(Continued from Page 51)
to live and work for the 'common good.'
They punish selfishness as a crime. The
people try to live by force forced
labor and forced sharing. The resull is
frustration and conflict, hunger and
"When these I nited States, alone in
the world and first in history, stooel for
individual freedom rather than big government, fnr private investment and
free charities rather than taxed-forced
'foreign aid.' for trade rather than a
world police force, they showed the
world how man mav escape from famine, pestilence and war. The result
was a century of life-saving such eis few
dreamers ever hoped for. . . .
"America gave most by showing how
all people everywhere could escape from
hunger and poverty bv establishing freedom for themselves.
"Now eis the United Slates returns to
the Old World policies of the Welfare
State, they help to lead mankind back
into the stagnant barbarism of coercive
collectivism, and this betrayal of the
American principle of freedom condemns to death more children than
I'NICEF could feed if it took all the
wealth of every American for the purpose.
"Moral law applies fee government's
conduct as to the conduct of private persons. The legal violence of government
has precisely the same effects as violence by private persons. The Good Samaritan who raises a club against the
indifferent passerbv himself becomes an
enemy of mankind whether he holds a
government job or nol. That is met the
road to peace."
The I nited Nations Road to War is
just the sort of book which has long
been needed to get the debate over the
UN down lo fundamental concepts. Dr.
Wall- bases his arguments directly nn
the premise of individual freedom and
limited government, -bowing how the
I nited Nations ideal and practice violate thi- premise. This is a book well
worth studying, and we are going hi
hear more of it. Recognizing its fundamental value. The Devin-Adair Company plans In bring out a cloth-bound
edition this fall. Readers will find much
worth pondering, while our more- doc-
trinaire internationalists may be encouraged in sharpen their wits as well
as their tongues.
G. W. DeArmond, Jr.
Treaties Versus the Constitution
By Roger Lea MacBride. The Caxton Printers.
Ltd., Caldwell, Idaho. 1955, 89 pp., SI.00.
Story of the
By Frank E. Holman. Committee for Constitutional
Government. Inc.. 205 East 42nd Street, New York
17, N. Y.. 1954, 179 pp., $1.00.
Unquestionably the debate over tin-
proposed Bricker Amendment involves
one of the great constitutional issues of
our history. It is a debate which will
continue until such time as an adequate
constitutional amendment assures that
domestic "treaty law" shall be subject
to the same constitutional limitations as
legislation by the Congress. Or else until
the Constitution, itself, is an anachronism, demolished in the machinery of international bureaucracy. More and more
close races for congressional seats are-
likely to hinge on this issue, but these
political fortunes are relatively unimportant.
It is not surprising that the great debate has brought forth books which represent searching studies of the threat
unrestrained treaty power offers to the
Constitution and to the concept of
limited government. Two such books are
Treaties Versus the Constitution and
Story of the "Bricker" Amendment.
Both are paper-bound and reasonably
priced. Both should be read and studied
by every American citizen.
Every year we have many political
issues. Some command an important
niche in history yet to be written, while
some are of the most transitory nature.
But in the whole fabric of American government the Constitution is the central
feature. It is the charter wherein free
men delegate certain well-defined,
limited powers to those whom they elect
to conduct their affairs of government.
The Constitution is the enunciation and
implementation of the right of self-government. It is not a charter guaranteeing
the right to rule. Our Constitution was
not designed to perpetuate the European
concept of unlimited government.
Bather, it was designed to repudiate and
guard against this very thing.
A fundamental constitutional issue is
one which goes to the very heart of our
federal Republic. The issue pointed up
by the Bricker Amendment is one of
these which now assumes transcendent
importance. It is not merely technical;
il bears directly upon the form of gov
ernment future generations of Americans shall have.
This issue is not going to be disposed
of by such sneering newspaper commentary as, "Senator Bricker took nearly
two months emphasizing his distrust of
the President's constitutional foreign
policy powers." The issue is not whether
the Presidenl can or cannot negotiate
treaties in the fiolel of foreign affairs
that has not been questioned. Rather, il
is an issue whether he can, with or with
out the concurrence of the Senate, make
and then enforce domestic law governing thc citizens of the United States,
without regard for constitutional limitations. Our same columnist on another
occasion referred lo the ''President's
constitutional authority, to make executive agreements," and went on to say
that an amendment should not "restrict
the areas in which treaties can be nego
tiated." This would seem to be ei rather
bald approval of unlimited executive
power, to say nothing of its being somewhat cavalier in ils regard for the actual
provisions and language of the Constitution. If this is indicative of the type of
"constitutional" commentary we are to
reael in the press, we will do very well.
indeed, to study more extensive writings
on the subject.
TREATIES VERSUS THE CONSTITUTION
Roger Lea Men-Bride, in his final \ceii
at Harvard Law School, made an extensive study of the question of amending
the Constitution to prevent abuse of the
Irealy power. The bulk of Treaties
Versus the Constitution weis submitted
as his thesis.
In addition lo being published by
Caxton. Mi. Mae-Bride's study has been
brought out in a special edition by the
Constitution and Free Enterprise
Foundation. Inc. in a first printing of
100 thousand copies. Thus, ihis is a book
which will be widely read and much i"
demand, and most properly so; it is an
excellenl ami highly informative study
nf the- history and implications of treaty
law. Frank Holman, himself lhe author
of one book and many pamphlets and
articles on lhe subjeel. has said. "I have
no hesitation in saying that it is one of
the best exposes of the danger of treaty
law in \iii.ricein rights emd tin- American form of governmenl thai has yel
Senator Bricker has said, "Mr. Mac-
Bride's book should be read bv everyone
who wishes to have a full understanding
of the momentous constitutional issues
involved in this historic debate for a
treaty-control amendment." Thus we
have a book giving the case for a consti
tutional amendment, highly praised by
two of the iiii-n who have mosl activel)
worked for such an amendmenl.
Mr. MacBride has searched the records of judicial cases involving treaty
issues. He has presented a great deed of
useful information in a compact, readable form. Adequate footnotes are available for those who wish to delve deeper
Some interesting points are brought
out which expose as trivial or deliberately deceptive various argument- n-rn
in opposition to a constitutional amendment.
One argument is that which holds thai
FACTS FORUM NEWS, September, 1955