prove a distant goal, and probably the most distinctive feature of our pro-gramme is the proposal that until such a development becomes feasible, thelegislative function to which you refer in your address should be entrusted toa completely impartial Tribunal. We fully admit that this Tribunal would notbe a perfect instrument, but we are convinced that it would be in?nitely moresuitable for the just settlement of non-judicial issues than either the SecurityCouncil or the Permanent Court, bearing in mind that the former is made upof politicians whose ?rst job is to further the interests of their own countriesand the latter of lawyers who have little knowledge or experience outside thepurely legal ?eld.With regard to the Society itself, we di?er from ??? and other suchorganisations in that we have always endeavoured to function as an inter-national Movement in the sense that our activities have never been con?nedto Great Britain. Before the war we had managed to build up embryonicnational sections of the Movement in most of the European countries, andthese were linked together in what we called our International Section. Weare now faced with the task of rebuilding this machinery, and there can beno doubt that your visit to the Low Countries will be of the greatest value inhelping us to carry that task a stage further.In Holland the foundations of a New Commonwealth Committee havealready been laid with Dr van de Coppello as its President and Dr Fortuin as itsHonorary Secretary. You will, of course, be meeting these gentlemen duringyour visit, and it occurred to me that you might wish to be informed of theirspecial connection with the Movement. I should also like to mention thenames of Dr Peter de Kanter and his wife Mrs de Kanter van Hettinga Trompwho are members of our Committee and who have always played a leadingpart in New Commonwealth activity.In Belgium we have not as yet been able to establish any sort of organismthough we hope to be able to do so in the near future.In apologising for bothering you with this letter, may I say again howthe autobiography of bertrand russell 526deeply grateful we are to you for having consented to undertake this journeyon our behalf.Yours sincerelyN. B. FootFrom the Netherlands Section of the New Commonwealth SocietyAmsterdam, October 7th 1947Beursgebouw, Damrak 62ADear Lord RussellNow that your tour through the continent of Western Europe has come toan end and you are back again in England, we want to express you once moreour great thankfulness for the lectures you delivered to the NetherlandsSection of The New Commonwealth in Amsterdam and The Hague. It was anunforgettable event to hear you – whom many of us already knew by yournumerous important writings – speak about the question which occupies andoppresses our mind: the centuries-old problem of war or peace. We cannotsay that your words have removed all our concern; on the contrary, to what-ever we may have got used since the thirties, your supreme analysis of thepresent situation has considerably increased our anxiety. But we know nowthat you also joined those who are anxious to construct a state of internationaljustice which will aim at the establishment of rules of law and in which thetransgressor will be called to order by force, if necessary.You will have learnt from the number of your auditors and the manyconversations you had that your visit to our country has been a great success.There is no Dutch newspaper nor weekly that failed to mention your visit andyour lectures.Thank you for coming, Lord Russell; we shall not forget your words!Yours very trulyDr van de CoppelloPresidentDr FortuinSecretaryFrom Gilbert MurrayYatscombeBoar’s Hill OxfordSep. 12 1951Dear BertieI was greatly touched by that letter you wrote to the Philosophic SocietyDinner about our ?fty years of close friendship. It is, I think, quite true aboutthe fundamental agreement; I always feel it – and am proud of it.I had explained that I preferred you to other philosophers because, whilereturn to england 527they mostly tried to prove some horrible conclusion – like Hobbes, Hegel,Marx etc, you were, I believe, content if you could really prove that 2+2 = 4,and that conclusion, though sad, was at least bearable (‘To think that two andtwo are four, and never ?ve or three The heart of man has long been sore Andlong is like to be.’)Have you read the life of Jos Wedgwood (The Last of the Radicals) by his niece?He sent a questionnaire to a great list of people in which one question was:‘To what cause do you attribute your failure?’ The only one who said he hadnot failed was Ld Beaverbrook! Interesting and quite natural.Providence has thought ?t to make me lame by giving me blisters on myfeet so that I can not wear shoes; a great nuisance.Yours ever, and with real thanks for your letter, which made me for amoment feel that I was not completely a failure.G.M.From General Sir Frank E. W. Simpson, ???, ???, ???Imperial Defence CollegeSeaford House37, Belgrave SquareS.W.116th July, 1952Dear Lord RussellMay I introduce myself to you as the present Commandant of this College,having taken over from Admiral Sir Charles Daniel at the beginning of thisyear.I am writing to ask whether you could possibly spare the time to visit usagain this year in December and give your excellent talk on ‘The Future ofMankind’. Admiral Daniel has told me how valuable and stimulating yourtalks to this College have been in recent years.The date I have in mind is Thursday, 4th December next, and the time10.15 a.m. You know our usual procedure.I much hope that you will agree to come and that the above date will beconvenient for you.Yours sincerelyF. E. W. Simpsonthe autobiography of bertrand russell 528From the Manchester Guardian, 22nd April 1954?????? ???????SirIn a leading article of your issue of April 20 you say: ‘The United States isnot so foolish or wicked as to ?re the ?rst shot in a war with atomicweapons.’ This statement as it stands is ambiguous. If you mean that theUnited States would not ?re the ?rst shot, the statement may be correct. But ifyou mean that the United States would not be the ?rst to use atomic weapons,you are almost certainly mistaken. The United States authorities have declaredthat any aggression anywhere by Russia or China will be met by all-outretaliation, which certainly means the bomb. It is apparently the opinion ofexperts that in a world war the Western Powers will be defeated if they do notuse the bomb, but victorious if they use it. If this is the view of the Russianauthorities, they will abstain at the beginning of a war from using the bomband leave to our side the odium of its ?rst employment. Can anybody ser-iously suggest that the Western Powers will prefer defeat? There is only one wayto prevent the necessity for this choice, and that is to prevent a world war.Yours &c.Bertrand Russell[Our point was simply that China, knowing the scruples which limit Americanaction, could disregard an American threat to retaliate with atomic weaponsif China did not desist from intervening in Indo-China. With Lord Russell’sgeneral point we are in agreement. – Ed. Guard.]From my cousin, Sir Claud RussellTrematon CastleSaltash, Cornwall12 July ’52Dear BertieI was given to read (in Vogue) by Flora your childhood’s Memories, whichI did with interest, and the more so, no doubt, as they evoked memories ofmy own. There must be few survivors of the Pembroke Lodge days. I thinkmy parents went there fairly frequently on a Sunday, driving from London ina hired one-horse brougham (they never owned a carriage in London) andtook one or two children with ’em. But I remember better an occasionalweekend there, and no doubt your grandmother and my parents thought,with reason, that our association would be pleasant, and bene?cial, to both.Your grandfather was dead before those days. I never saw him, but I remem-ber my father telling my mother at breakfast in Audley Square ‘Uncle John isdead’; and also that it fell to my father to return his ?? to the Queen, and thatreturn to england 529some important part of the insignia – the Star or the Garter – could not befound, which my father had to tell the Queen, who said: ‘that doesn’t matter.’I would like to see Pembroke Lodge again, and walk about the grounds.I believe it is in a dilapidated state, and no longer the home of a deservingservant of the State. I remember Windsor Castle, and that Henry VIII sawfrom Richmond Hill the gun ?red that told him Anne Boleyn was executed.I recall the family prayers, and my embarrassment at having to sing the hymnaudibly. I wonder in how many houses are family prayers now the rule? Thelast I recall were at Sir Ernest Satow’s. He was my Chief in Peking, and I wentto see him in his retirement. He was a bachelor, an intellectual, who had readall there is, and a man of encyclopaedic knowledge. Yet, I believe an undoubt-ing Christian. I formed this impression of him from his demeanour in theLegation Chapel at Peking, and the family prayers con?rmed it. His Japanesebutler, cook and housemaid, appeared after dinner, and he led the prayers.My only unpleasant memory of Pembroke Lodge arises from two boy friendsof yours of the name of Logan. They conceived, I suppose, a measure ofcontempt for me, and made no secret of it. Perhaps they thought me a ‘milk-sop’, or ‘softy’. However, I didn’t see them often. Per contra, like you, I have ahappy memory of Annabel (Clara we called her)5and I was often at YorkHouse. When her parents were in India, she came to us for her holidays (shewas at school) and I was much in love with her – I being then about 15–16years old. I wonder what became of the furniture and pictures etc. at Pem-broke Lodge. I suppose Agatha had them at Haslemere. I remember particu-larly a statue, a life-size marble of a female nude, in the hall.6I think a giftfrom the Italian people to your grandfather, in gratitude for his contributionto the liberation and union of Italy. Like you, I owe to the Russells shyness,and sensitiveness – great handicaps in life, but no metaphysics, tho’ I havetried to feebly – my father and elder brother had the latter, but not profes-sionally, like you. What I owe to my French progenitors I leave others tojudge. I noted lately in a volume of Lord Beacons?eld’s letters one writtenfrom Woburn in 1865, to Queen Victoria, in which he says: ‘The predominantfeature and organic de?ciency of the Russell family is shyness. Even Hastingsis not free from it, though he tries to cover it with an air of uneasy gaiety.’ Iam much too shy for that.I am happy to know of my family link with the heroic defender ofGibraltar – my great aunt’s great uncle. Athenais and I have taken to spendingthe winter at Gib. If ever, with advancing years, you want to escape theEnglish winter, I recommend it. A better climate than the Riviera, and in asterling area.Excuse this long letter. One thing led to another.Yours everClaudthe autobiography of bertrand russell 530Trematon CastleSaltash, Cornwall9 Aug. ’52Dear BertieThank you for your letter, and I fully share your indignation at the fateof Pembroke Lodge. Can it be that what you call ‘Bumbledom’ is now theCrown? All the same, I hope when I’m in London to go and see the old placeagain, and may:‘Fond memory bring the light’‘Of other days around me’,or will I (more probably):‘Feel like one’‘Who treads alone’‘Some banquet hall deserted’‘Whose lights are ?ed’ etc.But did not Agatha wisely leave the Italia that I remember, to Newnham,where such a work of art could excite admiration, but never, I trust, an unrulythought.I hope we may see you at Gib. next winter, if you want to escape theEnglish one. The climate is more equable and healthy than that of the Riviera,and being British soil, if you have a bank balance at home, you can draw onit – or overdraw, for that matter. The Gibraltarians, tho’ not typical English-men, are amiable and loyal. They know which side their bread is buttered,and there is no irredentism among them. O si sic omnes!The Rock Hotel is the place to stay – well run, but not exactly cheap.Yours everClaudTo and from Albert Einstein41 Queen’s RoadRichmondSurrey20 June, 1953Dear EinsteinI am in whole-hearted agreement with your contention that teachers calledbefore McCarthy’s inquisitors should refuse to testify. When The New York Timeshad a leading article disagreeing with you about this, I wrote a letter to itsupporting you. But I am afraid they are not going to print it. I enclose a copy,of which, if you feel so disposed, you may make use in any way you like.Yours very sincerelyBertrand Russellreturn to england 531TranslationPrinceton28.vi.53Dear Bertrand RussellYour ?ne letter to The New York Times is a great contribution to a good cause.All the intellectuals in this country, down to the youngest student, havebecome completely intimidated. Virtually no one of ‘prominence’ besidesyourself has actually challenged these absurdities in which the politicianshave become engaged. Because they have succeeded in convincing the massesthat the Russians and the American Communists endanger the safety of thecountry, these politicians consider themselves so powerful. The cruder thetales they spread, the more assured they feel of their reelection by the mis-guided population. This also explains why Eisenhower did not dare to com-mute the death sentence of the two Rosenbergs, although he well knew howmuch their execution would injure the name of the United States abroad.I have read your latest publications, ‘Impact’ and ‘Satan . . .’, with greatcare and real enjoyment. You should be given much credit for having usedyour unique literary talent in the service of public enlightenment and educa-tion. I am convinced that your literary work will exercise a great and lastingin?uence particularly since you have resisted the temptation to gain someshort lived e?ects through paradoxes and exaggerations.With cordial greetings and wishes,YoursA. Einstein41 Queen’s RoadRichmondSurrey5 July, 1953Dear EinsteinThank you very much for your letter, which I found most encouraging.Rather to my surprise The New York Times did at last print my letter about you. Ihope you will be able to have an in?uence upon liberal-minded academicpeople in America. With warmest good wishes,Yours very sincerelyBertrand RussellAlbert Einstein on Russell – 1940 (time of College of the City of New Yorkrow)Es wiederholt sich immer wiederIn dieser Welt so fein und biederthe autobiography of bertrand russell 532Der Pfaff den Poebel alarmiertDer Genius wird executiert.TranslationIt keeps repeating itselfIn this world, so ?ne and honest:The Parson alarms the populace,The genius is executed.Albert Einstein on Russell’s History of Western Philosophy, 1946Bertrand Russell’s ‘Geschichte der Philosophie’ ist eine koestliche Lektuere. Ich weiss nicht, obman die koestlische Frische und Originalitaet oder die Sensitivitaet der Einfuehlung in ferne Zeitenund fremde Mentalitaet bei diesem grossen Denker mehr bewundern soll. Ich betrachte es als einGlueck, dass unsere so trockene und zugleich brutale Generation einen so weisen, ehrlichen, tapferenund dabei humorvollen Mann aufzuweisen hat. Es ist ein in hoechstem Sinne paedagogisches Werk,das ueber dem Streite der Parteien und Meinungen steht.TranslationBertrand Russell’s ‘History of Philosophy’ is a precious book. I don’t knowwhether one should more admire the delightful freshness and originality or thesensitivity of the sympathy with distant times and remote mentalities on the part ofthis great thinker. I regard it as fortunate that our so dry and also brutal generationcan point to such a wise, honourable, bold and at the same time humorous man. Itis a work that is in the highest degree pedagogical which stands above the con?ictsof parties and opinions.‘? ??????? ?????????’7byBertrand RussellPerhaps the essence of the Liberal outlook could be summed up in a newdecalogue, not intended to replace the old one but only to supplement it. TheTen Commandments that, as a teacher, I should wish to promulgate, might beset forth as follows:1. Do not feel absolutely certain of anything.2. Do not think it worth while to proceed by concealing evidence, for theevidence is sure to come to light.3. Never try to discourage thinking for you are sure to succeed.4. When you meet with opposition, even if it should be from your husbandreturn to england 533or your children, endeavour to overcome it by argument and notby authority, for a victory dependent upon authority is unreal andillusory.5. Have no respect for the authority of others, for there are always contraryauthorities to be found.6. Do not use power to suppress opinions you think pernicious, for ifyou do the opinions will suppress you.7. Do not fear to be eccentric in opinion, for every opinion now acceptedwas once eccentric.8. Find more pleasure in intelligent dissent than in passive agreement, for,if you value intelligence as you should, the former implies a deeperagreement than the latter.9. Be scrupulously truthful, even if the truth is inconvenient, for it is moreinconvenient when you try to conceal it.10. Do not feel envious of the happiness of those who live in a fool’sparadise, for only a fool will think that it is happiness.From the News Chronicle, 1st April, 1954?? ???????? ??In November, 1945, in a speech in the House of Lords on the atomic bomb,Bertrand Russell said:It is possible that some mechanism, analogous to the present atomic bomb,could be used to set o? a much more violent explosion which would beobtained if one could synthesise heavier elements out of hydrogen. All thatmust take place if our scienti?c civilisation goes on, if it does not bring itselfto destruction: all that is bound to happen.From the News Chronicle, 1st April 1954??? ????:????? ?? ?? ?? ???? ?????Bertrand Russell, mathematician, philosopher, answers the questions thateveryone is asking (in an interview with Robert Waithman).Bertrand Russell sat very upright in his armchair, smoking a curved pipeand talking gently about the hydrogen bomb. But there was nothing gentleabout his conclusions.Britain’s greatest living philosopher, whose mind and intellectual couragehave moved the twentieth century since its beginning, is now 81. His hair iswhite and his voice is soft; and his opinions, as always, are expressed with amemorable clarity. I put a succession of questions to him and he answeredthem thus:the autobiography of bertrand russell 534Is there any justi?cation for alarm at the thought that some disastrous miscalculation mayoccur in the H-bomb tests?Though, obviously, there will come a time when these experiments aretoo dangerous, I don’t think we have reached that point yet.If there were a hydrogen-bomb war it is quite clear that practically every-body in London would perish. A shower of hydrogen bombs would almostcertainly sterilise large agricultural areas, and the resulting famine would befearful.But we are talking of the current tests, in peace-time. I do not expectdisaster from them. I think those who may have been showered withradio-active ash, whose ?shing catches have been damaged or destroyed,undoubtedly have every right to complain.But I do not foresee a rain of radio-active ash comparable with the phe-nomena we saw after the explosion of the Krakatoa Volcano in 1883 (which Iremember well), I do not think that, so long as the explosions are few, marinelife will be grievously a?ected.It is a?ected now by oil pollution, isn’t it – though that is much lessdramatic a story?Do you think that a feeling of dread and uncertainty at the back of people’s minds might havean evil social e?ect?Well, you know, it isn’t an e?ect that lasts long. As with the atom bomb at?rst, people get into a state; but after a little while they forget it.If you have perpetually mounting crises, of course, it will be di?erent. Thetruth is, though, that the thought of an old peril, however great, will notdistract people from their daily jobs.You will have observed that since the ?rst atom bombs were exploded thebirth rate has continued to go up. That is a reliable test.I should say that the fear of unemployment, which is somethingeveryone understands, has a much greater social e?ect than the fear of atombombs.And the international e?ects? Do we seem to you to have reached a strategic stalemate? Is therenow a new basis for discussion between Russia and the West?I think the existence of the hydrogen bomb presents a perfectly clearalternative to all the Governments of the world. Will they submit to aninternational authority, or shall the human race die out?I am afraid that most Governments and most individuals will refuse to facethat alternative. They so dislike the idea of international government that theydodge the issue whenever they can.Ask the man in the street if he is prepared to have the British Navy partlyunder the orders of Russians. His hair will stand on end.Yet that is what we must think about.You see no virtue in any proposal that the experiments should be stopped?return to england 535None whatever, unless we have found a way of causing the Russianexperiments to be stopped, too.In my opinion, there is only one way. It is to convince the Russians beyonddoubt that they can win no victory: that they cannot ever Communise theworld with the hydrogen bomb.Perhaps they are beginning to feel that. It seems to me to be signi?cant thatthe Russian leaders are now allowing the Russian people to know of thedevastation to be expected from an atomic war.But I would hasten the process. I would invite all the Governments ofthe world, and particularly the Russians, to send observers to see the resultsof the American tests. It ought to be made as plain as it can be made.There is one more thing we should do. We should diminish the anti-Communist tirades that are now so freely indulged in. We should try hardto bring about a return to international good manners. That would be a greathelp.And if – or when – the Russians are convinced?I think it ought to be possible to lessen the tension and to satisfy the