Изображения страниц

The Charter carries the torch for profit, greed and power. It pretends freedom but its freedom is that of a life prisoner; it pretends peace, but its peace is that between a master with flogging rope and his cowering slave.

Let all Nations give up their spheres of influence, liberate the East Indians, the Koreans, the Poles, etc., then, and then only, talk of peace.

World peace will come, but it can't come through blood and iron, hate and revenge, but through justice, equality and the Golden Rule.

A world cooperation will come when Nations have the Government of their choice and an equal voice in the affairs of Nations.

The United States Constitution will live for it is part of the divine plan, it is the torch guiding all struggling peoples to the light.

The San Francisco Charter is the last grasp of greed and hate by the vested interest and exploiters of human beings. Its falseness is only proof that the real is near, for the false must come first.

It is the final effort to deflect man from his rightful destiny of freedom and peace.

A vote for the Charter is treason to your country and to the peace hopes of the World.

To recapitulate: The San Francisco Charter voids the Declaration of Independence; violates the Constitution of the United States; scraps the Monroe Doctrine, and the ancient law of nations to conduct their own internal affairs.

It is all a well-laid plan or conspiracy by the privileged few, against all people.

Americans have been so cowed by propaganda under the excuse of "national emergency” they are condoning this treason to their country.


New York, N. Y., July 12, 1945. The Honorable Tom CONNALLY, Chairman, Committee on Foreign Relations,

United States Senate, Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR CONNALLY: We have today sent you the following night telegram:

We wish to register a statement concerning the attitude of the War Resisters League as to ratification of United Nations Charter. Statement follows under separate cover and we hereby respectfully request you to enter same in the record of your hearings."

The statement, sent for inclusion in the record of your hearings, is enclosed herewith. Sincerely yours,


Executive Secretary.


An open letter from the War Resisters League to the Committee on Foreign

Relations of the United States Senate, now in session to consider the support by the United States of the charter adopted at San Francisco Before the European phase of this war was over the executive committee of the War Resisters League unanimously adopted the following statement as our official position concerning the proposals for the United Nations Conference on International Organization, popularly known as the Dumbarton Oaks proposals:


The War Resisters League deplores the reactionary character of the Dumbarton Oaks proposals. We see them as representing no true international arrangement but the domination of the world by the five most heavily armed powers. It is a step back to the Triple Alliance, with special privilege for certain nations based on the old and dangerous principle that might makes right. We are glad opportunity is given for discussion and criticism and would point out the inherent defects which disturb us.

It is our conviction that the specific proposals made at Dumbarton Oaks are inadequate and a menace to the development of a peaceful and just world order.

First. The most serious defects of the old League of Nations, long recognized, are not remedied but at times even exaggerated. (a) Imperialism, against which the mandate system offered a weak gesture, is here completely disregarded. (6) No specific instruments are proposed to do away with the underlying causes of war in race tensions, economic inequalities and territorial irredentas, except that economic and social welfare is handed over to a council without power. (c) Armament regulation is entrusted to the Military Staff Committee of the five powers. (d) All possibility of progress is blocked as effectually as in 1919 by the requirement that amendments to the Constitution must be ratified by the powers possessing permanent seats on the Council.

Second.A significant change from the League of Nations is the abolition of the inefficient unanimity requirement in the Assembly, but even more important is the provision for the immediate coercion of aggressors by the Security Council, substituting for loose sanctions a definite obligation of members to carry out the decisions of the Council. This obligation is to be enforced through a permanent military staff committee of the five great powers, equipped with an immediately available air force. This proviso is a step back in the building of international cooperation for it merely strengthens the system of alliances and dependence on military power which is basic in the Dumbarton Oaks proposals and has already produced two wars.

Third. The obligations stated in the Atlantic Charter are completely ignored. There are watertight provisions which secure for all time the control of the allpowerful Council to the five nations which are expected to emerge as military victors in the present war. They have exclusive control of the military staff committee and the air-force quotas, possess the right of veto over all amendments, and hold the only permanent seats in the Security Council. The six nonpermanent members of the Council are to be elected for 2-year terms, and to be ineligible for immediate reelection. In the General Assembly the smaller “peaceloving” nations may make recommendations upon all matters except matters "relating to the maintenance of international peace and security which is being dealt with by the Security Council.”

Fourth. Not only do these proposals appear to the War Resisters League as a bartering of freedom, equality and justice in return for security from aggression, but this very security cannot be counted upon. If it should be finally determined, as one of the great powers has urged, that any Council member may be allowed a vote upon disputes involving itself, no small nation can be relieved from the fear of aggression by any permanent member. Moreover, as two of the five permanent members are still without stable government, and the three great powers are known to differ on crucial matters, the Security Council itself can give no guarantee of continued cooperation after the war emergency is over.

The War Resisters League cannot place confidence in any attempt to bring peace through armed coercion rather than through justice, friendship, and the removal of the underlying causes of war. We urge the American people to assert all possible effort toward the modification of the proposals for international organization along the following lines:

(a) To build international political machinery-based on the consent of the governed-capable of handling world problems vital to the economic and political freedom, and the security of people everywhere.

(6) To advocate democratic, federal structure, with membership, open to all and enforcement of world law on individuals rather than military coercion of nations in any international organization proposed.

(c) To recognize the universal abolition of conscription as the acid test of good faith in any world organization designed to prevent wars and create justice.

Since our adoption of the above statement, November 27, 1944, the nations were called together to draw up a' charter for the United Nations. It is significant that those invited included only nations at war. Iceland, for instance, whose constitution forbids a declaration of war, could not be invited, though one of the world's earliest democracies and a "peace-loving nation” if ever there was one.


In but one respect has the new Charter met the specific criticisms set forth in our League's statement—that which concerned mention of the Atlantic Charter. We are glad to note that the Atlantic Charter was taken from its discarded position and accepted by the drafters of the new Charter. We are glad, too, at the mention in the new Charter of: “fundamental human rights, in the dignity and value of the human person, in the equal rights of men and of nations large and small

the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples

promotion and encouragement of respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, language, religion, or sex * promotion of human rights."



It will be our duty to see that these words are transformed into reality. To this we must dedicate ourselves.

We cannot overlook, however, the reality that for the present the words just quoted are nothing but words and that the actions of the Big Three these last few months give us little hope that they are more than words.


Our league welcomes the fact that the Big Three have agreed on the San Francisco Charter as an indication of a temporary compromise of their imperialist differences—in that sense this Charter is a welcome Armistice.


With respect to the building of an enduring peace, however, we do not see it as even a step in that direction. We ask, at this point, examination of our League's statement with regard to the Dumbarton Oaks proposals. The basic ideas there set out still stand. We find no progress toward the solution of any of these minimum requirements, in a direction toward genuine world government or an effort for ending of conscription and the burden of armaments. Neither do we find among the builders of this new Charter a consideration of terms for an early end to the slaughter in the Pacific or for a program for Europe which would give confidence in humane treatment for the defeated or carrying out of the words quoted above from the early sections of the San Francisco Charter.

We, therefore, oppose the adoption by the United States Senate of the San Francisco Charter, unless amended to include the basic changes listed above.


Does rejection of the Charter mean world anarchy or world chaos, as so many supporters contend? No. It would mean only a recognition of the chaos and anarchy in the affairs of men which now exists, recognition of the status quo-a temporary alliance of the three “Big” states who each act as they please, with or without a charter. These three states, with or without the charter, are now engaged in a period of armistice as among themselves.

For the principles set forth in our November statement on the Dumbarton Oaks proposals, we shall continue to work. We cannot accept the San Francisco Charter as it now stands. It is not at present "better than no world organization.” It is an organization only in a nominal sense—the sense in which an alliance may be called an organization. It, therefore, misleads people who are anxious for a genuine world government. In this deception we cannot and will not join.

PETOSKEY, Mich., July 12, 1945. Hon. Tom CONNOLLY,

Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR SENATOR CONNOLLY: Wire services today and late Wednesday carried story that Mrs. Agnes Waters appeared before your committee representing National Blue Star Mothers for purpose of opposing United Nations Charter. National Blue Star Mothers formerly were known as Crusading Mothers of Pennsylvania and changed name to sound like the original war mother association, Blue Star Mothers of America, whose half-million members cooperate in the home-front war activities program. A survey recently showed great majority of these patriotic mothers approved in principle the Charter. Senator Vandenberg is familiar with the organization. Mrs. Waters does not speak for nor represent in any way Blue Star Mothers of America. We will appreciate having this statement put on the record and likewise will appreciate letting the press know the facts. Thanking you respectfully.

GEORGE H. MAINES, Founder, Blue Star Mothers of America.

FLINT, Mich., July 12, 1945. Hon. Tom CONNALLY,

United States Senate, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR SENATOR CONNALLY: I have read in the Detroit News, in the Detroit Times (Hearst), and the Chicago Tribune, while up here looking over a newspaper plant we are anxious to buy, that Mrs. Agnes Waters, of Washington, appeared before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. And that Mrs. Waters claimed to speak for the National Blue Star Mothers in opposition to the United Nations Charter.

My good friend, this lady is the same person who claimed to speak for several war mother groups a few years back, Blue Star Mothers, American War Mothers, Gold Star Mothers, among others, according to stories that appeared in PM newspaper, New York Evening Post, Washington newspapers, and whose ideas, as reported, were far different from those propounded by the Blue Star Mothers of America which was organized as a patriotic and educational association for service. The newspapers this writer is associated with sponsored and financed the Blue Star Mothers of America as a home-front war activity group for unity, tolerance and freedom. It was started as a result of the Pearl Harbor attack by this writer with the assistance of the department commanders in Michigan of the American Legion, VFW, DAV, and members of the Sons of the American Revolution, Military Order of the World War, Army and Navy Union of the USA, among other military and service organizations.

The record will show that a Philadelphia women's organization called the Crusading Mothers of Pennsylvania were so smeared by the press that they decided to change their group name to “National Blue Star Mothers" in January 1944. Our Blue Star Mothers of America had applied for a national charter prior to that, and were getting support from the late Senator Van Nuys who had promised us a committee hearing, you will recall.

In fact you told me you were impressed with the ideals of the original group, Blue Star Mothers of America, and their program. A majority of the members of the Senate Judiciary Committee had personally told this writer they would support a bill to give us a national charter. I only accepted the position voted me by the war mothers as national organizer and founder until a charter could be granted. We did not expect to have any opposition because it seems there was a place for such a home front group which would oppose the so-called subversive mother groups.

With a charter we could have protected the name, I believe. One thing you and your committee can count on, as Gov. Frank J. Lausche, Senator Homer Ferguson, Congressman W. W. Blackney (Michigan), Congressman John Lesinski (Michigan), and Senator Vandenberg could vouch for and that is there will be no planned campaigns, nor planned opposition from our mother association if we do not obtain a charter.

The Blue Star Mothers are not supposed to be in politics. They aim to help their sons and daughters in service, and to cooperate to furnish the womanpower to agencies like the American Red Cross, OPA, civilian-aide agencies, and the usual duties of good women who are interested in the welfare of their country. Reports show that in 1944 $270,000 was given away in cash and goods to service men and women by the Blue Star Mothers of America without one penny being charged to expenses. Only one secretary in national headquarters is on a pay roll. While we financed the group at the start, they are able to carry on now under the guidance of Mrs. Edna May Standing, of Cleveland, the national president. They do some splendid work, and I am glad to compliment them.

Will appreciate it if you will let your committee know the facts about National Blue Star Mothers and the original patriotic organization which is the Blue Star Mothers of America. Thanking you, and with a handgrasp, and sincere regard and respect for old times' sake, Your friend,


Founder, Blue Star Mothers of America. (The following communications, favoring the Charter, were later received for the record:)

HAMMONTON, N. J., July 7, 1945. Hon. Tom CONNALLY. Urge prompt ratification and approval of United Nations Charter.


Legislative Chairman, Second District Women's Federated Clubs of New Jersey.

CHICAGO, ILL., July 13, 1945. Senator Tom CONNALLY:

Trust you received for Senate Foreign Relations Committee record letter to you and statement sent air mail special yesterday. Commission on World Peace of the Methodist Church strongly urges ratification of Charter and supports statement adopted by Federal Council of Churches. As executive secretary of commission I am urging unanimous vote in Senate, believing this would have large influence for peace upon all nations of the world. Hope my letter stating support of Charter and statements of appreciation to United States delegation may be included in record. Your skillful leadership and devoted accomplishments of your colleagues are greatly appreciated.

CHARLES F. Boss, Jr.,

Executive Secretary, Commission on World Peace, Methodist Church, and Consultant for Churches at United Nations Conference.

SEATTLE, WASH., July 13, 1945. Senator Tom CONNALLY, Chairman, Foreign Relations Committee,

United States Senate: Please be advised of our unanimous and vigorous support of CIO President Philip Murray urging adoption of United Nations Charter.


Agent Pro Tempore, Marine Cooks and Stewards Association.

SEATTLE, WASH., July 13, 1945. Tom CONNALLY,

Chairman, Foreign Affairs Committee, Capiial Building: Alaska Fishermen's Union requests United Nations Charter be approved unanimously.


SEATTLE, Wash., July 13, 1945. Senator Tom CONNALLY,

Chairman, Foreign Relations Committee, United States Senate: This organization expresses solid support for CIO President Phillip Murray in his plea for favorable action your committee and Senate on United Nations Charter for International Organization. World peace is basis of industrial development for the Northwest and world trade. We feel Charter absolutely necessary to peace of world.

Hilda HANSON, Executive Secretary, Seattle CIO Council.

MIAMI BEACH, FLA., July 13, 1945. Senator Tom CONNALLY,

Chairman, Foreign Relations Committee, United States Senate: I believe I express the views of not only Connecticut independent Republicans but independent voters throughout the Nation in urging the immediate ratification of the United Nations Charter. It is a step in the right direction.


SCHENECTADY, N. Y., July 13, 1945. Senator Tom CONNALLY:

Charter must be ratified without fail. Make it quick. Then strengthen provisions for air, sea, and land forces with basis therefor under United Nations control. The organization must be able to act fast.


« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »