Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
174679243
label
Letter from Robert Hartnett to Daniel F. Clancy
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
174679243
contentType
document
title
Letter from Robert Hartnett to Daniel F. Clancy
citationUrl
collections
Records of the National Committee Against Limiting the Presidency
Subject Files
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
174679243
levelOfDescription
item
productionDates
day
15
logicalDate
1951-03-15
month
3
year
1951
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
photo
mediaId
00f0bb218907be86
ocrText
AMERICA
NATIONAL CATHOLIC WEEKLY
OFFICE OF THE EDITOR
329 WEST 108th STREET, NEW YORK 25, N. Y.
March 15, 1951
Mr. Daniel Francis Clancy
P.O. Box 322
Springfield, Ohio
Dear Mr. Clancy:
Thank you for your letter of March 6.
It is simply amazing how little discussion there was on the 22nd Amend-
ment. I myself took my doctorate in Political Science and was head of
the Department at the University of Detroit before being assigned to
editorial work here. I think it is a very serious mistake to write into
constitutions any restraints upon the electorate except those which are
necessary to promote the competent exercise of voting privileges and
those which protect minority rights and in fact all fundamental rights.
The fact of the matter is that we have a Federalist constitution but we
think about it in Jeffersonian terms. The State constitutions, many of
which are utterly ridiculous, have given rather full expression to Jef-
fersonian concepts, but the more forward looking States have either
succumbed to this trend or have worked away from it in recent years.
Maybe the idea of the no-third-term tradition was a very good one. If
so it should have been restored through extra constitutional means.
With best wishes.
Sincerely,
Reflartmest
Robert C. Hartnett, S.J.
Editor
RCH/cb