Faculty Members Slash At Bricker Amendment

Seven members of the University faculty last night denounced the controversial Bricker Amendment to limit the treaty-making powers of the president as variously "dangerous, "unnecessary," and "awful." Most of the men interviewed felt the amendment would definitely be harmful.

Meanwhile, in the Senate yesterday, a move to sidetrack the proposal seemed to be taking shape. Sen. Wayne Morse (Ind.-Ore.) told the Senate that he would try to have the constitutional amendment returned to the Senate Judiciary Committee as soon as possible. If this happens, there may be no action taken on the proposal for the remainder of this congressional session.

Among the principle objections of faculty members to the proposed amendment was the probability that it would weaken the United States in its negotiations with foreign powers. "No one could take the word of a negotiator seriously if it were subject to congressional veton on the basis of this amendment," explained Carl J. Friedrich, professor of Government.

Lengthy Ratification

In the past, Friedrich pointed out, it has taken from 15 to 20 years for an amendment to be ratified by all the states. Unless a system for speedier ratification could be instituted, this would prevent the amendment from having any immediate effect.

At a time when the United States must maintain good relations with its allies, Arthur E. Sutherland, prefessor of Law, felt that the isolationist implications of the amendment would prove harmful. He said that the amendment would be "advertising by our most serious and grave action," a mistrust of our friends.

Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr., associate professor of History, denounced the amendment as "an inevitable by-product of the Republican idea of the Presidency." He felt that the measure can "clearly be defeated" by President Eisenhower's supporters, who may make "meaningless concessions" to get a majority against it.

"If we had adequate Presidential leadership in this country, we would have no Bricker Amendment problem," he added.

Other faculty members who expressed their disapproval of the amendment were Daniel S. Cheever, lecture in Government, Oscar Handlin, associate professor of History, William C. Hardee, professor of Law, and Walter B. Leach, Story Professor of Law.