Edith writes regarding the enclosed letter (not present) she received for Lucy regarding her financial affairs. "Unfortunately we do not know her present address, but as you are to see her perhaps you would be so kind as to give her the Jaeger document and possibly help her to straighten it out." The Russells have paid the overdraft.

Lock thanks Edith for her letter of 24 July and its enclosed envelope, which he will explain to Lucy.

Farley asks for Lock's assistance if he is in contact with Lucy, as he needs to recover a book of BR's, Rush to Judgment by Mark Lane, which she borrowed. "I am very anxious to recover this book and should be grateful for anything that you can do in this respect."

Another TL(CAR) copy is in the file.

Lock thanks Farley for his letter of 3 December, and has written Lucy about the book, as he is in touch with her.

Lock writes regarding the arrangements for taking a course that the trustees are proposing for Lucy. He states that the trustees would be glad to know if BR approves this proposal.

"Messrs. Coward, Chance & Co. are pleased to announce that, as from 1st January, 1969, they are admitting into partnership Mr. R.M. Coleman and Mr. C.I. McGonigal who have been solicitors on their staff for some years."

BR thanks Lock for his letter of 30 December regarding the proposed arrangements for Lucy, which he agrees to, including an allowance with restrictions.

Tylor encloses a letter he has received from K. Blackwell, Russell Archives, McMaster University, Ontario (document .101951, record 116937).

Blackwell was referred to Coward, Chance by Lord Llewelyn-Davies, in quest for Crompton Llewelyn Davies's correspondence with BR. Enclosed with document .101950, record 116936.

Enclosed is a copy of a letter dated 1968/12/15 from BR, saying, "I should be grateful for every assistance given to McMaster University in obtaining copies of my papers to be added to my archives there."

See document .101951a, record 117031.

Coward, Chance write, "As you will appreciate, it would not be possible for us to let you have any correspondence between Crompton Llewelyn Davies and Lord Russell except with Lord Russell's express permission." A copy of Blackwell's letter and this reply is being sent to BR.

"In fact, we are satisfied that the relevant correspondence was destroyed when our former offices at 30 Mincing Lane were bombed on the night of 9th/10th May, 1941."

Farley writes on behalf of BR to thank Tylor for his letter to him on 13 March, regarding McMaster University. "Since you are confident that the relevant correspondence was destroyed in 1941, it would seem that the question of Lord Russell's permission does not arise."

Tylor encloses a letter he received from McMaster University, which came during his holidays (document .101955, record 116941).

He also encloses Coward, Chance's reply to Blackwell (document .101956, record 116942), as well as his response (document .101957, record 116943).

"I should be grateful if you would kindly indicate to me what reply you would wish me to make to Mr. Blackwell's letter."

Blackwell thanks Tylor for his letter of 13 March and expresses his disappointment to learn that the correspondence between Crompton Llewelyn-Davies and BR was destroyed by bombs.

"As I believe from information in these Archives that you are the Tylor with whom Lord Russell dealt with for many years, may I inquire whether you have preserved his correspondence with yourself, and whether at some time it might be made available for deposit in his Archives?"

Enclosed with document .101954.

Coward, Chance write in Tylor's absence to acknowledge the receipt of Blackwell's letter of 3 April, which will be called to Tylor's attention upon his return on 21 April.

Enclosed with document .101954, record 116940.

Tylor acknowledges that upon his return from his holiday that he read Blackwell's letter. He confirms that he is the Tylor in question, and informs Blackwell that his office only has letters after 10 May, 1941, the date on which the Mincing Lane offices were destroyed.

"In principle I would see no objection to the correspondence being made available for deposit in the Archives assuming, of course, that Lord Russell were prepared to agree. It is, however, a matter which I would have to discuss with my partners after reference to the correspondence concerned."

Enclosed with document .101954, record 116940.

BR thanks Tylor for his letter of 25 April and its enclosures, regarding McMaster University.

"I should be pleased to see my correspondence with you and your company go to McMaster University with the rest of my papers in due course. There is an arrangement with the University whereby an embargo is placed on papers concerning my relatives who are still alive and I expect the University to apply that embargo with care. I should be pleased if you would make the necessary arrangements direct with the University."

Another TL(CAR) copy is in the file.

Tylor thanks BR for his letter of 2 May, noting his wishes, and plans to communicate with McMaster.

"I am glad to learn that there is an embargo on papers concerning relatives who are still alive. When I said that I would have to consult my papers, I had in mind that there might be persons who could claim that these letters were confidential or that letters written by us to you about them were possibly libellous or susceptible of claims for libel."

There is an enclosed note to BR from Tylor stating, "Herewith a copy of my letter of today's date to Mr. Blackwell at McMaster University."

Tylor informs Blackwell that BR has given his consent to provide McMaster University with his correspondence with Tylor, in due course.

Tylor writes that while he is pleased to fulfil BR's wishes, he will have to consult his partners regarding this matter, as some may deem these letters libellous or susceptible to claims of libel.

""With regard to the latter letters, it might be that disclosure to third parties would deprive us of the protection of qualified privilege. In the light of these factors, it may be that we would have to ask the University for an assurance as to an adequate embargo addressed to us and possibly for an indemnity. We cannot really judge until we have had an opportunity of looking at the papers. This may take some time but I will, however, write to you further in due course."

[K. Blackwell's note: nothing further was heard from Tylor. He ceased to be a partner in 1972.]

Lock writes: "Although I hope I have managed to keep Mr. Christopher Farley informed of most of the developments with regard to Sarah, I thought that you would like to hear from me what has happened recently and what new arrangements have been made for Sarah", which Lock goes on to detail in this letter.

Edith thanks Lock for his letter of 21 November, and is pleased to learn about Sarah's situation. Edith addresses the points in Lock's letter, and also writes of her most recent update from Sarah.

Lock is to keep Anton Felton informed of the overall situation with regard to the grandchildren's finances, "Because he has a very full appreciation of our overall circumstances."

Lock thanks Farley for his letter of 16 January.

"There had been some misunderstanding between Mrs. Lucas and myself as to whom [sic] was waiting to hear from the other, but we have now clarified this and I have written to her with my suggestions today."

Powell encloses letters which he arranged to be typed (document .066260a, record 116951; and document .066260b, record 116952).

There is a numbered list of names in Edith's hand. They are the signatories of the Russell-Einstein Manifesto.

Draft letter (a). Enclosed with document .066261, record 116950.

Draft letter (b).

Letter is in an invitation to be a member of a committee of about twenty scientists to meet in India in December "... in order to make an appraisal of the dangers which have arisen from the development of weapons of mass destruction. This proposal has arisen from the public statement made in July of last year, of which we were among the signatories, and in which it was suggested that such a conference should be held."

The invitation explains why such a conference needs to be held, and what would be discussed.

Enclosed with document .066261, record 116950.

Another draft of this letter is available at record 132224.

Joliot-Curie's letter is in French, in reply to BR's of 6 July. [BR's letter must have been a form letter that was addressed individually to a number of scientists. See the list (which includes Joliot-Curie) noted on Powell's letter of 1956/07/08, document .066261, record 116950.]

Powell thanks BR for his letter of 6 July, and writes that he will, of course, hope to take part in the conference in India. "I hope to see Professor Yukawa in a few days time. No doubt you will have dispatched a similar letter to him; I will show him my copy, as it may be some time before he receives his own."

Burton, Rotblat's secretary, writes in his absence to acknowledge BR's letter of 6 July, as Rotblat is in the United States, and will return towards the end of August.

Powell thanks BR for his letter of 13 August, and its enclosed reply from Pauling.

Powell has heard from Yukawa who is also willing to sign, which means replies have been received from everyone BR has written to. "I feel that the response is encouraging and the signatures representative to permit us to proceed. Do you share this opinion? It would, of course, have been more satisfactory to have the two American signatures, but I think the balance has not been too seriously disturbed."

Attached is a note saying, "With Professor C.F. Powell's compliments." It is a draft for BR's message to the 1st Pugwash Conference.

BR writes that due to poor health he cannot attend the meeting of the Pugwash delegates, though his letter details the importance of arranging the Pugwash Conference.

Powell thanks BR for his letter of 16 August. "I have only yesterday seen a copy of the publication from the government of India, and have not yet had time to read it. I quite understand the personal point which you make; I myself was never in doubt as to how the public letter originated."

Powell has discussed replies to BR's letter, with Dr. Burhop, outlining their suggestions.

Powell encloses a handwritten list of "proposed additions to list of personalities to be invited." They are: A.H. Sturtevant, G.W. Beadle, R.E. Lapp, M. Tsuzuki, Skobeltzyn, Nuzhdin, de Castro.

Powell encloses a letter (not present) from Eaton, which he received from Burhop.

"I wonder whether you would feel able to approach him or whether you would prefer that somebody else should do so."

BR invites Bohr to the conference to be held in India the coming December.

Letter is slight modification of BR's previous invitation letters (document .066260b, record 116952).

Rotblat encloses a letter to Cyrus S. Eaton for BR to sign, asking for financial help for the conference in India (not present).

Rotblat informs BR that the Atomic Scientists' Association is planning to start a journal called The Atomic Age, keeping the public informed on issues regarding atomic energy. Rotblat has become the editor of The Atomic Age.

"I am very anxious that we should get as wide a circulation as possible and felt that it would be a great help to us if we were able to get the backing of a number of well known personalities. I believe that one of my colleagues has written to you to ask you for an appreciation of about 300 words, in which you would say something about the importance of such a journal and the function it may fulfill."

BR evidently wrote his reply by hand, sending his good wishes for the success of the journal.

Salmon thanks BR for his letter "... expressing good wishes to The Atomic Age", which has been forwarded to Rotblat.

Rotblat thanks BR for his letter of 20 September and his offer to contribute £50 to the cost of expenses of the congress, though Rotblat hopes there will be no need to make use of BR's offer.

"Although the number of acceptances has been fairly small, we feel that it may be worth while to go ahead with the conference. In accordance with our original suggestion to invite other people if we have too many refusals, we suggest the following five be invited: —Dr Oppenheimer, Dr Albert Schweitzer, Professor Rajewsky of Germany, Professor Thirring of Austria and Professor Burgers of Holland."

Rotblat encloses letters addressed to them, asking BR to sign them if he agrees with the suggestions, and to send them back to Rotblat who will mail them (not present).

Haddow writes that he has been in correspondence with George de Hevesy and encloses a copy of his last letter (record 116965).

Haddow thanks de Hevesy for his letter of 26 September.

"I was glad to know Hahn's opinion, and I presume he has conveyed this to Russell. The latter has of course always been keen on the so-called 'neutral' countries, although I confess this does not affect me in the slightest, and I should be glad to take part in discussions anywhere, provided they are representative and likely to serve some useful purpose." Haddow addresses specific points in de Hevesy's 26 September letter.

Enclosed with record 116964.

Kothari writes that he hopes BR has received his letter of 18 September.

"I have seen your letter to Mr. Moulik (Public Relations Officer, Indian High Commission, London). I am sincerely sorry for the unfortunate oversight about the authorship of the quotation at the beginning of Chapter VII (conclusion) in the book Nuclear Explosions." This is being corrected for the second impression, which will be released the following month. He is adding Born and Pauling to the list of signatories to the quotation.

Rotblat encloses a letter to Krishnan (not present).

"I hear now that all the Russians, both Nesmeyanov (President of the Academy) and Skobeltzyn will be coming, as well as two other Russians suggested by them. This means that we shall have enough Russians and my worry now is whether we shall get enough Americans."

Rotblat encloses fundraising letters (not present) for BR to sign.

Rotblat thanks BR for his letter and encloses another letter to Kothari for BR's signature and mailing (not present).

"I am glad to hear that you are going to be in London between November 7th and 14th and I would be grateful if you would ring me up soon after your arrival in order to arrange a time for a meeting."

Edith made a to-do list at the top of the letter: ring Rotblat. Turner (R. Brooke). Wood. Oath of Allegiance.

Rotblat encloses three fundraising letters for BR's signature (not present). "We have not heard from Krishnan that they agree to the postponement of the conference until Easter. We hope soon to send out a letter to all the people being invited telling them about the postponement."

Rotblat encloses a number of letters to go out to conference acceptees informing them that the conference is to be postponed, as per his 19 November letter, and asks BR to sign and mail them (not present).

He informs BR that they've been advised to approach the Aga Khan for financial support for the conference, and asks BR for his thoughts. "It has also been suggested that we approach an American Foundation called Resources for the Future. I do not know much about it. So far our intention has been to stick to individuals rather than institutions. I should be glad to have your comments on this as well."

On the verso of Rotblat's letter.

BR has signed the letters Rotblat sent on 22 November, and sees no objection to approaching the Aga Khan for financial support, though he doubts it would be provided. He has not heard of the foundation, "Resources for the Future", but if they do not have a definite political flavour he sees no objection in getting money from them.

Eaton thanks BR for his letter of 19 November, and is pleased to hear that BR is considering Pugwash for the location of his conference.

Eaton informs BR that considering the severity of Pugwash's later winter and early spring climate, an Easter meeting would not be possible, and due to an impending Canadian election in 1957, Eaton proposed starting the conference either June 29 or 30. "For a successful conference, I agree completely with you that the Communist countries would have to be represented. Inasmuch as Canada allowed us to have scholars from Soviet Russia and the People's Republic of China at Pugwash last summer, I would anticipate no difficulty on this score in 1957."

Eaton encloses articles BR may find of interest (record 116974 and record 116975).

Article titled "The Breakfast Commentator" is about Eaton and his Pugwash estate.

Enclosed with Eaton's letter, record 116973.

Article is a short feature about Eaton titled "Bulls Before Bullets".

Enclosed with Eaton's letter, record 116973.

Eaton encloses an exchange of cables between himself and New Times, the weekly USSR journal of opinion (record 116977 and record 116978).

Berezhkov asks Eaton to write a statement on his thoughts and wishes for the coming year to be published in the New Year's issue.

Enclosed with record 116976.

Telegram is Eaton's New Year's wish for New Times.

Enclosed with record 116976.

Burhop writes, "A French friend of mine, who is related by marriage to Mr. Howard Samuel, one of the people to whom you wrote asking for support for the international meeting, recently suggested to me that a personal approach to Mr. Samuel might help. Accordingly I called on him during last week and he agreed to make a donation of £100 and he wrote out the enclosed cheque for this amount. I wonder whether you would be good enough to send him a note of acknowledgement and thanks? I have taken the liberty to drafting something that might be suitable."

Burhop believes they should declare soon for Pugwash.

Rotblat thanks BR for sending him Eaton's cable.

He met with Powell and Burhop to discuss Eaton's offer of holding the meeting in Pugwash, and the three of them agree there are many advantages to holding the meeting in Canada and suggest that BR take Eaton up on his offer.

"We are a little bit worried, however, about his ideas for publicity of this meeting and we are just about to draft a letter suggesting to him that all matters of publicity be left to the delegates of the conference."

Rotblat suggests that while he drafts a letter to Eaton, BR cable him accepting his offer, and suggest the dates 5 to 12 July.

BR writes that he is willing to cable Eaton, as per Rotblat's suggestion. However, he has no record of his address, as he has passed along to Rotblat all the letters he has received from Eaton. He asks that Rotblat forward Eaton's address to him and draft the detailed letter for BR to sign.

This is the carbon copy. The dictation is available at record 15283 and the ribbon is at record 132214.

Rotblat encloses the letter to Eaton about holding the conference in Nova Scotia, asking BR to sign and send it if he agrees with its contents (not present).

He also encloses two cheques from Warburg and Samuel.

BR has signed and mailed the letter to Eaton, and deposited the cheques and encloses his own.

Typed on the verso of Rotblat's letter.

Eaton encloses a booklet on PS Troubadour, the shorthorn steer from Eaton's Acadia Farms, which was recently crowned International Grand Champion Steer (record 116985).

BR begins the letter with a bracketed comment "(I think we might drop formality, don't you?)".

He thanks Boyd Orr for his letter of 28 July and informs him that wives are definitely allowed to attend the congress, and he is bringing his own wife.

Rotblat thanks BR for his letter and cheque of £140, including BR's own contribution.

Rotblat asks BR if he would be willing to write an article for the New Scientist regarding H-bomb tests, which they would like written before the next H-bomb test takes place. It would appear in the 28 March issue and be needed by 15 March. "The A.S.A. are collaborating with the New Scientist in the sense that every fourth issue contains an atomic science section which is prepared by members of the A.S.A. In the first of these issues (I am sending you a copy of this by separate mail), I wrote an article, which deals only with the radiation hazards, should be followed by another dealing with the political arguments against h-bomb tests. I am sure there is no other person who could write such an article better and produce a greater effect on the public than yourself."

A copy of the carbon for this letter is located at record 7488.

BR encloses a letter from Eaton (not present), who seems to believe BR will go to Pugwash, which is not the case. BR asks Rotblat to either reply to Eaton directly, or write up a draft letter BR can sign to address some points in Eaton's letter.

He will write the article on the H-bomb tests. [Typed on the verso of Rotblat's letter.]

Rotblat encloses letters (not present) to Eaton and to the scientists previously invited, to inform them of the change of date and place for the meeting. He asks that if BR approves them, he sign and send them.

"I have still to write letters to the Indians and one other Russian, but with regard to the latter perhaps we should wait to see whether we shall get more American representation. At the moment there are far too few Americans. I feel also in deference to Mr. Eaton we should perhaps invite one Canadian, but cannot for the moment think of any suitable name."

Rotblat thanks BR for agreeing to write his article for the New Scientist.

BR encloses a letter from Oppenheimer which he cannot answer, and asks Rotblat if he would reply to it.

BR also encloses a letter from Lacassagne (not present).

BR writes that he has been reading Rotblat's paper about H-bomb tests in The New Scientist and other parts of the same journal, and is unsure as to the perspective he should be taking in his own piece on H-bomb tests. "I cannot treat the subject politically without expressing controversial opinions and I rather gather that The New Scientist would not wish for such opinion as opposed to scientific fact."

BR expresses his own views, that the tests should be abandoned by an international agreement, which if cannot be met, then should be abandoned by the government. "Is it in order for me to express these views in such an austerely factual journal?"

Rotblat agrees with BR's 2 March letter, that it is impossible to discuss the H-bomb politically without expressing a controversial opinion. "I had a chat about this with the editor of the New Scientist, Percy Cudlipp, who said that as long as we can hear an opposite view as well he will not mind having a controversial issue ventilated." In respect to this Rotblat has asked Sir George Thomson, who recently strongly spoke out against people advocating bans on H-bomb tests, to write an article.

A copy of the carbon for this letter is located at record 7486.

Rotblat encloses a suggested reply to Oppenheimer's letter and asks BR if he agrees with it to sign and send it (not present).

A copy of the carbon is located at record 7485.

BR encloses his article regarding the political aspects of the H-bomb tests (not present). "I hope you will succeed in getting them to print it, but I shall not be surprised if you do not." BR asks if he has permission to get the article printed in other countries and languages, as he is constantly receiving requests from Japan asking his position on the tests.

BR encloses letters from Pauling and Kalujeskaja (not present).

Powell informs BR that he notified Sir K.S. Krishnan and General Sokhey about the meeting date and location being changed from India, as per the initial proposal, to Nova Scotia in July, and that should this meeting be successful it is hoped that they could approach the Indian authorities.

Sokhey wrote to Powell advising him to contact Nehru, informing him of their decision and its reasons. Powell has drafted a letter to Nehru, which he encloses for BR's approval and to send (not present).

Eaton encloses a clipping from the previous day's New York Herald Tribune, stating that in the article, "... the chief mouthpiece of the Eisenhower administration, Alsop suggests that the warnings you have been giving to the world are beginning to be taken seriously" (record 116996).

Newspaper clipping, and photocopy of newsclipping, from 17 March 1957's New York Herald Tribune, titled "Peering into Hell". Enclosed with record 116995.

Rotblat suggests sending out three more invitations to Pugwash, as very few Americans have accepted. "One of these is H.J. Muller who previously refused but perhaps might be inclined to accept now. Dr. Price is the chairman of the Federation of American Scientists. If you approve of these letters would you kindly sign them and send them off" (not present). Rotblat informs BR that his article will be published by the New Scientist and will appear in the following week's issue, with Angus Maud taking the opposite view.

There are handwritten notes on this letter, stating "Letters signed and sent" and "Proofs returned 22 March 3/6/0 sent for reprints."

A copy of the carbon of this letter is located at record 7484.

BR asks Rotblat for permission to send a copy of his article on H-bomb tests to the Yomiuri, a Japanese newspaper, as they have been requesting a statement from him on nuclear tests.

Rotblat has ensured that the editor has no objections to BR's request to use his article for another publication. "It is rather sickening to see the Western powers decision to go ahead with nuclear tests. The need for our conference is now even greater than ever."

A copy of the carbon for this letter is at record 7483.

BR thanks Rotblat for his letter and permission to publish his article in Japan. The outcome of the Bermuda conference is disappointing.

He encloses an article by Max Born, who desires publication in England. "I am afraid it is too popular for the New Scientist, but I cannot think where else it could be published. I am sending it to you in case you think it suitable for the New Scientist. If you do not, would you be so kind as to return it to me as soon as possible? And if you have any advice as to where it might be published, I shall be grateful."

Rotblat encloses a letter for BR to sign and send to Professor Rehberg, as per Niels Bohr's suggestion (not present). He is drafting letters to people who have not yet decided requesting that they make a decision soon.

Regarding Max Born's article, Rotblat writes that he had previously offered to publish the article in the New Scientist if he shortened it, which Born refused to do. "I wonder whether you could use your influence with Born to reconsider his decision about reducing it for the New Scientist? I return the article herewith [not present]."

Eaton writes, "There are many signs that the world is beginning to take seriously the importance of nuclear development in establishing and maintaining peace. Your conferences are being held at a propitious time!"

Eaton has asked Rotblat for an invitation and a list of responses he has received.

BR thanks Rotblat for his letter of 5 April regarding Max Born.

"I feel that it is very desirable to please him, and in view of what you say in your letter, I wonder whether he could be induced to divide the article into two and at the same time shorten it, though less than if it remained one article, and whether, if so, you would be prepared to publish the two articles." BR is writing to Born as well with this suggestion.

Rotblat thanks BR for his letter of 15 March, and is having Born's lecture retyped as he has the only English version of the lecture, which will be forwarded to BR Wednesday.

BR writes to Born about publishing his article in the New Scientist. While the magazine cannot accept an article as long as his, BR suggests dividing the article in half, with each half somewhat shortened.

BR writes that he has not heard from Rotblat if he desires his contribution of £50 to go towards the Pugwash Conference.

In a postscript BR writes that he encloses a letter from Professor Weisskopf (not present).

Rotblat thanks BR for his letter and contribution towards the expenses of the Pugwash Conference.

Rotblat expresses concern with the poor response to the invitations to Pugwash, as there still has been no response from the last batch of letters sent out. Rotblat proposes inviting Dr. Brock Chisholm, former president of the W.H.O. as the conference will be held in Canada, as well as renewing Hahn's invitation.

Rotblat encloses a copy of a statement on the strontium hazard issued by the A.S.A. (not present).

Burhop writes that he, Powell and Rotblat have decided to recommend to BR that a new batch of Pugwash invitations be sent to the listed people and encloses the invitation letters (not present) to them, to be signed and sent by BR.

Burhop "saw" BR's "TV programme the other evening"; it was "superb". [It was BR on his life and times, televised 17 May 1957. Alan Wood was involved, for the biography was published next day. Lady Barnet may also have been involved.]

Eaton thanks Rotblat for his letter of 16 May, agreeing with the provisional programme changes and the list of participants, which was enclosed.

He writes that though the conference is set for 8-10 July, any scientists who wish to arrive a few days early are more than welcome to do so.

Eaton asks if there is anybody in the McGill faculty that would be useful to invite to the conference, as McGill has been incredibly helpful in previous meetings at Pugwash.

Burhop encloses invitations for the listed people, H.D. Smyth, J.A. Simpson, Chou Pei-yuan.

There is a handwritten note in the top left corner saying "Signed and sent".

Eaton encloses a copy of the Saturday Review of 25 May (not present) and New York Times front page story of 27 May, regarding the hazards of nuclear energy (record 117012).

Document is the New York Times front page article entitled, "Fall-Out Hearing Will Open Today: Congress Study Aims to Bar Politics and Get at Facts of Atomic Test Dangers" by John W. Finney.

Enclosed with record 117011.

BR encloses a letter from Hans Thirring, needing urgent attention (not present). BR feels it is desirable for him to go to Pugwash. "Have you funds in hand that you can use to send him the price of his ticket? As I told Rotblat, I am willing to contribute £50 to the expenses connected with the Congress at any moment if this would help. Will you please communicate with Professor Thirring about his expenses?"

BR writes that he is sure there is money for Thirring's fare, and has sent his letter to Burhop.

"I note what you say about 'a kind of atom hysteria'. It is not confined to Austria and is liable to grow until it becomes uncontrollable. I am very glad that you expect to go to the Pugwash Conference."

On the verso of the letter at record 117013.

Burhop encloses a number of letters in reply to those received from intending participants (not present).

He also encloses a proposed letter to Eaton (not present).

Chou writes as he cannot get a visa to London, as the visa office has not been informed of the conference. Yuan asks for BR's help with this as he is to leave for London on the 29th of the month.

The letter may be a transcription of a telegram.

Burhop encloses two letters to Eaton and Thirring, dealing with the matter of fare money.

He also encloses a letter which has arrived from Eaton (not present), and has discussed with Powell the idea of inviting someone from McGill, which Powell agreed would be a nice gesture.

Simpson replies to BR's invitation to Pugwash, though he is unable to take part in the conference due to commitments in July and August.

BR writes, "I think perhaps something ought to be done in the way of preparing participants [for my absence] and suggesting the need of a chairman. I have always thought it probable, as you and Rotblat and Powell have known, that I should not be able to go and now, for reasons of health, this is quite definite. I have an affliction of the throat which makes me unable to swallow many ordinary kinds of food and which gets worse if I am exposed to fatigue."

[This letter makes it clear that BR decided not to attend Pugwash before Edith's heart attack, which took place on June 6.]

Eaton thanks BR for his letters of 29 and 30 May, and informs BR that funds have been cabled to Professor Waddington and they are working on obtaining visas for others.

Eaton suggests John S. Forster of McGill as an addition to Pugwash. Also in file is a handwritten copy of the telegram.

Rotblat writes that Brock Chisholm could be the chairman of the conference, as it will be taking place in Canada.

He has received letters from Rabinowitch and Szilard suggesting people from the United States to be invited. He encloses the letters, as well as a letter to Foster of McGill (not present).

Rotblat writes that during his visit to Poland he was able to persuade Marian Danysz to go to Pugwash in place of Leopold Infeld.

Burhop should be asked to attend Pugwash to help with the organization as he would be the ideal person to deal with the secretarial and other work that will likely arise.

Rotblat asks BR to record a message on tape to be read at the conference as he will not be able to attend.

At Eaton's request the Bank of Nova Scotia encloses a draft for Canadian $520.00.

Eaton thanks Rotblat for his letter of 12 June, and confirms the list of attendees.

Eaton encloses a clipping from the New York Times of 17 June 1957 which "... shows the continued and ever-growing interest in the subject of your conference" (record 117026).

Document is a clipping from the New York Times by C.L. Sulzberger.

Article is enclosed with Eaton's letter, record 117025.

BR has signed the two letters Rotblat enclosed on April 29.

BR does not think it worth while to send cables to those who have not replied because of the expense and because "most of those who don't answer don't mean to come."

Rotblat thanks BR for his letter of 18 June and realizes that since his last conversation with BR, it will be impossible for BR to attend Pugwash.

He will send as little correspondence to BR as possible given the present difficulties he is facing. [Re Edith's illness.]