Sie sind auf Seite 1von 7


groups from other nations. This bi- path of chaotic departure from the peo- Secretary of State Included the purported
partisan organization is doing something ples' government by substituting their ratifications of the military enforced rump
more than just talking about interna- personal law rationalized under the 14th legislatures of ten southern states whose
tional understanding-it is doing some- amendment, their actions and verbiage lawful legislatures had previously rejected
said 14th Amendment. and also Included
thing about it. brand them and their team as seces- purported ratifications by the legislatures
If mankind is ever to abolish war from sionists-rebels with pens instead of of the States of Ohio and New Jersey although
the face of the earth, we first must guns-seeking to divide our Union. they had withdrawn their legislative rati-
break down the barriers of mistrust and They must be stopped. Public opinion fications several months previously. all of
suspicion among the peoples of the must be aroused. The Union must and which proves absolutely that said 14th
world. There is no better way to accom- shall be preserved. Amendment was not adopted In accordance
plish this than through just such pro- Mr. Speaker, I ask to include in the with the mandatory constitutional require-
grams as this one conducted by the RECORD, following my remarks, House ments set forth In Article V of the Constitu-
Concurrent Resolution 208 of the Louisi- tion and therefore the Constitution Itself
American Council of Young Political strikes with nulllty the purported 14th
Leaders. ana Legislature urging this Congress to Amendment.
These young people will be the lead- declare the 14th amendment illegal. Also, Now therefore be It resolved by the Legis-
ers of the world in years to come. They I include in the RECORD an informative lature of Louisiana. the House of Representa-
will be better leaders, more understand- and well-annotated treatise on the il- tives and the Senate concurring:
ing and tolerant leaders, if they are able legality of the 14th amendment-the (1) That the Legislature go on record as
to expand their knowledge of other na- play tOY of our secessionist judges- exposing the unconstltutionallty of the 14th
tions, other peoples, and other political which has been prepared by Judge Amendment, and Interposes the sovereignty
Leander H. Perez, of Louisiana. of the State of Louisiana against the execu-
systems. tion of said 14th Amendment against the
This is why, Mr. Speaker, I am so The material referred to follows: State of Louisiana and Its people;
pleased with the work being done by H. CON. RES. 208 (2) That the Legislature of Louisiana op-
the American Council of Young Politi- A concurrent resolution to expose the un- poses the use of the Invalld 14th amend-
cal Leaders. They have my wholehearted constltutlonallty of the 14th admendment ment by the Federal courts to Impose further
support in their program to further to the Constitution of the United States; unlawful edicts and hardships on Its people;
world understanding. to Interpose the sovereignty of the State (3) That the Congress of the United States
of Louisiana against the execution of said be memorlallzed by this Legislature to repeal
amendment In this State; to memorlallze its unlawful Joint Resolution of July 28,
the Congress of the United States to re- 1868. declaring that three-fourths of the
THE 14TH AMENDMENT-EQUAL peal Its joint resolution of July 28, 1868, states had ratified the 14th Amendment to
PROTECTION LAW OR TOOL OF declaring that said amendment had been the United States Constitution;
USURPATION ratified; and to provide for the distribu- (4) That the Legislatures of the other
tion of certified copies of this resolution states of the Union be memoriallzed to give
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. Speaker, I ask serious study and consideration to take sim-
unanimous consent that the gentleman Whereas the purported 14th Amendment ilar action against the valldity of the 14th
from Louisiana [Mr. RARICK] may ex- lawfullyto the United States Constitution was never Amendment and to uphold and support the
adopted In accordance with the re-
tend his remarks at this point in the quirements of the United States Constitu- Constitution of the United States which
RECORD and include extraneous matter. tion because eleven states of the Union were strikes said 14th Amendment with nUllity;
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there deprived of their equal suffrage In the Sen- and
objection to the request of the gentleman ate in violation of Article V, when eleven (5) That copies of this Resolution. duly
certified. together with a copy of the treatise
from Arkansas? southern states, Including Louisiana. were on "The Unconstltutionallty of the 14th
There was no objection. excluded from dellberatlon and decision In Amendment" by JUdge L. H. Perez. be for-
Mr. RARICK. Mr. Speaker, arrogantly the adoption of the Joint Resolution pro- warded to the Governors and Secretaries of
posing said 14th Amendment; said Resolution
ignoring clearcut expressions in the Con- was State of each state in the Union, and to the
not presented to the President of the
stitution of the United States, the de- United States In order that the same should
Secretaries of the United States Senate and
clared intent of its drafters notwith- take effect. as required by Article 1. Section House of Congress. and to the Louisiana Con-
standing, our unelected Federal judges 7; the proposed amendment was not rati- gressional delegation. a copy hereof to be
read out prohibitions of the Constitution fied by three-fourths of the states. but to publlshed in the Congressional Record.
of the United States by adopting the the contrary fifteen states of the then Speaker 0/ the House 0/ Representatives.
fuzzy haze of the 14th amendment to thirty-seven states of the Union rejected the C. C. AYCOCK.
legislate their personal ideas, prejudices, proposed 14th Amendment between the Lieutenant Governor and President
dates of Its submission to the states by the
theories, guilt complexes, aims, and Secretary 0/ the Senate.
whims. of State on June 16. 1866 and
March 24, 1868. thereby nulllfying said
Through the cooperation of intellec- Resolution and making It Impossible for rati- THE 14TH AMENDMENT Is UNCONSTITUTIONAL
tual educators, we have subjected our- fication by the constitutionally required The purported 14th Amendment to the
selves to accept destructive use and three-fourths of such states; said southern United States Constitution Is and should be
meaning of words and phrases. We states which were denied their equal suf- held to be Ineffective. Invalid. null. void and
blindly accept new meanings and frage In the Senate had been recognized by unconstitutional for the following reasons:
changed values to alter our traditional proclamations of the President of the United 1. The Joint Resolution proposing said
thoughts. States to have duly constituted governments Amendment was not submitted to or adopted
with all the powers which belong to free by a Constitutional Congress. Article I. Sec-
We have tolerantly permitted the ha- states of the Union. and the Legislatures of
bitual misuse of words to serve as a seven of said southern states had ratified the tion 3. and Article V of the U.S. Constitution.
2. The JOint Resolution was not submitted
vehicle to abandon our foundations and 13th Amendment which would have failed to the President for his approval. Article I.
goals. Thus, the present use and expan- of ratification but for the ratification of said Section 7.
sion of the 14th amendment is a sham- seven southern states; and 3. The proposed 14th Amendment was re-
serving as a crutch and hoodwink to pre- Whereas the Reconstruction Acts of Con- jected by more than one-fourth of all the
cipitate a quasi-legal approach for over- gress unlawfully overthrew their existing States then in the Union, and it was never
throw of the tender balances and pro- tuted governments. removed their lawfully consti- ratified by three-fourths of all the States In
tections of limitation found in the Con- placed legislatures by m!l!tary force and re-
them with rump legislatures which
the Union. Article V.
stitution. carried out m!l!tary orders and pretended I. THE UNCONSTITUTIONAL CONGRESS
But, interestingly enough, the 14th to ratify the 14th Amendment; and The U.S. Constitution provides:
amendment-whether ratified or not- Whereas In spite of the fact that the Sec- Article I. Section 3. "The Senate of the
was but the expression of emotional out- retary of State In his first proclamation. United States shall be composed of two Sen-
pouring of public sentiment following the on July 20. 1868. expressed doubt as to ators from each State • • ."
War Between the States. whether three-fourths of the required states Article V provides: "No State. without Its
Its obvious purpose and intent was but had ratified the 14th Amendment. Congress consent, shall be deprived of Its equal suf-
nevertheless adopted a resolution on July 28. frage In the Senate."
to free human beings from ownership as 1868.
a chattel by other humans. Its aim was of theunlawfully declaring that three-fourths
states had ratified the 14th Amend-
The fact that 23 Senators had been unlaw-
fully excluded from the U.S. Senate. In order
no more than to free the slaves. ment and directed the Secretary of State to to secure a two-thirds vote for adoption of
As our politically appointed Federal so proclaim, said Joint Resolution of Con- the Joint Resolution proposing the 14th
judiciary proceeds down their chosen gress and the resulting proclamation of the Amendment Is shown by Resolutions of pro-
test adopted by the following State Legisla- cannot be a constitutional Congress, when the Constitution. In consequence of this,
tures: the representation of each State forms an these States had no voice on the Important
The New Jersey Legislature by Resolution Integral part of the whole. question of proposing the Amendment. Had
of March 27, 1868, protested as follows: "This amendment Is tendered to Georgia they been allowed to give their votes, the
"The sald proposed amendment not having for ratification, under that power In the Con- proposition would doubtless have failed to
yet received the assent of the three-fourths stitution which authorizes two-thirds of the command the required two-thirds ma-
of the states, which Is necessary to make It Congress to propose amendments. We have jority. • • •
valid, the natural and constitutional right endeavored to establish that Georgia had a If the votes of these States are necessary to
of this state to withdraw Its assent is right, In the first place, as a part of the Con- a valid ratification of the Amendment, they
undeniable • • •." gress, to act upon the question, 'Shall these were equally necessary on the question of
"That It being necessary by the constitu- amendments be proposed?' Every other ex- proposing it to the States; for It would be
tion that every amendment to the same cluded State had the same right. difficult, In the opinion of the Committee, to
should be proposed by two-thirds of both "The first constitutional privilege has been show by what process in logic, men of Intelli-
houses of congress, the authors of said arbitrarily denied. Had these amendments gence could arrive at a different conclusion." •
proposition, for the purpose of securing the been submitted to a constitutional Congress, II. JOINT RESOLUTION INEFFECTIVE
assent of the requisite majority, determined they never would have been proposed to the
to, and did, exclude from the said two houses States. Two-thirds of the whole Congress Article I, Section 7 provides that not only
eighty representatives from eleven states of never would have proposed to eleven States every bill which shall have been passed by
the union, upon the pretence that there were voluntarily to reduce their political power in the House of Representatives and the Senate
no such states In the Union; but, finding the Union, and at the same time, disfran- of the United States Congress, but that:
that two-thirds of the remainder of the said chise the larger portion of the Intellect, in- "Every order, resolution, or vote to which
houses could not be brought to assent to tegrity and patriotism of eleven co-equal the concurrence of the Senate and House of
the said proposition, they dellberately formed States." 5 Representatives may be necessary (except
and carried out the design of mutilating the The Florida Legislature, by Resolution of on a question of adjournment) shall be pre-
integrity of the United States senate, and December 5, 1866, protested as follows: sented to the President of the United States;
without any pretext or justification, other "Let this alteration be made in the organic and before the same shall take effect, shall
than the possession of the power, without the system and some new and more startllng de- be approved by him, or being disapproved by
right, and in palpable violation of the consti- mands mayor may not be required by the him shall be repassed by two-thirds of the
tution, ejected a member of their own body, predominant party previous to allowing the Senate and House of Representatives, ac-
representing this state, and thus practically ten States now unlawfully and unconstitu- cording to the rules and limitations pre-
denied to New Jersey its equal suffrage in tionally deprived of their right of represen- scribed in the case of a bill."
the senate, and thereby nominally secured tation to enter the Halls of the National The Joint Resolution proposing the 14th
the vote of two-thirds of the said houses." 1 Legislature. Their right to representation is Amendment 0 was never presented to the
The Alabama Legislature protested against guaranteed by the Constitution of this coun- President of the United States for his ap-
being deprived of representation In the Sen- try and there Is no act, not even that of proval, as President Andrew Johnson stated
ate of the U.S. Congress.' rebeillon, can deprive them of Its exercise." • in his message on June 22, 1866.10 Therefore,
The Texas Legislature by Resolution on The South Carolina Legislature by Resolu- the Joint Resolution did not take effect.
October 15, 1866, protested as follows: tion of November 27, 1866, protested as fol- m. PROPOSED AMENDMENT NEVER RATIFIED BY
"The amendment to the Constitution pro- lows: THREE-FOURTHS OF THE STATES
posed by this joint resolution as Article "Eleven of the Southern States, Including 1. Pretermitting the ineffectiveness of said
XIV is presented to the Legislature of Texas South Carolina, are deprived of their repre- resolution, as above, fifteen (15) States out
for its action thereon, under Article V of that sentation In Congress. Although their Sena- of the then thirty-seven (37) States of the
Constitution. This Article V, providing the tors and Representatives have been duly Union rejected the proposed 14th Amend-
mode of making amendments to that instru- elected and have presented themselves ment between the date of Its submission to
ment, contemplates the participation by all for the purpose of taking their seats, their the States by the Secretary of State on
the States through their representatives in credentials have, in most Instances, been laid June 16, 1866 and March 24, 1868, thereby
Congress, in proposing amendments. As rep- upon the table without being read, or have further nullifying said resolution and mak-
resentatives from nearly one-third of the been referred to a committee, who have ing It ImpOssible for its ratification by the
states were excluded from the Congress pro- failed to make any report on the subject. In constitutionally required three-fourths of
posing the amendments, the constitutional short, Congress has refused to exercise its such States, as shown by the rejections
requirement was not complied with; It was Constitutional functions, and decide either thereof by the Legislatures of the following
violated in letter and in spirit; and the pro- upon the election, the return, or the quali- states:
posing of these amendments to States which fication of these selected by the States and Texas rejected the 14th Amendment on
were excluded from all participation In their people to represent us. Some of the Senators October 27, 1866.11
initiation In Congress, is a nullity."· and RepresentatiVes from the Southern Georgia rejected the 14th Amendment on
The Arkansas Legislature, by Resolution on States were prepared to take the test oath,
but even these have been persistently ig- November 9, 1866."
December 17, 1866, protested as follows: Florida rejected the 14th Amendment on
"The Constitution authorized two-thirds nored, and kept out of the seats to which
they were entitled under the Constitution December 6, 1866.' •
of both houses of Congress to propose amend- Alabama rejected the 14th Amendment on
ments; and, as eleven States were excluded and laws.
"Hence this amendment has not been pro- December 7, 1866.14
from deliberation and decision upon the one
now submitted, the conclusion Is Inevitable posed by 'two-thirds of both Houses' of a North Carolina rejected the 14th Amend-
that it is not proposed by legal authority, legally constituted Congress, and Is not, con- ment on December 14, 1866."
but In palpable violation of the Constitu- stitutionally or legitimately, before a single Arkansas rejected the 14th Amendment on
tion."" Legislature for ratification.'" December 17, 1866.' •
The Georgia Legislature, by Resolution on The North Carolina Legislature protested South Carolina rejected the 14th Amend-
November 9,1866, protested as follows: by Resolution of December 6, 1866 as follows: ment on December 20, 1866."
"Since the reorganization of the State gov- "The Federal Constitution declares, In sub- Kentucky rejected the 14th Amendment on
ernment, Georgia has elected Senators and stance, that Congress shall consist of a House January 8, 1867."
Representatives. So has every other State. of Representatives, composed of members
They have been arbitrarily refused admission apportioned among the respective States in • North Carolina Senate Journal, 1866-67,
to their seats, not on the ground that the the ratio of their population, and of a Sen- pp. 92 and 93.
quallficatlons of the members elected did not ate, composed of two members from each o 14 Stat. 358 etc.
conform to the fourth paragraph, second sec- State. And In the Article which concerns ,. Senate Journal, 39th Congress, 1st sessn.
tion, first article of the Constitution, but Amendments, it is expressly provided that p. 563, and House Journal p. 889.
because their right of representation was 'no state, without It consent, shall be de- 11 House Journal 1866, pp. 578-584-Senate
denied by a portion of the States having prived of Its equal suffrage In the Senate.' Journal 1866, p. 471.
equal but not greater rights than themselves. The contemplated Amendment was not pro- 12 House Journal 1866, p. 68-Senate Jour-
They have in fact been forcibly excluded; posed to the States by a Congress thuA con- nal 1866, p. 72.
and, inasmuch as all legislative power grant- stituted. At the time of its adoption, the • 18 House Journal 1866, p. 78-Senate Jour-
ed by the States to the Congress is defined, eleven seceding States were deprived of repre- nal 1866, p. 8.
and this power of exclusion Is not among the sentation both In the Senate and House, H House Journal 1866, pp. 210-213-8enate
powers expressly or by Implication, the as- although they all, except the State of Texas, Journal 1866, p. 183.
semblage, at the capitol, of representatives had Senators and Representatives duly 15 House Journal 1866-1867, p. 183-Senate
from a portion of the States, to the exclusion elected and claiming their privUeges under Journal 1866-1867, p. 138.
of the representatives of another portion, ,. House Journal 1866, pp. 288-291-Senate
• Georgia House Journal, November 9, 1866, Journal 1866, p. 262.
1 New Jersey Acts, March 27, 1868. pp.66-67. 17 House Journal 1866, p. 284-Senate Jour-
o Alabama House Journal 1866, pp. 210-213. • Florida House Journal, 1866, p. 76. nal 1886, p. 230.
3 Texas House Journal, 1866, p. 577. 7 South Carolina House Journal, 1866, pp. ,. House Journal 1867, p. 6Q--Senate Jour-
• Arkansas House Journal, 1866, p. 287. 33 and 34. nal 1867, p. 62.
Virginia rejected the 14th Amendment on On August 20, 1866, President Andrew "In all these States there are existing con;.
January 9, 1867.19 Johnson Issued another proclamation 30 stltutlons, framed in the accustomed way by
Louisiana rejected the 14th Amendment pointing out the fact that the House of Rep- the people. Congress, however, declares that
on February 6, 1867.'" resentatives and Senate had adopted Identi- these constitutions are not 'loyal and repub-
Delaware rejected the 14th Amendment on cal Resolutions on July 22nd al. and July lican,' and requires the people to form them
February 7, 1867.21 25th, 1861,82 that the Clv1l War forced by anew. What, then, in the opinion of Con-
Maryland rejected tho 14th Amendment on disunionists of the Southern States, was not gress, is necessary to make the constitution
March 23, 1867.22 waged for the purpose of conquest or to of a State 'loyal and republican?' The original
Mississippi rejected the 14th Amendment overthrow the rights and established insti- act answers the question: 'It Is universal
on January 31, 1867.23 tutions of those States. but to defend and negro sulfrage, a question which the federal
Ohio rejected the 14th Amendment on maintain the supremacy of the Constitution Constitution leaves exclusively to the States
January 15, 1868." and to preserve the Union with all equality themselves. All this legislative machinery of
New Jersey rejected the 14th Amendment and rights of the several states unimpaired, martial law, m1l1tary coerCion, and political
on March 24, 1868." and that as soon as these objects are accom- disfranchisement Is avowedly for that pur-
There was no question that all of the plished, the war ought to cease. The Presi- pose and none other. The existing constitu-
Southern states which rejected the 14th dent's proclamation on June 13, 1865, de- tions of the ten States conform to the ac-
Amendment had legally constituted govern- clared the insurrection In the State of Ten- knowledged standards of loyalty and repub-
ments, were fully recognized by the federal nessee had been suppressed.·s The Presi- licanism. Indeed, If there are degrees In re-
government, and were functioning as mem- dent's proclamation on April 2, 1866,'" de- publican forms of government, their constitu-
ber states of the Union at the time of their clared the Insurrection In the other South- tions are more republican now, than when
rejection. ern States, except Texas, no longer existed. these States-four of which were members
President Andrew Johnson, in his Veto On August 20, 1866,35 the President pro- of the original thirteen-first became mem-
message of March 2, 1867,20 pointed out that: claimed that the Insurrection in the State of bers of the Union."
"It is not denied that the States in ques- Texas had been completely ended; and his In President Andrew Johnson's Veto mes-
tion have each of them an actual govern- proclamation continued: "the Insurrection sage on the Reconstruction Act on July 19,
ment with all the powers, executive, judicial Which heretofore existed In the State of 1867,37 he pointed out various unconstltu-
and legislative, which properly belong to a Texas Is at an end, and Is to be henceforth tlonalltles as follows:
free State. They are organized like the other so regarded In that State, as In the other "The veto of the original b1l1 of the 2d of
States of the Union, and, like them, they States before named In which the said In- March was based on two distinct grounds.
make, administer, and execute the laws surrection was proclaimed to be at an end the Interference of Congress in matters
which concern their domestic affairs." by the aforesaid proclamation of the second strictly appertaining to the reserved powers
If further proof were needed that these day of Apr1l, one thousand, eight hundred of the States, and the establishment of m1l1-
States were operating under legally consti- and sixty-six. tary tribunals for the trial of citizens In time
"And I do further proclaim that the said of peace.
tuted governments as member States in the
Union, the ratification of the 13th Amend- insurrection Is at an end, and that peace,
ment by December 8, 1865 undoubtedly sup- order, tranqu1l1ty, and civil authority now
plies this official proof. If the Southern exist, In and throughout the whole of the
". • •
"A singular contradiction Is apparent here.
Congress declares these local State govern-
States were not member States of the Union, United States of America." ments to be illegal governments, and then
the 13th Amendment would not have been 4. When the State of Louisiana rejected provides that these 111egal governments shall
submitted to their Legislatures for ratifica- the 14th Amendment on February 6, 1867, be carried on by federal Officers, who are to
tion. making the 10th state to have rejected the perform the very duties on Its own officers
2. The 13th Amendment to the United same, or more than one-fourth of the total by th1.s illegal State authority. It certainly
States Constitution was proposed by Joint number of 36 states of the Union as of that would be a novel spectacle If Congress should
Resolution of Congress·7 and was approved date, thus leaving less than three-fourths of attempt to carryon a legal State government
February 1, 1865 by President Abraham Lin- the states possibly to ratify the same, the by the agency of Its own officers. It is yet
coln, as required by Article I, Section 7 of the Amendment fa1led of ratification in fact and more strange that Congress attempts to sus-
United States Constitution. The President's in law, and It could not have been revived tain and carry on an 1l1egal State govern-
except by a new Joint Resolution of the

signature Is affixed to the Resolution. ment by the same federal agency.
The 13th Amendment was ratified by 27 Senate and House of Representatives In • • • •
states of the then 36 states of the Union, accordance with Constitutional reqUirement. "It Is now too late to say that these ten
Including the Southern States of Virginia, 5. Faced with the positive failure of rati-
political communities are not States of this
Louisiana, Arkansas, South Carolina, Ala- fication of the 14th Amendment, both Houses Union. Declarations to the contrary made in
bama, North Carolina and Georgia. This Is of Congress passed over the veto of the Presi- these three acts are contradicted again and
shown by the Proclamation of the Secretary dent three Acts known as Reconstruction again by repeated acts of legislation enacted
of State December 18, 1965.28 Without the Acts, between the dates of March 2 and by Congress from the year 1861 to the year
votes of these 7 Southern State Legislatures July 19, 1867, especially the third of said 1867.
the 13th Amendment would have faUed. Acts, 15 Stat. p. 14 etc., designed illegally
There can be no doubt but that the ratifica- to remove with "Military force" the lawfully "During that period, While these States
tion by these 7 Southern States of the 13th constituted State Legislatures of the 10 were in actual rebell1on, and after that re-
Amendment again established the fact that Southern States of Virginia, North Carolina, bell10n was brought to a close, they have
their Legislatures and State governments South CarOlina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, been again and again recognized as States
were duly and lawfully constituted and func- Mississippi, Arkansas, Louisiana and Texas. of the Union. Representation has been appor-
tioning as such under their State Constitu- In President Andrew Johnson's Veto message tioned to them as States. They have been di-
tions. on the Reconstruction Act of March 2, 1867," vided Into judicial distriCts for the holding
3. Furthermore, on April 2, 1866, President he pointed out these unconstltutlonal1ties: of district and circuit courts of the United
Andrew Johnson Issued a proclamation that, "If ever the American citizen should be States, as States of the Union only can be
"the insurrection which heretofore existed left to the free exercise of his own jUdgment, dlstrlcted. The last act on this subject was
In the States of Georgia, South CarOlina, Vir- it is when he Is engaged In the work of form- passed July 23, 1866. by which everyone of
ginia, North CarOlina, Tennessee, Alabama, ing the fundamental law under which he Is these ten States was arranged Into districts
LouiSiana, Arkansas, Mississippi and Florida to live. That work Is his work, and it can- and circuits.
Is at an end, and Is henceforth to be so re- not properly be taken out of his hands. All "They have been called upon by Congress
garded." 29 this legislation proceeds upon the contrary to act through their legislatures upon at
Assumption that the people of each of these least two amendments to the Constitution of
States shall have no constitution, except such the United States. As States they have rati-
,. House Journal 1866-1867, p. 108-Senate as may be arbltrararUy dictated by Congress, fied one amendment, which required the
Journal 1866-1867, p. 101. and formed under the restraint of m1l1tary vote of twenty-seven States of the thlrty-
20 McPherson, Reconstruction, p. 194; An-
rule. A plain statement of facts makes this six then composing the Union. When the
nual Encyclopedia, p. 452. evident. requisite twenty-seven votes were given In
21 House Journal 1867, p. 223-Senate Jour-
favor of that amendment-seven of which
nal 1867, p. 176. votes were given by seven of these ten
22 House Journal 1867. p. 1141-Senate eral Records of the United States, G.S.A. States--It was proclaimed to be a part of
Journal 1867, p. 808. National Archives and Records Service. the Constitution of the United States, and
23 McPherson, Reconstruction, p. 194. so 14 Stat. p. 814. slavery was declared no longer to exist within
.. House Journal 1868, pp. 44-50-senate B1 House Journal, 37th Congress, 1st Sessn. the United States or any place subject to
Journal 1868, pp. 33-38. p. 123 etc. their jurisdiction. If these seven States were
.. Minutes of the Assembly 1868, p. 743-- ... Senate Journal, 37th Congress, 1st Sessn. not legal States of the Union, It follows as
Senate Journal 1868, p. 356. p. 91 etc. an inevitable consequence that in some of
,. House Journal, 39th Congress, 2nd Ses- 33 13 Stat. 763. the States slavery yet exists. It does not exist
sion. p. 563 etc. •• 14 Stat. p. 811.
27 13 Stat. p. 567. .. 14 Stat. 814.
28 13 Stat. p. 774. .. House Journal, 39th Congress, 2nd Sessn. 17 40th Congress, 1st Sessn. House Journal
.. Presidential Proclamation No. 153. Gen- p. 563 etc. p. 232 etc.
CXIII--986-Part 12
in these seven States, for they have abolished the duties by the President might be justly on us by the Constitution, and waited for
it also In their State constitutions; but Ken- characterized, In the language of ChIef Jus- Legislative InterpOSition to supersede our
tucky not having done so, It would still re- tice Marshall, as "an absurd and excessive action, and relieve us from responsib1llty.
main in that State. But, In truth, If this extravagance." The Court further saId that I am not wllllng to be a partaker of the
assumption that these States have no legal If the Court granted the Injunction against eulogy or opprobrium that may follow. I
State governments be true, then the aboli- enforcement of the Reconstruction Acts, and can only say . . . I am ashamed that such
tion of slavery by these l11egal governments If the PresIdent refused obedIence, It Is need- opprobrium should be cast upon the court
binds no one, for Congress now denies to less to observe that the Court Is wIthout and that It cannot be refuted."
these States the power to abolish slavery by power to enforce Its process. The ten States were organized Into Mil!tary
denying to them the power to elect a legal In a joint action, the states of Georgia Districts under the unconstitutional "Re-
State legislature, or to frame a constitution and MissIssippi brought suit against the construction Acts," their lawfully constituted
for any purpose, even for such a purpose as PresIdent and the Secretary of War, (6 Wall. Legislature Illegally were removed by "mil!-
the abol1t1on of slavery. 50-78,154U.S.554). tary force," and they were replaced by rump,
"As to the other constitutional amend- The Court saId that: so-called Leglslature3, seven of which carrIed
ment having reference to suffrage, It hap- "The bill then sets forth that the Intent out m1lltary orders and pretended to ratify
pens that these States have not accepted and design of the Acts of Congress, as ap- the 14th Amendment, as follows:
it. The consequence Is, that It has never been parent on thler face and by their terms, are Arkansas on Aprll 6, 1868;38
proclaimed or understood, even by Congress, to overthrow and annul thIs existing state North Carolina on July 2,1868;""
to be a part of the Constitution of the United government, and to erect another and dif- Florida on June 9, 1868; «>
States. The Senate of the United States has ferent government In Its place, unauthor- LouIsIana on July 9,1868;41
repeatedly given Its sanction to the ap- Ized by the Constitution and in defiance of South Carolina on July 9, 1868;40
pointment of judges, district attorneys, and Its guaranties; and that, in furtherance of Alabama on July 13, 1868;'3 and Georgia
marshals for everyone of these States; yet, this Intent and design, the defendants, the on July 21, 1868 ....
i! they are not legal States, not one of these Secretary of War, the General of the Army, 6. Of the above 7 States whose Legislatures
judges Is authorIzed to hold a court. So, too, and Major-General Pope, actIng under orders were removed and replaced by rump, so-
both houses of Congress have passed appro- of the President, are about setting in mo- called Legislatures, six (6) Legislatures of the
prIation bills to pay all these judges, at- tion a portion of the army to take m!l!tary states of Louisiana, Arkansas, South Caro-
torneys, and officers of the United States for possession of the state, and threaten to sub- lina, Alabama, North CarOlina and Georgia
exercising their functions In these States. vert her government and subject her people had ratIfied the 13th Amendment, as shown
Again, In the machinery of the Internal rev- to m!l!tary rule; that the state Is holding by the Secretary of State's Proclamation of
enue laws, all these States are dlstrlcted, Inadequate means to resist the power and December 18, 1865, without which 6 States'
not as 'TerrItories,' but as 'States.' force of the Executive Department of the ratifications, the 13th Amendment could not
"So much for continuous legislative recog- United States; and she therefore Insists that and would not have been ratified because said
nition. The Instances cited, however, fall far such protection can, and ought to be afforded 6 States made a total of 27 out of 36 States
short of all that might be enumerated. by a decree or order of his court In the or exactly three-fourths of the number re-
Executive recognition, as Is well known, has premises." quIred by Article V of the Constitution for
been frequent and unwavering. The same The applications for injunction by these ratification.
may be said as to judicial recognition two states to prohibit the Executive Depart- Furthermore, governments of the States
through the Supreme Court of the United ment from carrying out the provisions of of Louisiana and Arkansas had been re-estab-

States. the Reconstruction Acts directed to the over- lished under a Proclamation Issued by Presi-
• throw of their government, Including this dent Abraham Lincoln December 8, 1863.'·
The government of North Carolina had
"To me these considerations are conclusive dissolution of their state legislatures, were
of the unconstitutionality of this part of the denied on the grounds that the organization been re-establlshed under a Proclamation
bill now before me, and I earnestly commend of the government Into three great depart- Issued by President Andrew Johnson dated
their conSideration to the deliberate judg- ments, the executive, legislative and judicial, May 29, 1865.'·
ment of Congress. [And now to the Court.] carried limitations of the powers of each by The government of Georgia had been re-
"Within a period less than a year the legis- the Constitution. This case when the same established under a proclamation Issued by
lation of Congress has attempted to strip the way as the previous case of Mississippi President Andrew Johnson dated June 17,
executive department of the government of against President Johnson and was dismissed 1865.'7
some of Its essential powers. The Constitu- without adjudicating upon the constitu- The government of Alabam,a had been re-
tion, and the oath provided In It, devolve tionality of the Reconstruction Acts. established under a Proclamation Issued by
upon the PresIdent the power and duty to In another case, ex parte William H. Mc- President Andrew Johnson dated June 21,
see that the laws are faithfully executed. Cardle (7 Wall. 506-515), a petition for the 1865."
The Constitution, In order to carry out this writ of habeas corpus for unlawful restraint The government of South Carolina' had
power, gives him the choice of the agents, by ml!!tary force of a citizen not In the been re-establlshed under a Proclamation
and makes them subject to his control and mll1tary service of the United States was issued by President Andrew Johnson dated
supervision. But In the execution of these before the United States Supreme Court. June 30, 1865 ..•
laws the constitutional obl1gatlon upon the After the case was argued and taken under These three "Reconstruction Acts" O. under
President remains, but the powers to exer- advisement, and before conference In re- which the above State Legislatures were 11-
cise that constitutional duty Is effectually gard to the deCision to be made, Congress legally removed and unlawful rump or pup-
taken away. The m!lltary commander Is, as passed an emergency Act, (Act March 27, pet so-called Legislatures were substituted
to the power of appointment, made to take 1868, 15 Stat. at L. 44), vetoed by the In a mock effort to ratify the 14th amend-
the place of Its President, and the General President and repassed over his veto, re- ment, were unconstitutional, null and VOid,
of the Army the place of the Senate; and any pealing the jurisdiction of the U.S. Supreme ab Initio, and all acts done thereunder were
attempt on the part of the President to assert Court in such case. Accordingly, the Supreme also null and void, Including the purported
hIs own constitutional power may, under Court dismissed the appeal without passing ratification of the 14th Amendment by said
pretence of law, be met by official insubordi- upon the constltutlonal1ty of the Recon- 6 Southern puppet State Legislatures of
nation. It Is to be feared that these mlI!tary struction Acts, under which the non-ml!!tary
Officers, looking to the authorIty given by citizen was held by the ml!!tary without 38 McPherson, Reconstruction, p. 53.
these laws rather than to the letter of the benefit of writ of habeas corpus, In viola- 30 House Journal 1868, p. 15, Senate Journal
ConstitutIon, wl11 recognize no authority but tion of Section 9, Article I of the U.S. Con- 1868, p. 15.
the commander of the dIstrict and the Gen- stitution which prohibits the suspension of •• House Journal 1868, p. 9, Senate Journal
eral of the army. the writ of habeas corpus. 1868, p. 8.
"If there were no other objectIon than this n Sena te Journal 1868, p. 21.
to this proposed legislation, It would be That Act of Congress placed the Recon-
struction Acts beyond judicial recourse and 42 House Journal 1868, p. 50, Senate Jour-
sufficient." nal 1868, p. 12.
No one can contend that the Reconstruc- avoided tests of constitutIonality.
It Is recorded that one of the Supreme •• Senate Journal, 40th Congress, 2nd
tion Acts were ever upheld as being val1d and Sessn. p. 725.
constitutional. Court Justices, Grier, protested against the
action of the Court as follows: .. House Journal, 1868, p. 50.
They were brought Into question, but the
Courts either avoided decision or were pre- "This case was fully argued In the begin- •• Vol. I, pp. 288-306; Vol. II, pp. 1429-
vented by Congress from finally adjudicatIng ning of this month. It Is a case whIch In- 1448-"The Federal and State Constitu-
upon their constltutlonal1ty. volves the liberty and rights, not only of tions," etc., compiled under Act of Con-
In Mississippi v. President Andrew John- the appellant but of. millions of our fellow gress on June 30, 1906, Francis Newton
son, (4 Wall. 475-502), where the suIt sought cItIzens. The country and the parties had Thorpe, Washington Government printing
to enjoin the President of the United States a right to expect that It would receive the Office (1906).
from enforcing provIsions of the Reconstruc- Immediate and solemn attention of the .. Same, Thorpe, Vol. V, pp. 2799-2800.
court. By the postponement of this case we <7 Same, Thorpe, Vol. II, PP. 809-822.
tion Acts, the U.S. Supreme Court held that
the President cannot be enjoined because for shall subject ourselves, whether justly or .. Same, Thorpe, Vol. I, pp. 116-132.
the Judicial Department of the government unjustly, to the Imputation that we have •• Same, Thorpe, Vol. VI, pp. 3269-3281.
to attempt to enforce the performance of evaded the performance of a duty Imposed 00 14 Stat. p. 428, etc. 15 Stat. p. 14, etc.
Arkansas, North Carolina, Louisiana, South In that case, the Court brushed aside States has been adopted, according to the
Carolina, Alabama and Georgia. constitutional questions as though they did provisions of the Constitution, the Secretary
Those Reconstruction Acts of Congress and not exist. For Instance, the Court made the of State shall forthwith cause the amend-
all acts and things unlawfully done there- statement that: ment to be published, with his certificate,
under were in violation of Article IV, Sec- "The legislatures of Georgia, North Caro- specifying the States by which the same may
tion 4 of the United States Constitution, lina and South Carolnla had rejected the have been adopted, and that the same has
which required the United States to guar_ amendment In November and December, become valid, to all Intents and purposes, as
antee every State in the Union a republi- 1866. New governments were erected in those a part of the Constitution of the United
can form of government. They violated Arti- States (and in others) under the direction States."
cle I, Section 3, and Article V of the Con- of Congress. The new legislatures ratified In Hawke v. Smith, 1920, 253 U.S. 221, 40 S.
stitution, which entitled every State in the the amendment, that of North Carolina on Ct. 227, the U.S. Supreme Court unmistakably
Union to two Senators, because under pro- July 4, 1868, that of South Carolina on held:
visions of these unlawful Acts of Congress, July 9, 1868, and that of Georgia on July 21, "The fifth article Is a grant of authority
10 States were deprived of having two Sen- 1868." by the people to Congress. The determina-
ators, or equal suffrage in the Senate. And the Court gave no consideration to the tion of the method of ratification is the
7. The Secretary of State expressed doubt fact that Georgia, North Carolina and South exercise of a national power specifically
as to whether three-fourths of the required CarOlina were three of the original states of granted by the Constitution; that power Is
states had ratified the 14th Amendment, as the Union with valid and existing constitu- conferred upon Congress, and Is limited to
shown by his Proclamation of July 20, 1868." tions on an equal footing With the other two methods, by action of the Legislatures
Promptly on July 21, 1868, a Joint Resolu- original states and those later admitted Into of three-fourths of the states, or conven-
tion 62 was adopted by the Senate and House the Union. tions In a like number of states. Dodge v.
of Representatives declaring that three- What constitutional right did Congress Woolsey, 18 How. 331, 348, 16 L. Ed. 401. The
fourths of the several States of the Union had have to remove those state governments and framers of the Constitution might have
ratified the 14th Amendment. That resolu- their legislatures under unlawful military adopted a different method. Ratification
tion, however, Included purported ratifica- power set up by the unconstitutional "Recon- might have been left to a vote of the people,
tions by the unlawful puppet Legislatures of struction Acts," which had for their purpose, or to some authority of government other
6 States, Arkansas, North CarOlina, Louisiana, the destruction and removal of these legal than that selected. The language of the arti-
South Carolina and Alabama, which had pre- state governments and the null1fication of cle is plain, and admits of no doubt In its
viously rejected the 14th Amendment by ac- their Constitutions? Intrepretation. It Is not the function of
tion of their lawfully constituted Legisla- The fact that these three states and seven courts or legislative bodies, national or state,
tures, as above shown. This Joint Resolution other Southern States had existing Constitu_ to alter the method whiCh the Constitution
assumed to perform the function of the Sec- tions, were recognized as states of the Union, has fixed."
retary of State in whom Congress, by Act of again and again; had been divided into judi- We submit that In none of the cases, in
April 20, 1818, had vested the function of cial districts for holding their district and which the Court avoided the constitutional
issuing such proclamation declaring the rati- circuit courts of the United States; had been issues involved in the composition of the
fication of Constitutional Amendments. called upon by Congress to act through their Congress which adopted the Joint Resolution
The Secretary of State bowed to the action legislatures upon two Amendments, the 13th for the 14th Amendment, did the Court pass
of Congress and Issued his Proclamation of and 14th, and by their ratifications had ac- upon the constitutionality of the Congress
July 28, 1868,62 in which he stated that he tually made possible the adoption of the 13th which purported to adopt the Joint Resolu-
was acting under authority of the Act of Amendment; as well as their state govern- tion for the 14th Amendment, with 80 Rep-
April 20, 1818, but pursuant to said Resolu- ments having been re-established under resentatives and 23 Senators, in effect,
tion of July 21, 1868. He listed three-fourths Presidential Proclamations, as shown by forcibly ejected or denied their seats and
or so of the then 37 states as having ratified President Andrew Johnson's Veto message their votes on the Joint Resolution propos-
the 14th Amendment, Including the pur- and proclamations, were all brushed aside ing the Amendment, In order to pass the
ported ratification of the unlawful puppet by the Court in Coleman by the statement same by a two-thirds vote, as pointed out In
Legislatures of the States of Arkansas, North that: "~ew governments were erected in the New Jersey Legislature Resolution on
Carolina, Louisiana, South Carolina and Ala- those States (and In others) under the di- March 27, 1868.
bama, Without said 6 unlawful purported rection of Congress," and that these new leg- The constitutional requirements set forth
ratifications there would hiwe been only 26 islatures ratified the Amendment. In Article V of the Constitution permit the
states left to ratify out of 37 when a mini- The U.S. Supreme Court overlooked that Congress to propose amendments only when-
mum of 28 states was required for ratification It previously had held that at no time were ever two-thirds of both houses shall deem it
by three-fourths of the States of the Union. these Southern States out of the Union. necessarY,-that Is, two-thirds of both
The Joint Resolution of Congress and the White v. Hart, 1871, 13 Wall. 646, 654. houses as then constituted without forcible
resulting Proclamation of the Secretary of In Coleman, the Court did not adjUdicate eJections.
State also included purported ratifications by upon the Invalidity of the Acts of Congress Such a fragmentary Congress also violated
the States of Ohio and New Jersey, rtlthough which set aside those state Constitutions and the constitutional reqUirements of Article V
the Proclamation recognized the fact that abolished their state leglslatures,-the Court that no state, without its consent, shall be
the Legislatures of said states, several months simply referred to the fact that their legally deprived Of Its equal suffrage in the Senate.
previously, had withdrawn their ratifications constituted legislatures had rejected the 14th There is no such thing as giving life to an
and effectively rejected the 14th Amendment Amendment and that the "new legislatures" amendment lllegally proposed or never legal-
in January, 1868, and April, 1868. had ratified the Amendment. ly ratified by three-fourths of the states.
Therefore, deducting these two states from The Court overlooked the fact, too, that There is no such thing as amendment by
the purported ratifications of the 14th the State of Virginia was also one of the laches; no such thing as amendment by
Amendment, only 23 State ratifications at original states with Its Constitution and Leg- waiver; no such thing as amendment by ac-
most could be claimed; whereas the ratifica- islatUre in full operation under its civil quiescence; and no such thing as amend-
tion of 28 States, or three-fourths of 37 government at the time. ment by any other means whatsoever except
States in the Union, were required to ratify The Court also Ignored the fact that the the means specified In Article V of the Con-
the 14th Amendment. other six Southern States, which were given stitution Itself.
From all of the above documented historic the same treatment by Congress under the It does not suffice to say that there have
facts, It Is Inescapable that the 14th Amend- unconstitutional "Reconstruction Acts", all been hundreds of cases decided under the
ment never was validly adopted as an article had legal constitutions and a republican 14th Amendment to supply the constitutional
of the Constitution, that it has no legal form of government in each state, as was deficiencies In Its proposal or ratification as
effect, and It should be declared by the recognized by Congress by Its admission of required by Article V. If hundreds of litigants
Courts to be unconstitutional, and therefore those states Into the Union. The Court cer- did not question the valldlty of the 14th
nUll, void and of no effect. tainly must take judicial cognizance of the Amendment, or questioned the same per-
fact that before a new state is admitted by functorily without submitting documentary
Congress Into the Union, Congress enaots an proof of the facts of record which made its
Enabling Act to enable the inhabitants of purported adoption unconstitutional, their
The defenders of the 14th Amendment the territory to adopt a Constitution to set failure cannot change the Constitution for
contend that the U.S. Supreme Court has up a republican form of government as a the millions In America. The same thing is
finally decided upon its validity. Such Is not condition precedent to the admission of the true of laches; the same thing Is true of
the case. state Into the Union, and upon approval of acquiescence; the same thing Is true of III
In what Is considered the leading case, such Constitution, Congress then passes the considered court decisions.
Coleman v. Miller, 307 U.S. 448, 69 S. Ct. 972, Act of Admission of such state. To ascribe constitutional life to an alleged
the U.S. Supreme Court did not uphold the All this was ignored and brUShed aside amendment which never came Into being
validity of the 14th Amendment. by the Court 1D the Coleman case. However, accordlng to specific methods laid down in
In Coleman the Court inadvertently said Article V cannot be done without doing vio-
Gl 16 Stat. p. 706. this: lence to Article V Itself. This is true, because
62 House Journal, 40th Congress, 2nd Sessn. "Whenever official notice Is received at the the only question open to the courts Is
p. 1126 etc. Department of State that any amendment whether the alleged 14th Amendment be-
62 16 Stat. p. 708. proposed to the Constitution of the United came a part of the Constitution through a
method required by Article V. Anything be- found In Article V Is to write the new mate- of Israel, Abba Eban, in his address to
yond that which a court Is called upon to rial Into Article V. the United Nations Security Council on
hold In order to valldate an amendment, It would be Inconceivable that the Con-
June 6, 1967, set .the theme for a lasting
would be equivalent to writing Into Article V gress of the United· States could propose,
another mode of the amendment which has compel submission to, and then give life peace in the Middle East so much de-
never been authorized by the people of the to an Invalid amendment by resolving that sired by all the peace-loving nations of
United States. Its effort had succeeded-regardless of com- the world. His address was entitled,
On this point, therefore, the question Is, pliance with the positive provisions of Ar- "Not Backward to Belligerency but For-
was the 14th Amendment proposed and rati- ticle V. ward to Peace."
fied In accordance with Article V? It should need no further citations to On June 7, 1967, following the first
In answering this question, it Is of no real sustain the proposition that neither the United Nations resolution calling for a
moment that decisions have been rendered Joint Resolution proposing the 14th Amend-
In which the parties did not contest or sub- ment nor Its ratification by the required cease-fire in the Middle East, I stated to
mit proper evidence, or the Court assumed three-fourths of the States In the Union a distinguished group of Americans Wll0
that there was a 14th Amendment. If a stat- were In compliance with the requirements visited me in Washington as follows:
ute never In fact passed by Congress, through of Article V of the Constitution. I deem it most Imperative that the terms
some error of administration and printing When the mandatory provisions of the of the agreement to follow the cease fire
got Into the published reports of the stat- Constitution are violated, the Constitution provide effective guarantees, to the end that
utes, and If under such supposed statute Itself strikes with nulllty the Act that did permanent peace may be established In the
courts had levied punishment upon a num- violence to its provisions. Thus, the Consti- Middle East.
ber of persons charged under It, and If the tution strikes with nullity the purported The Interests of world peace would best
error In the published volume was discovered 14th Amendment. be served If the terms provide:
and the fact became known that no such The Courts, bound by oath to support the 1. For recognition of the validity of the
statute had ever passed In Congress, It Is un- ConstitUtion, should review all of the evi- sovereignty of the State of Israel by the
thinkable that the Courts would continue to dence herein submitted and measure the U.A.R. and other Arab states.
administer punishment In similar cases, on facts proving violations of the mandatory 2. A reaffirmation that the Gulf of Aqaba
a non-existent statute because prior decisions provisions of the Constitution with Article Is an International waterway and will re-
had done so. If that be true as to a statute V, and finally render judgment declaring main open for free passage to shipping of all
we need only realize the greater truth when said purported Amendment never to have nations through the Straits of Tlran.
the prinCiple is applied to the solemn ques- been adopted as required by the Constitu- 3. An opening of the Suez Canal to ship-
tion of the contents of the Constitution. tion. ping of all nations.
While the defects In the method of propos- The Constitution makes It the sworn duty 4. An ending of terrorism and border raids
Ing and the subsequent method of comput- of the judges to uphold the Constitution so that Israel may carry out its deSire to live
Ing "ratification" Is briefed elsewhere, it which strikes with nullity the 14th Amend- In peace with its neighbors.
should be noted that the failure to comply ment. 5. For direct negotiations between Israel
with Article V began with the first action by And, as Chief Justice Marshall pointed out and her Arab neighbors for the resolution
Congress. The very Congress which proposed for a unanimous Court In Marbury v. Madison of other pending Issues.
the alleged 14th Amendment under the first (1 Cranch 136 @ 179) :
part of Article V was Itself, at that very time, "The framers of the constitution contem- Indeed, it is within the province of the
violating the last part as weH as the first plated the Instrument as a rule for the gov- sovereign State of Israel to speak its
part of Article V of the Constitution. We ernment of courts, as well as of the legisla-mind on the terms of the agreement to
shall see how this was done. ture,"
There Is one, and only one, provision of
follOW the cease-tire-the terms which in
the Constitution of the United States which its view will best insure permanent
"Why does a judge swear to discharge his peace in the Middle East. We on the
Is forever Immutable-which can never be duties agreeably to the constitution of the
changed or expunged. The Courts cannot United States, If that constitUtion forms no other hand take the opportunity to make
alter It; the executives cannot change It; the rule for his government?" . suggestions which in our opinion will
Congress cannot change It; the States them- best secure the peace of the world-
selves-even all the States In perfect con-
"If such be the real state of things, that thereby also serving the best interests
cert-cannot amend It In any manner what- is worse than solemn mockery. To prescribe, of the United States.
soever, whether they act through conven- or to take this oath, becomes equally a An elaboration of the five points sug-
tions called for the purpose or through their
legislatures. Not even the unanimous vote of crime." gested on June 7, 1966, is accordingly
every voter In the United States could amend • in order .
this provision. It Is a perpetual fixture In "Thus, the particular phraseology of the I. THE STATE OF ISRAEL A SOVEREIGN NATION
the Constitution, so perpetual and so fixed constitution of the United States confirms
that If the people of the United States de- and strengthens the principle, supposed to The state of Israel is a member of the
sired to change or exclude It, they would be be essential to all written constl tu tions • • • United Nations-a full-fledged member
compelled to abolish the Constitution and courts, as well as other departments, are of the family of nations. Though the in-
start afresh. bound by that Instrument." tegrity of her borders were guaranteed
The unalterable provision Is this: "that The federal courts actually refuse to hear by the major powers-three times in 20
no State, without ~ts consent, shall be de- argument on the Invalidity of the 14th years-the State of Israel was obliged
prived of Its equal suffrage In the Senate." Amendment, even when the Issue is pre-
sented squarely by the pleadings and the evi- to go to war to put a stop to the viola-
A state, by Its own consent, may waive tion of her boundary lines.
this right of equal suffrage, but that Is the dence as above.
only legal method by which a failure to ac- Only an aroused public sentiment In favor It is therefore basic to any plan for
cord this Immutable right of equal suffrage of preserving the Constitution and our in- permanent peace in the Middle East that
In the Senate can be justified, Certainly not stitutions and freedoms under constitutional the sovereignty of the State of Israel be
by forcible ejection and denial by a major- government, and the future security of our recognized by her neighbors. This fact
Ity In Congress, as was done for the adoption country, will break the pOlitical barrier cannot be questioned-this truth is and
of the Joint ResolUtion for the 14th Amend- which now prevents judicial consideration should not be negotiable because its im-
ment. of the unconstitutionality of the 14th amend-
ment. port was underlined by the events of the
Statements by thD Court In the Coleman past 10 days.
case that Congress was left In complete
control of the mandatory process, and there- The foundation for a permanent peace
fore It was a political affair for Congress to THE MIDEAST CRISIS-NOT BACK- in the IViiddle East must be the absolute
decide If an amendment had been ratified, WARD TO BELLIGERENCY BUT anli unqualified recognition by the Arab
does not square with Article V of the Con- FORWARD TO PEACE States of the right of the State of Israel
stitution which shows no Intention to leave to exist as a sovereign state among other
Congress In charge of deciding whether there Mr. PRYOR. Mr. Speaker, I ask sov~reign states. When this fOlmdation is
has been a ratification. Even a constitution- unanimous consent that the gentleman laid, then Israel and her Arab neigh-
ally recognized Congress Is given but one from New York [Mr. TENZER] may ex- bors can, through direct negotiations,
volition In Article V, that Is, to vote whether tend his remarks at this point in the
to propose an Amendment on its own Initia- begin to build the structure leading to
RECORD and include extraneous matter. permanent peace.
tive. The remaining steps by Congress are The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there
mandatory. If two-thirds of both houses shall objection to the request of the gentleman II. STRAIT OF TIRAN AN INTERNATIONAL
deem It necessary. Congress shall propose WATERWAY
amendments; If the Legislatures of two- from Arkansas?
thirds of the States make application, Con- There was no objection. Since 1950, Egypt has repeatedly given
gress shall caU a convention. For the Court Mr. TENZER. Mr. Speaker, the dis- assurances that the Strait of Tiran
to give Congress any power beyond that to be tinguished Foreign Minister of the Stl!-te would remain open for "innocent passage