Faculty Sad but Calm Over 22nd Amendment Passage

A survey of faculty opinion last night showed local professors a little sorry but generally unconcerned over the ratification yesterday of the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution, which provides that no man may be President of the United States longer than ten years.

Nevada clinched the ratification at 7:30 p.m. (EST) by becoming the 36th state to approve the amendment, which was passed by Congress in March, 1947. President Truman is specifically exempted.

Robert G. McCloskey, assistant professor of Government, thought the new amendment "makes little difference," but he thought it would do "more harm than good because it makes a custom a legal requirement without the flexibility of a custom."

Lock Barn Door

McGeorge Bundy, visiting lecturer on Government, termed the amendment an "unfortunate reflection" on Franklin D. Roosevelt '04, but said passing it now was "like locking the barn door after the horse is stolen."

Arthur N. Holcombe '06, Eaton Professor of the Science of Government, welcomed the new amendment because, he said, "an executive can get too strong and destroy the balance of power." On the other hand, Samuel H. Beer, associate professor of Government, labeled the statute "grotesque, lamentable, and absurd."

Kirtley F. Mather, professor of Geology, said he considered the amendment "unimportant" and thought it would do "no harm."

Contacted late last night Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr. '38, associate professor of History, branded the ratification "terrible and fantastic because it might deprive the people of the free choice of a president."