Imagini ale paginilor
PDF
ePub

has contended that there is no longer any real distinction between foreign and domestic affairs? Were you aware of that statement?

Mr. LASHLEY. I have seen it used somewhere, and I did not understand it very well.

Mr. SMITHEY. If that analysis is allowed to stand, can it no longer be said that there is an implied limitation on the treatymaking power insofar as the subject matter is concerned ?

Mr. LASHLEY. If I am to answer on the assumption that that statement was made by somebody, I would not know how to answer. I do not understand precisely what whoever made it intended by it. I do not have the context which led up to or explained it. So I would merely be romancing to attempt to answer it. I do not know too well what is meant by there no longer being any distinction between foreign and domestic affairs. To me, there is a good deal of distinction between them.

Mr. SMITHEY. If a matter once becomes a matter for discussion

Senator KEFAUVER. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Smithey referred to that analysis, if that is allowed to stand. And I did not know that analysis had ever been established.

Mr. SMITHEY. I think you will find it is in the record with the citation, Senator.

Senator KEFAUVER. Who established it? Who had the power to establish it?

Mr. SMITHEY. That was a declaration, and it is the opening sentence of a State Department publication. I can give you the num. ber. No. 3972, of the General Foreign Policy Series No. 26, released 1950, with a foreword by President Truman. The first statement is as I quoted it: There is no longer any real distinction between domestic and foreign affairs.

Senator KEFAUVER. That does not establish anything as the law of the land. That is somebody's opinion.

Mr. SMITHEY. Senator, I was not attempting to establish anything as the law of the land. I was asking him if, in the light of that, it could be said that if that be true, there is any implied limitation on the subject matter of a treaty.

Senator KEFAUVER. Your question was: “If this analysis is allowed to stand." You were asserting it as if it was the law of the land at the present time, and I do not think that impression should be left in the record.

Mr. SMITHEY. Senator, if I gave any impression that that was the law of the land it was unintended. However, it certainly is the assertion or was the assertion of the Department of State. It is not judicial law. I intended to ask the witness-

Senator KEFAUVER. Who signed the document?

Mr. SMITHEY. It is in the Foreign Policy Series, and it is here for your examination if you care to examine it, Senator.

Senator KEFAUVER. Mr. Chairman, I do not think we are getting off on the right basis by taking some statement out of a pamphlet which, as far as I can find, is not signed by anybody, and saying that that is the analysis of the State Department.

The CHAIRMAN. There is no harm in the opinion, anyhow. Senator KEFAUVER. I guess not. Mr. SMITHEY. It has been presented to the committee on a number of occasions.

The CHAIRMAN. We have asked many witnesses the same question.

Mr. LASHLEY. There may be an argumentative sense in which certain matters of foreign relations and domestic relations are the same, but the statement could not go, in my own mind, without having studied it, as a general proposition. I think there is a difference between foreign relations and domestic relations.

Mr. SMITHEY. I asked you that primarily because in the course of your statement you had sought to encourage certain international agencies in their endeavor in certain fields. Mr. LASHLEY. I believe that to be our duty, yes.

Mr. SMITHEY. Insofar as the agreements, say, of the International Labor Organization are concerned, where they deal with such subi jects as maternity protection, do you think that those are appropriate matters for the consideration of international agreements?

Mr. LASHLEY. I do not know. I have no idea. I do not believe I could be of any service to the committee in discussing this proposed constitutional amendment by going into the details of various social subjects that might be discussed around the table in educative process of these various committees associated with the United Nations. I have not enough information on the subject to be of any value to the committee.

Mr. SMITHEY. The only reason I asked you the question, sir, was because of your earlier reference that you would encourage them to go into these field as much as possible.

Mr. LASHLEY. Yes.

Mr. SMITHEY. If I misinterpreted you, I wanted to give you an opportunity to answer that question.

Mr. LASHLEY. At the time you began asking me, in answer to Senator Symington I was saying or was about to say-perhaps I may not have finished the point I was about to say, I think, that the Government does not have the power to make treaties which are contrary to the prohibitions of the Constitution any more than the Congress has power to pass laws which are contrary to the prohibition in the Constitution. T'he Constitution is the background against which treaties must be measured, against which acts of Congress must be measured, as to their validity.

Mr. SMITHEY. Were you present at the Louisville, Ky., regional meeting of the American Bar when Mr. Dulles made his statement which has been widely quoted ?

Mr. LASHLEY. No, I was not.

Mr. SMITHEY. To the effect that treaties can override the Constitution?

Mr. LASHLEY. In a pamphlet published by the committee on peace and law of the American Bar Association, I saw an excerpt from his speech to that effect, and I did not have the rest of the speech. I do not know whether the bald language that was quoted has been modified by further exposition in the speech. I do not know that. But so far as the categorical statement you have just quoted is concerned, I would not agree with that.

Mr. SMITHEY. I have no further questions.

The CHAIRMAN. I want to thank you very much for coming You always help out this committee. It was a very fine thing for you to do.

Mr. LASHLEY. Thank you so much, Senator Langer.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Albert Edelman?

STATEMENT OF ALBERT I. EDELMAN, ATTORNEY AT LAW AND MEMBER OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR THE UNITED NATIONS

Mr. EDELMAN. I am Albert I. Edelman, an attorney with offices 30 Pine Street, New York City, and a member of the board of directors and executive committee of the American Association for the United Nations.

I appear before this committee in two capacities, one as an individual citizen and member of the board of American Association for the United Nations, and, secondly but primarily in my capacity as chairman of the resolutions committee of a conference that was held here in Washington just 2 weeks ago which dealt with United States responsibility for the world leadership. It was held at the Shoreham Hotel on March 1, 2, and 3.

The conference was attended by delegates and observers from 120 national organizations. The conference was opened with a message from the President, and it was addressed by the Secretary of State and by distinguished representatives of both political parties. It was the third annual conference of its kind, each one called by the American Association for the United Nations, dedicated to discussion of United States responsibilities in international affairs, and dedicated to the common purpose of strengthening American support of the United Nations.

Senator DIRKSEN. Mr. Edelman, tell us a little more about the Association for the United Nations. I would like to know a little about the background of the organization.

Mr. EDELMAN. Yes. The American Association for the United Nations, Senator, is a membership corporation which is the successor to the League of Nations Association, which existed for many years prior to World War II. It has a board of directors

The CHAIRMAN. Give us the names of your board of directors.

Mr. EDELMAN. The members of the board of directors include: Mr. Thomas J. Watson, Mr. Sumner Welles, Mr. Adlai Stevenson, Mr. Harry Bullis, Mr. Herman Steinkraus, Mrs. Franklin D. Roosevelt.

I can add to those. I am a member of the board.
The CHAIRMAN. Will you furnish a complete list ?
Mr. EDELMAN. May I furnish complete list to the committee?

Senator DIRKSEN. That will be good. Furnish a complete list of the board. I suppose it has officers, also ?

Mr. EDELMAN. Yes; it has officers. The honorary chairmen are Mr. James T. Shotwell and Mr. Sumner Welles. The president is Mr. William Emerson, of Boston. The vice presidents are Mr. John W. Davis, Mr. Douglas Fairbanks, Jr., and there the two others.

May I furnish you with a list of officers? The executive director is Mr. Clark Eichelberger.

Senator DIRKSEN. And all of the directors. I think it would be helpful if you could furnish at least a little identity. I assume, for instance, Harry Bullis is identified with General Foods or General Mills. Would that be right!

Mr. EDELMAN. Yes, sir.
Senator DIRKSEN. Give us some idea.
Mr. EDELMAN. You would like a description in each case?

a

Senator DIRKSEN. That is right, and insert a statement. I presume it is a corporation not for profit.

Mr. EDELMAN. Yes, sir.
Senator DIRKSEN. Organized under the laws of New York?
Mr. EDELMAN. Yes, sir.

Senator Dirksen. Put in something also about your membership so we get a pretty good picture. How many members do you have, by the way?

Mr. EDELMAN. We have approximately 45,000 enrolled members.
Senator DIRKSEN. Are they dues-paying members?

Mr. EDELMAN. Dues-paying members. We have chapters and regional offices in every port of the country, and we also have what are called affiliated organizations, and they consist of quite a large number of national organizations and community organizations from various sectors of American life with whom we have an affiliation in the matter of international affairs and United Nations affairs, specifically.

Senator DIRKSEN. Is it a self-sustaining organization based on dues ?
Mr. EDELMAN. It is based on dues and gifts.
Senator DIRKSEN. Large donors ?

Mr. EDELMAN. It is hard to define the word “large,” but there are some donors who give substantial gifts and others who give more modest gifts.

Senator DIRKSEN. Is that restricted information, or could it be supplied for the record ?

Mr. EDELMAN. I cannot answer that offhand. If I may, Senator, I would like to consult the members of our executive committee. We would be delighted to supply anything that we can.

The CHAIRMAN. How much are your dues a year? Mr. EDELMAN. The dues are in varying categories, starting I think with $2 or $3, $5, $10, and some contribute $25.

Senator DIRKSEN. You have life memberships, I suppose ?

Mr. EDELMAN. I do not think we have precisely that designation in our association.

Senator DIRKEN. You maintain headquarters in New York?

Mr. EDELMIN. Our national headquarters is maintained at 45 East 65th Street.

Senator DIRKSEN. And you have a paid staff, I assume.
Mr. EDELMAN. We have a paid staff.
Senator DIRKSEN. Put that all in the record as background.
Mr. EDELMAN. Yes, Senator.
(The information supplied follows:)

OFFICERS

Honorary presidents:

Sumner Welles

James T. Shotwell
President: William Emerson
Executive vice president: Oscar A.

Executive director: Clark M. Eichel

berger
Associate directors:

de Lima
Vice presidents :

Mrs. Emmons Blaine
John W. Davis
Joseph E. Davies
Douglas Fairbanks, Jr.
Manley 0. Hudson
30572-53-42

Estelle Linzer

Margaret Olson
Director for finance : Hall A. Siddall
Director for public information:

Eleanor Mitchel
Director for formal education : John V.

P. Lassoe, Jr.

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

Henry A. Atkinson

Pauline E. Mandigo Mrs. Dana C. Backus

Charles L. Marburg Cyril J. Bath

Phoebe Marr Jacob Blaustein

William Menke Frank G. Boudreau

Hugh Moore Harry A. Bullis

Carlyle Morgan Ralph J. Bunche

James P. Pope Harold S. Buttenheim

Mrs. Joseph M. Proskauer James B, Carey

Mrs. Franklin D. Roosevelt Benjamin V. Cohen

Easton Rothwell Andrew W. Cordier

Hugh Schwartzberg Malcolm W. Davis

Paul C. Sheelin Oscar A. de Lima

James T. Shotwell Ken R. Dyke

Gregory Smith Albert I. Edelman

Mrs. William Dick Sporborg Clark M. Eichelberger

Herman W. Steinkraus Victor Elting

Adlai Stevenson William Emerson

Arthur Sweetser Raymond B. Fosdick

Telford Taylor Melvin D. Hildreth

Thomas J. Watson John I. Knudson

W. W. Waymack Herbert H. Lehman

Sumner Welles Myrna Loy

Quincy Wright Mr. EDELMAN. Resuming, if I may, on the Washington conference, we had there representatives of these many national organizations,

, which included many sectors of American life. There were representatives of labor organizations, industry, church groups, public affairs groups, veterans organizations, and so on.

Mr. SMITHEY. You have then what is known as member organizations?

Mr. EDELMAN. I want to explain, in presenting the resolutions, with particular reference to Senate Joint Resolution 1, I want to describe as accurately as I can the character of this conference and the conditions under which the resolution was adopted. I want it to be very clear on the record. These many organizations are invited by the American Association for the United Nations to send delegates or observers to attend our conference, which includes addresses by distinguished representatives of government and includes roundtable discussions and includes debate on an adoption of a series of resolutions. One of the resolutions adopted at this conference which was held just 2 weeks ago.

(The witness Lashley was heard at this point, following which Mr. Edelman resumed the stand.)

The CHAIRMAN. You may continue your statement, Mr. Edelman. Mr. EDELMAN. Thank you, Senator.

I would like first to say a word about some reference that was made to me by Senator Dirksen while I unfortunately had left the room, but on my return I gathered that Senator Dirksen made some reference to the American Association for the United Nations and its program of distributing materal about the United Nations.

I want as far as I can to assure you, Senator Dirksen, that our work is educational work, educational work about the United Nations and for the support of the United Nations. We do not customarily appear to testify on legislation, but we deem this issue very much as you deem it, to be a matter that is nonpartisan and nonpolitical, and we felt that our concern in United Nations affairs justified our coming here really as individual citizens.

« ÎnapoiContinuați »