DES MOINES, Iowa, February 17, 1953. Senator WILLIAM LANGER, Chairman, Senate Judiciary Committee, Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C.: Board of governors Iowa State Bar Association unanimously favor adoption of constitutional amendment re treaties and executive agreements. Lawyers of Iowa believe lawmaking functions belong in the Congress and will favor any amendment similar to one recommended by American Bar Association. IOWA STATE BAR ASSOCIATION, By EDWARD H. JONES, Secretary. BAKERSFIELD, CALIF., February 18, 1953. Senator WILLIAM LANGER, Chairman, Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C.: Fully approve constitutional amendment endorsed by American Bar Association preventing foreign treaties becoming American law. D. L. TYLER SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF., February 18, 1953. Senator LANGER, United States Senate, Washington, D. C.: Request favorable consideration on amendment recommended by American Bar Association committee on peace and law. ANNA M. COLLINS. SAN MATEO, CALIF., February 18, 1953. Senator LANGER, Judiciary Committee, United States Senate, Washington, D. C.: I earnestly recommend favorable consideration amendment Constitution as revised by American Bar Association. The Honorable WILLIAM LANGER, ODUS C. HORNEY, Brigadier General Retired. FORT WAYNE, IND., February 18, 1953. Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C.: At a regular meeting of the Fort Wayne Medical Society, Fort Wayne, Ind., February 17, it was requested that we go on record as favoring the early approval of the Bricker resolution, Senate Joint Resolution 1. FORT WAYNE MEDICAL SOCIETY. Hon. WILLIAM LANGER, KELLOGG, IDAHO, February 17, 1953. Chairman, Senate Judiciary Committee, United States Senate, Washington, D. C.: Commend to you and your committee for favorable action text of constitutional amendment on treaty law proposed by American Bar Association committee on peace and law. This proposal arrived at after long and serious consideration by leading American lawyers, debated and now approved by recommendation of the American Bar Association. Consider such an amendment as a great need and this proposed form as the proper solution to that need. ROBERT E. BROWN, President, Idaho State Bar. Hon. WILLIAM LANGER, SHERIDAN, Wyo., February 17, 1953. Chairman, Senate Judiciary Committee, United States Senate, Washington, D. C.: The house of delegates of American Bar Association has approved proposed constitutional amendment re treaties and executive agreements as sponsored by Hon. Frank E. Holman, Seattle, Wash. I urge favorable consideration of this draft as approved by the American Bar Association. H. GLENN KINSLEY, State Delegate, American Bar Association for Wyoming. DENVER, COLO., February 17, 1953. Hon. WILLIAM LANGER, Chairman, Senate Judiciary Committee, United States Senate, Washington, D. C.: The constitutional amendment regarding treaties and executive agreements, in substantially the form recommended by the American Bar Association, is, in our judgment, imperative to the security and well-being of the citizenry of the United States. JAMES A. WOODS, ROYAL C. RUBRIGHT, CHARLES J. BEISE. BAKERSFIELD, CALIF., February 17, 1953. WILLIAM LANGER, Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C.: I respectfully request your support for the constitutional amendment as outlined by American Bar Association committee on peace and law. JOHN S. KING, 511 Jefferson, Bakersfield, Calif. Senator WILLIAM LANGER, Washington, D. C.: TULARE, CALIF., February 17, 1952. I favor the passage of the Bricker bill with the amendment opposed by the American Bar Association closing the loopholes. MERVIN J. FULTON. RESOLUTION The American Flag Committee hereby adopts the following resolution: Whereas great danger is facing the United States of America, by reason of the many international proposals being submitted by treaty to deprive the United States of America of her constitutional rights and power, and the constitutional rights and power of the individual States of the United States of America: Therefore, be it Resolved, That the subcommittee of the Judiciary Committee of the Senate draft proper legislation in the form of an amendment of the right to make treaties, to be submitted to the States, to protect the American Government and the people thereof, against the many abuses and dangers of treaty law. THE AMERICAN FLAG COMMITTEE, Dated this 12th day of February 1953. Mrs. R. E. HANKINSON, Mrs. E. ELIZABETH LAINE, W. HENRY MACFARLAND, Jr. Hon. WILLIAM LANGER, AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION JOURNAL, United States Senate, Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR: I am advised by Frank Holman, of Seattle, Wash., that the Senate Judiciary Committee, of which you are chairman, will begin hearings on Wednesday, the 18th, on a proposed constitutional amendment limiting the effect of treaties and executive agreements. From the information I have received, I understand there will be a great many varying texts and forms of amendment presented to the committee. All of these have to deal with the same subject, which is limiting the effect of treaties and executive agreements. As you are aware, the American Bar Association, through its house of delegates, has recommended a constitutional amendment which has heretofore been presented to you and the members of your committee. This amendment has been carefully considered for many years by some of the ablest lawyers in America and clearly expresses the cumulative thinking of the American Bar on this subject. The purpose of this letter is to emphasize the fact that we of the American Bar wish to see a constitutional amendment approved by your committee in substantially the form heretofore recommended by our association. Yours very truly, ROY E. WILLY. AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION, Chicago 10, Ill., February 16, 1953. Hon. WILLIAM LANGER, United States Senator, Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C. DEAR BILL: I have been advised that hearings will commence February 18 on the constitutional amendment relating to treaties and executive agreements. I have written to you before on this subject. The Ameri I understand that there are about a dozen different amendments. can Bar Association, through many of its very fine legal minds, have worked out a constitutional amendment which I am convinced is what this country needs. I certainly would favor an amendment substantially in the form recommended by the American Bar Association. I think that the amendment so suggested is responsive to the thinking of the people in this part of the country. I have never liked the idea of negotiating treaties and executive agreements without the knowledge or consent of the people, the effect of which is to override what we always thought was the supreme law of the land, namely, the Constitution, and I think it is time to put a stop to it. With kindest regards, I am, Yours very truly, HERBERT G. NILLES, State Delegate for the State of North Dakota. CONCORD, N. H., February 16, 1953. Hon. WILLIAM LANGER, Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR: I am writing you concerning the proposal to amend the Constitution relating to treaties and executive agreements. As a member of the house of delegates of the American Bar Association, I voted in favor of the form as recommended by the American Bar Association. I favor a constitutional amendment substantially in that form, and I will appreciate anything you can do in support of it. Very truly yours, WILLOUGHBY A. COLBY. WYMAN, STARR, BOOTH, WADLEIGH & LANGDELL, Hon. WILLIAM LANGER, Chairman, Senate Judiciary Committee, Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: I write to you to record my endorsement of a constitutional amendment with reference to treaties and executive agreements which shall be worded substantially as in the form recommended by the American Bar Association. I have been engaged in the general practice of law in New Hampshire for a little over 50 years. I have read all of the literature and arguments relating to treaties and executive agreements that I have been able to secure. I believe that such a proposed amendment is called for as an aid to the conservation of our constitutional system. Respectfully yours, LOUIS E. WYMAN. LOFTIN & WHAL, Jacksonville 1, Fla., February 16, 1953. Re Senate Joint Resolution 1, International Treaty Law. Hon. WILLIAM LANGER, Chairman, Senate Judiciary Committee, United States Senate, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR SENATOR: I understand that the Senate Judiciary Committee, under your leadership, proposes to begin hearings this week on the constitutional amendment with respect to treaties and executive agreements; that there are about a dozen varying texts before your committee. I am very much in favor of the proposal to limit the authority of the executive department of the Government to make these international agreements. In the past, in my judgment, many treaties and other international agreements have been made which were not only contrary to the best interest of the country but which were also in violation of the United States Constitution and some State constitutions. I favor a constitutional amendment to take care of this situation. While undoubtedly the subject can be approached in a good many ways, I think an amendment substantially in the form as that recommended by the American Bar Association would definitely alleviate all evils. I sincerely trust your committee will report out such an amendment. Sincerely yours, SCOTT M. LOFTIN Hon. WILLIAM LANGER, MOSTELLER, FELLERS, ANDREWS & LOVING, Chairman, Senate Judiciary Committee, Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR LANGER: It is my understanding that, as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, you are commencing hearings on a proposed constitutional amendment dealing with treaties and executive agreements. As you know, the American Bar Association has devoted considerable time and attention to this matter, utilizing the ability and capacity of particularly qualified members of the bar as well as the considered judgment of members of its house of delegates. It would appear that an amendment substantially in the form approved by the American Bar Association should merit a favorable reception by your committee, and I know you will see to it that the views of the American bar are heard and that the studied efforts of these constitutional lawyers receive appropriate consideration. Your thoughtful leadership in connection with this important matter is greatly appreciated. Very sincerely yours, JAMES D. FELLERS. Hon. WILLIAM LANGER, THE CHURCH PEACE UNION, New York 21, N. Y., February 16, 1953. Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: The enclosed is a copy of a resolution passed by the executive committee of the Church Peace Union protesting the Bricker resolution. It was voted May 21, 1952. Very truly yours, JOHN R. INMAN, Assistant Secretary. RESOLUTION IN OPPOSITION TO SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION 130, COMMONLY CALLED THE BRICKER RESOLUTION The Church Peace Union records its opposition to Senate Joint Resolution 130, joint resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to the making of treaties and executive agreements, commonly called the Bricker resolution, for the following reasons: 1. The existing Constitution of the United States provides adequate safeguards against the encroachment of treaties or executive agreements on the rights of United States citizens. 2. Our Government, in order best to serve the national interest, must frequently participate with other nations in international organizations. Senate Joint Resolution 130 would prohibit many treaties of arbitration and conciliation which must rely on commissions and tribunals of an international nature and would nullify all agreements to refer disputes to the International Court of Justice. Further, it would seriously jeopardize the formation or continued existence of such international organizations as the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and the United Nations. We strongly urge that the Congress, the President, and the courts of the United States hold uppermost the rights of the citizens of the United States together with the national interest and employ the existing constitutional machinery in protecting both. Voted at executive committee meeting of the Church Peace Union May 21, 1952. Senator SMITH. Mr. Chairman, I do not know what organizations have protested except just the one you mentioned. It might be well to have Mr. Smithey check on the organizations that have protested and those in favor, too. We might have some information there that would be worth while. The CHAIRMAN. The staff will do that. Mr. Holman, maybe you and I can get together sometime in the next day or two to see how we can expedite this matter and get it determined as rapidly as possible. Mr. HOLMAN. I am at your service, sir. The CHAIRMAN. You understand these matters are delayed and delayed and delayed and delayed, and this is a very important matter. I want this Congress to act upon it. Mr. HOLMAN. I am at your service any time, sir. Senator SMITH. May I inquire, are the protests you mentioned, for the most part, on the principle of the proposed amendment or as to the form or language? The CHAIRMAN. They do not say. Mr. HOLMAN. Is there one protest? The CHAIRMAN. There is one protest. Senator SMITH. I can see that there can be many differences of opinion about the precise language to be used. I am not certain at all myself about that, a good many of us are not. The CHAIRMAN. We will give them a chance to be heard. They are mostly by rabbis and ministers. There is the Church Peace Union |