategist (New York, 1997), 1–3, 341–54Google Scholar. See also Gellman, Irwin F., Secret Affairs: Franklin Roosevelt, Cordell Hull, and Sumner Welles (Baltimore, 1995)Google Scholar. The scandal was not reported in the mainstream press but was widely known in the department and in Washington. According to Assistant Secretary of State Breckinridge Long, “There is a lot of talk about Welles’ departure being on account of difference in opinion about policy. That is not the case. The trouble was purely and simply that Welles was accused of a highly immoral bit of conduct, that Bullitt became advised of it, and spread the story. … Bullitt is a person without honor. … I have known him a long, long time and know him well but I have never had any confidence in him. …The lurid story has been circulating for months.” Breckinridge Long Diary, 29 August 1943, Long Papers, Library of Congress, Box 5, folder 3 (emphasis mine). For Bullitt’s stature in European affairs, see Kaufmann, William, “Two American Ambassadors: Bullitt and Kennedy,” in The Diplomats, 1919–1939, ed. Craig, Gordon and Gilbert, Felix (New York, 1963), 655Google Scholar: “Bullitt was something more than the American ambassador to France. He acted as both a roving emissary … and the informal inspector-general of the Diplomatic Service. He was in contact communication with the President”; cf. Gellman, Secret Affairs, 122–23, and Norman Davis: [Bullitt’s] feelings are so strong on certain subjects as to prejudice and becloud his judgment. I have had several responsible persons tell me that for the past year he has been quietly conveying the impression that he is the spokesman for the President in Europe. … It is a tragedy and a disgrace that American representatives abroad do not pull together as a team for their country.” (Davis to Hull, 3 April 1937, Cordell Hull Papers, Library of Congress, Box 41, folder 98A.)

6. “Memorandum, January 14, 1944,” William C. Bullitt Papers, Sterling Memorial Library, Yale University, Box 73, folder 1828.

7. Murphy, Robert, Diplomat Among Warriors (Garden City, N.Y., 1964), 35–36.Google Scholar

8. John Cudahy to Moore, 30 December 1936, R. Walton Moore Papers, Franklin D. Roosevelt Presidential Library, Hyde Park, N.Y., Box 4, folder 2; see also Brownell, Will and Billings, Richard N., So Close to Greatness: A Biography of William C. Bullitt (New York, 1987), 257ffGoogle Scholar.

9. Bohlen, Charles E., Witness to History, 1929–1969 (New York, 1973), 20ffGoogle Scholar.

10. Bullitt to House, 20 September 1918, Bullitt Papers, Box 40, folder 927.

11. Roosevelt to Henry Morgenthau, quoted in Brownell and Billings, So Close to Greatness, 235. For Bullitt’s role in an alleged “London–Paris–Washington peace axis,” see Moffat, Jay Pierrepont, The Moffat Papers (Cambridge, Mass., 1956), 199Google Scholar.

12. Brownell and Billings, So Close to Greatness, 265.

13. Bullitt to Moore, 30 March 1936, Moore Papers, Box 3, folder 9; Bullitt to A. J. Drexel Biddle Jr., 14 September 1937, Bullitt Papers, Box 9, folder 181; and Bullitt to Hull, “The Foreign Policy of the Soviet Union,” 19 July 1935, Bullitt Papers, Box 40, folder 944.

14. Hickerson to Hull, 10 August 1943, State Department Lot Files M1244 (Matthews-Hickerson Papers), NARA, Box 1, reel 2.

15. Harold Ickes reported Bullitt’s views in February 1940: “Greatly to my surprise, I found that Bullitt does not want to go back to Paris [from Washington]. He would like to have a job here but it would have to be a big one. … One reason that Bill does not want to go back is that he is carrying such a heavy responsibility. He said that the French consult him on everything and do everything that he suggests. He speaks of Daladier in high terms but some of this may be due to the fact that Daladier does accept his advice so readily. … Bill thinks the war is about to break out in an aggravated form. … He doesn’t believe that Germany will invade either Holland or Belgium. … He believes that French pilots are by far the best. The production of planes in both France and England is way under Germany. … This is his explanation of the apparent reluctance of Germany to do much in the air against France and England.” The Secret Diary of Harold L. Ickes, vol. 3, The Lowering Clouds, 1939–1941 (New York, 1955), 132–33. See also Bullitt to Jane Ickes, 16 October 1939, Harold Ickes Papers, Library of Congress, Box 26, folder 16.

16. Bullitt had expressed interest in being named Secretary of State, Secretary of War, or Secretary of the Navy in 1940. Roosevelt appointed him a roving representative instead, then later as an assistant to Navy secretary Frank Knox.

17. Bullitt’s congratulatory note to Welles betrayed his usual sense of superiority but was cordial nonetheless: “I congratulate you on your appointment as Under Secretary of State. I had hoped that the post would go to Judge Moore … but I am sure you know that you will have my fullest and heartiest cooperation. … I trust that you will be able to find time to write to me occasionally not only about the work of this Mission but also about the European situation in general.” (Bullitt to Welles, 28 May 1937, Sumner Welles Papers, Franklin Roosevelt Presidential Library, Box 39, folder 6.) See also letter (5 August 1938, Box 44, folder 20) from Welles thanking Bullitt for hosting Welles’s younger son, Arnold, in Paris. For Bullitt’s earlier career ambitions, see Brownell and Billings, So Close to Greatness, 34, 189.

18. Of course there was more to it than met the eye. Welles’s longtime friend, the columnist Drew Pearson, who knew of which he spoke, noted, “Inevitably a man pays when he marries a rich wife and Sumner, although he has had great advantages, has paid in the end rather heavily.” (Drew Pearson Diaries, 1949–1959, ed. Tyler Abell [New York, 1974], 37.)

19. Psychohistorians, among whom Bullitt numbered himself following his collaboration with Sigmund Freud on a life of Woodrow Wilson, may find it interesting that both men had deep attachments to strong mothers who died prematurely. See Benjamin Welles, Sumner Welles, 8–9, 18, 119; Brownell and Billings, So Close to Greatness, 17–19, 37–38.

20. For the Latin American origins of Welles’s ideas of collective security, see Benjamin Welles, Sumner Welles, 53ff.

21. Bullitt to Roosevelt, December 5, 1941, Bullitt Papers, Box 72, folder 1820; cf. John J. McCloy to Henry Stimson, 18 September 1944, on making the Atlantic Charter the basis of the postwar treatment of Germany (John J. McCloy Papers, Amherst College Special Collections, Box WDC, folder 2); Borgwardt, A New Deal for the World, 40–41.

22. Herbert Feis to Bullitt, 2 July 1937, Herbert Feis Papers, Library of Congress, Box 12, folder 7.

23. Cf. “Memorandum May 28, 1943 [with Churchill, Stimson, Ickes, Welles et al.]” Leo Pasvolsky Papers, Library of Congress, Box 7, folder 3; Halifax to Foreign Office, 10 June 1943, no. 2688, Winston Churchill Papers CHAR 20/112/118–19, Churchill Archives Center, Cambridge University.

24. Bullitt to Moore, 8 January 1937, Bullitt Papers, Box 58, folder 1435.

25. Ibid.; Bullitt to Hull, “The Policy of the United States with Respect to the Soviet Union and Communism,” 20 April 1936, Bullitt Papers, Box 40, folder 944; Bullitt to Loy Henderson, 1 November 1939, Loy Henderson Papers, Library of Congress, Box 6, folder 6.

26. Bullitt to Kirk, 28 September 1939, Bullitt Papers, Box 45, folder 1076.

27. Bullitt to Edward House, 19 October 1917, Bullitt Papers, Box 103, folder 230, and Bullitt to William Phillips, 13 June 1918, Box 103, folder 239.

28. Bullitt to Hull, “The Policy of the United States with Respect to the Soviet Union and Communism.”

29. Moffat, The Moffat Papers, 280–81. For Welles’s anger at the British for considering making territorial concessions to the Soviets in 1941, see Glantz, Mary E., FDR and the Soviet Union: The President’s Battles over Foreign Policy (Lawrence, Kans., 2005), 109–11Google Scholar. Welles’s apologia for Roosevelt on the subject is found in Welles, , Where Are We Heading? (New York, 1946), 102ff.Google Scholar

30. Contrary to popular belief, Pasvolsky was probably not Jewish, nor was Bullitt, even though his mother was of Jewish descent. “Memorandum for the Record Re. Leo Pasvolsky,” 8 April 1963, Herbert Feis Papers, Box 23, folder 7; Bullitt to Julius H. Amberg, 21 May 1934: “my mother, unfortunately, was only 1/180th Jewish. If she had more Jewish blood, I probably should have had more brains.” Bullitt Papers, Box 1, folder 9. For suspicions of Pasvolsky as “dangerously un-American,” see Lt. General Embick quoted in the diary of William Leahy, 29 March 1945, Leahy Papers, Library of Congress, reel 4.

31. Notter, Harley, Postwar Foreign Policy Preparation, 1939–1945 (Washington, D.C., 1949), 19Google Scholar; Myron Taylor to Hull, 13 April 1944, Hull Papers, Box 53, folder 167.

32. Feis, Herbert Feis Papers, Library of Congress. Stettinius said he was “too damn longwinded.” Quoted in Matthews, H. Freeman, Memories of a Passing Era (Washington, D.C., 1973), 273Google Scholar; and Dean Acheson called him “that little rat … [who] possessed poor old Cordell’s mind.” Quoted in Lamberton Harper, John, American Visions of Europe: Franklin D. Roosevelt, George F. Kennan, and Dean C. Acheson (Cambridge, 1996), 256Google Scholar.

33. Pasvolsky to Hull, “Possibilities of Conflict of British and American Official Views on Post-War Economic Policy,” Records of Leo Pasvolsky 1938–45, State Department Lot Files, Box 1, folder 7, NARA.

34. Ibid. See also Pasvolsky, “The United States and the United Nations,” public lecture delivered at Leon Handell Assembly Hall, University of Chicago, 16 July 1946, in Hull Papers, Box 55, folder 181; Pasvolsky to Hull, “Possibilities of Conflict of British and American Official Views on Post-War Economic Policy,” 12 December 1941, in Hull Papers, Box 85, folder 366.

35. Schlesinger, Stephen C., Act of Creation: The Founding of the United Nations (Boulder, 2003), 43ffGoogle Scholar.

36. Ibid., 33; “owlike”: David Lilienthal quoted in Weil, Martin, A Pretty Good Club: The Founding Fathers of the U.S. Foreign Service (New York, 1978), 202, 292Google Scholar; James Bonbright oral history (Arlington, Va., 2000).

37. Ickes, , The Secret Diary of Harold L. Ickes, vol. 2, The Inside Struggle, 1936–1939 (New York, 1954), 351Google Scholar.

38. Memorandum of conversation with Cordell Hull, 29 July 1943, Bullitt Papers, Box 40, folder 946. Bullitt also noted here that Hull had wanted to assign him to the postwar planning committee but thought it best to wait until Welles resigned. Harold F. Gosnell, “Under Secretary of State Welles, September 1939–September 1943, Draft,” Records of the War History Branch, State Department Lot Files 714, Box 1, folder 5; cf. Long paraphrasing Hull: “Welles thinks so fast and moves so rapidly that he gets way out in front and leaves no trace of the positions he has taken or the commitments he has made, and the Department is sometimes left in the dark as to his meaning and actions. … There are several persons in the Department in key positions whose presence is due to Welles and who act as if they were part of his organization as opposed to the regular establishment.” Breckinridge Long Diary, 15 March 1940, Long Papers, Library of Congress, Box 5, folder 3.

39. “Personnel Principally Engaged in Post-War Work as of January 14, 1944,” Leo Pasvolsky Papers, Library of Congress, Box 7, folder 4; Donald Blaisdell oral history, Harry S. Truman Presidential Library, Independence, Mo., 44.

40. Gosnell, “Office of the Secretary of State During Secretary Hull’s Term of Service,” Gosnell, “Under Secretary of State Welles,” Box 1, folder 3; and “Office of European Affairs and Its Predecessors,” Box 4, folder 3.

41. Bendiner, Robert, The Riddle of the State Department (New York, 1942), 185Google Scholar. Despite the left-wing bias of this source, its caricature of Dunn was widespread.

42. See Weil, A Pretty Good Club, 49, 80–84, 141. Pearson was also the estranged son-in-law of legendary newspaper publisher Cissy Patterson, a one-time rumored lover of Bullitt (as was Missy LeHand, Roosevelt’s personal assistant, see note 58 below).

43. The Memoirs of Cordell Hull (New York, 1948), 1:523; cf. Weil, A Pretty Good Club, 81: “Dunn became a surrogate son to his childless boss.” Weil described Dunn consistently as the department’s gray eminence (146ff.).

44. Dunn to Welles and Hull, 5 August 1943, State Department Central Files, RG 59/250/111.20A/648, Box 183, folder 2. For the coordinating work of the committee, see RG 59/250/111/8-1243 and the minutes in Box 162.

45. The two groups were meant to be both “related” and “complementary.” Memorandum by Selden Chapin, 20 January 1943, State Department Central Files, RG 59/250 111/875, Box 161, folder 1. Both committees were abolished with the departmental reorganization in January 1944, with all postwar planning placed under the authority of Dunn as head of the new Office of Special Political Affairs. A smaller Advisory Council on Postwar Foreign Policy was retained with the geographer Isaiah Bowman as chair. Gosnell, “Under Secretary of State Welles,” and also “Conference with Mr. James Dunn and Mr. Pasvolsky,” Box 34, folder 1; Notter, Postwar Foreign Policy Preparation, 211ff.; Berle to Hull and Welles, 11 June 1943, Adolph Berle Papers, Franklin D. Roosevelt Presidential Library, Hyde Park, N.Y., Box 58, folder 4, and Berle to Hull, 27 December 1943, ibid., folder 5; Dunn to Pasvolsky, 22 February 1943, Records of Leo Pasvolsky, Pasvolsky Papers (National Archives), Box 4, folder 3. For Dunn’s earlier liaison role, see “Meeting of the Committee for Political Planning, Sunday December 6 [1942],” Matthews-Hickerson Papers, NARA, Box 2, reel 17.

46. Hickerson to Matthews et al., 6 January 1945. Hickerson would go on to become one of the primary drafters of the North Atlantic Treaty. Dunn’s particular views on the Soviet Union are suggested in correspondence with the Harvard professor S. H. Cross, in Hull Papers, Box 52, folder 159.

47. “Reorientation of American Foreign Policy,” 28 January 1941, Pasvolsky Papers, Library of Congress, Box 7, folder 2. See also “Conversations on International Organization [Pasvolsky and Michael Wright],” Record of Leo Pasvolsky, State Department Lot Files, Box 5, folder 6; and Hamilton Fish Armstrong to Harley Notter, 4 January 1949, Armstrong Papers, Seeley Mudd Library, Princeton University, Box 47, Folder 23; cf. Miscamble, Wilson D., , C.S.C., From Roosevelt to Truman: Potsdam, Hiroshima, and the Cold War (Cambridge, 2007), 263ff.Google Scholar; Santis, Hugh de, The Diplomacy of Silence: The American Foreign Service, the Soviet Union, and the Cold War, 1933–1947 (Chicago, 1983), 173Google Scholar; Mayers, David, George Kennan and the Dilemmas of U.S. Foreign Policy (New York, 1988), 4.Google Scholar

48. “This particular moment is indicated for making a really serious effort to have adopted by the principal free countries of the world a declaration of principles with regard to commercial policies, access to raw materials, and financial relationships on the broad and mutually beneficial basis which you have always advocated. … That in all this atmosphere of military operations, propaganda, territorial claims being made by the forces of conquest, the so-called ‘New Order’ being proclaimed over areas which are to be locked up tightly against other areas, there could not be a more impressively encouraging accomplishment announced than a declaration of the adoption of your broad program over the large area now free. … When one considers that that free area is all of North and South America, Australasia, the British Isles, India, and large parts of Africa, it would seem that the adoption of a program which would apply to such a large area would be extremely impressive. … It would also be a source of great encouragement to those in the conquered and controlled areas who are wondering whether it is worthwhile to hold out.” (Dunn to Hull, 24 July 1941, Hull Papers, Box 49, folder 145.) Cf. Hugh Wilson to John Foster Dulles, 21 September 1945, Dulles Papers, Seeley G. Mudd Library, Princeton University, Box 25 (reel 5). See also Dunn to Hull, 9 April 1943, Hull Papers, Box 85, folder 366.

49. Notter, Postwar Foreign Policy Preparation, 18–19. The original advisory committee’s mandate also included work on coping with a possible German victory (28ff.). This aspect of the committee’s work ceased in early 1941. For the critical role of Davis, the head of the American Red Cross, who managed to remain in the good graces of both Hull and Welles (but not Bullitt), see Welles, Seven Decisions, 20–24; Hull, pp. 224, 1627; Gellman, Secret Affairs or Good Neighbor Diplomacy, 122–23; Divine, Robert A., Second Chance: The Triumph of Internationalism in America During World War II (New York, 1971), 115Google Scholar, and Jebb, Gladwyn, “Thank God for Norman Davis!” in The Memoirs of Lord Gladwyn (London, 1972), 126–27Google Scholar.

50. O’Sullivan, Christopher D., Sumner Welles, Postwar Planning and the Quest for a New World Order, 1937–1943 (New York, n.d.)Google Scholar, chap. 4; Charles Yost to Pasvolsky, 14 April 1942, Records of Leo Pasvolsky, Box 2, folder 5. For a good summary of the Council on Foreign Relations’ contribution, see Smith, Neil, American Empire: Roosevelt’s Geographer and the Prelude to Globalization (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 2003), 325–46Google Scholar, and 385 for Bowman’s prejudice against Pasvolsky. There was also the “Informal Agenda Group,” comprising, inter alia, Dunn, Bowman, Davis, Pasvolsky, and Myron Taylor, which Hull established in the spring of 1943 in order to marginalize Welles. Another especially active, unofficial postwar planner was John Foster Dulles, who oversaw the efforts of the Federal Council of Churches of Christ in America. For its influence, see, for example, Dulles to Walter Van Kirk, 13 October 1942, in J. F. Dulles Papers, Princeton University, Box 282.

51. Subcommittee on International Organization, Minutes 33, 26 March 1943, Welles Papers, Box 189, folder 4. The British had similar ideas; see Jebb, The Memoirs of Lord Gladwyn, 115, 120ff.

52. Welles, Where are We Heading? 23–27. See also note 67 below.

53. Phone transcript of conversation between Pasvolsky and Hull, 10 May 1945, Pasvolsky Papers, Library of Congress, Box 11, folder 7. At the time some also argued that “regional councils” would be less likely to find support among the American people than a single worldwide organization. See, for example, Hamilton Fish Armstrong, “Notes on Regional Councils versus a World Organization,” 21 April 1943, Hull Papers, Box 51, folder 155. See also Gellman, Irwin F., Good Neighbor Diplomacy: United States Polices in Latin America, 1933–1945 (Baltimore, 1979), 213–16Google Scholar.

54. Multiple memoranda of conversation between Pasvolsky and Gromyko are in the Pasvolsky Papers, Library of Congress, .

55. Foreign Relations of the United States (1945) 1: 682-6.; Schlesinger, p. 186; Russell, Ruth B., A History of the United Nations Charter: The Role of the United States, 1940–1945 (Washington, D.C., 1958), 414, 641, 697–98Google Scholar. (This was Pasvolsky’s own history, which remained unfinished at the time of his death, later completed by his assistant, Russell). For Dunn’s role in the Declaration, see Weil, A Pretty Good Club, 197–98; Jebb, The Memoirs of Lord Gladwyn, 127, 129–31, 148–56; de Santis, 123, 130, 133. Cf. Miscamble, From Roosevelt to Truman, 66.

56. Bullitt to House, 19 October 1917, Bullitt Papers, Box 103, folder 230. The Genghis Khan reference is from Bullitt’s The Great Globe Itself, 2.

57. Bullitt to Roosevelt, 31 August 1938, Bullitt Papers, Box 71, folder 1797; and Bullitt to Roosevelt, 23 April 1939, folder 1800.

58. Bullitt’s other pet issue was the creation of a National Security Council–type structure in the White House to oversee foreign policy. The two generally dined alone at Bullitt’s house, but occasionally others, notably Dunn and James Forrestal, joined. See, for example, William D. Leahy Diary, Library of Congress, 12 June 1942, 4 March 1943, 2 March 1946, 18–19 October 1947, reels 3–4. For Bullitt’s relationship with Missy LeHand, see Costigliola, “Broken Circle,” 652ff.

59. Henderson to Bohlen, 6 November 1967, Charles E. Bohlen Papers, Library of Congress, Box 36, folder 8. Richard and Pat Nixon also attended the funeral.

60. Isaiah Berlin to Horace Rumbold, 24 January 1945, Berlin Papers, Bodleian Library, Oxford University, Box 112, folder 15: “[Bohlen’s] general idea, with which I think I agree, is that the Russians have no concrete plans about Western Europe and that anything we present will be seriously considered; with suspicion, indeed, but still taken as the basis for discussion; whereas if we wait for them to speak, or settle everything bit by bit, their suspicions will merely multiple per number of cases for solution, and the aggression will make any set general settlement impossible, if you see what I mean. If this is too obscure, ignore it and ask for his views direct. He is still pretty touchy about Russia, like everyone who has sat there, particularly with Bullitt, but is thoroughly exited about the President’s “Great Design” for a real permanent alliance, thinks the adventures well worth risking since there is no other alternative, and is prepared to be very liberal and bold.” Cf. de Santis, The Diplomacy of Silence, 84–85, and Mayers, George Kennan, 94–97.

61. Given his heritage, there had been some suspicion that Pasvolsky was overly friendly toward the Soviets, a charge that was made worse by the close association of Pasvolsky with two Soviet spies, Alger Hiss and Harry Dexter White. But in Pasvolsky’s case there is no evidence of any treachery.

62. Bullitt to William David Angel, 12 April 1964, Bullitt Papers, Box 1, folder 13; Brownell and Billings, So Close to Greatness, 317ff.

63. “Roosevelt’s Thinking on Postwar Organization” [notes by Herbert Feis], Herbert Feis Papers, Library of Congress, Box 54, folder 2.

64. This is Kaufmann’s view in “Two American Ambassadors,” 679–80.

65. Cf. Widenor, William C., “American Planning for the United Nations: Have We Been Asking the Right Questions?” Diplomatic History 6, no. 3 (July 1982): 245–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

66. Bullitt, The Great Globe Itself, 136.

67. Welles draft, n.d., in Walter Lippmann Papers, Sterling Memorial Library, Yale University, Box 109, folder 2210.

68. Bullitt, The Great Globe Itself, 152–55.

69. Notter, Postwar Foreign Policy Preparation, 122.

70. Welles, Sumner, ed., An Intelligent American’s Guide to the Peace (New York, 1945), 5–8Google Scholar; cf. a highly critical review of Welles’s Time for Decision by Breckinridge Long in Long Papers, Library of Congress, Box 189, folder 12.