Presidential Papers, Doc#714 Personal To Dillon Anderson, 5 February 1954. In The Papers of Dwight David Eisenhower

Document #714; February 5, 1954
To Dillon Anderson
Series: EM, AWF, Administration Series ; Category: Personal

The Papers of Dwight David Eisenhower, Volume XV - The Presidency: The Middle Way
Part IV: "Pushing ahead along the broad center"; December 1953 to March 1954
Chapter 9: Fending off "the reactionary fringe"

 

Dear Dillon: Thank you very much for your thoughtful letter.1 I showed it to one of my top legal advisers, who said, "Certainly it is much more reasonable than most of the incoming mail on this subject."2

We have been concerned with what you call "a serious anomaly in our Constitutional pattern." We think that this point is well taken care of by the provision in the Knowland substitute which states explicitly that no treaty or other agreement in conflict with the Constitution can have any force or effect.3

Concerning this whole argument, I think there is one observation to make that has direct application. Human beings, admittedly imperfect and fallible, sometimes waste a terrific amount of time in trying to devise the perfect instrument for governing their contacts with each other and, in this case, also governing a nation's contacts with another nation.

I personally do not believe that the founding fathers were guilty of oversight in writing certain things in general rather than in completely specific terms. They well knew that their instrument could not be perfect; they had to depend upon humans to execute it and to give it life and substance.

As a matter of fact, I don't know what a human would do with a perfect thing if he had it. (We probably are considering something anomalous when we entertain the thought.)

Another observation to make is that the writers of the Constitution had just been through four long years of frustrating experiences under the Confederation. They knew that international obligations could be discharged only by the nation acting as a unit. They therefore explicitly provided that a properly drawn up treaty could not be vitiated by the laws of any one of the states. That had happened to them time and again under the Confederation and they knew it would not work.4

It suddenly strikes me that I, a layman, have a very great deal of self-confidence, if not affrontery, in writing to an accomplished lawyer about such things. I think I shall stop right here.5

Thanks again for your letter.

With warm personal regard, Sincerely

1 For background on Anderson's letter of January 29 (AWF/A) see no. 704.

2 This was Attorney General Herbert Brownell's comment (see no. 707). Eisenhower sent Brownell a draft of this reply, which was returned with the typed notation: "Mr. Brownell says there is nothing wrong in this letter. Do you want to send it--or do we desist all S.J. Res. 1??" (AWF/A).

3 See nos. 700 and 704.

4 On Eisenhower's view regarding flaws in the Articles of Confederation see no. 673.

5 For developments see no. 741.

Bibliographic reference to this document:
Eisenhower, Dwight D. Personal To Dillon Anderson, 5 February 1954. In The Papers of Dwight David Eisenhower, ed. L. Galambos and D. van Ee, doc. 714. World Wide Web facsimile by The Dwight D. Eisenhower Memorial Commission of the print edition; Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996, http://www.eisenhowermemorial.org/presidential-papers/first-term/documents/714.cfm

 


Dwight D. Eisenhower Memorial Commission
1629 K Street, NW Suite 801
Washington DC 20006
Phone: 202.296.0004    Fax: 202.296.6464