In early 1949, Federal Union spawned the Atlantic Union Committee, with former Supreme Court Justice Owen J. Roberts as Chairman, former Under-Secretary of State Will Clayton and former Secretary of War Robert Patterson as Vice Chairman, to lead an intensive nationwide campaign for Atlantic integration. This was the climate in which NATO was adopted, the stage already having been set by the Marshall Plan of which Clayton was the principal author. In the period 1949-53, the Atlantic Union Committee (AUC) became the primary organization in America supporting NATO. In the early 1950's, the AUC took the initiative to form an Atlantic Assembly, as an annual consultative assembly of parliamentarians from the NATO countries, which formally became the North Atlantic Assembly in 1966, and then was transformed into the NATO Parliamentary Assembly under which name it operates today.

Atlantic Union Committee Meeting

Atlantic Union Committee Formed!

From Freedom & Union, April, 1949

 Judge Robert P. Patterson & Justice Owen J. Roberts at AUC press conference.

The Ides of March—a dangerous day for dictators, as Julius Caesar, the first of the Kaisers, Czars and Commissars learned 1992 years ago—were marked this year by a notable advance in the unending struggle for human freedom.  But it differed promisingly from the futile blow that Brutus struck. It was creative, not destructive only.

It was the announcement of the formation of a powerful "Atlantic Union Committee for a Federal Convention of Democracies."  It was the launching of organized citizen political action to transform the ideal of Federal Union of the Free into living constitutional law and government, and thus deliver freedom and peace from the absolute national sovereignty and dictatorship that threaten both today.

With it, the basic ideas the Union Now and FREEDOM & UNION have been championing, entered the field of practical politics.

The decision to form the Atlantic Union Committee was taken by a group of citizens from coast to coast who met in private recently at the Barbizon Plaza Hotel in New York under the chairmanship of Justice Owen J. Roberts.  They unanimously adopted the following resolution:

"Resolved that an action committee be formed for the purpose of

"a) enlisting public support for a resolution to be introduced in Congress inviting the other democracies with whom the U.S. is contemplating an alliance, to meet with American delegates in a federal convention to explore the possibilities of united with them in Federal Union of the Free, and

"b) continuing this support until such a Federal Union of Democracies becomes and accomplished fact."

The officers and Board of Directors they then elected gave the Atlantic Union Committee the strongest leadership that any American citizens organization in the international field have begun with in more than a generation.

The president is Owen J. Roberts, former Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court.  One vice president is Robert P. Patterson, U.S. Under Secretary of War from 1940 to 1945, then Secretary of War from 1945 to 1947.  The other vice president is Will L. Clayton who served as Assistant Secretary of State for Economic Affairs.  He was a father of the International Trade Organization and helped both inspire and work out the Marshall Plan.  He retired from diplomatic service only a few months ago.

Together these three leaders bring to the support of the Atlantic Federal Union program deep knowledge and broad practice in the fields of constitutional government, justice, international trade, economics, diplomacy, politics in the highest sense.  Their names carry weight abroad as well as here, and not only the White House and the key Departments of State, Defense and Commerce, but in both Houses of Congress and both parties.

The Treasurer of the Atlantic Union Committee is Elmo Roper, well-known marketing consultant and public opinion surveyor.  The Committee’s secretary, Walden Moors, is a former Democratic candidate for Congress and former professor of political science at the University of Rochester, N.Y.

The other 13 members of the Board are Herbert Agar, author and lecturer, former editor, Louisville Courier-Journal; Edgar Bissantz, architect, Pacific Coast Director of Federal Union, Inc; Sevellon Brown, editor, Providence Journal & Evening Bulletin; Gardner Cowles, editor and publisher, Look Magazine, President, Des Moines Register, Minneapolis Tribune Co.; Dr. A. Powell Davies, clergyman, author, lecturer; Henry C. Flower, Jr., Vice President, J. Walter Thompson Co.; Hugh Moore, Chairman of the Board, Dixie Cup Co.; Edmund Orgill, President, Southern Hardware Dealers Ass’n.; Harry Scherman, President, Book-of-the-Month Club; Clarence K. Streit, author of Union Now, editor, lecturer; Dr. Harold C. Urey, Nobel Prize Winner, atomic scientist; William L. White, editor, author; John Orr Young, public relations counselor, cofounder of Young & Rubicam, President, John Orr Young & Associates.

Mr. Agar was founder and president of the Fight for Freedom Committee in 1940-41.  Hugh Moore was chairman of the executive board of the Committee of Defend America by Aiding the Allies in 1940.  Then he was president of Americans United for World Organization which mobilized support for the United Nations.  Later he became a member of the executive committee of the American Association for the United Nations, and he was treasurer of the Committee for the Marshall Plan which Judge Patterson headed last year.  Mr. Streit was the founder of Federal Union, Inc. in 1939 and has been its president since.

The executive director, Earl E. Hart, managed Harold Stassen’s Washington, D.C. office during his campaign for the 1948 Republican nomination.   Before that he managed the campaigns of Harold Burton, now Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, for mayor of Cleveland and Republican Senator from Ohio, winning against great odds.  During the 5 years that Mr. Burton served in the U.S. Senate, Mr. Hart was his secretary.

In the early stages of the AUC’s formation, Justice Roberts and Mr. Clayton journeyed to Washington to make obvious soundings there.

As a result of these soundings and of the rapid development of the negotiations for the Atlantic alliance, the AUC Board, which at first had planned to have its resolution calling for an Atlantic Federal Convention introduced at once in both houses of Congress, decided to defer this until after the Pact was ratified.  The feeling was that the alliance had apparently committed itself too far to the other governments negotiating the Pact to be deflected from it now.

Therefore, to clear the stage sooner, it was agreed that the AUC, while believing alliances inadequate in themselves, would support the Administration’s proposed Atlantic Pact "as an important first step toward Atlantic Union."   At the same time it would keep the goal of Union before the world by announcing formation of the committee before the Pact was submitted to the Senate, and by beginning at once to prepare and mobilize public opinion for the subsequent Federal Convention move to transform the Alliance into a federation of democracies.

In announcing the formation of the AUC at a press conference in Washington, Justice Roberts express belief that the alliance would be an immediate step to prevent war and would serve to bring the democracies closer together.  But, he declared, it would not be enough to insure permanent peace.

"After Congress has acted on the Pact," he said, "this Committee will ask Congress to pass a resolution calling for an international convention to explore how far the U.S. and other democracies could wisely go at this time in forming a true federation of the Atlantic democracies. Such a federation would be formed within the framework of the U.N.

"Such a federation," he continued, "would offer three immediate benefits.  It would strengthen the U.N. It would raise the standard of living and lower the cost of military security for all.  When organized, the Union would admit other nations which protect individual liberty by law, and practice representative government.  In the meanwhile, it would make democracy so powerful that the Kremlin could not hope to star war with any prospect of success.

"We want to hear," the Justice said, "from all Americans who want to join with us."

Judge Patterson stated: "Union of the democracies will convince the Kremlin that the democracies mean business.  The Kremlin will immediately see that the creation of a federal defense force for a union of nations would be far stronger than any staff agreements between separate nations.

"Yet nothing," he added, "could be more in the spirit of peace symbolized by the U.N. than form some of its members to reach the ultimate degree of understanding involved in the formation within the U.N. of a federal union by mutual consent.  The calling of a federal convocation of Atlantic nations to discuss union would immeasurably strengthen the U.N."

Mr. Clayton, unable to be present for the conference, issued a statement saying in part:

"The preservation of peace and freedom is the only thing that counts in the world today.  Russia is on the march determined to communize the world. Russian communism opposes the civil freedom and the religious freedom which democracy holds dear.  There is only one way to stop Russia short of war.  Democracy must be made to work in all those lands which are still free.

"In economic terms, democracy works when people have more to eat, more to wear and better homes in which to live.  This rising standard of living can only be realized in the modern world by releasing the world’s productive capacities through striking off the shackles of economic nationalism, and by reducing armaments.   This calls for an economic merger of democracies.

"I favor union of the free, believing it to be the only road to world freedom, world prosperity and world peace.  I believe such a union is the next step forward in the spiritual, economic and social development of the human race."

Mr. Streit explained that, in accepting membership on the Board of the Atlantic Union Committee and urging his supporters to get behind it, he was acting in his private capacity, not as President of Federal Union, Inc.  He described the latter as a non-profit membership association and research in the principles of individual liberty and international federalism, as distinguished from political action.

"Federal Union, Inc. leaves political action entirely to others," he said, "and will continue its educational work as an independent organization.  The bright prospects opened up by the formation of the new committee make further adult education in our free federal principles, here and in Western Europe, all the more urgently necessary.  And once the Convention is called, we shall face the greatest task and opportunity of public education in America’s principles of freedom and federal union that the world has ever known—and even greater opportunity than the U.S. Federal Convention of 1787 provided."

Open Letter to NATO Leaders

From Freedom & Union, May, 1953

On the eve of the April 23 meeting of the North Atlantic Council in Paris, 140 citizens of four Atlantic Pact nations, representing the fields of industry, education, religion, labor, publishing, finance, science, law, civic organizations and public affairs, addressed an open letter to their countrymen and NATO representatives.   The letter was initiated by Governor Christian Herter or Massachusetts; Joseph C. Grew of Washington, former Ambassador to Japan; former Under-Secretary of State, Will L. Clayton, of Houston, Texas; and former Ambassador to Norway, Lithgow Osborne, of New York. The text of the letter follows--

AS CITIZENSof the United States, Great Britain, France and Canada, we are addressing this open letter to our fellow citizens on the eve of the meeting of the North Atlantic Council in Paris, and to our representatives at that meeting.

We are convinced that the burdens of taxes and high prices which rest so heavily on all our peoples can be eased only by a better integration of the economic, defense and foreign policies of all our countries through the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

We point out that there is authority in the Treaty for further development of the North Atlantic Community t a) give us better defense at less cost; b) create a reliable and expanding economy to raise the standard of living for the Atlantic Community and the whole free world; c) multiply the effectiveness of our foreign policies to safeguard individual liberty and to establish peace.

Better defense at lower costs depends as much, if not more, on the integration of our economic policies as it does on the integration of our defense policies.  By wise economic coordination, we could so increase the combined national incomes of the 14 NATO members that their combined defense costs would be a much smaller percentage of their incomes than it has been hitherto.

To achieve these goals we respectively suggest the following steps:

1.  A joint declaration by the responsible Ministers attending the North Atlantic Council meeting that they will propose immediate steps to lower tariffs, eliminate quotas and other trade restrictions, simplify customs proceedings and free currencies to the end that the Atlantic nations may eventually become one financial and trading community.

2.  Closer cooperation by NATO with all international agencies engaged in economic activity. Absorption by NATO of the separate functions of these agencies wherever such action would make for efficiency and good relations.

3.  The creation of a North Atlantic Consultative Assembly, composed of representatives of peoples of the NATO countries, which would have as its principal objective the implementation of Article II of the North Atlantic Treaty which pledges members to bring about "conditions of stability and well being" and to "encourage economic collaboration between them."

4.  The setting up of a central agency to coordinate Allied policy and planning all vital areas where imperialist Communist aggression threatens peace, including Europe, the Middle East and the Far East.

We hope that these proposals will receive consideration at the forthcoming meeting of the North Atlantic Council.  We set them forth in the belief that all items on the agenda for this meeting are related to the paramount issue of whether we, the free peoples of the earth, can attain among ourselves a unity adequate to prevent a third World War.

We endorse the statement of our NATO Secretary-General that: "The democracies should form the habit, and have the means, of thinking together and acting together in all matters, be they great or small, in the interests of any of their number that are threatened, and further that the enemy should know without a shadow of doubt that they are so aligned."

We also endorse the statement of President Eisenhower, made in his report as NATO Supreme Commander on April 2, 1952, that: "There is power in our union…Visible and within grasp we have the capability of building such military, economic and moral strength as the Communist world would never dare challenge."
We are convinced that all the above steps would be taken by the NATO nations in the event of war.  We ask that they be taken now in order to prevent war.

 
John Foster Dulles on an Atlantic Union of Democracies in his introduction to The New Federalist

"Great peril often calls for the bold application of great principles of universal scope.

Today there is great peril. Seven hundred million people, or about one-third of the entire human race, have already come under the rule of a group whose practices derive from an atheistic and materialistic philosophy, who believe that their dominance must be extended to the entire world and who believe that violence is not only a permissible but a necessary means of achieving their "one world."

The peril from that expanding and hostile unity cannot be easily overcome. We are trying to bolster up, by military and economic aid, some nations which we hope will be a barrier to Soviet Communism. The European Recovery Program, the North Atlantic Treaty and the Military Assistance Program are important steps in a good direction. But even these measures do not provide the reality of dependable common defense. Unity remains a contingency, not a fact.

When our founders had only disconnected sovereignties with which to face the aggressive empires of their day, they found strength by adopting the principles of federalism. That was a flexible formula that made it possible to have unity with respect to selected matters that were of common concern while leaving state sovereignty undisturbed as regards all other matters.

The Federalist papers that expounded that thesis contain an unparalleled wealth of political wisdom upon which we should continue to draw. The authors pointed out the unreliability of mere promises by sovereign states to stand together when peril strikes. Such promises, they showed, are rarely kept unless, when the event occurs, national self-interest coincides with the promise. Thus no member of an alliance or league can plan dependably on common defense. They concluded that the only way to achieve the strength that our States needed was to create a measure of organic unity before the happening of the events which might be disruptive of unity.

Fortunately for ourselves and the world, our country still produces men of political vision, wisdom and courage. Among them are the authors of this book, Owen J. Roberts, John F. Schmidt and Clarence Streit. They bring to present problems the spirit of the authors of The Federalist papers. Indeed, one of the present chapters is a textual reproduction from Alexander Hamilton. The present authors explore the possibility of invoking, at this juncture, the federal principle as between at least some of the peoples who face a common peril and who have like political institutions. They conclude that there exists a basis for the unified handling of matters which, in the present state of the world, are very much of common concern to them all.

Whenever the federal principle is invoked there arise differences of opinion as to precisely what matters are clearly of such common concern as to call for common governance. In our own country that debate started when our federal Constitution was conceived and it has gone on ever since. Inevitably there would be comparable differences of opinion as to the possible extension of the Federal principle as between a group of nations which are now wholly independent. There can, however, be little doubt but what this principle of federalism ought to be thoroughly explored as providing a possible way for free peoples to gain the added strength needed to meet the severe tests that fate may hold in store for them. Most Americans have forgotten, and few Europeans have known, how light, but yet how strong, can be the bond of federation.

There is now pending in Congress an Atlantic Union Resolution which calls for a Federal Convention of those nations which sponsored the North Atlantic Treaty. This makes especially relevant the present book. It deserves, and I trust will receive, widespread consideration.

January, 1950 "