Изображения страниц


I am appearing to ask for the ratification of this Charter and the statutes annexed thereto in accordance with the Constitution of the United States.

To what constitutional provisions was Mr. Truman referring? The one which states:

The President shall have the power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties, provided that two-thirds of the Senators present concur.

This Charter is not a treaty. President Truman did not call it a treaty. This Charter sets up a world superstate, controlled principally by the United States, the British Empire, and the Russian Soviet Union and supposedly China. China's part is problematical, since she cannot even remove her partners in the world organization for peace and security from her territory.

Under what constitutional authority can our Senate assume obligations to set up or make laws and treaties for the United Nations who are not a part of the United States? Chapter IV, article 33, takes away from the President and Senate the power to make treaties and places the making of international agreements in officials who are not the elected representatives of the people of the United States; another breach of constitutional authority. Chapter VII, articles 45 and 46, take away the power to declare war from Congress and transfers it to the United States delegate, an appointee of the President. Congress cannot alter nor change the Constitution except by the method provided in the Constitution.

The delegation of power to the members of the General and Security Council and others who compose the administrative body of the United Nations will gradually supersede the powers and duties of Congress until that body will be entirely eliminated, since its functions will consist only in acquiescing to the dictates from the White House. One does not have to read James Buinham's the Managerial Revolution, to know that the functions of Congress decline while the powers of the bureaucrats steadily increase. In short, the United States will merge into this world government unless the people exercise the one real power they possess, the power of the purse. Who will pay for the United States share of the expenses of the United Nations, of the Bretton Woods monetary agreements and UNRRA? Again the Constitution clearly limits expenditures by Congress, section 1, article 8-the Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States.

In working for the ratification of this Charter do our President and Senate feel that they can by pass or are above the Constitution? Governments have been overthrown by intrigues and infiltration as well as by bloody revolution, which, pray God, will never happen in the United States. In this country our Government is a government of the people, for the people, and it is time that it be by the people. The people can maintain their rights by coming to Washington, petitioning Congress for redress of grievances, or, failing in that, refuse to pay taxes until the spending by Congress for unconstitutional purposes be stopped.

Believe me I go from house to house, and everybody is in agreement, and they are willing to do it.

The CHAIRMAN. Does anyone have any questions? (No response Thank you very much. You stayed well within your time.

Mrs. JOHNSON. I would like to have inserted in the record a resolution adopted by the Women's League for Political Education on July 8, 1945.

The CHAIRMAN. It has already been inserted by Mrs. Keefe.
The next witness is Mr. Ray Krimm.



Mr. KRIMM. My name is Ray Krimm. I am executive director of the United Nations Council at Philadelphia and an associate consultant of the United States delegation at the San Francisco Conference, representing Americans United for World Organization.

Senator Connally, and members of this committee, the United Nations Council at Philadelphia, with 4,500 members in Philadelphia, castern Pennsylvania, and southern New Jersey, is the largest regional organization of its kinds in the country. We were represented at San Francisco. We have fought for years for a better international understanding and better international good will.

If any man ever died of a broken heart in this country, that man was Woodrow Wilson. But just before he died he told his old friend Josephus Daniels, "Be not discouraged. The things we have fought for are certain to prevail, and I will make this concession to Providence. They may come in a better way than we proposed.”

We of the United Nations Council of Philadlephia feel that that better way is here. We are wholeheartedly in favor of immediate ratification of this world Charter. We do not contend for a moment that the Charter is perfect, but, as the lady representing the National League of Women Voters has pointed out, it is definitely a step in the right international direction. It opens the door to better international understanding and good will, and it gives us a chanceanother chance to cooperate with the other nations of the world in the maintenance and preservation of peace.

Twenty-odd years ago, as I do not have to recall to this committee, We missed the bus," and we in the United Nations Council of Philadelphin ferrently hope at this time that the l'nited States does not miss the bus.

I have been intrigued by the testimony today, by two conflicting points of attack against the Charter. One group says that it is an idealistie concept, this new world organization. Other opponents have made quite a t-lo about the reto power. I think it would realise that the Charter is not an idealistic docu

liisa Very realistiesemed, which recognizes the fact that the more tives the Big Fire, to win this war, and it is 10 lething the Charter so those seme fire big nations to pryspil tir

1: 1. sits up the reto power na pants Iste stihis was the understanding In this pois: Fs--that unless you do hare

unanimity among the five big powers you are not going to have world peace anyhow. I contend that is a very realistic viewpoint. There is nothing idealistic about this world Charter. There is no idealism here. If you will, it is a form of power politics, but it certainly is not idealistic.

Tomorrow morning, or sometime tomorrow, Judge Oliver, chairman of our board, will appear before your committee to go into detail as to why our organization favors immediate ratification of this world charter. I just wanted to state my few words this afternoon.

Thank you very much.
The CHAIRMAN. How many ,nembers have you?
Mr. KRIMM. Forty-five hundred, Senator.
The CHAIRMAN. All in Pennsylvania?

Mr. KRIMM. Well, no; in Philadelphia, southeastern Pennsylvania, and southern New Jersey.

I should like to point out also that we have been told by the Department of State that, prior to the San Francisco Conference, we had held by far the greatest number of meetings held in any community in the country on the Dumbarton Oaks proposals, the number of meetings we held in that section being more than 200. We are rather proud of that record.

The CHAIRMAN. Your organization, then, is for ratification?

Mr. Krimm. Oh, very much so-immediate ratification. We feel that it would be a ghastly mistake for the Senate to take a recess before this was acted upon favorably.

The CHAIRMAN. Are there any questions by the Senators? (There was no response.)

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Mr. Krimm. Have your representative here tomorrow. I do not know whether we will reach him then, but he had better be here.

The committee will stand adjourned until 10:30 tomorrow morning. I shall ask Senator Vandenberg and the members of the subcommittee to remain for a few moments.

(At 4:05 p. m. an adjournment was taken until Thursday, July 12, 1945, at 10:30 a. m.)

[ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]




Washington, D.C. The committee met, pursuant to adjournment, at 10:30 a. m., Thursday, July 12, 1945, in the caucus room, Senate Office Building, Senator Tom Connally, chairman.

Present: Senators Connally, George, Wagner, Thomas of Utah, Murray, Green, Barkley, Guffey, Tunnell, Hatch, Hill, Lucas, Johnson of California, Capper, La Follette, Vandenberg, White, Austin, and Wiley.

Also present: Numerous other Senators, not members of the committee. The CHAIRMAN. Please come to order. Mrs. Florence Cafferata. [No response. ] The CHAIRMAN. Absent without leave. [Laughter.] A VOICE. She is still on the train, Mr. Chairman. The CHAIRMAN. Very well. I will call her name again later. Mr. Thomas J. Reardon, of Hartford.


The CHAIRMAN. Give your name, residence, and whom you represent to the reporter.

Mr. REARDON. My name is Thomas J. Reardon, Hartford, Conn., with direct authorization of a number of citizens of the United States of both political parties, and races and creeds. Under this authorization, of which I will leave a copy with you, it is to appear before committees of Congress for the specific purpose that I will outline to you.

The CHAIRMAN. Was this authorization by the group coming together or writing you?

Mr. REARDON. Each one was an individual authorization for that purpose.

The CHAIRMAN. All right, you may proceed. Mr. REARDON. In the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, may the blessing of Almighty God enlighten our minds and move our hearts to know and to do rightly.

At the outset I affirm that this so-called Charter is not properly before your honorable committee for the following reasons:

1. The proposed cooperation between the nations is not through constitutional processes.

2. It is not an exercise of treaty-making powers through negotiation and ratification.


« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »