Help! : a shrill call from the Atlantic Charter in the form of an open letter "To whom it may concern"


A Shrill Call From The

OTLIlllTIC CHARTER

In The Form Of An Open Letter

“TO lUHOfll IT OlflY COnCERO”

WITH ADDENDA

JOHN J. FITZGERALD

Price 25 Cents

For quantity prices see inside back cover



FOREWORD

This open letter was never planned by me. It simply developed
as the logical outcome of the campaign Avhich opened with a simple
letter of protest addressed to an official of the Canadian Broad-
casting Corporation. That letter and this one were dictated by a
zeal foi- the survival of the Atlantic Charter. They are in support of
one of Mr. Chnrchiirs more recent declarations that the Atlantic
Charter is still “our main aim and purpose and base”.

The Polish situation with which this letter deals is merely in-
cidental. Nowhere herein do I seek to be considered as an authority

^

on the Polish boundary issue nor on the matter of the internal
affairs of Poland. The Polish crisis serves only as an example of
how the Atlantic Charter is susceptible to betrayal. (.

My appeal made on behalf of the Atlantic Charter is* for
“Help !’* The Atlantic Charter at this moment is being “smothered”
to death by propaganda.

The rescue brigade exists in that same form as the organiz-
ation that effected the rescue at Dunkirk. There was nothing
“already organifed” but every org^iiz^fipjjt^ within reach leaped
into action. This letter appeals to every ihcTi'viaual, every oi*ganized
body and every news meclium under the Union Jack and the Stars
and Stripes,

The Author.

The contents of this pamphlet are not cop\hIghted. They may
be reproduced in full or in part ad. lib.

The Author.



To Whom It May Concern

It concerns all and sundry to realize that a threat exists whereby we shall
be faced with the dilemma of choosing between Russia and the Atlantic Char-
ter. That in the course adopted to deal with the threat there is a danger that
we might both abandon the Atlantic Charter and lose the co-operation of
Russia.

The purpose of this letter is to
establish how the responsibility for the
ripening of that threat rests, not en-

tirely on the mystifying antics of
Russian officials and newspapers in
connection with Russians dispute with
Poland, but in a definite degree and
with more flagrant guilt, the respon-
sibility may be laid at the door of
elements under the Union Jack and the
Stars and Stripes.

The purpose also is to appeal to
those elements to change their tactics;
to indicate how pressure may be
brought to bear in order to induce
them to do so and, finally, to explore
the possibility of at least one formula
as a contribution which will help avert
the tragedy.

Without Russia there can be no
United Nations and no Atlantic Char-
ter, then, at all costs, outside of vio-
lation of principle or connivance at
open treachery, we must hold Russia.

Without the Atlantic Charter, apart
from saving our skins, there ceases to
be any purpose for the United Nations,
then we must save the Atlantic Charter.

Poland is the test.

Let the United Nations fail to co-
operate in unity with reference to
Poland, then the organization becomes
a myth.

Let the provisions of the Atlantic
Charter be violated in regard to Poland,
then the document becomes a scrap of
paper.

These are clear-cut conclusions con-
cerning which those whom it may con-
cern will surely agree that there need
be no confusion.

RUSSIA

Of the United Nations, Russia is the

center of this theme. Like a physician

bent on removing a blemish I shall, in

this letter, focus attention on an out-

growth in our Russian relations which

mars what ought to be an appealing

and fascinating outline. But it is only

a blemish — it is not a birthmark. It
is capable of responding to treatment.

Russian initiative is held to be respon-

sible for the marring outgrowth, at the

same time there are elements within

the nations under the Union Jack and

the Stars and Stripes who are contri-
buting to its obstinacy. To this acces-
sible contributing cause I propose to

direct the treatment. It consists, prin-

cipally, of doses of Public Opinion.

With that task before me it is in or-
der that I should record to what extent
I recognize all that is great in Russia,

and in her history. Without that recog-
nition there can be no sincere approach
to proposals. Above all I subscribe to
those many, many tributes couched in
terms more precise and more eloquent
than I command which have paid
homage to Russians courage, her cap-
acity for endurance, her all-out support

(inherent in the spirit of each of her

citizens) to the militant defenders of

her soil, her genius for organization,

her intense love of the homeland set-
ting ablaze that fire of patriotism

which wins victories — victories in-
deed for Russia, victories that mean so
very much to all the United Nations,
victories that urge us to seek the sup-

port of her alliance and to offer her the



'‘HELP!”

contribution of our own. It would be
insane and immoral to gloss over the
outrages — they can never be any-
thing but outrages — imposed during
the past quarter century in the name
of the Soviet experiment. But I want
to believe that the destructive pliase
is over, that we can find a basis for
mutual understanding whereby we
may navigate the shoals that lie ahead.

In whatever degree we must con-
demn phases of the Soviet experiment,
we must at the same time confess we
have a very great deal to learn from
the legitimate part of the process
whereby it achieves results. I welcome
with great enthusiasm all the recent
signs that “soci'o-cultural:” forces in
Russia are pushing toward a construc-
tive course. Indeed we do want Russia
as a full-fledged member of the United
Nations whose presence will add to the
lustre of us all.

Possessed of all these natural gen-
erous dispositions, should an issue arise
where bedrock principle is involved
and where we have reason to consider
Russia as the nation assailing that prin-
ciple

;
then, conscious of our own short-

comings and perhaps of our own past
record, with no “holier than thou”
attitude, but as earnest converts and
sincere allies we must be persuasive,
we must be hard boiled and we must
make it clear that we cannot be part-
ners with her in acts of unquestioned
treachery. In face of such acts, in bit-
ter disappointment, steeled to take the
consequences, we must part company;
which God forbid I

^

Nor let any one suggest that this at-
titude is conceived of Nazi propaganda.
Such an attitude may please the Nazis
but its dictation comes from that un-
failing voice, which cannot be silenced,
deep down in the conscience of every
red-blooded citizen.

THE ATLANTIC CHARTER
The Atlantic Charter is involved in

this theme. It is the charter of Demov

cracy in process of finding that in-

tegral expression which Democracy,
has never yet achieved.

Its dynamic inspiration may be
found in the four freedoms : Freedom
of Speech, Freedom from Want, Free-
dom from Fear and Freedom of Wor-
ship. Very wisely it sets forth provi-
sions calculated to bring about a state
of international stability without
which there could be no hope of giving
effect to its Four Freedoms. Two of
those provisions stand out in this dis-
cussion. Like the Four Freedoms, they
indicate inspiration for the sacrifices

which war entails and objectives for
the provisions which Peace demands.
They are

:

1. “To seek no territorial changes that
do not accord with the freely ex-
pressed wishes of the people

concerned.”

2. “To see sovereign rights and self-
government restored to those who
have been forcibly deprived of
them.”

Now, the Atlantic Charter is confined
to “objectives”.

Difficulties lie in the way of their
achievement.

First the United Nations must win
the war.
Then arise the problems of ideol-

ogies, boundaries, minorities, ethno-

logical groups, etc.

NOW ARE WE IN EARNEST
ABOUT THE ATLANTIC CHARTER?

Certainly there is nothing under the
sun about which we should be more in
earnest. The “total war” we are wag-
ing is directed primarily to clearing

the way so that its “objectives” may
be achieved. The “difficulties” in the
way sink into insignificance in face of
those other difficulties that have been
overcome since Dunkirk and Pearl
Harbour.

Surely if we are not in earnest about
the Atlantic Charter, then our whole



“ H E L P I ” 3

procedure is a sham, a mockery and a

ruse.

The peoples of Europe know well
what that Charter stands for in terms
of their future.

The peoples of Europe long for its
realization. But those same harassed
peoples need so badly to be convinced
that we are in earnest, that we are
sincere, that we are determined, that
they can have confidence in the “con-
sequence” behind our formula!

The harassed peoples of Europe are
not being given those reassurances by
the rank and file of the peoples under
the Union Jack and the Stars and
Stripes. These are rather, in gullible
fashion, giving reassurances to those

elements who would wreck the Atlantic
Charter.

Let me make it clear that I am not
here entering into a discussion of “for-
eign policy” as such. I am dealing with
the spontaneous popular response to
all that the Atlantic Charter signifies.

Contrasted with the realm of “ob-
jectives” with which the Atlantic
Charter deals there exist, in certain
definite situations, treaties which make
“actual” the more or less precise de-
finition of how those “objectives” are
to be interpreted. It does not follow
that the present interpretation in those
situations is by any means final yet,
not for one moment can it be reason-
ably presumed that this distracting
hour is the time to review that “actual”
interpretation, set forth on an estab-
lished and Avell defined basis, much less
to disturb it without review.

To violate what is “actual” will cer-
tainly not inspire confidence in the
good faith of our intention to make
“real” what is set forth as the dynamic
“objective” of Democracy.

The plain truth is that to proceed in
that insane fashion would simply make
a mockery of the Atlantic Charter.

BRITISH-RUSSIAN ALLIANCE

Irrevocably bound up in the spirit
and purpose of the Atlantic Charter is
the treaty of Alliance between Great
Britain and Russia signed by author-
ized representatives of both nations on

May 26th, 1942. Indeed the preamble
reaffirms the acceptance of that De-
claration (the Atlantic Charter) by
both parties. Article 5 of that treaty

between Russia and Great Britain de-
clares that:

“they will act in accordance with the
two principles of not seeking terri-
torial aggrandisement for themselves
and of non-interference in the inter-
nal affairs of other states.” Let me
repeat

:

1. No territorial aggrandisement for
themselves.

2. No interference in the internal
affairs of other states.

POLAND

Now Poland is in a definite situation,
on the basis of existing treaties, which
makes “actual” the more or less pre-
cise definition of how the “objectives”
of the Atlantic Charter are to be in-
terpreted.

Great Britain, the United States and
Russia all three are committed.
Whether in the form of treaties or of
notes, or of recognition of treaties, or
of solemn declarations

;
in virtue of

provisions in each and all of these
forms, Poland is entitled to feel secure
in the recognition by the United Nations
of no territorial changes as at August
1939. Much less should Poland expect
to be made the victim by the action of
a member of the United Nations, of ac-
tual forceful acquisition of nearly half
of her territory, so recognized.

Some day the provisions of the At-
lantic Charter may need to be invoked
to establish what territorial changes
in Poland would be in “accord with
the freely expressed wishes of the



4 « H E L P 1 ”

people concerned.” Nothing but the
craven counsels of dread and of fear
and of appeasement in the face of
tlireats and of force could pretend that
the day is at hand to pursue such a
course.

Moreover the alternative submitted
to Poland involves no such reasonable
procedure, it involves the possibility of

unilateral decisions and actions on the
part of Eussia which the United
Nations would be called upon either
to condemn or to accept.

In the matter of territorial claims
upon Poland what is involved is “bed-
rock principle” and the threat of “open
treachery”.

Now I leave what concerns the “ter-
ritory of Poland” and I come to the
question! of “interference in the in-

ternal affairs of Poland.”

That interference is in actual pro-

cess. It is aimed at the complete over-

throw of the Polish Government-in-
exile to be brought about on a basis

dictated by Russia and through a prO'
cedure directed by Russia.

So the threat to Poland involves the
principles” set forth in the

treaty of Alliance between Great Bri-
tain and Russia in which is irrevocably
bound up the spirit and purpose of the
Atlantic Charter.

Should the threat be given effect the

Atlantic Charter becomes a scrap of

paper and, except to save our skins,

there ceases to be any purpose for the
United Nations.

With Russia as the nation assailing
the principles involved - we would be
faced with that situation where, in

honour bound, in bitter disappoint-
ment, steeled to accept the conse-

quences, we would have to make it clear
that the fatal hour had arrived when
we must part company —- once more

;

wliich God forlnd !

DEMOCRACY’S CONCERN

Please fix eyes on that picture while
I now unburden to whom it may con-
cern the central message of this letter

:

The Atlantic Charter is primarily,
by conception and by enunciation, the
treasured formula of the Democracies.
In the midst of dramatic circumstances
it was proclaimed on August 14th, 1941,
by Mr. Churchill and Mr. Roosevelt, as
the charter of our dynamic democracy.
Later Russia simply “adhered to” its
fundamental principles.

Surely then under the Union Jack
and the Stars and Stripes there ought
never to be any suggestion of toler-
ation of the violation of its principles.

The most vigilant of its champions
ought to be the news-media which
mould and reflect Public Opinion.
Those whom it may concern may not
have particularly focussed attention on
what is taking place in this respect.
Deep interest in the prospect of com-
plete victory at arms, in the progress

along the path that leads to the “un-
conditional surrender” of the Nazis,

the straining of every muscle in support
of the men and women of the armed
forces; the impact of so many absorb-
ing considerations has made us listless
about concern for the “soul” within the
purpose for which all these tremendous
preoccupations are being enacted.

Let those whom it may concern be
prepared to realize the extent and the
'consequences of their listlessness as
they pause and, with thoughtful con-
sideration of all that is involved, ex-

amine how, before their very eyes,
hardly with their realization, certainl^^
without any audible protest from them
the Atlantic Charter is being under-
mined not by Russia but by those media
under the Union Jack and the Stars
and Stripes on whom we should be able
to count as its ever unfaltering cham-
pions. Not only undermined; the pro-
posal is to strip it of all its meaning!



» H E L P 1 »» 5

At this point it is important to define
the term “News Media”. In this letter
it includes editorials, news items, com-
ments, newscasts, the voices of cinema
narrators and kindred material pro-
duced by that vast, closely ranked
army (which both moulds and reflects
public opinion) made up of a variety
of categories including the press, the
radio, the cinema news, and greater
and lesser publications.

TWO EXHIBITS

To give those whom it may concern
leisurely opportunity to examine what
is in process I shall here submit two
exhibits : One an editorial, one a news
item. The former with reference to the
principle of “territorial aggrandise-

ment”
;
the latter with reference to the

principle of “interference in internal

affairs”.

To multiply these exhibits those
whom it may concern, be they near at
hand or far away, will find themselves
within reasonable reach of newspaper
files or radio scripts which will reveal
their counterpart again and again.

The editorial appeared in London,
England. The news item in my local
daily published less than 100 miles
from this Northern Ontario town. On
page 27 of the addenda to this letter
is reproduced another editorial which
appeared in Toronto. It brings into play
both the “territorial” and “interfer-
ence” principles. Unfortunately the

mass of exhibits is not wanting.

During November 1943 I read the
following, quoted from an editorial in
the London Times

:

“Russia claims no extension of the
frontiers held by her when Hitler
unleashed his invading hordes in

June, 1941; and after all that she
has endured and achieved in the
last two years, any proposal to cur-
tail them would be clearly resented
as ill-conceived and ill-timed.”

The London Times will hardly pro-
test, even if others may, should I refer
to it as the leading and most eminent
newspaper in Great Britain.

That single editorial, in one medium
of one category of media, of itself, and
especially in the light of what has hap-
pened within the four or five months
since it appeared, constitutes a major
tragedy.

Russia is mentioned but in that edi-
torial it is not Russia that indicates
what “would be clearly resented as
ill-conceived and ill-timed” nor is it
“Red Star” nor “Izvestia”, nor
“Pravda” nor “Wolna Polska”; no it
is Great Britain’s leading and most
eminent news medium which, within
the sacred sanctuary of its editorial
space, declares, in effect, that it would,
“be ill-conceived and ill-timed” to
stand by the principles of the Atlantic
Charter.

Poland is not mentioned. Indeed
Poland is only one of four nations that
could be involved in those few sen-
tences that sound so innocent.

Their very suavity betrays a con-
sciousness of their iniquity.

But consider the ignominy and the
transparent “malice aforethought” in
these words; “When Hitler unleashed
his invading hordes in June 1941.”
Never forget that September 1939 is
the date — yes, earlier than that the
hordes were unleashed! The “fore-
thought” is prompted by a realization
of the date when Russia “adhered to”
the Atlantic Charter. It surely is a
mockery and a resort to stupid cow-
ardice to forestall an objection which
would rule out what is proposed in the
editorial, the objection being based on
Russia's “adherence” to the Atlantic
Charter. The editorial postulates that
whatever territory was grabbed in the
name of the Nazi onslaught prior to
June 1941 does not come within the
compass of the provisions of the At-



6 « HELP 1 ”

lantic Charter, and that the claimant
to such territory is not bound by the
Principles which are the essence of the
Atlantic Charter.

The significance of this incident with
relation to the purpose of this letter
will appear later but now I leave it to
those whom it may concern to pause
and give thoughtful consideration to all
that it involves.

TWO FOLD THREAT

Before submitting exhibit two it will
be well to recall pertinent facts,
though most of them are familiar, to
establish the two-fold threat to Poland,
which involves the principles inherent
in the Atlantic Charter. As I write it
is yet but a threat

;
perhaps before this

letter is published the threat, by happ^^
united decisions, will have been re-
moved. I pray that it will never, never
be fully realized.

With reference to the territory of
Poland the nature and extent of the
threat can be briefly stated

:

During the last week of November,
1943, Mr. Cordell Hull in reporting to

Congress on the Moscow conference
gave the assurance that Soviet Russia,

Great Britain, the United States and
China “have laid the foundation for a
co-operative effort in the post-war

world toward enabling all peace-loving
nations, large and small, to live in
peace and security, to preserve their
liberties and rights of civilized exis-
tence, and to enjoy expanded oppor-
tunities and facilities for economic,
social and spiritual progress.”

That same week Mr. Constantine
Oumansk^", Soviet Ambassador to
Mexico (formerly envoy at Washing-
ton) made a statement which indicated
that Russia intended to keep the bor-

ders it established in Poland when, as

an ally in the Nazi cause, it helped

partition that country in 1939.

Passing over intervening incidents

then came a declaration from Moscow
fixing the Curzon Line as Russia’s idea
of a Polish frontier.

These demands suffice to establish
the threat to the j)rinciple of: “terri-

torial changes that do not accord with
the freely expressed wishes of the

people concerned” as stated in the At-
lantic Charter; and of “no territorial
aggrandisement” as set forth in article
5 of the Treaty of Alliance between
Great Britain and Russia.

Now for a glance at pertinent facts
which establish the threat with refer-

ence to “non-interference in the inter-

nal affairs of Poland”:

Exiled in London is the official Pol-
ish Government, so recognized by all
the United Nations. That recognition
includes Russia because it was with
that Government-in-exile that Russia

completed agreements and to it Rus-
sia directed notice of severance of re-

lations. That Polish Government is in
constant contact with an adminis-
tration within Poland that operates
secretly, and it does approximate an
embodiment of the National will. That
exiled Polish Government is more “re-
presentative” than most of the allied
Governments in London.

It has made momentous decisions,
all favourable to the cause which binds
the United Nations.

It has organized within Poland and,
most spectacularly, outside of Poland,
legions of defenders of the cause of
the United Nations on land, in the air
and at sea.— Divisions of soldiers, or-
ganized by that exiled Polish Govern-
ment, are to-day fighting side by side
with Canadian and U. S. soldiers in
Italy.

The Polish Government- in-exile in
London is identified before the world.
Its composition, its record, its activ-
ities, its internal and external difficul-



“HELP!

”

7

ties are as well known, or are compe-

tent to be as well known, as the com-

position, record, activities, internal

and external difficulties of the Govern-

ment of Great Britain or of any and

all the Governments of the United

Nations in or out of exile.

From what follows we shall see what
the threat is that would constitute “in-

terference” with the Polish Govern-

ment-in-exile and with the internal af-

fairs of Poland

:

The Russian press tells us and in

identical sentences our own correspon-
dents repeat, that there exists in Rus-

sia a “Union of Polish Patriots”. This

“Union” is to be the sponsor for a

“National Council” within Poland to

supplant the Polish Government-in-

exile. There are no signs of any other

sponsors, notably no free agents, with-

in Poland who seek to supplant, on a
basis of patriotism, the Polish Govern-

ment-in-exile. It is not an easy matter

to establish the identity, the com-

position, the record, the activities, the

external and internal difficulties of the
so-called “Union of Polish Patriots”.

But the following reference to its
President and her husband makes clear
at least one feature of Russian inter-

ference. It is quoted from an article by
F. A. Voigt, formerly foreign editor of

the Manchester Guardian

:

“The President 'of the ‘Union of
Polish Patriots’ is a female novelist
named Wanda Wasilewska, who
went over to the Russians in Septem-
ber, 1939. Her husband is a certain
Korneichuk, another promoter of the
anti-Polish campaign, who is Deputy
Commissar for Foreign Affairs. That
is to say, he is a Russian Government
official. Wanda Wasilewska herself
is a member of the Supreme Soviet
and, therefore, of the Russian admin-
istration. Neither of them is a Polish
subject. Both are Russian. She has
been rewarded for her exploits in
verbal warfare (her command of in-
vective is prodigious) with the rank

of colonel in the Red Army — an
honour denied even to the redoubt-

able Ludmilla Pavlichenko, who vis-
ited London recently and is alleged

to have slain over a hundred Germans

with her own hands.”

Since the above was written Alex-

ander Korneichuk has ceded the office

of Russian Vice-Commissar of Foreign

Affairs and is now Foreign Commissar
of the Russian Ukraine. Russian dis-

patches make it clear that he is to co-
operate with the “Union of Polish Pat-
riots” to supplant the Polish Govern-

ment-in-exile. Need one prophesy as to
the sinister mission of those who would
take its place?

The status of the “Union of Polish
Patriots residing in the U.S.S.R.” is

somewhat of a poser. Consider the
Soviet decree of November 1939, re-
affirmed in December 1941 and applied
to the Poles on January 16th, 1943,
with the result that, by Russian de-
cree, all former Poles “residing in the
U.S.S.R.” were turned into Russian
subjects. Still, in all the world, only

Russia insists that some mysterious
group of these residents under Wanda
Wasilewska are “Polish Patriots”.

Incidentally, it is significant that the

Soviets are denouncing the Polish gov-
ernment-in-exile for not instructing the
Polish “underground” to co-operate
with the advancing Soviet armies. This
obviously means that the Polish-Gov-
ernment-in-exile is receiving the com-
plete and wholehearted support of the
Polish population, who look to it as
their legitimate government.

And now there comes to Glorious
Poland, where Hitler could find no
Quislings, the unexampled privilege of
setting up, so the Russian Ministry of
Information advises, a “National Coun-
cil” organized under the superb direc-
tion of two ‘Polish patriots’, Wanda
Wasilewska and her husband who, at
the same time, is Foreign Commissar
of the Russian Ukraine.

“Non-interference” indeed!



8 « HELP I ”

EXHIBIT TWO

At this point I submit exhibit two.
It is an Associated Press dispatch. It
appeared in the Sault Daily Star and,

I suppose, in most of the dailies of

Canada. No doubt its counterpart went
to the United States:

MOSCOW, Feb. 22 (AP)—Wolna Polska,
organ of the Union of Polish Patriots in

Eussia, has endorsed the formation of a

national council inside Poland and describes

it as a “crushing blow” to the “emigre Fas-

cist clique” of the Polish government in

London.

The current issue of Wolna Polska says the
council, which claims complete rights to

represent the Polish nation, was selected by

“the most democratic methods” and is. unit-

ing all groups actively engaged in the tight

against Germany.

Please recall the news items, the
newscasts, the words of commentators
dealing with the activities of “The
Union of Polish Patriots resident in

the U.S.S.R.” or with the antics of

Russian newspapers and Russian of-

ficials with reference to Polish terri-

tory and then please come to a realiz-

ation of how suavely, just as in the
Associated Press dispatch quoted

above, the tenor of nearly all of these

was calculated to leave the impression
that the “Union” was God’s answer to
Poland’s prayer and that Russian
claims to Polish territory were more
or less in line with a just solution of

the Polish boundary problem.

Not the remotest impression could
remain in the mind of the reader or
listener that violation of the principles

of the Atlantic Charter was involved,
nor even the terms of Article 5 of the
Treaty of Alliance between Great Bri-
tain and Russia, nor of the other solemn
treaties, notes, declarations, etc. near-
ly all of which reaffirm over and over
again, the inviolability of Polish Ter-
ritory as at August, 1939, nor that most
of these were entered into with the
very Government-in-exile which it is
now proposed to supplant.

Once again it is not Russia nor
Wolna Polska, nor any Russian medium
that is thus forcing upon us these in-
ferred interpretations of what the news
involves. No, the news item above
quoted was framed by our own corres-
pondent, presumed to possess quali-
fications for a most important post, a
servant, not of Leftists here nor in Rus-
sia, but of that great organization, the
Associated Press. He serves the lead-
ing newspapers the country over. The
responsibility for his being there and
for that item rests with a whole suc-
cession of people whose enlightened
contribution to the cause of the United
Nations we are entitled to expect.
Moreover the news items pass muster
in every press office before they are
permitted to reach the reader. Yet, in
in paper after paper and in newscast
after newscast, that item and many
others like it were published with only
a rare adequate editorial comment
about the principles at stake.

I have never been a reporter much
less aspired to the important assign-
ment of correspondent at Moscow. Yet
I venture to redraft that item in some-
thing like the form that a red-blooded
press representative, possessed of the
spirit of the Atlantic Charter, could be
expected to frame it:
MOSCOW, Feb. 22 (AP)—Wolna Polska,

organ of the 'Union of Polish Patriots in
Eussia’ is working overtime to make it ap-
pear that the efforts of the 'Union’ to under-
mine the Polish Government-in-exile is not
'Soviet-sponsored but rather that they are
in support of a movement originating with-
in PoJand. It has endorsed, so its columns an-
nounce, the formation of a national council
inside Poland and describes it as a 'crush-
ing blow’ to the 'emigre Fascist clique’ of
the Polish government in London.
The current issue of Wolna Polska says

the council, which claims complete right to
represent the Polish nation, was elected by
'the most democratic methods’ and is unit-
ing all groups actively engaged in the fight
against Germany. British and U. S. diplo-
matic circles here are silent about evidence
to support the claims made by Wolna Polska
that the Council has complete right to re-



9“HELP!

”

present the Polish nation and as to how the
election by the most democratic methods
was carried out.”

Perhaps that dispatch would not
have passed Russian censorship even

though it concerns Polish affairs. In
that case let the ravings of Wolna
Polska be confined to its own readers
rather than permit the A. P. corres-
pondent to become an agent to spread
its propaganda.

In other spheres of the war our cor-
respondents well know how to make
enlightened contributions to the cause

of the United Xations. We would be
aghast should we read a dispatch, say
from Berne, something like this:
‘‘BEPXE, Feb. 22 (AP)—German radio

reports heard here describe the safe landing

at a Portugese port of the disabled hospital

ship H.M.G. ‘Mercy’. The report announces
that the crew of a German submarine were
forced to disable the ship because, as the

result of observations ‘made by the most
scientific methods’ they became aware that
although clearly marked as a hospital ship
it carried ‘commandos and contraband likely
to be landed in Xorway’. Hitler is reported
to have personally congratulated the mem-
bers of the crew on the special precautions
taken not to sink the vessel in the event

that some disabled allied war victims might
have been on board.”

Xo correspondent would ever send
such a message, yet, with a little ex-

aggeration, it is, in its sphere, on a

par with the spirit behind the published

A. P. dispatch from i\Ioscow on Feb-
ruary 22nd.

There is something wrong!
At this stage let me be most dispas-

sionate. In the crisis with which this
letter deals the channels through which
Public Opinion is moulded and reflected
are, generally si>eaking. pursuing a
course which will surely replace the
present crisis by one far more intrac-
table and in that course they are
abandoning sacred principles. For those
principles the people loyal to the Union
Jack and to the Stars and Stripes sin-
cerely believp thbs war is being waged.
For the triiunph of those principles

they pour out their blood and their
treasure.

I recognize that all news media do
not pursue this fatal course. The Xew
York Time.s, for instance, endeavours
to keep our thinking straight when its
editorials interpret news involving the
Russian-Polish crisis. All honour to it
and to others who emulate that policy.
(This is my only mention of a medium
under the Stars and Stripes and it is
in a po.sitive role. I am maintaining a
becoming silence in this re.spect but
radio echoes convince me that there too
it will be easy to unearth exhibits.)

All honour, too. to publications like

the ‘'Xineteenth Century and After”
which in its issue of last June published
an article by F. A. Voigt, formerly
foreign editor of the Manchester Guard-
ian, which has rendered a distinct ser-
vice in the cause of a better under-
.standing of the fundamental issues in-
volved in Soviet Russia *s attitude to-
wards Poland and We.stern civiliz-
ation. To Mr. VoigUs article I owe the
inspiration for this letter and upon it
I have relied for manv of my factual
statements. If is reproduced and pub-
P'shed in the United States bv the Xa-
tioual Committee of Americans of
Polish Descent. Incornorated, 105 East
22nd Street. Xew York.

Mhat is wrong?

NOT BY ACCIDENT

I confess I cannot put my finger on
it. But I am convinced of this : A tre-
mendous conspiracy is being enacted.
As a result of wide.spread gullibility
and of “absorbing preoccupations”, to
which I have previously referred, it is
meeting with a great measure of suc-
cess in smothering public conscious-
ness of what is at stake and therebv
curbing the spontaneous expression of
Public Opinion.

IVhat Is h'^pnening, is happening,
21 ot by accident but by design.



10 ‘‘ HELP I »

Very few in the great ai*my of those
carrying out the design are involved
in its conception and in the directing
of its accomplishment. But behind it
all, there is a design.

The symptoms prompt me to olfer
the following diagnosis, always sub-
ject to review by competent special-
ists. I invite those whom it may con-
cern to find a more accurate outline

:

1.

The disbanded Comintern of the
Soviet Internationale bequeathed to
the nations under the Union Jack
and the Stars and Stripes coteries of
fanatic zealots who are not suscep-
tible to conversion. These zealots,
even more than Russia, want Com-
munism everywhere. They decry
Russia’s constructive tendencies, yet

they cling to Russian domination as

the hope for the realization of their
scheme. To that end they encourage
Russia in a policy of discord with

Poland and they have no inclination
to permit the Atlantic Charter to in-

fluence Russia’s ambitions.

It is in the throes of that coterie

that the News Media seem to be
clutched so far as their treatment of

the Russian-Polish situation is con-

cerned. Twenty clever Leftists, mas-
ters of subtlety and of the art of

promoting mass psychology, who
manage to succeed in insinuating
themselves into dominating key posi-
tions would more than suffice — yes
even ten or five ! Then with scores of
properly placed, so-called Liberals,

steeped in varying degrees of, per-

haps ordinarily harmless. Leftist

tendencies thev accomplish their de-

sign. The world-wide set up for the
gathering of news and columnizing
of opinions for all News Media, more
narticularlv about Russia, seems to
be undulv honey-combed with agents
who. wittinsrly or unwittingly, are ac-
complices of the designing coterie.

2. Conscientious personnel in the press,
radio and cinema are absorbed with
the news of great world events, and
exciting local issues. The dispatches,
syndicated articles and columnists’
contributions come to them ready
for presentation. The very clever
procedure outlined in (1) has already
stamped its effect on those contri-
butions. The justly favourable atti-
tude towards Russia makes it easy
for the innocent looking daily doses
to go unchallenged. More difficult to
account for (and it needs the atten-
tion of those responsible) are the
decidedly Leftist editorials or com-
ments, the authoritative voice of the
medium or the expressed conviction
of the commentator, which issue from
time to time. These appear at inter-
vals far enough apart not to arouse
too much attention and their phras-
ing is calculated to “get by” and yet
make some impenetration. There are,
also, certain publishers and com-
mentators who are the obvious con-
federates of the designing coterie.

3. It is most likely that directions from
the British Foreign Office, the Am-
erican State Department and the
Canadian Department of External
Affairs have rightly requested a
great degree of tolerance in this

crisis. This plays into the hands of
the conspirators with the result that

the response has overrun all dictates
of prudence and of fidelity to the
bedrock principles of our people.
(Not for a single instant do I in-

volve any of the Diplomatic Offices.
Official declarations from London
and Washington seem just right. I
do not pretend to be qualified to crit-
icise them. Sometimes I do shudder
at the progressive tendency to make
them less decisive. The Diplomatic
Offices, however, are bound to suc-
cumb to the negative atmosphere
that surrounds Public Opinion. Like-
wise they need the stimulant of its
intelligent positive expression.)



‘'HELP! 11

If the diagnosis in Nos. 1, 2, 3, does

not fit the actual case then, to account

for the abnormal conditions, something

else almost as mischievous must be

wrong. In other words if it is not ‘‘scar-

let fever” it must be “measles”!
Whatever is wrong, in God’s name

let us apply ourselves to the task of
putting it right!

A Call To Action
Let the retinue of splendid, loyal

men, truly devoted to the dynamics
of

Democracy who occupy responsible

key positions in the huge network of

News Media bestir themselves, review

how the theme of this letter has actual

application and set to work at the ur-

gently needed shake-up.

Let the advertisers, who with their

dollars, and the readers, who with

their pennies, finance, not Russian

propaganda, but the destructive antics

of those elements under the Union

Jack and the Stars and Stripes realize

that a situation exists which needs their

scrutiny.

Please keep in mind that while our

task involves elements at home ; Russia

too will respond to Public Opinion

when it is unmistakably manifest, vir-

ile and steadfast. Witness how Public

Opinion, in non-Russian nations, in-

duced Russia to call off its direct all-

out attack on religion in 1932 and again

in 1938.

Public Opinion makes itself felt in

various ways

:

A letter to the editor, a telephone
call to a friend in a key position, a

round-robin, a resolution moved at a

Labour meeting, a Service Club lun-

cheon, a Town Council, the organization
of protest rallies, etc., etc. The distri-

bution of pertinent constructive liter-

ature. Each of these and a combination

of them all is needed. Every move

characterized by the earnest, sincere,

tenacious, fighting spirit which the ex-

igency of the issue demands and wor-

thy of citizens loyal to the Union Jack

or the Stars and Stripes.

To illustrate what I have in mind
there is an addenda to this letter set-
ting forth the correspondence involved
in a single-handed campaign waged in
this cause, not spectacular nor char-
acterized by any great degree of skill
nor erudition but earnest, sincere and
everlastingly bent on being effective.
There was no idea that any such cam-
paign would develop when I wrote the
first letter of comment dated November
29th, 1943.

Similar campaigns, directed as cir-
cumstances dictate, can be waged with
overwhelming support from the rank
and file of every day citizens who, fin-
ally conscious of what is going on, ap-
ply themselves to straight thinking,

straight writing, straight speaking and
straight acting in this crisis. A series
of campaigns waged from every county,
town and city under the Union Jack
and the Stars and Stripes, waged by
individuals, by groups, by organiz-
ations and finally, by all whom it may
concern.— It seems to me, such a series
of campaigns would have consequen-
tial- effect.

Let us rouse ourselves as individuals
and as organizations.

I propose, not a campaign against
Russia, but a campaign against the pos-
sibility of World War III. A campaign
of protest and protest and protest
against those elements, rabid Leftists
and gullible indifferents, who would
becloud the radiant promise of the pro-
visions of the Atlantic Charter; not so
much in the sentences of its formula
but in the true, warm, sincere senti-
ments that have fired the unmeasured
sacrifices of the peoples under the
Union Jack and the Stars and Stripes.

/



12 ‘‘HELP! ’’

Sentiments that make us work and fight
and endure to achieve tranquility and
security for ourselves and for all the
world. Aspirations in whose realization,
provided we reveal them in truth and
in earnestness, no nation under the sun
need hesitate to unite.

Does Russia hesitate now?
Then let the ardour of our devotion

to the Atlantic Charter draAV her, like
a magnet, to that realistic state of
mind which will make her an all-out
sponsor for the promise that it holds
for us, for Russia and for the world.

Let the News Media and every other
medium ring out the praises of Russia.
At the beginning of this letter I give
sincere indication of the possibilities.

Let there be heartfelt words of warm
and true gratitude, let us becomingly
seek her friendship. However when
certain elements at home seek to turn
these generous sentiments into an in-
terpretation that would encourage Rus-
sia to expect us to support her in what
we regard as treachery

;
when with

fawning, mawkish adulation they ex-
pose us to the contempt of Russia, let
us rise as one mighty force and strangle
the efforts from whatever direction
they may come.

A FORMULA
At the outset of this letter in stating

its purpose the last reference was: “To
explore the possibility of at least one

formula as a contribution which will
help avert the tragedy.” As the con-
clusion approaches I am forced to state
that that formula is embodied in all
the arguments, all the conclusions and
all the exhortations that have gone

before.

With these in mind the following is
respectfully submitted

:

Let all the United Nations realize
that in the midst of the “turbulent at-
mosphere of conflict” there can be no
sensible opportunity for permanent
solutions as to boundaries nor as to
determining “the freely expressed
wishes of the people concerned*”

That interference by one of the Un-
ited Nations with the internal affairs
of any other one is intolerable.

That where a situation arises de-
manding immediate action by one of
the United Nations compelled to protest
against the effect upon it of the internal
administration of another of the United
Nations then on the basis of a deflned
procedure, and in the spirit of the At-
lantic Charter and pertinent treaties

;

a disinterested, impartial international

agency embracing only the membership
of the United Nations be set up to at
once adjudicate the issue. The solution
thus arrived at to hold good only till
the Peace Conference and general ad-
justment of world problems.

That all realize that at this crucial
hour unanimous decisions and cohesive
plans concerning the prosecution of the
war constitute the vital need to the
exclusion of all others.

That in the presence of what has been
revealed as such splendid results in
meeting that vital need all must unite
in making sure that no untoward in-
cident nor incidents interfere with the
fullest realization from such marvel-
lous unity of effort, and that, certainly,
no member of the United Nations make
demands on others compromising their
sovereignty and their honour.

A FINAL APPEAL

Now to whom it may concern just
one more plug to urge and press for an
immediate, unmistakably manifest, vir-
ile, steadfast Public Opinion:

It has long since been revealed that
when on March 7th, 1936 Hitler’s
troops marched into the demilitarized
zone of the Rhineland, in flagrant vio-
lation of the Locarno Treaty, those
troops had strict orders to retreat if
the French army opposed them in anV
way. In that crisis the Foreign Office,
the State Department, the Department
of External Affairs failed. The decision
was that France should not march. In-
stead it was decided to appeal to the
League of Nations.



“HELP!

”

13

During March of the previous year
Hitler had wiped out the military pro-
visions of the Versailles Treaty by
proclaiming the formation of a German
conscript army.

Let us in all earnestness and with
search of conscience realize that be-

tween the violation by Hitler in 1935
of the military’ provisions of the Ver-
sailles Treaty and the march of his
troops on the Rhineland in March 1936,
there intervened twelve months which
witnessed the most ignoble collapse of
right thinking, right writing, right

speaking and right acting by the For-
eign Office, the State Department, the
Department of External Affairs

;
by

the media which mould and reflect
Public Opinion; and Anally by Public
Opinion itself.

VThen the state offices of diplomacy
fail, when the news media fail

;
then

Public Opinion must be ever alert and,
of its o^vn momentum, force the issue
as a result of an ever virile, ever stead-
fast and unmistakably manifest stand.

Since that tragic collapse of the role

of Public Opinion in 1935-1936 I know
of no crisis wherein it could more ef-
fectively expiate that collapse than the

one which unfolds itself at this hour.
At this hour let Public Opinion avert
what would be perhaps a worse catas-
trophe than the consequence of its fail-

ure in 1935-1936.

Even now, without for one moment
relaxing its supreme contribution to
th# world struggle. Democracy looks
to the days of Peace and realizes that
the “status quo” of 1939 is gone for-
ever. It realizes past deficiencies and
seeks a system wherein the ideals of
Democracy will find integral expression
by pervading the whole .structure of
the social order including politics,

economics and social institutions.

In 1935-36 the driving accomplish-
ments of Hitler, Mussolini and — it
must be said, of Stalin gripped the im-
agination of the world. Democracy was
held up as decadent I Indeed we were

floundering
;

the soul of Democracy
was groping for its integral expression.

Since then the world has witnessed
Dunkirk, the Battle of Britain, the el-
ectrifying effect of Pearl Harbour, the
miraculous overnight production of
sinews of war for all our needs and the
needs of all our allies, the great part
Democracy has played in the accel-
erated march of the Lmited Nations to
supremacy in the air, on land and over
the seven seas 1 Make no mistake

;

Democracy is in the saddle — its steed
is headed, not to selfish ends, but to
preserve all that it holds sacred and
to bring to the world, and to each of its
peace-loving nations

;
tranquility, se-

curity and freedom!

Democracy does not strut. In the
spirit of Christian love it welcomes co-
operation, it is flexible and seeks to
adjust its procedure to conflicting situ-
ations such as the friendship of Russia
is bound to provide. It has all the tol-
erance that strength and power impose.

Let Democracy carry on, nor let up
for a single moment in its hastening
pace, nor compromise any of its high
ideals; then no power on earth nor in
hell can stay the onward course which
will spread its beneficient rays over the
whole world, not by force nor by im-
position but in response to the appeal
of eager masses whose weakened bodies
and famished souls cry out for deliver-
ance. Let Public Opinion never hesitate
for a moment to proclaim that glorious
actuality. Xor let anything that is
craven creep into that spirit which
urges us in face of flight, to defend
the Right.

My plea is to hold Russia as a worthy
member of the family of the LMited
Nations and, at the same time, to stand
by the Atlantic Charter. Whatever
course is most effective to hold the one.
on the basis of re.spect and goodwill,
is sui'e to be the course that will .stand
by the other. My real dread is that a
course will be pursued calculated to
forfeit both.



14 *^HELP1 ”

I realize here that it is not the docu-
ment christened on the mid-Atlantic
for which I j)lead. It is for the spirit

which that document sought to define,
and which existed long before the At-
lantic Charter.

It is the heritage of Christian prin-

ciples no matter how befogged they
may have become

;
the off-shoot of the

culture which Christianity has reared

over the centuries
;
at the hour of our

challenge it found itself devoted to

love of Freedom and the sanctity of

the fireside; it wavered when Hitler
first flouted its protests.

But the moment Hitler’s hordes
violated one foot of Polish soil its out-

raged sense of Justice and of Bight

was set ablaze.

The sanctity of the soil of Poland was

the touchstone of the challenge that let

loose our righteous indignation out of

which grew our righteous might. Our
aroused interest in the sanctity of the

soil of Poland embraces all that the
Atlantic Charter tries to define.

When the carnage is over should one
foot of that soil in the West, or in the
East, be under the stranger’s heel;
then the crusade launched in response
to the spirit which gave birth to the
Atlantic Charter will not have met
a full measure of success. The spectre
of the failure will lurk with the wel-

coming crowds at the landing quay
and on the street corner. Its white
shroud will be the map of Poland and
its dumb tongue; ‘‘the freely exnressed
wishes of the people concerned”.

To whatever extent you may accept
or dismiss all that has gone before
heed the words I shall now write

;
they

are those of a lady of charm and love-
liness; reflected from her qualities of
heart and mind.

On April 11th, 1943, Her Majesty,
Queen Elizabeth broadcast a message.

Her Majesty announced at the outset

:

“It is because there is something that

deep in my heart I know ought to be
told you.” Prom that message which
brought to blistered spirits the refresh-

ing effect of a soothing balm, I quote

only one sentence uttered just before

the close. It defines the formula and
provides the key to the solution of all
the world’s problems

:

“IT IS THE CREATIVE AND
DYNAMIC POWER OP CHRISTIAN-
ITY WHICH CAN HELP US CARRY
THE MORAL RESPONSIBILITIES
WHICH HISTORY IS PLACING UP-
ON OUR SHOULDERS.”

As a Christian I write this letter as-
piring to Faith, Hope and Charity

;

and above all to Charity; Charity to-
wards Poland and towards Russia, and
with malice toward none. In that spirit
all Christians will concern themselves

to unite in the words which are the
one common heritage which a divided
Christendom accepts undisturbed and
unchanged. The words given to us first
hand by Infinite Wisdom, which I pre-
sume to repeat:

“Our Father, Who art in heaven,
hallowed be Thy name, Thy kingdom
come. Thy will be done on earth as it
is in heaven.”

As a Canadian citizen and a British
Subject I write, conscious that this very

letter testifies to the triumph within
our realm of the First Freedom. That
triumph gives us confidence for the

final triumph of all Pour Freedoms of
the Atlantic Charter and of its pro-

visions;, “to see no territorial changes
that do not accord with the freely ex-

pressed wishes of the people con-

cerned” and “to see sovereign rights and
self-government restored to those who
have been forcibly deprived of them.”



“HELP!

”

15

In that spirit I quit the realm of precious four words which unite us all
controversy and of didactics in union in one purpose and one accord

:

with those under the Stars and Stripes
I stand at attention to the strains of “God Save the Kino-.”
“The Star Spangled Banner” and next,
with my own compatriots, as the least To Whom It May Concern, believe
of His Majesty’s subjects, I repeat the me to be.

Sincerely yours.

John J. Fitzgerald

Blind River, Ontario, Canada,

April 21, 1944.

Feast of St. Anselm, Bishop of Canterbury.



16 ADDENDA

ADDENDA
The following is submitted as the ‘'illustration” referred to on page 11 of

this pamphlet.

The weakness of this “illustration” is that it seems to wind up with nothing

but a group of letters suspended in mid-air. Do not jump at that conclusion. I
knoAv beyond question that there have been results.

In spite of the confusion imposed on the mind of the man in the street by
the conflict which arises between his enthusiasm for Russia's contribution to the
defeat of Hitler and his apprehension at Russia’s contribution (in its relations
with Poland) to the defeat of Our Cause as defined in the Atlantic Charter, I
am still convinced that millions under the Union Jack and Stars and Stripes
are in accord with the general ideas and the conclusions set forth in the previous
pages.

•

In the process of reading what follows please visualize the immediate and
enduring effect that would have ensued provided that, of those millions, there
had been ten, or a hundred, or a thousand, or ten thousand who, either them-
selves or through various organizations, as a logical consequence of that accord
with those general ideas and conclusions, had taken steps similar to those
described below. It is not inferred that all can devote the time for a continuing
campaign -but each argument and each well founded protest dealt with below
called for support in the thousands

;
sometimes from this source, sometimes

from that; as a result Public Opinion would really make itself felt. As stated
in note 2 on page 17, I am prepared to join with all and sundry who feel that
organization is needed.

THE FIRST LETTER OF COMMENT

Neil M. Morrison, Esq.,
Supervisor of Talks & Public Affairs,
Canadian Broadcasting Corporation,
55 York Street,
Toronto, Ontario.

Dear Mr. Morrison:

I was sorry to learn from your letter of
November the 25th, signed by your secretary,
that copies of the speeches given at the

Maple Leaf Gardens in connection with the
big Eussian celebration are not available.

You will recall that in June of this year
we had a discussion by correspondence re-
garding the broadcast of one William

Mandel. Certainly any protests made in con-
nection with what Mr. Mandel had to say
on that occasion ought to sink into insig-

nificance in face of the altogether super-

lative, spurious and unconvincing eulogy ex-

pressed at Maple Leaf Gardens. I am not so
greatly disturbed by the event because the
boundless statements, I think, will reach

their proper level upon sober reflection by
the listeners and the exaggerations will have
the effect of making people realize that there
must be some limit to the degree of super-
lative perfection in connection with every-
thing that Soviet Eussia has anything to do

"The word ‘^spurious” used above is strong.
To substantiate it I simply refer Mr. Brock-
ington and others to the report made by the
Anglican Archbishop of York, Dr. Cyril
Foster Garbitt, following his recent visit to
Eussia.

In his report he did his best, in all charity
‘ and in recognition of our present generous
sentiments, to give Eussia all possible credit
about freedom of worship in Eussia but no-
thing in the Archbishop’s report confirms
Mr. Brockington’s eloquent but exaggerated
remarks. I was anxious to secure a copy of
his speech, it needed checking up on so many
scores.



ADDENDA 17

When the Eeverend Father Ledit challenged
His Excellency, Mr. Gousev, Soviet Envoy to
Canada, on the charge that priests were still
held in Eussian jails he received no reply.

(See “Note 1” below.')

No criticism can, of course, be directed
against you. There is no doubt that it was
an outstanding national event and there was
nothing for the C. B. C. to do but give the
public service in connection with the event.
It seems to me, however, that the C. B. C.
went the limit. I believe it was the very next
night that in connection with “Canadian
Eoundup” the Toronto speaker again ex-
hausted the superlative in his description of
the event. He did not confine himself to des-
cribing the event but gave out a whole lot
of personal opinions which I, for one, do not
accept. Then, there was a re-broadcast of the
speech made by a former news correspondent
whose name I forget but certainly he went
the whole way in telling us that we must im-
itate Soviet Eussia in every respect. Then a
little later in the week the Toronto contri-
bution to “Canadian Eoundup” presented a
young lady medical student describing some
medical reunion which was taking place in
Toronto. It is significant that she too seemed
to want to talk more about the excellence of
Eussia than she did about any other features
of the reunion. The manner in which she in-
sisted upon talking about Eussia did not ap-
peal to me as a natural outcome of an every
day medical student’s observation in con-
nection with the reunion. It seems to me that
what she was saying was inspired either as
the result of membership in some Commun-
istic organization or as the result of naive

listening to some persons who are so con-

nected. JUST HOW DID IT HAPPEN THAT
SHE WAS THE ONE SELECTED?
(See “Note 2“ below.)

Now I do not think that there is a single
informed Canadian who has not a great ad-
miration for the Eussian people at this hour
and, at the same time, who does not recognize
that we in Canada, and that the people of
the world, owe a great debt to the Eussian
people for the sacrifices that they are mak-
ing and for the wonderful feats that they
have performed in contributing to the over-
throw of world enemies. I want Canada and
Canadians to do all that can be done in pay-
ing our share of that debt to Eussia. But,

since that is our real attitude and since we
are sincere in our recognition of all that is

good in connection with Soviet Eussia, why
do we have to be belaboured with all the rot
that went on at the big meeting at the Gar-
dens, and in connection with the other
material that, from time to time, comes to
us over the radio, especially from Toronto
and Vancouver.

So far as our debt to Eussia is concerned
all the allied nations should be ready to re
cognize it and to pay it to the extent that
it can be paid. But, never let it be said that
any one of the allied nations or any nation
subscribing to the Atlantic Charter is ready
to pay Eussia with territory that belongs to
someone else. That is a thought I seldom hear
expressed over C. B. C.

To realize that there are reasons for alarm
in connection with Soviet Eussia one only
has to consider the following quotations from
an editorial which appeared some weeks ago
in the London Times:

Note 1 : The speeches taken as a whole gave
blanket approval to everything that has hap-

pened in Eussia during the past 25 years.

They eulogized by inference the results in
atheistic education, the conception of the

individual man which is at the root of our
conflict with Eussian ideology, insisted that

freedom of religion exists, etc. The theme of

the demonstration was to the effect that to
approve everything Eussia has ever done one

only need know all about it.
I have never considered Mr. Brockington a

Leftist but that very fact suited the Leftists

all the more; when, in his unchecked display

of demonstrative oratory, he pronounced a
panegyric, exaggerated beyond all concept of
normal license in such circumstances, which,

to the thoughtful citizen, was nauseating,
and, to the Leftists, a triumph.

Note 2: To anyone a bit familiar with
Communist technique (now “Tim Buck
Leftists”) it was evident that during that
entire week C.B.C. programs were paying the
Leftists’ piper.

Thousands of loyal and grateful Canadians
had gathered in a huge demonstration organ-
ized under a name that at this time cannot
but beckon all good men and true: The Coun-
cil for Canadian Soviet Friendship.
That wholehearted tribute to Eussia was

spoiled by Leftists in the background (or
perhaps in the foreground) who took advan-
tage of the event to build up their propa-
ganda. To be effective that propaganda must
be repeated and repeated. The week follow-
ing the demonstration in Maple Leaf Gardens
was a Eoman holiday for the Leftists.

(Note 2, continued next page)



18 ADDENDA

(The letter tlien coiitimies with several

paragraphs devoted to the London Times edi-
torial and the Onmansky incident referred
to in previous pages of this pamphlet.)

The letter concludes as follows:

Now surely you will agree that it is in no
spirit of “baiting’’ Eussia nor no fanatical

prejudice against the home of outrages im-
posed in the name of Communism that makes
one stand in dismay in face of what is re-

vealed in the above quotations.

May you look upon it as an expression of
confidence in you that I once again place be-

fore you my conviction that there is subtle,
organized propaganda behind all the hulla-

ballo about Soviet Eussia and that the in-

visible or visible hands directing this propa-

ganda are not thinking of the interesits of

Canada nor of the United Nations and cer-

tainly not of the Atlantic Charter. I think

that some prominent Canadians are being

made the dupes of these propagandists and

not the least some people in C. B. C.

I am still looking forward to that proposed
visit with you. In fact I’ve telephoned you

a couple of times in Toronto but it was al-

ways after hours.

With kind regards,

Yours very truly,

John J. Fitzgerald.

Note 2 (continued):-
Couched in all the subtlety of which the

Leftists are masters, an analysis will demon-

strate how well the propaganda was directed

to the development of that mass psychology

which fits their two-fold purpose:

1. To secure world sanction, by approval or

by connivance, of every act and move by

Eussia.

2. To set up that conflict in the mass mind

with reference to the ideals of Christian

Democracy and Atheistic Communism which

paves the way for their “organized chaos”

out of which they emerge as the saviors

and impose their system.

Those are the two goals of Leftist propa-

ganda today and the objectives which the in

nocent sounding sentences are working to

effect.

In spite of Canadian complacency Leftists

will never completely succeed in Canada, of

that I am sure. I am equally sure that if we
do not wake up we shall find that we have
permitted the stage to be set for havoc, on

a national scale and over a prolonged period,

such as was experienced a few years ago, on

Among others, copy of the above letter was
sent to the Prime Minister with a covering
letter under date of December 2nd, 1943, as
follows:

“Dear Mr. King:
The attached letter to Mr. Neil Morrison,

Supervisor of Talks and Public Affairs, Can-
adian Broadcasting Corporation, Toronto, is
forwarded to you for purposes of record. Al-
though it is addressed to you as Prime Min-
ister I feel that you will find that it more
likely pertains to matters which come under
your direct control in your capacity as Min-
ister of External Affairs.

This copy of the letter to Mr. Morrison is
not sent with the object of securing any
comment from you. Although I would ap-
preciate the satisfaction of having you read
the letter^ yet I realize how busy you are and
would suggest that, if you cannot give the
entire letter consideration, that you, at least,

glance at the few paragraphs which I have
especially marked. Would you particularly
note my conclusion in the last two paragraphs.

In the midst of the current laudable pre-
paration of plans for men and women who
will return from all branches of the services
I hope that Canada, at least, will be prepared
to take all the risks entailed in making sure
that these men and women were not being
mocked when we used the inspiration which

a limited scale and over a short period, in
Winnipeg, Eegina and Vancouver. Let us not
wait for their “Pearl Harbour” inning to
organize and effect their defeat. I am pre-
pared to join with all and sundry in such an
organization and would invite advice from
those interested.

In the meantime Leftists are having a
mystifying success, devastating and tragic, on
a world-wide scale, in keeping dormant the
outcry of public opinion against threatened

and actual violations of the principles for
which Democracy is in the war.

Their numbers are limited but their organ-
ization is perfect, their energy untiring. It
is not their representation in parliament that
matters—they only seek the odd propaganda
speech in that arena—but what really counts
is the number of confederates or “dupes”
whom they can count upon in key positions
to promote their mission and spread their
propaganda. Let the man in the street stop
and realize what is going on, then bestir
himself ever so little; they could at this stage
be swamped iuto complete impotence in the
blink of an eyelash.



ADDENDA 19

rests in the provisions of the Atlantic Charter

to urge them on.

Believe me,

Yours respectfully,”

Under date of December 7th, an acknowl-

edgment was received from Mr. W. II.
Wrong, Under Secretary of State for Exter-

lan Affairs as follows:

Dear Sir:

Your letter of Deceml>er 2nd addressed
to the Prime Minister has been referred to

this Department. I should like to thank

you for forwarding a copy of your letter

of November 29th to Mr. Morrison of the
C. B. C.

Yours sincerely,”

One of those included in the reference
“among others” above, sent me under date
of December 3rd, 1943, a letter of thanks
with comment which really set in motion
the single handed campaign that is unfolded
in the following exchange of correspondence.

That comment was:

“I think you will have to probe much
further back than young Mr. Morrison to
find the real niggers in the woodpile. One
of the biggest is Eichard Stanton Lambert,
chief adviser to the CBC on talks and the
like. He is an arrant Leftist, and is the
new chairman of the ‘Writers’, Broad-
casters’ and Artists’ War Council’, five
of whose seven branches were personally
organized by a member of Tim Buck’s na-
tional executive. I believe that investi-

gation would show that the CBC staff was
honeycombed with Leftists.”

Before I leave this correspondent it will

be well to record information received from
him over two months later under date of
February 7th. I had been sending him odd
copies of some of the letters that follow and
he was evidently prompted to spur me on.
Please note the information that immediately

follows was not in my possession prior to
February 7th, 1944. It was not passed on oy
me at this time to the C, B. C. because I
decided that if energetic action had followed
my representations previous to February 7th,
this information would soon be revealed to
those concerned:

“There is one bit of background that
you ought to know. One of the most aggres-
sive and dangerous men in the Communist

Party of Canada is a young Russian
named Davinsky. Under the name of “Roy
Davis”, he was a leader in the Young Com-
munist League from about 1933 to 1939,
and was the first editor of the Communist
Youth publication, NEW ADVANCE. In
1939-41 he faded out temporarily, but re-

emerged under a new name as ‘Raymond
Arthur Davies’, contributing a flood of ar-

ticles to the TORONTO DAILY STAR and
even to such capitalistic papers as SATUR-
DAY NIGHT. Ordinarily the change of
name would be quite venial and even com-
mendable; but in this instance it was ob-
viously undertaken as camouflage. Aided by

his vogue in these new journalistic circles,
he took the main initiative in August 1942
in organizing in Toronto the united-front

‘Writers’, Broadcasters’ and Artists’ War
Council’, whose secretary he became and
into which he brought such notorious Com-
munists as Ed Yardash and A. A, McLeod.
Next year, he made a trip through Western
Canada^ actually addressing Canadian
Clubs, and organized five new branches of
the ‘War Council’, In 1943, he also xjub-
lished a villainous piece of propaganda, en-

titled THIS IS OUR LAND, in which he
tried to whitewash the Ukrainian-Commun-

ist organization, the Ukrainian Labour-

Farmer Temple Association. In the fall of

1943, friends in Toronto raised enough funds
to send him to Moscow to cover the Moscow
Conference and to stream-line propaganda
for the Canadian public. And now, for the
X>ast month he has been quoted almost daily
on the national news-summary of the CBC
as the authority for vivid little items on

Soviet achievement on the industrial front.
(By the way, he was listed with his i^hoto-
graph, in the CANADIAN TRIBUNE for
August 28, 1943, as a member of Tim Buck’s
new national executive.) The question is,
how does a high ranking Communist have
the inside track with the CBC? Why is his
clever propaganda thrust daily into every
Canadian home? The x>resident of the War
Council, of which Davies-Davinsky is secre-
tary, is E, S. Lambert, chief adviser on
talks to the C.B.C.”

The information contained in the letter of
December 3rd, about the “War Council” and
its president made me feel that something
must be done. Strangely enough I turned to
the Minister of Finance. The reason is re-
vealed in the letter to him under date of
December 15th, 1943, to which was attached
the quotation above recorded (the Dec. 3rd
item, not Feb. 7th)

:



20 ADDENDA

Blind Eiver, Ontario,

December 15th, 1913.

lion. ,T. L. Ilsley, K.C., P.C.

Minister of Finance,

Ottawa, Ontario.

Dear Mr. Ilsley:

Tlie subject matter of this letter does not

pertain directly to your Department. My
reasons for coming to you are:

1. The idea of Eesponsible Government makes
each member of the Cabinet responsible
for all Departments and all members of
the Cabinet responsible for one.

2. I have complete confidence in you.

3. Apart from my capacity as Vice-President
of a Company operating an essential war
industry, my most direct contribution to
the war effort and to the promotion of all
the ideals which the United Nations pro-
fess is in the honour I have had of being
the Local Chairman of every Victory
Loan. That makes me an officer in your
battalion — you are the one to whom I
naturally turn, I hope, with some measure
of title.

At the inception of the Fourth Victory Loan
I forwarded to you under covering letter
dated April 9th, 1943, copy of my letter of
April 3rd, 1943, to Eric D. Scott, organizer
of the Fourth Victory Loan for Sault S'te.
Marie District.

From the contents of your cordial reply
dated May 3rd, 1943, I realized that you
had carefully read my letter sent to Mr.
Scott and I was gratified at your assurance
that my observations would be carefully
considered.

At that time I outlined ‘^serious con-
siderations” under 4 headings. One of these
was Trifling with Communism”. Perhaps a
more appropriate reference in view of recent
developments would be: ‘‘Trifling with
Leftists”.

Now I come to you, Mr, Ilsley, to ask you,
in Gudz's name, to act; in face of the respon-
sibility of your position and the power which
that position directly and indirectly vests in
you, fortified by a very high degree of public
confidence with all classes of citizens, I ap-
peal to you not to rest until something is
done to put a stop to the manner in which
Canadian citizens are being abused as re-
vealed herein.

Attached is copy of my letter to Mr. Neil
Morrison, Supervisor of Talks and Public
Affairs, Canadian Broadcasting Corporation,
Toronto. That letter explains itself.

Attached also on a yellow sheet is extract
from a written comment I have received. I
have no personal knowledge of what is re-
vealed in that comment but I am prepared
to accept the authority of its author.

Mr. Ilsley, let me say I cannot see any ex-
cuse for our Government to permit such a
state of affairs to exist. It impresses me as
culpable betrayal to put the air waves under
the control of men who are out to under-
mine everything for which the men and
women in the services are fighting, and for
which the entire population is straining every
effort in their support.

I feel that is all I need to set before you
in that regard.

Now, in my letter to Mr. Morrison, I in-
clude two quotations: one from an editorial
in the London Times, another, a dispatch
from Washington about the remarks of the
Soviet envoy to Mexico.

Cynics may say that the antics of the
Soviet envoy are just what to expect. But
that such an editorial would appear in the
London Times is tragic. That it passes with
no official protest is sickening — it leaves
a lump in my stomach which simply will not
dissolve. That editorial makes a scrap of
paper of the Atlantic Charter and nobody
seems to give a damn!

I make this latter comment in passing,
perhaps you can do something about that
also.

But in the matter of the C. B. C. I know
you can get quick results if you will put
your heart to it, and I sincerely hope you
will.

Believe me,

Yours faithfully,
John J. Fitzgerald.

The reply under date of December 29th
was as follows:

Dear Mr. Fitzgerald,

I duly received your letter of December
15 with enclosures, regarding the character

of certain broadcasts over the CBC. You
put it up to me very strongly “to act”.

I have read with great interest your letter

and its enclosures, but I must candidly say
that I do not know how I, as Minister of
Finance, or personally, can interfere with

the operations of the CBC. The Minister in
charge is, as you know. Major General La-
Fleche, but I am far from suggesting that
he could do very much about these broad-
casts as the whole question of interference



ADDENDA 21

by the Government with the dissemination
of views over the CBG, is one of great deli-
cacy and difficulty.

I did not hear the broadcast to which you
take exception. Indeed, your letter to Mr.
Morrison seems to dwell much more on the
attitude of the London Times and on the
remarks in Mexico City of the Soviet Am-
bassador to Mexico, than it does on Can-
adian broadcasts.

I presume you have written Major General
LaFleche, and I will be glad to have a word
with him about the matter, although, as I
have said, I do not know what steps it would
be possible or desirable for the Government
or a Minister to take.

Yours very truly,
(Signed) J. L. Ilsley.

I consider this letter entirely satisfactory.

Ministers must be exceedingly careful about

what they put on record. I am satisfied Mr.
Ilsley will do all that his many duties will
permit. He did promptly confer with Major
General LaFleche. Under date of January
5th, 1944, I received the following letter

from the Minister of National War Services:

Dear Sir

:

The Honourable J. L. Ilsley, Minister of
Finance, to whom you wrote on the 15th of
December, 1943, has communicated with me
about the subject matter of your letter. I
have taken note of your remarks ,and wish
to out tbat the policies governing

broadcasts are made by the Board of Gov-
ernors of the Canadian Broadcasting Corpor-
ation and by no other person. This is accord-
ing to a law which was passed by the Can-
adian Parliament.

Should you so desire, I would be very glad
to pass on the contents of any communi-
cation you may indicate to the Board of
Governors but I suggest you can save much
time by dealing direct with them and there-
fore suggest that should you care to pursue

the matter, that you address any further
communications to the Secretary, Board of

Governors, Canadian Broadcasting Corpor-

ation, Ottawa.

Some interest has been aroused in regard
to the manner in which the Canadian Broad-

casting Corporation deals with w^hat it terms

controversial broadcasting. It is a very dif-

ficult problem because of the impossibility

of x^leasing every person. I may say that I
am quite convinced that the members of the
Board of Governors are good, solid, Canadian

citi2}ens whose only thought is to do the

best they possibly can in the Canadian in-
terest. I am equally convinced that if you
care to communicate with them, they will
give most careful consideration to your
point of view.

I could x^ossibly save time by passing on
the contents of your corresx^ondence with Mr.
Ilsley but do no care to do so because I am
not certain that this would be pleasing to
you.

Trusting this will be of some assistance
to you, I am.

Yours faithfully,

(Signed) L. E. LaFleche.

To this I replied:

Blind Eiver, Ontario,

January 11th, 1944.

Major General L. E. LaFleche,
Minister of National War Services,
Ottawa, Ontario.

Dear Sir:

Thank you for your letter of January 5th,
sent to me as a result of communication with
you by the Honourable J. L. Ilsley, Minister
of Finance, regarding the subject matter of
my letter to him of December 15th.

In my letter to Mr. Ilsley I aq^pealed to
him “not to rest” until something is done
to put a stop to x^i'Gvalent abuses in the C.

B. C. The same letter constituted a covering
letter for copies of other communications
which dealt with the “abuses”.

The abominable situation is disclosed in
the following information sent to me by an
erudite, reliable, well-informed Canadian:

a. That Eichard Stanton Lambert, chief ad-
viser to the C. B. C. on talks and the like
is an “arrant Leftist”.

b. The belief that “investigation would
show that the C. B. C. staff is honey-
combed with Leftists”.

c. That Eichard Stanton Lambert is the new
chairman of the “Writers’, Broadcasters’

and Artists’ War Council.”
d. That five of the seven branches of that
War Council were personally organized by
a member of Tim Buck’s national
executive.

I mentioned to Mr. Ilsley that the above

information is not within my personal
knowledge but that I accept the authority

of the one who sent it to me. The Depart-
ment of Justice is in a x^osition to x)i‘oi>^pfJy

establish the facts.



ADDENDA00

1 assure you, Sir, that I fully realize how
hard pressed are all Ministers of the Crown
at this time and 1 would never have troubled
Mr. Ilsley did I not feel that the gravity
of the situation warranted my appeal to him
as a Minister of the Crown “not to rest”
till something effective is done just as I, in
my limited sphere, intend “not to rest” un-
til I have exhausted every possible means to
secure action.

That it is not my policy to impetuously
rush off “a letter to the Minister” is in-
dicated from the fact that my first gesture
in these developments was to send a letter
of protest to Mr. Xeil M. Morrison, Super-
visor of Talks and Public Affairs, C. B. C.
Toronto. Of this I have received no acknow-
ledgment, and I have concluded that Mr.
Morrison has been instructed by some su-
perior, perhaps Mr. Lambert, to ignore the
protest. I had a previous satisfactory (ex-
change of communications with Mr. Mor-
rison which makes me feel that it would
not be his personal policy to thus ignore

my letter.

The succession of broadcasts which in-
spired my letter to Mr. Morrison are done
and past. Their effect would never disturb
me in the least as an isolated outcropping
and the whole object of my letter was to
put Mr. Morrison on guard.

Now I realize how naive I was to write
such a letter in face of information received
as a result of forwarding a copy of that
letter to one whom I felt would be interested.
This information I disclosed to Mr. Ilsley
and I now have repeated to you.
The third paragraph of your letter of

January 5th, refers to the “very difficult
problem” involved in what is termed “con-
troversial broadcasting” and refers to the
impossibility of “pleasing every person”.

The situation with which I am now deal-
ing has no relation to that difficult prob-

lem. If I am not pleased with what a
speaker on a controversial subject has to

say and if my displeasure arouses me
sufficiently I would probably write him but
1 would never blame the C. B. C.

My protest as one of His Majesty’s sub-
jects is against the use of the broadcasting

facilities controlled by His Majesty’s Gov-
ernment in Canada as an instrument to
deliberately undermine the institutions sym-
bolized by the Crown; especially at this hour
when the blood and treasure of the nation is
being poured out in defence of those insti-

tutions.

I admit that the agencies organized to

thus undermine those institutions are very
clever, sometimes very subtle, sometimes ar-

rogant but always on the job. They often
succeed in using prominent, would be loyal,
Canadians as a front but the Government of
Canada should not be so easily duped.

I do not feel that it would be consistent
for me, at this stage, to write to the Board
of Governors of the Canadian Broadcasting
Corporation but I assure you that you may
make any use of this letter or of my let-
ters to Mr. Ilsley which you think might be
effective.

I realize. Sir, that comment one way or
another from a Minister in a situation of
this nature is not always in order and, while

I would appreciate an acknowledgment, I
do not ask you to commit yourself on
the merits of representations, my one desire
is for action.

Believe me,

Yours respectfully.

Then under date of January 12th, 1944,
Major General LaFleche wrote;

Dear Sir

:

I beg to acknowledge receipt of your let-

ter of yesterday’s date and as you have

authorized me to make any use of your let-
ter, I am bringing the contents of your com-
munication to the attention of the Chairman,

Board of Governors, Canadian Broadcasting
Corporation. There is nothing else for me
to do except in such a general way that it
would not have any immediate purpose.

Please accept my thanks for the interest
you have displayed in radio broadcasting.

Yours faithfully.

On January 11th, I had written the follow-
ing .to the Honourable J. L. Ilsley:

Dear Mr. Ilsley:

While thanking you for your letter of

December 29th, 1943, I wish also to advise

you that Major General LaFleche has written

me as a result of your communication with
him.

I attach a copy of my reply to him.
Please be assured, Mr. Ilsley, that no fea-

ture of the earnestness with which I approach
this C.B.C. situation is more sincere than
the confidence I have expressed in you.

It is therefore in no spirit of importuning
that I repeat my appeal to you “not to rest”
until the evil is cured.

Believe me.

Yours respectfully,



ADDENDA 23

The following letter under date of Janu-
ary 31st, 1944, gives the contents of the last

chapter in this episode but not the last in

the whole campaign:

Major General L. E, LaFleche, P.C.,
Minister of National War Services,
Ottawa, Ontario.

Dear Sir:
Under date o-f January 28th, I received a

letter from Mr, Eemi Morin, Chairman,
Board of Governors, Canadian Broadcasting
Corporation, from which I quote as follows:

“The Honourable L. E. LaFleche has
handed me a copy of your letter to him,
dated January 11th, 1944.

The information it contains and your
comments were communicated informally
to my colleagues of the Board and will no
doubt be useful to them.”

To this I have replied as follows:

“This is to thank you for your letter
of January 28th. I appreciate its brevity
from which I deduce that for once we
shall have action rather than words

“I take the term ‘no doubt’ in its lit-
eral sense which means that when there
is no doubt there is a certainty.”

I am hoping for effective results and my
determination “not to rest” is as firm as
ever and my file is still open.

Yours very truly,
John J. Fitzgerald.

What is revealed in the following exchange
of letters is interesting in as much as it ex-
poses the antics of the administrative office

of the National Council for Canadian-Soviet

Friendship in connection with providing me
with a copy of Mr. Brockington’s speech. It
all arose as a result of the acknowledgment
of my letter to Mr. Morrison sent on Novem-
ber 29th, 1943. That acknowledgment finally
arrived under date of January 27th, 1944. It
explains the delay:

CANADIAN BEOADCASTING
COEPOEATION

55 York Street,
Toronto, Ontario,

January 27, 1944
Mr. John J. Fitzgerald,
Blind Eiver, Ontario.

Dear Mr. Fitzgerald:
I was going through a file yesterday and

discovered to my chagrin that a letter you
wrote me well over a month ago had not
been answered. Apparently it came in when

I was away from town and was put away
by mistake before I had a chance to reply
to it on my return.

I hope you will pardon this discourtesy
which I assure you was not intended.

Were you able to secure copies of Mr.
Brockington’s talk? Although we did not
publish it I understand that the Council for

Canadian-Soviet Friendship did.

I appreciate your concern about this ques-

tion and I would like to thank you for your

very stimulating letter, I certainly do not

think we should attempt to whitewash the
U.S'.S.E, in the interests of United Nations

unity. After all, in the long run that would

only defeat its own purpose. However I do
think it is important to try to arrive at

some better mutual understanding, which

is our purpose in presenting programmes of
this kind. Actually we try to secure speakers
with different points of view. For example,

I remember one talk we had by Mr. Philip,
Ottawa Correspondent for the New York
Times, last summer which definitely presented
the Polish side of the border dispute, and
which opposed the Eussian claims. Last week
Mr, Wilson Woodside also dealt with this
problem and also with the Pravda incident
in a way which made some of the strongly
Pro-Eussian advocates (see note 3) very annoyed.
We try not to allow ourselves to become
dupes of any propagandists, although we are
continually being accused of that by all
sides on controversial questions of this kind.

I am sorry I have not been here when you
phoned, but I hope you won’t give up try-
ing whenever you are in town.

Yours faithfully,
(Signed) Neil M. Morrison,

Supervisor of Talks & Public Affairs

Blind Eiver, Ontario,
January 28th, 1944

Neil M. Morrison, Esq.,
Supervisor of Talks k Public Affairs,
Canadian Broadcasting Corporation,
55 York Street,
Toronto, Ontario.

Dear Mr. Morrison:

Thank you for your letter of tlie 27tli
instant and for the information as to where
I might procure a copy of Mr. Brockiiigton ’s
speech. I have not the address of The Coun-
cil for Canadian-Soviet Friendship but will

find it.

Note 3: They are always on the job!



24 ADDENDA

You are certainly fori^ivcii for Avhat ap-
l)eared to be ignoring my letter. I had put
the blame on some superior who might have
so instructed you. This impression comes as
a result of fairly reliable information that

the C.B.C. is honeycombed with Leftists in-
cluding fairly high officers. I know, from our
earlier correspondence, that your policy

would be to at least acknowledge the letter.
With kind regards,

Yours very truly,

John J. Fitzgerald.

CANADIAN BEOADCASTING
CORPORATION

55 Y'ork St.,

Toronto, Ont.,

February 1, 1944.

Mr. John J. Fitzgerald,
Blind River, Ontario.

Dear Mr. Fitzgerald:

In case you have had trouble finding the

address of the Council for Canadian-Soviet

Friendship, may I mention that Mr. Malcolm
Ross is their organizer and that you can

address him in care of the Council at the
Star Building, King Street West, Toronto.

Please continue to write me about our
programmes. We do our best to present a
cross-section of Canadian opinion in our

Talks and Public Affairs Programmes.

Some people write in as you do, saying
that we tend to present a leftist point of
view. Others say that we are too far to the
right and thoroughly unprogressive 1

We make every effort to see that the main
bodies of opinion are represented and try to
do .this in all fairness.

Thanks again for your letter, and with all
good wishes.

Yours faithfully,

(’Signed) Neil M. Morrison,
SuxDervisor of Talks & Public Affairs

Blind River, Ontario,

February 2nd, 1944.

Mr. Malcolm Ross,
Council for Canadian-Soviet Friendshix),

Star Building, King Street West,
Toronto, Ontario.

Dear Sir:

I am informed that your organization very
likely printed the principal speeches that

were delivered on the occasion of the demon-
stration held under your auspices at the
Maple Leaf Gardens during the month of
November last, including the speech made by
Mr. Brockington.

I Avould appreciate receiving 3 sets of the.se

speeches if available and I shall remit
pronix>tly if you would send me an invoice
for any charge in connection with these
cojjies.

I would also apxH'eciate having the address
of Mr. Brockington if it happens to be con-
venient for you to send it to me.
Thanking you for your kind attention,

Yours very truly,
John J. Fitzgerald.

About ten days later I sent a coi>y of the
above to ,Mr. Morrison with a notation that

I had received no reply then followed:

CANADIAN BROADCASTING
CORPORATION

55 York S't.,
Toronto, Ont.

Feb. 16, 1944.

Mr. John J. Fitzgerald,
Blind River, Ontario.

Dear Mr. Fitzgerald:

I am enclosing copy of letter sent to Mr.
Malcolm Ross, Council for Canadian Soviet
Friendship.

I hope Mr. Ross will either send you the
printed address given by Mr. Brockington,
or let you know the intentions of the Coun-
cil in this regard.

With all good wishes.
Yours faithfully,

NEIL M. MORRISON,
iSuxDervisor of Talks & Public Affairs

The enclosed copy:
55 York St.,

Toronto, Ont.,

Feb. 16, 1944

Mr. Malcolm Ross,
Council for Canadian-Soviet Friendship,

Star Building, King Street West,
Toronto, Ontario.

Dear Mr. Ross:
A note from Mr. John J. Fitzgerald of

Blind River, tells me that he has not yet
received the address given by Mr. Brock-
ington at the Maple Leaf Gardens.

I understood that your organization was
going to publish this address and send it to
those peoj)le who wrote to the CBC for it.
Would you kindly write to Mr. Fitzgerald

telling him of your intentions with regard
to this matter.

Yours faithfully,
Neil M. Morrison,

Sux>ervisor of Talks & Public Affairs.



ADDENDA 25

Still nothing happened!

Finally one month later the following
arrived:

NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR CANADIAN-
SOVIET FRIENDSHIP

2 Temperance Street, Toronto

March 15, 1944
Mr. John J. Fitzgerald,
Blind River, Ontario.

Dear Mr. Fitzgerald,

May I apologize for the delay in answering
your letter. In error, it was filed away before
being answered.

The report of the Congress will consist of

the four main si^eeches: Prof. E. Simmons.

Dr. Yilhjalmur Stefansson, Dr. Max Yergan
and Leonard Brockington. The pamphlet will

sell for ten cents. The material is being
mimeographed and should be ready by the

end of the week.

We shall be pleased to know your
requirements.

Sincerely,

(Signed) Helen Longman,

Secretary.

I promptly forwarded a postal money order

for 30 cents and requested 3 copies.

Nothing further happened until March 30th.

Then I received an envelope postmarked at

Toronto March 29th. Inside was a receipt
dated March 20th. The form of receipt was

not such as one would expect from a quasi-

public organization. It was on a stock form
such as may be procured in any stationery
store. The receipt indicated ‘‘3 copies Con-
gress Report’’. No intimation of when I
might expect them.

Nothing further happened till Easter Mon-
day, April 10.

Oil that date I was in Toronto. I decided
to call for my copies!

My first letter to Mr. Ross had been sent
to the Star Building but the reply came on a
printed letterhead indicating 2 Temperance
Street as the address. There I went. The el-
evator attendant duly directed me to the
office of the Council”. The young lady and
young man in attendance had evidently never
heard of Mr. Brockington nor his speech but

when I mentioned the “Congress Report” the

young lady said: “Oh, you want Dr. Ross

in the Star Building.” There I went and duly

received my 3 copies! I want to say, in all
fairness, that I do not believe the “re^Dorts”

were actually in print much sooner than I

received my copies. However the inefficiency
or deliberate discourtesy disclosed in what
happened between the date of my first letter
to Dr. Ross, February 2, and the date I re-
ceived the copies, April 10, is worthy of note.

Moreover I find it disturbing to consider
what might be the significance of having the
letterhead address at 2 Temperance St. and
the administration headquarters in the

“sanctum sanctorum” of the Toronto Daily
Star! (The office is not in the tenants’ section
of the Star Building, but on the beautifully

appointed Executive Floor. The “National
Council” may be reached through the Star
telephone.)

Does this mean that the official basis of
the “Council” for promoting Canadian-Soviet
Friendship is in accord with the pronounce-
ments of the Toronto Daily Star? My inter-
pretation of the Star’s basis is that the way
to promote friendship with Russia is to “se-
cond the motion” every time Russia makes a
proposal but never to expect Russia to second

any proposal from Canada particularly if it
pertains to making effective the provisions
of the Atlantic Charter.

On the back of the 2 Temperance Street
letterhead is a long list of “patrons” x>rob-
ably 300 names including Lieutenant Gover-
nors, Prime Ministers and Chief Justices. I
respectfully suggest that these “x>atrons”

should not rest satisfied with absentee
control.

I cede to no one iu a heartfelt desire for

Canadian-Soviet friendship. I would seek it*
on the basis of self-resx>ect and goodwill
wherein the citizens of one sovereign state
seek friendshij) with the citizens of another

sovereign state. I doubt that the National
Council of Canadian Soviet Friendshixi is
jiroceeding on that basis nor on any basis
that its worthy name imxilies.

* * *
My interest being thus focussed, I was

prompted to write to the Globe and Mail on
January 14th, 1944. This develojied into a
side campaign of its own:



26 ADDENDA

THE TWO GLOBE AND MAIL EDITOKIALS' FROM THE ISSUE OF JANUARY
12th, H)44, AND THE UNPUBLISHED LETTER OF COMMENT:

IT SEEMS SO LONG AGO

(Globe and Mail, Jan. 12, 1944)

It seems centuries ago. So much lias hap-
pened in tliat time, so close did the world
come to losing its freedom, it is hardly
credible that it is only three and a half years
since a little island first stood alone in the

face of onrushing hordes that were so sure
of world domination.

Mr. C. R. Stettinius’ book ‘‘Lease-Lend,
Weapon for Victory” recalls American aid to
Britain after the fall of France. It was after
the miracle of Dunkirk that the President of

the United .States had sent across the At-

lantic half a million rifles, 900 75-mm. field

guns, 80,000 field guns, and 130,000,000
rounds of ammunition for the rifles and other

equipment.

Looking into a future now assured of vic-
tory, it is well to recall those days of gloom,

of frustration, of retreats, of Nazi successes.

In the days of the ‘'phony war” it was going

to be very easy. Just sit behind the Maginot

Line, just blockade the Germans. They had

no oil. They had no generals. They had no-

thing but a madman as leader. Victory was
easy.

It was on April 9, 1940, that Germany in-

vaded Norway and Denmark. The British
people, the British House of Commons, so

subject to forces of public opinion, debated

Norway. On May 8 Mr. Chamberlain got a
majority of 81 after a bitter division. Then

on May 10 it came. Germany invaded Luxem-
burg, Belgium and the Netherlands.

“At last”, sighed the waiting world, “It

has come. Now we can meet it face to face.
The waiting is over.”

But, like the voice of doom, each new day
boomed down on free men. Luxemburg gone.
Holland gone. Belgium fallen. France totter-

ing. Then to a world taught the greatness of

Gamelin and his French armies, the impos-

sible happened: France fell. Petain took

over.

It was on June 3 that Dunkirk’s evacu-
ation was over. The Germans took possession
but not before the British Army, without
equipment, its transport left on the beaches,

had reached the Isles.

Alone was Britain.

“We’re in the finals anyway,” said the lit-
tle Cockney.

Russia remained aloof. The United States,
with its heart in the right place but unpre-
pared for war, was aghast. For if Britain fell
there was scarce a chance for the rest of us.
The wise men in the capitals of the world
said: Britain’s done. No equipment, no arms,
nothing.

Meanwhile a man with the face of a wilful
child, the heart of a St. George, the words
of a master of his tongue rose. He rallied
his people. He brought to the front all the
fight, the determination that had made his
nation great through the centuries. In Win-
ston Churchill Britain found its leader and
the world its hope. The world trembled,
while old men, very young boys, drilled with

staves, and the armies prepared for an in-
vasion that they would have to repel with
sticks, with little ammunition, with no tanks,
with few planes.

It was in that fall that Goering sent his
mighty air force to bomb Britain into sub-
mission. As the bombs fell, British spirit
rose. The little people of the Isles held on.
Tiny Union Jacks appeared, stuck into rubble
that used to be their homes, their hospitals,

their schools. Still the bombs fell. Still the
people’s determination grew. They would
never surrender.

And those lads of the Royal Air Force, less
than 500 aircrew members, flew their Spit-

fires again into the skies, into the formation

of outnumbering Nazi squadrons. Boys flew

again and again when they should have been
resting. Tired, weary, sleepy-eyed, they

fought on. It was they, those few pilots, who
saved us all. Those pilots and the heart of
Britain that would never buckle.

Alone, alone from June, 1940, until June

22, 1941, when Germany attacked Russia, the
people of Britain braved the skies raining

death. Not death of soldiers alone, but death
for women, for old men, for little children
as they played in the streets.

Now as we face the days when freedom
seems sure of safety it is well to recall that

solid year and those who saved that freedom.

It is only three and a half years since

Prance fell. It does seem like ages.



ADDENDA 27

A FAIR PROPOSAL
(Grlobe and Mail, Jan. 12, 1944:)

There has been an unexpectedly swift
fulfilment of the recent prediction in these
columns that the prospects of a solution of
the problem of the Russo-Polish .frontier
which would leave Poland without serious
grievance were by no means hopeless. A
broadcast from Moscow by Tass, the official
Russian news agency, which would not speak
without the full authority of Stalin and his
government, announces that Russia has of-
fered Poland as her eastern frontier the
“Curzon Line,” so called because it was re-
commended in 1919 as the most equitable
boundary by an impartial commission of ex-
perts nominated by the Marquis Curzon,
then Britain’s Foreign Secretary. By this
offer Russia renounces' her claim to part of
the Polish territory which she occupied in
1939 as the result of her unfortunate pact
with Germany. The “Curzon Line” is what
is known as an ethnographic or racial fron-
tier, because under it areas in which the
Poles are in a clear majority would be as-
signed to Poland, and Russia would retain
territory in which White Russians, Ukrain-
ians or other races constituted the majority
of the population. The total number of Poles
left outside Poland would not be large, and
the most important non-Polish minority in
the debatable territory, the Ukrainains of

Eastern Galicia, would achieve their desire
to be united with the rest of their race under

the Soviet system.

It is hardly to be expected that the Polish

Government-in-exile will hasten to announce

its enthusiastic acceptance of this offer, as

it has stood out firmly for the restoration of

the pre-war boundaries. But it would be well
advised not 'to adopt a stiff-necked attitude.

For one thing, there is no guarantee that it

commands the allegiance of a majority of
the Polish people. It is in disfavor with the

Russian Government, which prefers to place

its confidence in the more democratic group

of Polish patriots now living in Russia, and
has given official recognition to their organiz-

ation^ Very significantly the Tass broadcast

contrasted the success of this latter group in

organizing a Polish army corps, which is now
fighting against the Germans with the Rus-
sian armies, and the proved incapacity of the

Polish emigre Government in London to es-
tablish friendly relations with the Soviet

Union and organize an active struggle against
the German invaders in Poland itself.

This emigre Government will realize sev-
eral things. First, it is today completely in

the power of the Russians to keep all the
territory which they occupied in 1939. Se-
condly, it is folly to visualize any possibility
of the United States and the British Com-
monwealth fighting Russia on this issue or
even pressing her strongly. Thirdly, if this
fresh offer is rejected the Russians might
withdraw it or use their power to instal in
Warsaw a Government which was prepared
to accept it. So, if the Polish Government in
London adopts a stiff attitude, it will alienate
the sympathies of the people of the Western
democracies, and might well bring complete
discredit upon itself.

The Russian offer, of which the British and
American Governments probably had full cog-
nizance, has an element of generosity in it,
and seems to be a valuable and hopeful con-
tribution to the building of a better world.
It indicates that Russia is not intent upon
grabbing all the territory that she can lay
her hands on, and is ready to show some
consideration for the interests of other
nations. Moreover, the Tass broadcast reveals
a certain concern for the regeneration of
Poland as a strong State. It suggests that
Poland be given back those portions of East
Prussia which were primordial Polish land
before they were filched by the Germans.
To place any large number of Germans under
Polish rule would leave a dangerous open
sore; but what is sauce for the goose is sauce
for the gander. The Nazis had no scruples
about expelling ruthlessly the Polish popu-
lation from territory which they incorporated
in the Reich, and they have thus established
a precedent for clearing the German popu-
lation out of parts of Eastern Prussia whose
incorporation in Poland would give her a
needed outlet to the Baltic Sea.

THE UNPUBLISHED LETTER

Blind River, Ontario,
January 14th, 1944.

To the Editor,
The Globe and Mail,
Toronto, Ontario.

Dear Sir:

Your issue of January 12th, 1944, carried
two striking editorials; one under the title,
“It seems so long ago”; timely and inspiring
in the telling manner in which it gives a
setting to that phrase “Alone was Britain”.
The other under the title “A fair proposal”;
shocking in its appeal to that idea of appease-
ment the shame of which Britain expiated in
that long, long night when she stood alone!



28 ADDENDA

Sir, I do not claim competence as an ar-

biter as to what are the just boundaries of

Poland but I do claim that the Atlantic Char-

ter sets up the principles which ought to

govern the approach to fixing those

boundaries.

Your editorial scraps the idea of an ap-
proach based on the Atlantic Charter.

The most shocking part in your editorial
is that in which you propose that the pre-
cedent established by the Nazis in Polish ter-
ritory would justify a similar procedure by
the United Nations in dealing with East
Prussia. God forbid! God forgive you.

Among others I challenge and deny the
following statements in your editorial:

1. “The Ukrainians of Eastern Galicia
would achieve their desire to be united
with the rest of their race under the

Soviet system.” — They have no such
desire,

2. “The more democratic group of Polish
patriots now living in Eussia”. The “Union
of Polish Patriots” is not more democratic.
The president of the Union, one Wanda
Wasilewska, far from being a Polish pat-
riot, is a Polish traitor. She went over to
the Eussians in 1939 when Eussia was with
Germany and when Poland, like Britain,
stood alone. Her husband is Deputy Com-
missar for Foreign Affairs in the Soviet-
regime.

In an article published in the June issue
of “Nineteenth Century and After” Mr. F.
A. Voigt, formerly Foreign Editor of the

Manchester Guardian, forcefully outlines the
Polish situation. After citing recent solemn

treaties with Poland by Eussia, Britain and
the United States he concludes:

“It is, therefore, beyond dispute that
Great Britain and Eussia are pledged to
assist Poland in securing her full inde-

pendence within frontiers she held in 1939,

that the annexation by either power of any
territories within those frontiers is a clear

violation of definite treaties, and that

Great Britain is specifically pledged to help

Poland in resisting any attempt, whether

direct or indirect, open or covert, to inter-

fere in Polish internal affairs.”

Stalin,, the realist, may welcome your edi-
torial but he will despise the spirit that

dictated it. While we admire Eussian feats
and are eternally grateful for them, let us

seek the respect of Eussia rather than the

contempt that comes from mawkish adulation.

Yours faithfully,

(Signed), John J. Fitzgerald.

On January 17th, the following letter was
sent to Mr. W. H. Wrong, Under Secretary
of State for External Affairs, Ottawa:

Dear Sir:

I wish to place on record with your De-
partment the attached copy of letter under
date of January Itth, 1944, written by me
to the Editor of The Globe and Mail,
Toronto.

Yours faithfully,

To this there was no acknowledgment.

The following letter was. sent to Mr. E. E.
Stettinius, Jr., The Under Secretary of State,
Washington, D.C.:

“Dear Sir:

I listened intently to every word of your
excellent presentation over N. B. C. on

the program: The State Department

Speaks.

How completely I share your esteem for
our contemporary Mr. Cordell Hull.

Today I have sent to the Under Secre-

tary of State for External Affairs in Can-

ada, for purposes of record, a copy of a

letter I wrote under date of January 14h,

to The Editor, The Globe and Mail, Tor-

onto. It has just occurred to me that my
sentiments are echoed by legions of your

own citizens, so I take the liberty of for-
warding you a copy.

With sentiments of highest esteem, be-

lieve me,

Yours faithfully.”

To this the following reply was received,
under date of January 24th:

“Dear Mr. Fitzgerald,

Thank you for your letter of January 17
regarding the State Department’s radio
program and enclosing a copy of your let-
ter to the editor of The Globe and Mail in
Toronto. I deeply appreciate your writing

me and I am glad to have this frank state-
ment of your views.

With good wishes,

Sincerely yours,

(Signed) E. E. Stettinius, Jr.”



ADDENDA 29

On February 3 I was en route to Montreal
and read a typical dispatch. It seemed to
offer an opportunity for The Globe and Mail
to make amends for its regrettable editorial
of January 12th and, from Sudbury, Ontario,
I wired the Editor as follows:

“Eefer my letter to you January 14th re
editorial issue twelfth stop Canadian Press
dispatch reported Sault Star announces

Tass broadcast Alexander Korneichuck re-
lieved as deputy commissar foreign affairs
Soviet he is husband of Wanda Wasilewske
president Polish Patriots untenable situ-

ation and bad faith obvious.”

The wire was not acknowledged and
though I did not see a copy of the Globe and
Mail for several days I feel sure there was
no response in its columns.

On February 14th I was at North Bay and
early in the morning a dispatch greeted me
on the front page of the Globe and Mail

which prompted the following telegram:

RT. HON. W. L. MACKENZIE KING
OTTAWA, ONT.

CAN YOU NOT ARRANGE THAT TASS
CORRESPONDENT WILL BE ABLE TO
SEND A RINGING DISPATCH TO THE
SOVIET TODAY PROM A PROTEST ON
THE FLOOR OP THE HOUSE FOR THE
DASTARDLY USURPATION IN POLAND
BY THE FORMER DEPUTY COMMIS-
SAR OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS IN THE
SOVIET STOP CONSULT MY LETTER
TO GLOBE AND MAIL JANUARY FOUR-
TEENTH SENT TO W H WRONG WITH
COVERING LETTER DATED SEVEN-
TEENTH.

This was ignored.

To Mr. Gordon Graydon, Leader of the Oj:)-
position, was sent the same telegram with
this sentence inserted at the beginning:

‘‘Have just sent following telegram to

the Prime Minister quote.”

Under date of February loth, Mr. Graydon
replied:

“Dear Mr. Fitzgerald:

I received your telegram yesterday and

drew it to the attention of the Prime

Minister.”

The issue of the Globe and Mail of March
6th, reported the speech of Mr. George Mc-

cullagh, publisher, delivered at a staff dinner

on the evening of March 4th, in celebration
of the 100th anniversary of the founding of
The Globe. After reading that speech I was
impelled to write Mr. McCullagh as follows:
(please note the postscript, it both tempers
and aggravates the trend of the body of the
letter)

:

Blind River, Ontario,

March 8th, 1944
George McCullagh, Esq.,
Publisher, The Globe and Mail,
Toronto, Ontario.

Dear Mr. McCullagh:
I read with a great deal of interest the re-

port of your speech last Saturday evening.
Since, as a result, I am writing this letter,
may I open with congratulations to the
Globe and Mail, to you and to Mr. Wright.

This letter deals with the significance of
the following quotation from the report of
your speech:

“It is important that, if the editorial page
is crusading for a certain policy, the news
department recognizes its duty to publish
in the news columns all utterances, to the
contrary or otherwise, concerning that pol-

icy, so far as possible within space limit-

ations. It is a debt we owe to the people
that the unhampered, unaffected opinions
appear in this journal ...”

and:

“On the editorial page we express what
we believe to be honest oi^inion; if this in-
volves criticism, let that criticism be found
in our news columns; if it involves praise,
let that be found there, too.”

I attach copy of a letter under date of

January 14th, addressed to “The Editor, The
Globe and Mail.” That letter certainly “in-
volved criticism” but it was never published.
I did not complain; I do not now complain.
I merely bring it to your attention.

There is another development in this con-

nection. On March 3rd, I wrote as follows:

“To the Editor,
The Globe and Mail,
Toronto, Ontario.

Dear Sir:

On January 14th, I addressed a letter to
you making comment with reference to two
editorials in your issue of January 12th,
1944. The editorials were under the titles
“It Seems So Long Ago”, and “A Fair
Proposal”.



30 ADDENDA

For a reasonable period I watched your

paper to see if the letter would be published

and I never observed that it was published.

It may be that I shall be publishing some
material which I am getting together in con-
nection with the Polish situation. This would
include a copy of the two editorials referred
to and my unpublished letter. I would ap-
preciate it if you would let me know that 1
am correct in saying that my letter of Janu-
ary 14th to you was never published. It may
just be* possible that I overlooked some issue.
Addressed stamped envelope is enclosed.

Thanking you for your kind co-operation.”

The stamped envelope has not been used
and there has been no reply in any form.
Perhaps the celebration of the 100th Anni-

versary has something to do with the delay

that is if “delay” is all that is involved. A
few words at the foot of my letter would
have sufficed.

It would not be fair to draw general con-
clusions from my isolated experience but the
decision with reference to whether or not

my letter of January 14th, was to be pub-
lished constitutes a superb test of policy as

defined in the above quotation from your
speech. Considering the nature of the issue

involved I do not think there is any sound

basis to possibly take refuge, in this instance,

in making a distinction between “news col-
umns” and “letters to the editor.” The test
of sincerity remains.

Now the intention is not to call your per-
sonal sincerity in question much less your
executive capacity to make it effective. This
incident illustrates how, in your difficult

position, it is so important to make sure that

the intensity of the one backed up by the

thoroughness of the other would make it very

difficult for a two barreled situation to arise

such as I now bring to your attention.

The tenor of your speech makes me feel

you would appreciate receiving a letter such

as this and I hope you will accept it in the

spirit with which it is written.

Yours very truly,

John J. Fitzgerald.

P.S.—Since this letter was written the noon
mail (Mar, 8) has brought a reply to mine

of March 3, signed by H. V. Ferguson. I
had not asked for an explanation but I am
certainly not impressed with the “sincer-

ity” of the one offered.

My letter dealt specifically with the edi-
torial and was hot on top of its publication,

t J.J.F.

The letter referred to in the postcript was
as follows:

“Dear Sir:
Previous to receipt of your letter of Jan.

14 this paper gave prominence to letters by
writers presenting both sides to the Polish
boundaries question. These views having been
published, other letters on the subject began
to arrive. But there appeared little use in
continuing a controversy on a subject of
Polish concern on which divergent opinions
were held by writers. As space conditions and
pressure of other matter made impossible
continuance of the discussion, these were not
used.

Hoping you will understand newspaper dif-
ficulties in this resj)ect. I remain.

Yours sincerely,”

The following three letters reveal a sample
of Leftist courtesy:

Blind Eiver, Ontario,
January 20th, 1944.

F. Muszynski, Esq.,
Secretary,

Polish Central Committee of
Greater Toronto,

Toronto, Ontario.

Dear Mr. Muszynski:
I was very pleased to see that the Globe

and Mail published your letter in support of
the Polish Government in London.

You will be interested in the attached copy
of letter which, so far, has NOT been
published!

I have had the advantage of reading the
pamphlet “Poland, Russia and Great Britain”
by F. A. Voigt, issued by the National Com-
mittee of Americans of Polish Descent Inc

,

lOo East 22nd St., New York, also “Polish-
Russian Relations” by Oscar Halecki, issued
by The University Press, Notre Dame, Ind.

I believe your organizations should take
every possible means to ensure a wide cir-
culation of these booklets.

What would you think of having 100' Polish
boys 15 to 18 with some sort of uniform or
cap go from office to office selling these books
in Toronto and every city in Canada and the
United States! Also it would be well to see



ADDENDA 31

that these pamphlets get into the hands of

all editors, radio commentators and radio

personnel.

Yours cordially,

John J. Fitzgerald.

Blind River, Ontario,

January 20th, 1914.

The Editor,
Polish Weekly Chronicle,
165 iSpadina Avenue,
Toronto, Ontario.

Dear Sir:
Will you kindly indicate the street address

of Mr. F. Muszynski on the attached envelope
and mail it.

I read his recent letter in the Toronto

Globe and Mail and have sent him a co]3y of
the attached which was not published.

Yours very truly,

John J. Fitzgerald.

Blind River, Ontario,

March 11th, 1944
Hon. Louis S. St. Laurent, K.C.,

Minister of Justice,

Ottawa, Canada.

Dear Mr. St. Laurent:

If consistent would you kindly pass on the

attached for attention.

Under date of January 20th, I wrote to
Mr. F. Muszynski, Secretary, Polish Central

Committee of Greater Toronto, Ontario. I

did not have his street address but out of a

directory I selected the address of “The

Polish Weekly Chronicle” and forwarded the

letter to their office. It was duly enclosed in

a stamped envelope and completely addressed

except for the street and number. Under pres-
sure of various duties I neglected to pursue

the matter further but yesterday it became
important for me to know what happened to
the letter so I managed to secure Mr. Mus-
zynski on the telephone. He advises me that
“The Polish Weekly Chronicle” is a rabid
Leftist journal and that we could not expect
them to render the service I had requested.

I am sure you will agree that this outfit
has shown itself to be a very poor sport in
the circumstances and I have been wondering
if your Department has ever investigated its
activity.

If it would not be entirely out of order I
would appreciate it if a member of the Royal
Canadian Mounted Police or some repre-
sentative of your Department in Toronto
would find it convenient to investigate just
what happened in connection with my letter.
I realize that these people were under no
obligation and were quite entitled to throw
the whole business into the waste paper bas-
ket, but a representative from your Depart-
ment in the course of rendering this private
service might get some valuable information
in the public interest.

Assuring you that I shall graciously abide
by your decision in this matter.

Yours cordially,
John J. Fitzgerald.

THE ABOVE CAMPAIGN HAS' PRODUCED
RESULTS MORE COMPLETE THAN SOME
OF THOSE INVOLVED WANT TO GIVE
THE AUTHOR THE SATISFACTION OF
KNOWING. LET THE RESULTS BE MUL-
TIPLIED A THOUSAND FOLD!



32 ADDENDA

“EXTRA’^
As this pamphlet goes to press there has come to the author’s notice a ‘‘B.

U.P.” dispatch dated April 4, announcing the statement issued by Captain
Victor A. Kravchenko on the occasion of his resignation from the position which
he held with the Soviet Government in charge of the metals division of the
Soviet Purchasing Commission at Washington. A few brief quotations from
Captain Kravchenko’s statement make far more apparent than anything this
pamphlet contains the urgent demand that all elements within the Democracies
rally to the support of the Atlantic Charter.

The following are quoted from the dispatch and from a full report in the
New York Times of April 4:

“For many j^ears I have worked loyally
for the people of my country in the service
of the Soviet Government and have followed
closely the development of Soviet policy in its
various stages. For the sake of the Soviet
Union’s interests and her people I tried hard
to overlook many aspects of the situation
which were repugnant and alarming. But I
cannot keep silent any longer. ...”

“I can no longer support the double-faced
political manoeuvers directed at one and the
same time toward collaboration with the Un-
ited States and Britain while pursuing aims
at variance with such collaboration. Collabor-
oration with the democratic countries can-
not be pursued while the Soviet Government
and its leaders are in reality following a
concealed policy of their own designed to
accomplish purposes at variance with their
public professions.

“The Soviet Government has dissolved the
Communist International but only in form;
in reality Moscow has continued to support
its Communist party affiliates in many coun-
tries. The new democratic terminology being
utilized by Moscow is only a manoeuver. In-
telligent and informed people in Eussia and
abroad are not deceived by the new Soviet
terminology of nationalism, the object of
which is to conceal the substance and purpose
of real Soviet policy. These purposes have

guided also the formation of the All-Slav
Committee in Moscow and of the so-called
Union of Polish Patriots, with their alleged
national programs.

“The latest manoeuvers directed toward
the formation ‘of a Polish Government that
would be obedient to the Soviet Government
have provoked consternation and protests,

which I fully share. The Soviet Government

rightly objects to the interference of out-

siders in the internal affairs of Eussia. Wh}’-,

then, do the Soviet rulers consider it proper

to force their brand of “democracy” upon

Poland . . . .”

“Officially the Soviet Government has

proclaimed its desire to support establishment

of democratic regimes in Italy, Austria and

other countries. In reality, this is but another

attempt to adapt its own aims to the purposes

of the Allies and to promote the inclusion

of Communists, obedient to the Kremlin, in

the future Governments of these countries
})

“While professing to seek the establish-

ment of democracy in countries liberated

from fascism, the Soviet Government at-

home has failed to take a single serious step

toward granting elementary liberties to the

Eussian people.

The Eussian people are subjected, as be-

fore, to unspeakable oppression and cruelties,

while the NKVD (Soviet secret police), act-
ing through its thousands of spies, continues

to wield its unbridled domination over the

peoples of Eussia. In the territories cleared

of the Nazi invaders, the Soviet Government
is re-establishing its political regime of law-

lessness and violence, while prisons and con-

centration camps continue to function as
before.

The hopes of political and social reforms
cherished by the Eussian people at the be-
ginning of the war have proved tP be empty
illusiopg . r »



ADDENDA 33
“I confirmed my long susj^ieion that cap-

italist democracy as presented in the propa-
ganda and teaching of the Soviet Govern-
ment at home has no relation to the reality
I found in the United States. You Americans
cannot understand what it means to me never
to have been asked for my passport by any-
one in the entire seven montlis of my resi-
dence in this country. . . ”

“The Comintern continues to function but
by different methods and in other forms.
Haven’t you noticed that the new political
clothes donned by Browder bear a striking
resemblance to those adopted by Stalin? And
haven’t you observed also that while the
Comintern, official organ of the Communist
International, has ceased publication, that its

place has been taken by War and the Work-
ing Class, which now sets the tone and line
for the policies and utterances of the Com-
munist parties abroad? The Daily Worker in
this country refleeted fully the statements

appearing in War and the Working Class on
the factual fight in the American Labor party
in New York and reflects also the attitude
taken by the New Moscow organ on matters
concerning labor in the United States. I cite
these as only some examples for the guidance
of my American friends.”

AN EASTERN MUNICH
I would further suggest study of an article,

also lately brought to 1113" notice, in The
American Mercury for March 1944, entitled:
Will Stalin Dictate An Eastern Munich? by
William Henry Chamberlin, one of the fore-
most authorities on Eussian histoiw and
[)olitics.

Leftists have been accused of bu^nng up
all the copies of the March Mercuiy in cer-
tain centres but reference libraries should

still have their issues (unless thej" have been
“lifted”). Moreover I understand Mr. Cham-
berlin’s article has been reproduced by per-
mission of the publishers and is available at
certain Polish Consulates and from some
Polish organizations.

The article describes the “smear Poland”
campaign as an insult to American intel-
ligence and American fair play. In a few con-
vincing paragraphs it knocks* the wind out
of certain glib commentators and media like

New York P M., The Nation and the New
Eepublic.

Let us tiy to fathom wlij^ it is that the
facts revealed in articles such as tlie one nere

mentioned do not come to us, in tlie ordinary

course, through the popular news media.

f
The contents of this pamphlet are not copyrighted. Tlie^^ ma^'

be reproduced in full or in jiart ad. lib.

The Author. 1

Quantity Prices: 5 copies, $1.00; 12 copies, $2.00; 50 co])ies.

$7.50; 100 copies, $12.00; 500 copies, $50.00. Copies will be mailed

post])aid do submitted lists at a charge of 5 cents additional per

name to cover postage, envelope and clerical work. For instance:
for a list of 50 names remit $7.50 plus $2.50, a total of $10.00.
Please address orders and make remittances by mail or wire ]ta.v-
able to :

Atlantic Charter Committee, Blind River, Ontario, Canada

(The name “Atlantic Charter Committee” is selected as a i)ro-
visional name should an organization develop as a rallving agency
for “ Help !’C



Cliffe Printing' Company, Limited
Sault Ste. Marie, Out.