among men. The prophets of the Old Testament did not hesitate to denounce rulers, people, or nations, if they had become guilty of spiritual wickedness. The apostles of the New Testament did not hesitate to warn God's people against specific errors and those who taught them. Our Lord Jesus Christ did not hesitate to excoriate such groups as the Pharisees, the Saducees, and the Herodians. Let us imagine that these same dynamic spiritual leaders are living in the foreseeable future, with such instruments of international law in effect as the Covenant on Human Rights and the Genocide Convention. From what could happen to them, we can determine what may happen to us, if these things come to pass in our own lifetime. The CHAIRMAN. Any questions, Senators?

Senator SMITH. That was a resolution adopted by a group representing, I believe you said, about a million communicants.

Rev. Mr. SCOTT. That is right, the American Council of Christian Churches is composed of 16 Protestant denominations. It has more than 6,000 congregations, over 1 million adherents.

Senator SMITH. I was trying to bring that out because that is not one of the so-called ultraliberal or Red-tendency groups.

Rev. Mr. SCOTT. No, indeed. The American Council is set up indeed to defend the Good Old Book and to cry out against the infringement of modernism and liberalism in these days.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much.

Senator BRICKER. May I make one suggestion here to emphasize what the reverend has said about our having one vote. In the consideration of the council of the Covenant of Human Rights, our representative made a suggestion that the right of the ownership of property should be included in the covenant. Immediately Russia objected because she said, "We have no private property ownership in Russia." Then Denmark, as I remember the record, moved that it be stricken out on the ground that it is not a fundamental human right. Of course, our one vote was not enough to save it.

Senator DIRKSEN. Mr. Chairman, I want to make one general observation for the record; then I would like to ask consent to insert in the record at this point a telegram I received from Dean Clarence Manion, former dean of the Law School at Notre Dame University, in which he subscribes to Senate Joint Resolution No. 1. I would like to have it included. It is entirely possible Senator Bricker may have received the same telegram.

Senator BRICKER. I do not know that I have. But I know that Dean Manion would like to testify if the opportunity comes. He wants to come and present his testimony at a later date.

Mr. SMITHEY. I may say at that point he has been notified of the hearing. He has not responded yet.

Senator BRICKER. He tried to call me yesterday, but he did not get me. But he got the word to me.

(The telegram referred to, from Dean Clarence Manion to Senator Dirksen, is as follows:)

Senator EVEREtt Dirksen,

SOUTH BEND, IND., February 18, 1953.

Senate Judiciary Committee, Washington, D. C.:

I hope that your Senate Judiciary Committee will speedily approve and favorably report Senate Joint Resolution No. 1 in a form which will nullify any treaty or executive agreement which conflicts with the Constitution of the United

States. Language should make sure that "No treaty or executive agreement shall be effective as internal law of the United States except through legislation which would be valid in the absence of the treaty.

CLARENCE MANION,

Former Dean, University of Notre Dame College of Law. Senator DIRKSEN. I want to make this one general observation: I have seen very little literature on the subject getting out of the United Nations if it should ever prove a real difficulty. Now, Members of the House and Senate have been inundated from time to time with letters urging that we get out of the United Nations. But I am sure they are not aware of the difficulties that attend that course. I went back to read the committee report in connection with the treaty because I was not a Member of the Senate at the time, and I discovered that an escape clause had been left out of the charter for the very good reason that they wanted to lay no temptation in the way of a country to get out immediately in case it should become dissatisfied. So, today there is actually no escape clause in the charter and, insofar as I am familiar with the legislative process, if we wanted to divest ourselves of membership it would require a joint resolution passed by the House and the Senate, and it would have to go to the White House. I will not speak for the present incumbent of the White House, but I am confident from the public averments made by his predecessor that such a resolution would have been vetoed. It would then have required a two-thirds vote on the part of both branches of Congress to pass that joint resolution over a veto to take us out of the United Nations, which would be a very difficult and tortuous course, indeed. Now, modern thinking and modern viewpoint being what it is at the present time, one does not need to be an expert to apprehend that to get out of the United Nations in the foreseeable future, if that course were well recommended, would be no easy task. So, we must go on the premise that we are going to be members for quite a long time to come, unless thinking changes somewhat. Consequently, what we are dealing with here in the Bricker resolution is something that must be considered against the backdrop of years, and I think it adds to the importance of the consideration that is before this committee.

But I did want to make that statement with respect to the escape clause because very little is said about it. Then, when you try to find it in the charter, you discover it is not there.

Rev. Mr. SCOTT. It is conspicuous by its absence.

The CHAIRMAN. I might also add there is no provision for amending the charter either.

Senator DIRKSEN. No; it is rather tortuous after the first 10 years. The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much.

Rev. Mr. SCOTT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. The committee will stand adjourned, subject to the call of the chairman.

(Whereupon, at 3:30 p. m., the committee was adjourned subject to the call of the Chair.)

TREATIES AND EXECUTIVE AGREEMENTS

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 1953

UNITED STATES SENATE,

SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY, Washington, D. C. The subcommittee met, pursuant to recess, at 10 a. m., in room 424, Senate Office Building, the Honorable Everett Dirksen presiding. Present: Senators Langer (chairman), Dirksen (presiding), Butler of Maryland, and Kefauver.

Also present: Senator Watkins.

Wayne H. Smithey, subcommittee counsel.

Senator DIRKSEN (presiding). The committee will come to order. As the first order of business this morning we will insert in the record of the hearings statements that will be filed or are on file now by the American Farm Bureau Federation, the American Civil Liberties Union, the National Sojourners, the National Foreign Trade Council, Inc., and the Air Transport Association. In addition to those, another statement will be filed at a later date by the National Association of Manufacturers, so that we can allow that statement to go in the record as of now and take it when it has been presented. (The statements above referred to are as follows:)

AMERICAN FARM BUREAU FEDERATION, Washington, D. C. Re amendment to the Constitution relative to abrogation of individual rights by international treaties

Hon. WILLIAM LANGER,

Chairman, Senate Committee on the Judiciary,

United States Senate, Washington, D. C.

DEAR SENATOR LANGER: We appreciate the opportunity afforded the American Farm Bureau Federation to present this statement regarding this important matter before you, in respect to amending the Constitution.

The American Farm Bureau Federation is deeply concerned with the issue of maintaining the rights of individuals and of the States as guaranteed by our Constitution. The official voting delegates of the 47 member States and Puerto Rico, representing 1,500,000 farm families (the equivalent of 6,500,000 individuals in the program), adopted the following resolution at the 1952 annual convention held in Seattle, Wash., in December 1952.

(a) "Through the Constitution, our forefathers founded a great government, designed to secure the God-given blessings of liberty to themselves and their posterity. Their objective was to protect the rights of life, liberty, and property. With wisdom and foresight, a government with built-in checks and balances was developed. This was based on a legislative, executive, and judicial division of authority. The danger of unbridled centralized power was wisely foreseen, and power of government was diffused among the States and the people, not by default but by design.

To insure control by the people, the Bill of Rights provided that, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution nor prohibited by it to the States are reserved to the States respectively or to the people.”

Thus, with freedom protected, the initiative of individuals has been encouraged, with the result that human and natural resources have been combined to produce goods and services for all.

Today we have more widespread educational and religious opportunity and more and better housing, food, and clothing than in any other place on earth. We work fewer hours for our goods, receive better goods in return, and have more services available for all than is possible under any other system of government. Under no other system has man achieved such universally high standards of living. Nowhere has the individual achieved greater dignity.

Every citizen has a great challenge before him to work vigorously and constantly to maintain these freedoms and to assist all mankind to march forward to higher standards of living.

These official voting delegates further stated in resolution that

"Property rights cannot be taken away without infringing on human rights" and further,

"That the Constitution is the basic law of the land, and that its interpretation should be consistent with the intent of its authors."

Our American Farm Bureau Federation further states:

"We will continue to stand up for our beliefs in true Americanism, unequivocably support the Constitution of the United States and, individually and as a group, resist any continued drift toward socialism. Furthermore, we will reject communism wherever and in whatever form it may be found, be it in schools, churches, clubs, farm groups, or other associations, or Government agencies. by every means at our command within constitutional limitations."

Our members realize that international arrangements are essential as a part of our basic objective to promote world peace and well-being. Furthermore, they know that our own best long-term interests may be furthered with economic, political, and military arrangements with our friends in the free world.

We recognize this in asserting that America must assume her rightful role of leadership in the maintenance of freedom and peace. Our concern for good foreign relations is further shown in such resolutions as:

"Recommending that a bipartisan commission of the Congress be established to study, report, and where appropriate, recommend legislation to reconcile our domestic and foreign objectives."

Our further concern for maintaining and promoting good foreign relations is indicated by our supporting in principle:

(a) The Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act.

(b) The International Wheat Agreement. (c) The Mutual Security Program.

(d) The technical-assistance program.

However, we believe that international arrangements and our desire for close collaboration with our friends need not be achieved at the expense of our own individual liberties, nor in a way to nullify our Constitution and basic laws.

Therefore, we believe the efforts of Congress to permit the people in the States to express themselves through amendment to our Constitution is entirely proper. The American Farm Bureau Federation therefore in resolution states: "We urge an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to provide that no treaty shall ever take precedence over our laws and Constitution. We further recommend that the American Farm Bureau Federation take such action as necessary to stop ratification of any treaty now pending before the United States Senate, and further to secure the termination of any treaty previously ratified where there is in such treaty the possibility of infringement on the rights and privileges of citizens in this country under the Constitution of the United States."

We are certain that after hearings on Senate Joint Resolution 1 and Senate Joint Resolution 2, the best features of the several bills before the several committees of the Congress bearing on the issue will be incorporated into the proper type of legislation designed to achieve the desired goals most effectively.

We believe this can be done without impairing our relations with the essential international organizations or the vital treaties with our friends.

We respectfully request that this statement become part of the official record of these hearings and be properly considered in the committee deliberations.

Very truly yours,

JOHN C. LYNN, Legislative Director.