Mr. HUNTLEY. Mr. Lodge, your grandfather, Senator Henry Cabot Lodge, who opposed American entry into the League of Nations, at least on the terms then being specified, is sometimes called an isolationist. Is that an accurate word?
     Mr. LODGE. No; it is not. He favored entrance of the United States into the League of Nations with reservations which would have protected the sovereignty of the United States; and I might say many of those reservations are implicit in the United Nations Charter, so that in quite a real sense my grandfather was ahead of his time.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. You think he would have supported the U.N. today?
     Mr. LODGE. The provision in the U.N. whereby U.S. troops cannot be ordered into combat without the consent of Washington is directly the same as one of the principal Lodge reservations.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. Now your father died when you were quite young. Did your grandfather have considerable influence over your early years?
     Mr. LODGE. Well, my mother had the greatest influence, but my grandfather had a great deal of influence, yes. Then my father s brother, my uncle, John Lodge, had influence on me too.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. Now, you opposed some of FDR's early efforts to ally the United States with Britain in the early stages of World War II. The question I'm getting at: Does that make you in those days an isolationist
     Mr. LODGE. Well, the definition of isolationist in those days in 1937 and 1938 was that you were, (a) opposed to taking sides in the conflict, and (b) you were opposed to measures of military preparedness.
     Now I was opposed to taking sides in the conflict but I was always in favor of military preparedness. I did think that the Germans would not get to Paris. I thought that. I wasn't the only one who thought that, and I was wrong. And I did vote for the lend-lease bill. But I voted against repealing the arms embargo.
     Mr. BRINKLEY. Mr. Lodge, I'd like to ask you a series of questions somewhat general in nature about the Presidency and your view of it. We have all heard a great deal lately about presidential leadership, weak and strong, vigorous and otherwise. Say, for example, President Roosevelt - whether or not you agree with him or agreed with him - would you classify him as a strong, effective leader in getting his policies in effect?
     Mr. LODGE. President Theodore or President Franklin?
     Mr. BRINKLEY. Franklin.
     Mr. LODGE. Well, he got his policies into effect at the beginning and then when the Supreme Court packing bill came up he began to get a series of reverses in Congress, and then when he tried to purge the Democratic Senators who didn't agree with him that didn't work out. He certainly was a man with a strong personality - Sir Winston Churchill said of him he was a formidable politician - and a very remarkable man, but he didn't always succeed in getting his way.
     Mr. BRINKLEY. Well, judged on the same scale, how would you classify President Eisenhower? You were one of his original supporters.
     Mr. LODGE. Oh, I think President Eisenhower has been a very strong President. I think he's exerted a great influence on world events. I think he's exerted a great influence in Congress. I think particularly during the time when the Republicans had control of the House a great deal of forward-looking legislation was passed. I would think he was a strong President.
     Mr. BRINKLEY. Well, the Democrats, as of course you know, have almost unanimously charged that he has been less than vigorous and has taken a narrow view of the powers of the Presidency. I assume you don't agree with that. Would you say that Mr. Eisenhower, just to take a couple of specific examples, has done all he could or all the President could, to support, say, the Supreme Court decision on schools?
     Mr. LODGE. Well, I'm not versed in all the details of those things because for 8 years I've been concentrated on foreign policy. I do feel that the President has done a great deal about civil rights. And I saw a study the other day showing that he had done more on civil rights than any President we'd ever had since Lincoln. That's a pretty good record. I think it hasn't been advertised much, but I saw a study made to that effect.
     Mr. BRINKLEY. Well, in another field, do you think that in the first 4 or 5 years of this administration it did all that needed to be done in the field of missiles, rockets?
     Mr. LODGE. I think it started in - I remember visiting Fort Bliss, oh, in the latter years of the Truman administration when I was on active duty then in the Reserve, and meeting Dr. von Braun then, who said that "if they give me the money I can go to the moon." I think under this administration greater strides have been made in developing missiles than were done before that. And in the arms race that we're having with the Soviet Union, there's bound to be times when one gets ahead of the other in one respect or the other. We had the monopoly of the atomic bomb, then we lost that. But no serious student of international power or facts doubts for a minute that the United States is tile strongest power in the world today, and I'm sure the Soviet Union doesn't doubt it.
     Mr. BRINKLEY. Well, what I want is your view of the Presidency. You think the President should take the broader rather than the narrower view of his duties, responsibilities and policies?
     Mr. LODGE. Well, I believe in people holding public office being active and being energetic and doing everything they can while they are in the office. Yes, that's my general view about any public office.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. Mr. Lodge, you said frequently you were determined to rebut the Communists on every issue in the U.N. How do you feel, looking back now over your years at the U.N., how do you feel you came off in those frequent debates with Gromyko and Sobolev and all the rest of them?
     Mr. LODGE. Well, I think we've come off extremely well. Judging by the votes, for instance, in that whole period of time we were never defeated. Judging by the impact on world opinion, I think the fact that the United States gets in with its version, gets into the same news story that goes out all over the world, is bound to have a very helpful effect over the years, and I think the fact that even in those newly developing countries, which could understandably be filled with resentment at their erstwhile rulers, that even in those countries the fact that they are thoroughly aware of the dangers of Soviet imperialism is due in large part to the debates in the United Nations which have familiarized their representatives with the Soviet Union and have shown the Soviet Union in its true light; so I think from that viewpoint this business of standing up to the Russians, which is the common phrase, is a useful thing to do. Now of course standing up to the Russians in debate in the U.N. is only a part of foreign relations. We have to stand up to them in the broad sense that we can show we can make democracy work here and that we can do all the things as a remarkably superior civilization, as free men, and that you don't have to become a pawn of the state to do those things.
     But to take your specific question, I think the debates in the U.N. served a very useful purpose.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. Well, you've come near to answering this question but let me phrase it again. Is the struggle one really of debate? Isn't the struggle one really of power, and motivation, and programs, and action?
     Mr. LODGE. Well, it's a whole lot of things. There is a debating aspect to it of course. And then there's a military aspect to it. And then there is this question of you've got all the questions that involve a superior society, and in a go-ahead country like the United States we understand what it means that our children be well educated, that our old people be cared for, that the health of our citizens be advanced, and that we make our cities proper places and restful places in which to live; that there be opportunities for youth, that we eliminate the pockets of unemployment. All those things are part of the total challenge. Then, partnership with the less-developed countries of the world in Africa, Asia, and Latin America in their war on poverty, illiteracy, and disease. The success of our diplomacy in getting international agreements such as the one last summer which put the United Nations into the Congo and prevented the Congo from becoming another Korea, all those things are involved in the challenge.
     The extent to which we practice what we preach in the field of civil rights in a world in which four-fifths of the people are not of the white race, that's a matter of pressing importance.
     So it's certainly standing up to the Russians in debate. Although I make no apology for it, it is only a part of the total contemplation.
     Mr. BRINKLEY. Mr. Lodge, one of the many charges made by the Democrats is that in the last 8 years the Republican Party has offered no major new ideas. I assume you do not agree with that?
     Mr. LODGE. I certainly do not.
     Mr. BRINKLEY. What would you say are some of the major new ideas that have been offered in the last few years?
     Mr. LODGE. Well, we have the atoms-for-peace offer in 1953; we have the open sky proposal; we have the creation of the United Nations Emergency Force, which has turned the Gaza strip and the entrance to the Gulf of Aqaba from an explosive, dangerous area into a tranquil area; we have the United Nations presence in the Congo; we have the measure to take surplus foods and make them available to India and other countries. We have the action which we took in the United Nations validating our use of troops in Lebanon. There are so many of these things that you'd be hard put to list them all.
     Mr. BRINKLEY. All right, that's in the past. What new ideas might we expect from you, if you win the next Republican administration, let us say, in relation to Cuba? Do you have some new ideas on how to deal with the problem of Cuba?
     Mr. LODGE. Well, I believe that the way to deal with Cuba is first of all to have the other Latin American countries participate with you in whatever is done. I think it's poor psychology for us, a great big, powerful, English-speaking country, to attempt to deal with this by ourselves. I think it's much better psychology for the other Spanish-speaking countries of Latin America to take an interest in it, which they have done at the recent conference in San Jose. And I think when the Cuban question went into the Organization of American States that was the beginning of a solution. Then I think we have two extremes that we must avoid, the obviously intolerable one of the conversion of Cuba into an imperialistic, communistic base. Equally to be avoided is a situation as in Hungary where we would be placed in the part the Soviet Union played in Hungary.
     Mr. BRINKLEY. So what do we do?
     Mr. LODGE. I think we trust in the leadership of the Organization of American States, gradually working this thing out. I think we don't do anything in the sense of sending in troops, or of taking violent action. We try to show restraint, we try to show patience. We watch for the opportunities, we prove to the people of the underdeveloped countries in Latin America that we are with them in their effort at land reform, that we are with them in their attempts at a better life.
     I think those things are very potent, and I believe those things will gain results.
     Now to answer the rest of your question on what can be done in the future in the way of new ideas, the Vice President announced in Chicago after we were nominated that he was going to put the neat Vice President in charge of all the nonmilitary aspects of the world struggle, and I think one thing that ought to flow from that is the creation of an office for the nonmilitary aspects of the world struggle, one of whose jobs would be constantly to take and hold the initiative.
     That is becoming increasingly pressing as the world is becoming more and more shrunken. I think that's one specific step that coup accomplish a great deal. That would combine policy in the U.N., loans and grants, the USIA, economic aid, and all those things.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. Do you have some ideas, Mr. Lodge, how the Foreign Service might be improved?
     Mr. LODGE. Well, I think we ought to demand nothing less than the best, and we ought to be willing to pay the price. I don't mean in money, but the price in human spirit, that this great challenge involves.
     The men in the Foreign Service are right on the front line of our foreign relations and we have some very good men, and I know many of them who have been my associates here at the United Nations. But one thing we should do I think is offer premiums for excellence in languages because we are deficient in language, and we are getting better, but we ought to accelerate that process.
     I'm sure that young men will be attracted to the Foreign Service, and certainly we should do everything we can to do so.
     Mr. BRINKLEY. The other day, on that particular point, in, I believe South Bend, you said that on January 20 the terms of office of ambassadors, along with everyone else
     Mr. LODGE. All the Presidential appointments.
     Mr. BRINKLEY (continuing). Expire. And I believe you said after that date we will have a completely new lineup. What did you mean by that?
     Mr. LODGE. I didn't mean anything dramatic by that. It's just a fact that all Presidential appointments expire on the 20th of January and then the President has the right to reappoint somebody else.
     Mr. BRINKLEY. You didn't necessarily mean they would all be switched?
     Mr. LODGE. Everybody be fired? No. But I do think there will be a great many changes because 4 or 5 years is the normal term for an ambassador, and most of them, their terms will be expiring then, but I'm not saying there won't be some cases that will be reappointed.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. What is your response, Mr. Lodge, to the assertion that we have lost some ground in international affairs in the past year, year and a half ?
     Mr. LODGE. You mean prestige?
     Mr. HUNTLEY. Prestigewise, yes.
     Mr. LODGE. Well, I think there's a tremendous confusion of thought about that. When the Communists instigate a riot against a highranking American official in a foreign country that doesn't mean we have necessarily lost prestige. It means the Communists don't like it. If we conducted our policy in such a way with the Communists then our opponents in the election might accuse us of appeasement, and justifiably so. This country mustn't expect to be loved. A country that's as big and powerful as we are is not loved, and when people don't like us it ought not to distress us. What we ought to look for is to be respected, is to have people think that our word is good, is to have people know that our motives are noble and humane. And people do know that.
     In the very true essence we have tremendous prestige, more than any other country in the world. You've seen that in the votes in the United Nations. You saw it just recently in the Security Council when we had touchy matters like the Cuban question, or the RB-47 question, and even the Afro-Asians, who were uncommitted, so-called neutralists, voted with us. That doesn't happen when a country's prestige is low. And when the Soviet Union proceeded against us on the U-2 case they got resoundingly defeated, and I notice they are going to do it in the General Assembly here, and they will be resoundingly defeated again. That doesn't betoken a lack of prestige.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. Doesn't the Cuban situation, however, go even beyond prestige? That becomes pretty close to being material, does it not?
     Mr. LODGE. Well, Cuba is a country of great importance to us and of great interest to us, and certainly it's a matter of great importance, there's no doubt about that. But I don't think the word "prestige" applies to it. I've heard some people say, whose names I will not mention, and they were currently candidates for office, that the situation in the Congo is due to American prestige. Of course there's no relationship whatever. But I was also glad to see Senator Mike Mansfield of Montana, a prominent Democrat, praise the work that Secretary Herter and I have done in the Congo; and I was delighted to see Governor Stevenson say that in reviewing the record of foreign policy recently there was much to be proud of. So I appreciate those bipartisan notes.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. By the way, have you made it a policy not to mention the names of the opposing candidates?
     Mr. LODGE. Well, I think in a contest for the Presidency it's well to avoid personalities or personal tone of any kind.
     Mr. BRINKLEY. This had led, Mr. Lodge, as I know you know, to a belief among the Democrats that you are running for office against Khrushchev rather than against Kennedy.
     Mr. LODGE. I'm not running "against." I don't believe that's the way to look at it. I think that's rather a neat phrase but I think it gets away from the point. I think the voters are entitled to a choice, and I go before crowds and I tell them what I think we ought to do in the future. I don't review the past. I don't believe in running against the past or running in favor of the past. I say here is what we ought to do in the future, I make my offering, listen to me. Listen to the other man's offering and then make up your minds. I think an attack by me on them would be discounted at once. It would be a waste of time.
     Mr. BRINKLEY. The Vice President has been suggesting that Mr. Kennedy not discuss during this U.N. meeting while all our visitors are here, what he regards as our weaknesses in defense and other areas. What do you think of that? Do you think this is a time not to discuss this? Do you think there's some reason why it should not be discussed now?
     Mr. LODGE. Well, I don't think we ought to appear to be a divided people. But I would see that some of the things that have been said by our opposition are not susceptible to criticism so much on the grounds that they are unpatriotic as on the grounds that they show rather poor judgment and are rather absurd. I'd rather put it on that ground.
     Mr. BRINKLEY. Then you don't object to absurdity and poor judgment on the part of your opponents?
     Mr. LODGE. Yes; I think it's a pity when something is done that is obviously absurd because I think that I like to see the whole level of the thing kept up.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. Mr. Ambassador, it's been said that while you were in the Senate you were never quite a member of the club and that you were inclined to be what they sometimes call a "loner." Will you comment about that?
     Mr. LODGE. Well, I ran - everybody has forgotten it except me, but I ran against Senator Taft to be the Republican leader of the Senate. Why should Senator Taft put me into his club? I mean to me that's so obvious. I've read those things about me being a loner, et cetera. Why should I be in the club of Senator Taft, whom I respect very much, when I'm trying to get his job away from him? That's one of those subtleties that escapes me.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. Another thing. Can you explain how or why you forsook the comparatively placid profession of journalism and undertook this hazardous one of politics?
     Mr. LODGE. I never knew journalism was placid before, frankly. Well, there was a great friend of mine, now dead, a man called John Trout, who was an automobile salesman in Beverly, where I lived, and he was a very persuasive man. He could persuade people to buy automobiles. He came around one day and persuaded me I ought to run for the legislature. It came about like that. So I did. I went to the Herald Tribune and I said, I'm going to resign because I'm going into politics.
     The late Ogden Reid, the publisher, said, "You'll probably be defeated. and I'll give you a leave of absence."
     I've been on leave of absence from the New York Herald Tribune since 1932.
     Mr. BRINKLEY. Referring again to your career in the Senate of 14 years, isn't it?
     Mr. LODGE. Thirteen.
     Mr. BRINKLEY. In looking back over your voting record, anyone who does look back over it will find it's very liberal, progressive minded, more so than a great many members of the Republican Party. Is that not true? Do you think that's not true?
     Mr. LODGE. I haven't compared it with others but I wouldn't be surprised if that were true.
     Mr. BRINKLEY. When Mr. Nixon chose you to be the candidate for Vice President there was some objection in some parts of the party, particularly in the Midwest. Why was that? Are you too liberal for them ?
     Mr. LODGE. All I can say is I have just been in the Middle West. I've been in Illinois
     Mr. BRINKLEY. Those were the leaders of the party.
     Mr. LODGE. I've been with the leaders of the party in Illinois, Ohio, Indiana, Wisconsin. I've had nothing but the most friendly possible support and they all seem to think they are glad I'm on the ticket, and I think they mean it.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. When you were in the U.N. how much freedom and latitude did you have to go ahead and act on your own?
     Mr. LODGE. Well, you have to have to have a great deal. My job was never to usurp, never to go beyond instructions, on the one hand; on the other hand, not to refer a whole lot of detail back to Washington I ought to settle myself. It's a fine balance and we never once in almost 8 years lead any misunderstandings at all. I felt I knew the Presidents mind, I knew what the broad trend was. But of course on the immediate questions of when to rebut and whether to rebut and what to say, I had to decide that.
     Then Washington looks to me to make recommendations to them as to what my instructions ought to be. I would often write out here is what I think we ought to do, one, two, three, four, because I was close to it and could see the detail. Then I'd send that back and they would approve it and say, go ahead. I would say I plan to make such and such a speech Tuesday, and send the text down. They would suggest a change, perhaps, or do it this way.
     On the other hand, if it was quick you just had to go ahead and do it.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. There were never any frustrations?
     Mr. LODGE. Never any frustrations. I always told them they had the right to repudiate me if I got them into trouble, but they never did.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. Were you completely happy, for example, in the fall of 1956 when you had to more or less take the lead in what amounted to a condemnation of Britain, France, and Israel in the Suez affair?
     Mr. LODGE. I wasn't happy, of course, no. Happy is not the word. I handled it in the Security Council. Mr. Dulles came up and handled it in the General Assembly, but I was supporting President Eisenhower's policy. But, of course, I wasn't too happy, no. But I will say that as a result of all that we have got a much better situation in the Gaza strip and in the entrance to the Gulf of Aqaba than existed beforehand, so that in many ways the Israelis accomplished what they sought to accomplish. What they were after was tranquillity and they got the tranquillity, but the U.N. has provided it instead of the other way.
     Mr. BRINKLEY. On a domestic political problem, Mr. Lodge, the President in the last few years has several times expressed his displeasure, even anger, at the fact he was not able to get the cooperation he wants or expected out of the Democrats who control the Congress. It is very likely that the Senate will continue to be Democratic, possibly the House. If you and Mr. Nixon win how do you propose to deal with that? It seems to be a new political fact of our time. Divided government. What are your views on that?
     Mr. LODGE. Well, I think that's quite constitutional. We haven't got a parliamentary system in America such as exists in England. We're not making a mess of the parliamentary system; we aren't even trying to have a parliamentary system, and the Constitution envisages governments of checks and balances, separate, rendering an individual judgment. The worst thing you can say about a Congressman or senatorial candidate is that he's a rubberstamp. The voter expects Senators and Congressmen to exert independent judgment. That much having been said, I think it's the duty of the Executive when he deeply believes in something, to try to mobilize public opinion and I think a man who is as good a speaker as Vice President Nixon is and who has got the intellectual force that Dick Nixon has got can do a lot to mobilize public opinion, and if you will pardon a slightly partisan remark, I don't see how one could do worse than the Democratic leaders did at the last special session in which, with a 2-to-1 majority, they prove although they have the title of leaders they have very few followers.
     Mr. BRINKLEY. I just wanted to ask if you win you think Mr. Nixon would get along better with Lyndon Johnson as Senate leader than Mr. Eisenhower has?
     Mr. LODGE. Or Mr. Kennedy would. I think Mr. Nixon is a very effective man. And I think he would get results out of any Congress because of his intellectual force, because of his persuasive capacities with individuals, and because of his persuasive capacity with the public. Mr. Eisenhower has gotten better results out of the Congress than Mr. Kennedy and Mr. Johnson did at this last session. When they all opposed the civil rights pledge in the Democratic platform, which did us a lot of harm over here in the U.N. it was an international matter; it was really bad.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. Some recent surveys taken throughout the country are revealing you as the most popular of all four of the candidates on the two tickets. What is your reaction to that?
     Mr. LODGE. Well, I just can't believe that. People have been very nice to me since I started campaigning. I began on the 31st of August. People slap me on the back and say, "Good for you," at the U.N. I don't take this so-called popularity as a tribute to me personally. I think people approve of the course that the United States has followed in the U.N., which they have seen on television. I don't need to tell you gentlemen what a powerful thing television is. You've been in their home working, doing your job, defending the country, expounding the issues, and I think they have liked that.
     But, as for my having a big personal popularity, I wouldn't think that.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. Do you think there is a serious tendency in this country to elect Presidents as a result of a popularity contest?
     Mr. LODGE. I think less than usual, less than it used to be. I think that used to be true when I was a young man. But I think today people take the whole situation very seriously. They contemplate it somewhat the way you contemplate the choice of a doctor. It's a very serious matter. They want the man who is the wisest and the most all-seeing, et cetera. To change my metaphor, they want an experienced captain on the bridge. They think there's no time for on-the-job training, and in Richard Nixon they see an experienced captain on the bridge and I think that is his strength.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. I would guess, Mr. Lodge, that you dislike some of the chores which campaigning calls for.
     Mr. LODGE. No.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. Do you find it fun?
     Mr. LODGE. I think the whole thing has been great fun. I left the U.N. with, I don't mind saying, with a twinge of sadness, because I was very happy there, and I liked the work and I felt I was doing some good. But the very next day Nelson Rockefeller and Louis Lefkowitz picked me up and flew me up to the Catskills and I started shaking hands and making little talks, and on Monday we got into helicopters and went to all the beaches along the south shore of Long Island, and I've been going everywhere and doing everything since then, and I've been so busy I haven't had time to miss the United Nations, and I've enjoyed it very much. I'm a gregarious type. You know, people are people, and I'm handshaking around the country now, but I always was the handshaker for America over in the U.N., you know. It's not such a big adjustment as all that.
     Mr. BRINKLEY. Mr. Nixon said sometime a few weeks ago that one of the greatest weaknesses of the Republican Party was the fact it was not attracting young voters. Why do you think the party is not attractive to young Americans?
     Mr. LODGE. Well, that would be a very serious thing if it were so. I've seen a good many young people since I've been out on the road, I must say. I've seen a lot of them. I think the most enthusiastic meeting I ever attended was a meeting of young Republicans in Chicago 10 days or 2 weeks ago.
     Of course, any party has got to attract young people, it's got to; and broadly speaking, the way to attract young people, or people of any age, is to tell them where do we go from here, to point the way to the future, not to rehash the past. We're not engaged in writing history. We're engaged in trying to lead the way into the future.
     Mr. BRINKLEY. Well, in leading the way into the future, we were talking a few minutes ago about new ideas. What new ideas might we expect on, say, Red China? What new ideas might there be in our dealings with Red China?
     Mr. LODGE. Well, that depends initially on Red China's behavior. If the behavior continues the way it has been then it's pretty hard to see much of a change. If the behavior takes another turn then you could take a look at things.
     Mr. BRINKLEY. Well, on another, let us say a domestic issue, Mr. Nixon about a year ago was moved in after a long steel strike and helped to settle it. That obviously is not a very good way to do it even in his own opinion. What new ideas might there be in that field of labor-management relations? Do you have any at all?
     Mr. LODGE. Well, I think you've got to give the recently enacted labor legislation a chance to see what it does. I wouldn't think we'd want to recommend a new legislation next January. I think we'd want to see what the pending legislation does.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. Might we expect to see some new thinking applied to a situation like Berlin?
     Mr. LODGE. Yes. I would like to see a strong attempt made to bring the United Nations into the Berlin question by stationing United Nations guards at the checkpoints.
     You know, these uniformed guards over here on First Avenue, a very highly selective group of men. And possibly we should study setting up something similar to the United Nations truce supervisory organization in Palestine which provides machinery for quick arbitration of disputes that occur on the borders.
     Now those things should not be done as a substitute for the troops that are there now but supplementary thereto. I think something like that is well worth a try.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. Have you ever had any feeling, Mr. Lodge---
     Mr. LODGE. Of course - excuse me for interrupting - we should under all conditions keep our word to the people of Berlin. That's indispensable because if you once go back on your word in one place you've destroyed your reputation for honor all over the world, so we've got to keep our word to the people of Berlin. Excuse me.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. Yes. Have you ever had any feelings just the way things are it seems the Communists tend to act and we're forced to react rather than vice versa?
     Mr. LODGE. Well, I don't think that was true in the United Nations during the last 10 days. My successor, Ambassador Wadsworth, succeeded in unmasking before the world the attempt of the Communists to penetrate the Congo, and a resolution was passed supporting the Secretary General, denouncing unilateral interventions of all kinds. Then a day or two later with our friends we got together and defeated the Communist candidate for President of the General Assembly and elected the representative of Ireland.
     I think we certainly beat them to the punch in Lebanon. We've beaten them to the punch on the open skies plan. There are all kinds of things that we have done.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. The President. this past week made a great speech before the U.N. in terms of substance.
     Mr. LODGE. Oh, yes.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. It carried the United States into every phase of international cooperation. Why is it that Khrushchev comes along and makes a thoroughly destructive speech and seems to get as much ar more attention than did the President?
     Mr. LODGE. Because it's the nature of journalism, a profession in which all three of us have been engaged, to stress what is bad - and maybe that isn't the fault of journalism. Maybe it's human nature, but the man who is the bull in the china shop, who breaks everything, who throws all the custard pie on the floor and makes an exhibition of himself always gets publicity over the man who is doing something constructive. But this thing isn't entirely a publicity contest. That's a very secondary aspect to it, and you can be sure that when President Eisenhower said he wanted to join these underdeveloped countries in the war on poverty, illiteracy, and disease that he was making votes for the United States over here in the U.N. and that's what counts, and Khrushchev's performance has horrified all the representatives of these new countries and made them realize that they must at all costs not become flags of convenience for the Soviet Union.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. Thank you very much, Mr. Lodge.

     Mr. HUNTLEY. Mrs. Lodge, you were born and reared here in Beverly, Mass., weren't you?
     Mrs. LODGE. Yes; I was. I was born here and I spent most of my life here.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. Did you and the Ambassador know each other as children?
     Mrs. LODGE. No; I never saw him as a child. We met when I was 18 at a dance in Boston.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. He was about 22 or 23 at that time?
     Mrs. LODGE. Yes; that's right.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. He must have been a handsome specimen then, too, wasn't he?
     Mrs. LODGE. He was. I thought he was extremely good looking.
     Mr. BRINKLEY. Did things go to your complete satisfaction from the start, from your first meeting?
     Mrs. LODGE. Well, I thought he was a little slow.
     Mr. BRINKLEY. He finally came around ?
     Mrs. LODGE. Finally came around, yes. We were married 2 years later.
     Mr. BRINKLEY. Did you build this house?
     Mrs. LODGE. Yes; we built this house about 30 years ago when Cabot ran for the legislature.
     Mr. BRINKLEY. Are you happy to be back here in your own house with your own furniture and books, and away from the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel?
     Mrs. LODGE. Yes; I'm delighted to be home again, but as for being delighted to be away from the Waldorf-Astoria, I think the 8 years we had at the U.N. were the most interesting years of my life.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. You must have made some wonderful friends.
     Mrs. LODGE. Oh, we did. We made very warm friends, and friends that I hope I'll see a great deal of in the future.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. Would you like to travel?
     Mrs. LODGE. Oh, yes; I love to travel.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. What about the campaign, Mrs. Lodge? Are you going to go along with the Ambassador?
     Mrs. LODGE. Yes; I hope to. I hope everywhere he goes I'll go.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. Do you know what the schedule is going to be yet, what the itinerary will be?
     Mrs. LODGE. No. I ask every day what the itinerary is going to be, and I'm never told.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. Of course this won't be the first experience campaigning for you.
     Mrs. LODGE. Well, no, because I used to go around Massachusetts with him, but it's very different going around the country.
     Mr. BRINKLEY. Do you make political speeches? Have you ever made any ?
     Mrs. LODGE. Never, and I never hope to.
     Mr. BRINKLEY. I was hoping you'd say, yes, because I was going to ask you for a short sample.
     Mrs. LODGE. Well, I'm sorry but the answer is "No."
     Mr. HUNTLEY. This is a question, Mrs. Lodge, which I am instructed by the girls at NBC must be asked of you. How in the world do you look as you do with eight grandchildren?
     Mrs. LODGE. Well, it's very nice of you to put it that way. I suppose because they give me such a wonderful time.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. They are all here this summer.
     Mrs. LODGE. Yes; they all spend their summers here. The five that live in Washington they come here for the summer vacation, and three others are here all the year round.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. They range in size and age from what to what?
     Mrs. LODGE. They range from 10 to a month.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. And the generation of noise and confusion doesn't disturb you?
     Mrs. LODGE. No. I love that sort of noise and confusion.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. When you were at the U.N. and living in a hotel and in New York you had a great deal of entertaining to do. You may have more to do in Washington. But at the U.N. you had a problem you wouldn't have in Washington, and that is that your guests would speak many different languages. And at a party you don't have this simultaneous translation earphone contraption. How did you handle that?
     Mrs. LODGE. Well, most of the people speak English or French or Spanish, and as I speak fluently very bad French, and I can understand Spanish and have to respond in the sign language, it worked out all right.
     Mr. BRINKLEY. It made a pretty lively party with everyone conversing in sign language.
     Mrs. LODGE. Yes, but you'd be surprised that almost every one of those delegates speak English or French.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. Did you spend much time over at the U.N. listening to the sessions, Mrs. Lodge?
     Mrs. LODGE. Yes; I used to go over quite a lot, but I also used to listen over the radio because in New York City they have the broadcasts complete from the U.N.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. And some of those long sessions that went on into the weary hours of the morning, particularly at the time of the Hungarian crisis and Suez crisis, those must have been exciting hours.
     Mrs. LODGE. Oh, I'll never forget those; yes. Exciting and terrible hours. I was there then. I sat through all of those.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. You stayed right over there?
     Mrs. LODGE. Yes.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. Did the Ambassador ever bring home some of the problems from the U.N., or was he able just to cast them off ?
     Mrs. LODGE. He never talked over the problems with me in the U.N. much. He talked about incidents that had happened there and sort of broad policies of the U.N., but he cast off at mealtime, when I saw him - either late or early - the problem of the day.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. Speaking of mealtime, it's been alleged that there is one dictate that you have enforced in this home mainly, that is, politics only at breakfast and nothing after that. Is that true?
     Mrs. LODGE. That's right, but I'm the one that does the talking at breakfast, and Cabot hides behind the newspaper and pretends to listen, but he doesn't.
     Mr. BRINKLEY. When Khrushchev was here last year, Mrs. Lodge, the Ambassador was the escort for him, and you went along with Mrs. Khrushchev.
     Mrs. LODGE. Yes; I did.
     Mr. BRINKLEY. Tell us about that, will you? How was it? What was she like, and what did you do?
     Mrs. LODGE. Oh, it was a very interesting trip. The part I loved most was all the places I saw in this country. When Mrs. Khrushchev - she was always very polite, she was considerate. She'd admire the scenery. We never got much beyond that.
     Mr. BRINKLEY. Could you answer all her questions?
     Mrs. LODGE. Sometimes I had difficulty but I always answered.
     Mr. BRINKLEY. Right or wrong.
     Mrs. LODGE. Right or wrong, I gave her an answer.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. Did you have any role this summer in the decision that the Ambassador had to make for himself, namely, whether or not to accept the nomination ?
     Mrs. LODGE. No, no. I had nothing to do with that.
     Mr. BRINKLEY. Clear, unequivocal answer.
     Mrs. LODGE. Clear, unequivocal answer, yes, that's right.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. Both of you must have known that it might come, and what kind of a psychological preparation does one have to make for this?
     Mrs. LODGE. But you see I never really did believe it really would come, so I didn't prepare for it, and that's why when it happened it was the most hectic day in my life.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. Newspapermen suddenly appeared, television, and radio men.
     Mrs. LODGE. Yes, yes. And then getting packed to go to Chicago, and then getting packed to leave the Waldorf, and sorting out this and that, things you've accumulated in the last 8 years.
     Mr. BRINKLEY. Well, you don't make speeches during campaigns; you do travel with Mr. Lodge?
     Mrs. LODGE. Yes.
     Mr. BRINKLEY. What do you do while he is politicking?
     Mrs. LODGE. I have a wonderful time.
     Mr. BRINKLEY. What did you do?
     Mrs. LODGE. I have all the fun, none of the work. Well, I listen to his speech and then I meet a whole lot of people, and I love that. And then I see this country, and every part of this country is a very exciting place to visit. And I pack his bags, and I do things like that.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. Speaking of psychological preparation, there must be another one through which you're going this very summer. November 8 is going to come along and I would assume that all the plans that any ordinary human being would care to make must always be predicated with that one word "if."
     Mrs. LODGE. Always, and crossed fingers, and toes if possible, always.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. But this should not be too great an adjustment for you if things turn out as I'm sure you hope they do.
     Mrs. LODGE. Yes; I do hope so very much.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. Because you've been in Washington before.
     Mrs. LODGE. Yes. I've lived a lot in Washington. We lived there the first 2 years we were married when Cabot was in newspaper work. And then we lived there - how long was he in the Senate? - I think about 13 years. We lived there 13 years then, and I love Washington. I think its a very nice place to live.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. You like Washington life?
     Mrs. LODGE. Yes; I do. And I think it's a beautiful city and I love the surrounding country.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. Would you hope that, let's say, the Vice President would continue to take an active interest, and play a role in foreign affairs, might continue that work?
     Mrs. LODGE. Oh, yes; I do hope he does, because Cabot is extremely interested in that and he thinks it's so terribly important.
     Mr. BRINKLEY. Mrs. Lodge, I read somewhere or other that John Mason Brown, the lecturer, speaking of you, said, as best I can remember the quote it was: "I love that woman; every politician should marry an Emily Lodge." Why do you suppose he said that? I don't really expect an answer.
     Mrs. LODGE. I can't imagine why he said that.
     Mr. BRINKLEY. I don't really expect any answer, I just wanted to quote the line.
     Mrs. LODGE. Well, that's very nice of you. I love to have it quoted. Nothing pleases me more. I can't imagine - I don't think he knows me as well as he thinks he does.
     Mr. BRINKLEY. He knows you well enough to go around talking about you, and that's what he says.
     Mrs. LODGE. Because I'm lazy, and that is a besetting sin for an active man's wife.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. The Ambassador's role at the U.N. took both you and him on many travels. Was there any one continent or country that is your favorite?
     Mrs. LODGE. Well, I don't think there was any one favorite. I loved them all. We went about 4 years ago to the Sudan when the Sudan got its independence, and I'll never forget coming in over the desert. You see the Blue Nile join the White Nile right there in Khartoum, with its thin band of green going along the river. And then you see these very small little white birds like doves flying right over the Blue Nile. It was perfectly beautiful. And the pilot as we were landing said, "The temperature is 104." And I thought of course I'd be slightly warm when we landed, but not at all because the humidity is 4 percent. It's a wonderful place. Oh, I'd love to go back there. And then we went to Libya, and then just last year we went to the Cameroons on New Year's Eve. We spent New Year's Day in the Cameroons the day it got its independence in the two cities there, Yaounde and Douala. And then we went to President Tubman's inauguration in Liberia. Do you want some more about my travels?
     Mr. HUNTLEY. I should say, it's interesting.
     Mrs. LODGE. And then 2 years ago we went to Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India. And I'd love to go back to all four of those countries.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. The tour of Russia, too, did you find that interesting?
     Mrs. LODGE. Oh, very interesting, very. And I'll never forget Samarkand, the place where Tamerlane lived, and where his tomb is. And you can see the road and the mountain where they came and conquered most of the surrounding territory; the pass is exactly the way it was. And you get a sense of the past that I can't describe in that part of the world.
     Mr. HUNTLEY. Well, Mrs. Lodge, thank you so very much, and our sincere apologies for the manner in which we have disturbed you here in your home today.
     Mrs. LODGE. It's been the greatest pleasure for me. I never thought this would happen to me. I just loved every minute of it.