Foreign Relations of the United States, 1952–1954, General: Economic and Political Matters, Volume I, Part 2

Eisenhower Library, Staff Secretary Office records, “Legislative Leaders Conference”

Supplementary Notes on the Legislative Leadership Conference, January 11, 1954, by the Assistant White House Staff Secretary (Minnich)¹

confidential

Washington, January 11, 1954.

[Here follows discussion of patronage.]

Bricker Amendment—See also separate memorandum (copy attached) entitled “The Bricker Amendment”, dated January 11, 1954.

Sen. Knowland said that he was only interested in getting a frank discussion of the matter at this time. He thought national sentiment might be stronger than the President realized, and he didn’t think his own substitute had much chance of success. Most of all, he believed “this festering sore” must be closed out of the Senate along the lines discussed the other night.

Attorney General Brownell reported on the meeting that was held following the discussion at the White House (Mansion).² An agreement was reached, but subsequently on Saturday³ Sen. Bricker phoned from Ohio to say he found a philosophical difference between what he believed and what the Administration believed, that he would have to offer the “which clause,” and that he could not enter into any compromise. Further, that if the “which clause” did not win approval, that would be alright with him but that he had to make the fight.

The President just couldn’t see any basis for the existence of the great scare that the Constitution was being destroyed or would be destroyed; it almost caused one to think that the whole Executive Branch, the Senators and the Courts had lost all their brains. The President noted that Sen. Bricker’s adviser leaned into his ear every five minutes.

Sen. Millikin hoped that every avenue could be explored towards a satisfactory conclusion. He was seriously concerned about the sharp division in the Senate and the way the issue could divide not only the Senate but the Party and the country. He thought the immediate problem was to discover how to undo the differences that had just reappeared.

Sen. Saltonstall endeavored to encourage the President to have another small conference with Sen. Bricker; small, because personalities were getting into it and slight “rubs” from some people were making agreement difficult.

Mr. Brownell recalled again how Sen. Bricker had agreed, then went back to Ohio, checked with Mr. Holman, then turned around from the agreement. Mr. Brownell said that Sen. Ferguson had tried to impress upon Sen. Bricker that he as a Senator had to make up his own mind, and that there was more to this than just satisfying the American Bar Association.

Sen. Saltonstall thought that if the right person put up the proper language to amend Sen. Bricker’s proposal it would get a majority vote and be well along the way to the two-thirds vote needed to pass. But in all of this there must be great care not to frustrate Sen. Bricker.

The Vice President did not expect that any further discussion would succeed in reconciling the basic philosophical difference. He felt the Administration did need to decide exactly what substitute it could support and then stand firmly on that. Thus could the Administration get a majority in support. But a terrible situation would occur, he felt, if the question were one of the Bricker Amendment or nothing. Apparently all that Sen. Bricker personally wanted was to make the fight he had promised his backers, and to get his name on an amendment. Not much could be expected from further negotiations.

Sen. Knowland wanted to have one more whirl at negotiation, or at least discussion. Sen. Millikin agreed with Sen. Knowland because it would help avoid any appearance that Sen. Bricker did not get a fair hearing from the Administration. Sen. Knowland commented that we had made much headway in that respect, and Sen. Millikin concluded that the important thing was to get the question settled and out of the way if at all possible.

The President stated that there was a matter of principle involved, beyond which he could not go. As for Frank Holman, he seemed to be determined that “he’s going to save the United States from Eleanor Roosevelt.”

With Senators Knowland, Millikin and Saltonstall urging the President to talk with Sen. Bricker just once more, the President finally agreed to do so.⁴

L. A. Minnich, Jr.

[Attachment]

Memorandum by the Assistant White House Staff Secretary (Minnich)

confidential

Washington, January 11, 1954.

The Bricker Amendment

In a lengthy discussion at the Legislative Conference on January 11, 1954, the President spelled out clearly his own feeling about the Bricker Amendment.

He began by emphasizing that very few people have any knowledge of the Bricker Amendment and that probably less than one per cent are familiar with the basic issues involved, particularly the “which clause”. He then asserted the need for recognizing that great political advantage would accrue from the Administration making a firm stand for the things in which it believes, and conversely that to depart from convictions would leave the Administration worse off politically. He pointed out that the President was duty bound to defend the Constitution and he reported the convictions of people like Mr. Griswold of Harvard Law School that acceptance of the Bricker Amendment would be a sell-out of the Constitution. He asserted that he would therefore fight to the bitter end against the “which clause”, if need be by going into every State in the Union.

The President was careful to point out that he was not personally involved by the threat and limitation of Presidential power, for he would no longer be in office by the time the amendment could take effect.

The President summarized his feeling about the matter by saying that Sen. Bricker was trying to make the Administration represent 49 governments in its dealings with foreign powers, whereas he was convinced that in foreign affairs there could be only one United States.

The President repeated several times during the discussion that he was willing to work for mutually satisfactory language but there was a matter of principle involved beyond which he could not go.

Minnich

1. The meeting took place at the White House at 8:30 a.m.
2. This is presumably a reference to the meeting at the White House on Jan. 7. See footnote 1, p. 1827.
3. Jan. 9.
4. No record has been found of a subsequent meeting between President Eisenhower and Senator Bricker.