232. Memorandum From the President’s Special Counsel (Kendall) to President Eisenhower0
In any approach on the Hill in respect to changing the Connally Reservation, the paramount importance of our other programs, including Mutual Security, in this Session ought to be kept uppermost in mind.
A lot of the same people or same thinking which went into the Connally Reservation are still present, or extant, in the Senate and John Bricker has only just gone. It would seem unfortunate to stir things up if they would hurt the current program.
For that reason (and I am sure Secretary Dulles would agree with this), almost exquisite care should be taken as to (a) who is approached first and how the approach is made; and (b) such approach should be closely coordinated with Bryce Harlow and our own Hill group.1
- Source: Eisenhower Library, Whitman File, Dulles–Herter Series. Attached to the source text was a February 3 memorandum from Dulles to the President regarding revision of the Connally Amendment, which addressed the issue of jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice.↩
- On February 9, Eisenhower told Dulles the administration should not initiate revision of the Connally Amendment, but might accede to congressional attempts to change it. (Memorandum from Meeker to Becker, February 16; Department of State, Central Files, 360/2–1659)↩