Debate on Formosa

As the reading clerk of the U.S. Senate droned and stumbled through President Eisenhower's message on Formosa, about 40 Senators sat in the chamber listening intently. The faces of some reflected doubt--of others, determination. All looked grave. After the reading, Georgia's Democratic Senator Walter George, chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, introduced the joint resolution that would implement the message.

The House of Representatives received the message with reservations. Speaker Sam Rayburn grumbled to newsmen that Ike was asking for authority that he already possessed. Majority Leader John McCormack bitterly denounced the Administration's "vacillating policy." Then the House leadership rose to the occasion. Said Speaker Rayburn: The President wants "to do it this way, so I think it ought to be done this way rather promptly." Five hours after Ike's message was received by the House, its Foreign Affairs Committee approved the resolution, 28 to 0.

Next day, with Rayburn's blessing, the resolution went to the House floor under a closed rule, i.e., no amendments were allowed and debate was limited to three hours. Most speeches were highly emotional. Said South Carolina's Democratic Representative Mendel Rivers: "I believe while this thing is fraught with danger, it is far more dangerous to be guilty of inaction than to be guilty of action. I believe in action." Cried New Jersey's Democratic Representative Alfred Sieminski: "Does mainland China want Japan on Formosa? Does Russia want Japan in Korea? That is the issue both face. It seems to me that memories of the past should remind Peking and Moscow that they have never had it so good in the Pacific. Heaven help them if they move against us." Then Sieminski sat down, leaving the House in utter bewilderment.

The House adopted the resolution, 409 to 3. The dissenters: North Carolina's Democratic Representative Graham Baren, who said the matter had not been given enough consideration, Kentucky's Republican Representative Eugene Siler, who had promised the mothers of his district not to send the boys to war, and Illinois' Republican Representative Timothy Sheehan, who said the resolution was not tough enough.

An Emerald Island. Meanwhile, the Senate was treading more cautiously. For some eight hours one day, the Joint Chiefs of Staff testified before the combined Senate Foreign Relations and Armed Services Committees. At hand was a map of Formosa and the China coast, set on a metal tripod. The mainland was shown in a rich chocolate color, Formosa in emerald green. There were other maps, kept well covered and guarded by military personnel when not in use. It was a tense session. Said Minnesota's Democratic Senator Hubert Humphrey: "I recall that there was not one smile, not one jest." It was highly secret. Near the end of the day, Admiral Arthur Radford, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, noticed a stenotypist at work. Witness Radford flushed darkly, said that if he had known any record was being made, his answers would have been far different. Virginia's veteran Democratic Senator Harry Byrd suggested that the transcript be burned. It wasn't.

"A Great Disservice." After the Senate Committee approved the resolution, 27 to 2 (Oregon's Wayne Morse and North Dakota's William Langer), the measure went to the Senate floor, where debate was already in progress. Wayne Morse made an impassioned, two-hour speech in opposition. At times, his voice roared throughout the chamber; again, he spoke in the lecture-hall tones of a law-school professor. Among his main arguments: the resolution amounted to authorizing a preventive war (a theme quickly picked up by Vermont's Republican Senator Ralph Flanders).

Nearby sat Republican Leader William Knowland, scowling furiously and scribbling notes with red, then blue, then black pencils. When Morse finished and left the chamber, Knowland arose, his right fist clenched white, his voice choked with anger. Wayne Morse, said he, had rendered "a great disservice to our country." If left unchallenged, Morse's statements "might cause the men in the Kremlin or in Peking to believe that a decision to engage in a preventive war or an act of aggression had been made by the Government and the people of the U.S....They might decide to strike before that could occur."

There was never any doubt that the resolution would be approved; but there was a harsh possibility that there would be enough adverse votes to make it a costly victory. Many Senators were obviously hesitant: Virginia's Byrd collared newsman after newsman to express his doubts. Minnesota's Humphrey and Tennessee's Democratic Senator Estes Kefauver wanted the resolution drastically amended. Even Georgia's Democratic Senator Richard Russell, chairman of the Armed Services Committee that had helped report the resolution, declined to take the floor in its support.

There was real danger that the debate would drift on, delaying the vote until this week. But Knowland and George realized the danger and pressed hard for a vote. Their basic argument: delay or a sizable opposition would weaken the U.S. stand, encourage the Communists. At 9:50 Friday night the vote came. Only three--Morse, Langer and New York's Democratic Senator Herbert Lehman--voted against the resolution. In the greatest show of U.S. unity in years, 85 Senators * voted for it.

* The absentees--all of whom said that, if present, they would have voted aye--were Democrats Dennis Chavez of New Mexico, J. Allen Frear of Delaware, John F. Kennedy of Massachusetts, Matthew Neely of West Virginia and Lyndon Johnson of Texas, and Republicans Charles Potter of Michigan, John Bricker of Ohio, and Vermont's Flanders.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.