Woodrow Wilson – Page 4 – The Intelligent Collector Magazine

Atom Bombs: From Pop Culture Novelty to Unimaginable Threat

first-day-cover-postmarked-july-28-1955 — A First Day Cover postmarked July 28, 1955, and signed by six crew members of the Enola Gay, which dropped the first atomic bomb on Hiroshima, went to auction in April 2005.

By Jim O’Neal

As North Korea continues to relentlessly pursue offensive atomic weapons – perhaps a weaponized missile delivered by a submersible vessel – the world is perplexed over how to respond. U.S. sanctions are ignored, China is permissive, complicit or both, and South Korea and Japan grow more anxious as the United Nations is irrelevant, as usual.

Concurrently, polls indicate that attitudes about the use of atomic bombs against Japan to end World War II are less favorable. But this was not always the case.

At first, most people had approved the use of the bomb on Hiroshima, followed by a second bomb a few days later on Nagasaki. They agreed the bombs hastened the end of the war and saved more American lives than they had taken from the Japanese. Most people shared the view of President Truman and the majority of the defense establishment: The bomb was just an extension of modern weapons technology.

There had even been some giddiness about the Atomic Age. The bar at the National Press Club started serving an “atomic cocktail.” Jewelers sold “atomic earrings” in the shape of a mushroom cloud. General Mills offered an atomic ring and 750,000 children mailed in 15 cents and a cereal box top to “see genuine atoms split to smithereens.”

But the joking masked a growing anxiety that was slowly developing throughout our culture. In the months after it ended the war, the bomb also began to effect an extraordinary philosophical reassessment and generate a gnawing feeling of guilt and fear.

Then, the entire Aug. 31, 1946, issue of The New Yorker magazine was devoted to a 30,000-word article by John Hersey entitled, simply, “Hiroshima.” The writer described the lives of six survivors before, during and after the dropping of the bomb: a young secretary, a tailor’s wife, a German Jesuit missionary, two doctors and a Japanese Methodist minister.

The power of Hersey’s reporting, devoid of any melodrama, brought human content to an unimaginable tragedy and the response was overwhelming. The magazine sold out. A book version became a runaway bestseller (still in print). Albert Einstein bought 1,000 copies and distributed them to friends. An audience of millions tuned in to hear the piece, in its entirety, over the ABC radio network.

After Hersey’s book with its explicit description of the atomic horror (“Their faces wholly burned, their eye sockets were hollow, the fluid from their melted eyes had run down on their cheeks”), it was impossible to ever see the bomb as just another weapon. The only solace was that only America possessed this terrible weapon.

However, it soon became clear that it was only a matter of time before the knowledge would spread and atomic warfare between nations would become possible. People were confronted for the first time of the real possibility of human extinction. They finally grasped the fact that the next war could indeed be what Woodrow Wilson had dreamed the First World War would be – a war to end all wars – although only because it would likely end life itself.

Let’s hope our world leaders develop a consensus about the Korean Peninsula (perhaps reunification) before further escalation. It is time to end this threat, before it has a chance to end us.

Intelligent Collector blogger JIM O’NEAL is an avid collector and history buff. He is President and CEO of Frito-Lay International [retired] and earlier served as Chairman and CEO of PepsiCo Restaurants International [KFC Pizza Hut and Taco Bell].

Great Depression Overshadows Hoover’s Humanitarian Legacy

President Hoover’s 1932 Presidential Christmas Card was sent to close staff members. This card, and another for the First Lady, realized $1,673 at a December 2012 auction.

By Jim O’Neal

Images of the 1929 stock market crash, Hoovervilles (shanty towns built by the homeless), and the soup lines of the Great Depression are all associated with President Herbert Hoover. His administration (1929-33) coincided with all these events, although most of the underlying causes occurred prior to him assuming office.

A remarkably different perspective of his career emerges when one closely examines the years preceding his time in the White House.

In 1900, he and his wife Lou helped defend Tientsin, China, during the Boxer Rebellion, then Herbert started traveling the world displaying his engineering and business prowess. He found silver, lead and zinc in Burma, zinc in Australia, and both copper and oil in Russia. He also accumulated wealth and prestige as his company benefited from rescuing financially troubled mining companies. By 1913, his personal wealth soared to over $4 million.

When World War I broke out, Hoover was in London and shifted his primary focus to alleviating the inevitable suffering he knew would be next. First, he established the American Citizens Relief Committee and helped Americans escape the continent to London. Next, he headed a private charitable group, the Commission for Relief in Belgium. As always, he worked tirelessly, raising funds from the British, French and American governments to import wheat for Belgium millers to convert to flour for bread.

After the United States entered the war, President Wilson brought Hoover to Washington to head up the administration of U.S. food production. Then, he returned to Europe in 1918 to head post-war food relief to the allies. When he decided to include Germany as well, critics complained they should be punished instead. Hoover countered, “The United States is not at war with German infants!”

He did a lot more than stave off starvation. His rebuilding efforts included the wrecked European economies: heavily polluted rivers were cleansed, railroads repaired, and communication systems re-established. As Bolshevism festered in the rubble, the Hoover-led American efforts established capitalism to counter it.

In 1919, President Wilson appointed Hoover vice-chairman of the Second Industrial Conference in Washington. The group’s final report, primarily written by Hoover, called for progressive reforms: greater equity between profits and wages; a minimum wage law; equal pay for men and women; and a 48-hour workweek. Even today, these reforms sound familiar.

Hoover made a strong run for the 1920 Republican presidential nomination, but lost out to Warren G. Harding. He would not get his chance for another eight years … just when all the cracks were beginning to appear and the roof would come cascading down as he took office.

Bad luck, bad timing or both? Either way, Hoover was at the helm when the ship started to list and he carried the stigma of blame for the rest of his life. History can be a cruel master.

Today’s Political Schisms Would Not Surprise George Washington

A painting by Jeremiah Paul Jr. (d. 1820) depicting George Washington taking leave of his family as he assumes command of U.S. forces during the “quasi-war” with France in 1798, realized $47,500 at a May 2015 Heritage auction.

By Jim O’Neal

George Washington was a staunch opponent of political parties due to the corrosive effect he (strongly) believed they would have on all levels of government.

As president, Washington worked hard to maintain a non-partisan political agenda, despite significant differences that existed right in his cabinet.

His 1796 farewell address was replete with advice to the country, and by extension, to future leaders. One prominent warning was to avoid the formation of political factions that would pose a danger to the effectiveness of government (think gridlock in Washington, D.C.). A second peril was entanglements with foreign governments, since they inevitably lead to war. The examples here start with the War of 1812, two World Wars, Korea, Vietnam and end with the Russian threats to NATO, the China Sea and the remarkably complex situation in the Middle East and North Korea.

After Washington’s retirement, John Adams and Alexander Hamilton ignored his sage advice and wasted little time confronting the Democratic-Republicans, headed by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. Adams became the first (and last) Federalist president. He was easily defeated in 1800, after one term, by Jefferson and Aaron Burr. Adams finished a dismal third and the Federalists gradually faded into irrelevance.

The Democratic-Republicans put together a nice run of three Virginia presidents – Jefferson, Madison and James Monroe – however, the party lacked a strong center and split four ways. Next was an alliance between John Quincy Adams and Henry Clay of the National Republican Party, which only won a single election in 1824 that required the House to settle. When Andrew Jackson defeated Clay in 1832, the party was absorbed into the Whigs … a diverse group of anti-Jackson politicos.

Then the Whig Party fell apart in the 1850s over the issue of the expansion of slavery in the new territories. In fact, after the 1854 election, the largest party in the House of Representatives was the Opposition Party, with 100 members, followed by 83 Democrats and 51 American Party members (the Know Nothings).

These parties never seem to last long (thankfully).

Next it was the New Republican Party’s turn (the Party of Lincoln) until another major kerfuffle occurred in 1912 when Teddy Roosevelt and President William Howard Taft managed to divide the Republican Party enough to let Democrat Woodrow Wilson win the White House … until he had a stroke and his wife took over.

A century later, we appear to be in another political schism, with a socialist, Senator Bernie Sanders, on the Democrat Party side and on the other, Donald “The Wall” Trump, who claims to have part of the Republican Party supporting him. It is not clear which part.

Only one thing seems certain. Thanks to President Washington, we were warned!

P.S. As history teaches … this too shall pass.

Germany’s Aggressive U-boat Tactics Pushed America into WWI

Cunard Line produced a tin advertising plaque to promote the RMS Lusitania’s New York-Liverpool route.

By Jim O’Neal

When World War I erupted, one unassailable fact was that the British Royal Navy was far superior to any of the other combatants. Germany recognized this significant British advantage and realized they would have to rely (heavily) on their fleet of U-boat submarines.

Then in February 1915, the German navy adopted a controversial policy of unrestricted warfare on all enemy ships, including merchant vessels. Their objective was to interrupt transatlantic trade, as well as prevent guns and ammunition shipments to the British Isles.

On May 7, 1915, at 2:12 p.m., the RMS Lusitania, en route to Liverpool, England, from New York City, was hit by torpedoes on her starboard. This was followed by an internal blast, suspected to be the boiler room. The ship sank in less than 20 minutes. All 1,200 passengers, including 128 Americans, were either killed or drowned. The German Embassy in Washington, D.C., had published warnings in several New York newspapers reminding prospective passengers of the dangers involved in transatlantic travel. One such notice, in fact, had appeared adjacent to a Cunard Line advertisement for the return trip of the Lusitania.

President Woodrow Wilson sent a strongly worded protest to the German government demanding an apology, but the Germans claimed they were justified since the Lusitania was secretly carrying armaments to the British. Secretary of State William Jennings Bryan resigned because he believed Wilson was leading the country to war. The U.S. had maintained a strict policy of neutrality since Americans were leery of involvement in a foreign war.

However, on Feb. 1, 1917, the Germans resumed their aggressive policy of unrestricted U-boat warfare and two days later, Wilson announced the U.S. was breaking all diplomatic relations with Germany. The American liner Housatonic was sunk by a U-boat just hours later.

Finally, on Feb. 6, 1917, the United States formally entered World War I, “the war to end all wars” … except for all the other ones that would follow.

Edith Bolling Wilson Played the Role of First Woman President Long Before Hillary

This Wilson & Marshall jugate was offered at a June 2015 auction.

By Jim O’Neal

Former President Bill Clinton often reminded voters that if they voted for him, they would get “two for the price of one” – referring, of course, to Hillary. Little mention was made that Al Gore was included in the deal. One assumes that now Hillary has a similar promise tucked away for the appropriate time.

Quite the opposite was true when Woodrow Wilson won the presidency in 1912. His first choice for VP, House Speaker Oscar Underwood of Alabama, turned him down, and the delegates chose Thomas Riley Marshall, much to Wilson’s dismay.

Later, he treated his VP with disdain, not terribly uncommon, except in this instance, Wilson unfairly branded him an unworthy featherweight – “A small caliber man” … “brought along to deliver Indiana’s electoral votes and little more.”

Once in Washington, Marshall spoke his mind early and often, but quickly saw it was a waste of time. After Wilson literally forced him to move his office out of the White House, he settled into the tedium of his daily chores and practiced keeping his wit sharp as a well-paid public speaker.

However, he soon decided his role as President of the Senate was his primary constitutional duty and devoted most of his time there. Marshall sincerely believed the office of VP was an extension of the legislature as opposed to the executive branch. On March 8, 1917, he led an effort to impose a rule on senators to end filibusters if two-thirds of voting senators agreed. This helped eliminate anti-war efforts to block supplies for Europe.

One exception was when Wilson was in Europe after the United States entered World War I. VP Marshall became the first to hold Cabinet meetings in the absence of the president. But this was short-lived.

After President Wilson was partially paralyzed and without any doubt incapacitated by a second stroke in October 1919, Vice President Marshall should have moved forcefully to assume the presidency.

He had the backing of Secretary of State Robert Lansing, Cabinet members and Congressional leaders. Instead, he allowed the First Lady, Wilson’s personal physician and Wilson’s cronies to conceal the president’s condition in an elaborate cover-up involving seclusion, forged signatures and false health reports.

This button and ribbon shows Woodrow Wilson and First Lady Edith Bolling Wilson.

And so the man who, as governor of Indiana, had personally laid the final “Golden Brick” to complete the Indy 500 Speedway in 1909 contented himself with press reports, senatorial oversight and some of the most scathingly delightful commentaries and one-liners ever uttered about the office of the vice president.

Voters literally got “one for the price of two,” but ironically this did not include either President Wilson or VP Marshall, but Edith Bolling Wilson – the First Lady and Wilson’s second wife.

P.S. Marshall’s only real claim to fame is the phrase “What this country needs is a good 5-cent cigar.” That line actually originated in Kim Hubbard’s comic strip Abe Martin of Brown County. Marshal saw it, repeated it on the Senate floor and myth became history (once again).

Presidential Election Has All the Elements for a Third-Party Surprise

This Roosevelt & Johnson campaign flag for the 1912 “Bull Moose” Progressive Party ticket realized more than $5,900 at a May 2010 Heritage auction.

By Jim O’Neal

Former NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg recently indicated he may once again consider a run for the presidency, presumably as a third-party candidate. He had similar aspirations in both 2008 and 2012, but finally concluded it would be futile.

Most politicos presume this is a low possibility, primarily because historically, third-party aspirants have not fared well at the ballot box. Most believe that the current two-party system is tilted against third parties, unless there are unusual situations.

The most prominent example was over 100 years ago when Teddy Roosevelt broke his promise of “no third term” by declaring he had actually meant “no consecutive three terms.” Once he failed to get the Republican nomination, he broke away and ended up finishing second as a Progressive (Bull Moose) candidate in 1912. This ended up dividing Republican support for President Taft and allowed Woodrow Wilson to capture the presidency in an upset.

A similar situation occurred in 1992 when Ross Perot siphoned off 19 percent of the popular vote and Bill Clinton defeated the incumbent President Bush 41 with 43 percent of the popular vote.

Another example is the Libertarian Party, which fielded their first presidential candidate in 1972. After a convention in Salt Lake City, they chose John Hospers (who was chairman of the Philosophy Department at USC) for president and Theodora “Toni” Nathan for vice president.

Out of 77 million votes cast, they received a grand total of 3,674 official votes.

However, there was one “faithless elector,” Roger MacBride from Virginia, who decided that the Libertarians were more deserving than Nixon/Agnew and cast his vote for them (maybe he knew something?). Regardless, the result was that Hospers became the last third-party candidate to win an electoral vote and Toni Nathan became the first, last and only female to ever win one (as a third-party candidate).

For the record, Strom Thurman snagged 39 electoral votes in 1948 and George Wallace ended up with 46 in 1968. Ross Perot received almost 20 million votes in 1992, but ended up with zero electoral votes.

The “Corrupt Duopoly” that journalist Tom Friedman labels the current political elite has become very effective at limiting third-party efforts to break through. This may be a good thing when compared to the multi-party systems in Europe that require odd coalitions to form governing majorities.

This election year has all the elements to provide a surprise for the first time in many years.

State of the Union Speeches Will Continue Evolving

Twenty-three lines in Abraham Lincoln’s own handwriting from his last State of the Union address went to auction in June 2009.

By Jim O’Neal

On Jan. 15, 1975, President Gerald Ford in his State of the Union speech said:

“The State of The Union is not good. Millions of Americans are out of work. Recession and inflation are eroding the money of millions more.”

“Prices are too high and sales too slow.”

“The national debt will rise to over $500 billion.”

“We depend on others for essential energy.”

These were remarkably candid admissions and atypical from most of his predecessors, who took great leeway with the facts to spin a nice story.

George Washington personally delivered the first State of the Union to a joint session of Congress on Jan. 8, 1790.

Then Thomas Jefferson abandoned the “in person” practice because it was too similar to what a monarch might do, something he was trying to avoid (i.e., a speech from the throne).

In 1913, President Woodrow Wilson revived the practice and it has gradually become a major national event. It has also morphed into a presidential wish list rather than a practical, non-political assessment of national conditions … as designed.

Personal attendance by high-profile politicians is a “must,” except for one Cabinet member who is in the line of secession (a designated survivor) in the event of a major catastrophe.

In 1981, Jimmy Carter felt compelled to issue an “exit” State of the Union, but that lame-duck ritual has been discontinued.

However, I suspect presidents will increasingly remind us … one more time … about everything that was accomplished, in case we forgot. It provides an excellent chance to combine a farewell with the start of a memoir … and not leave a legacy assessment in the hands of less gentle hands.

I would.