The news scimitar. (Memphis, Tenn.) 1907-1926, 1919-05-23
WILSON'S VIEWS
ON THIRD TERM
IN 1918 LETTER
Believes Third Nomination Is
Not Objectionable as Long
as There Is No Legal Limi-
tation.
BY DAVID LAWRENCE.
(The News sclmitar's Special Core.
eRarHanN

X ne news Sclntar's Special Corres
WASHINGTON, 5SStiy Nav 2s-Frie7ds
and advisers of President Wilson who
are in position to know what he has
said on the subject Of a third term
are positive that he will not be a can
didate to succeed himself in 1920. But
that is his personal preference, and it
is not necessarily based on any opposi-
tion to the third term idea itself. II the
people had before them the question of
limiting the tenure of office, Mr.. VIII
son would favor two terms as the limit
TO be placed by constitutional amend
ment
But in the absence Of any constitu-
tlonal limitation as at present, he be-
lieves the political parties are free to
nominate president for third term
and the people are free to accept or
reject his candidacy at the polls.
Told in Letter.
Mr.. Wilson'S position on the subject
of terms for the presidency is fully
described in confidential letter writ
ten in February, 1918, to A. Mitchell
Palmer now attorney general, who was
chairman of the Democratic caucus in
the house of representatives at the
time. Publication of the letter has
never been authorized, though one
newspaper did publish some extracts
1916 opened In view OF the fact that
the Palmer letter, however is pointed
to today as q comprehensive statement
of the presidents position, 1t is perth
nent to reproduce the full text, which
follows:
my Dear Mr. Palmer:
THANK you warmly for your letter
of Feb. 8. 1t was characteristically con-
siderate of you to ask my views with
regard to the joint resolution which has
just come over from the house with re-
gard to the presidential term. | have
not hitherto said anything about this
question because | had not observed
that there was any evidence that the
public was very much interested in it..
/ must have been mistaken in this, else
the senate would hardly have acted so
promptly upon it.
ut Is q matter which concerns the
character and conduct Of the great Of
flee upon the duties of which l am
about to enter. | feel, therefore, that
in the present circumstances, ! should
not be acting consistently with my
ideals with regard to the rule Of entire
frankness and plain speaking that ought
to exist between public servants and
the public whom they serve il l did not
speak about it without reserve OF any
kind and without thought of the per-
sonal embarrassment.
THE question is simply this: Shall
our presidents be free so far as the
law Ia concerned to seek a second term
Of four years. or shall they be limited
by constitutional amendment to sin
gle term of four years or to a single
term extended to six years?
Impersonal View.
81 can approach the question from 9
81 nt,,t 80 xria hn.
cause | shall most. carefully abide by
the judgment of my party and the pub
lic as to whether l shall be a candidate
for the presidency again in 1916. | abb
solutely pledge myself to resort to moth
ing but public opinion to decide that
question.
1.-THE president ought to be abso-
lutely deprived of every other means
Of deciding it. He can be. l shall use
to the utmost every proper influence
within my reach to see that he Is be-
fore the term to which ! have beer
elected is out That side OF the matter
need disturb no one.
"And yet If he is deprived of every
other means of deciding the question
what becomes Of the argument for q
constitutional limitation for a single
term?
"The argument is that it Is not clear,
" known just how long each president
should remain in office. Four years II
too long term for president who
is not a true spokesman of the people
who is imposed upon and does not lead
1t is too short term for presiden
who is doing or attempting a grea
work of reform and perhaps has no
had time to finish it, To change thu
term to six years would be to increase
the likelihood of it's being too lont
without any assurance that it would il
happy cases be long enough.
'A fixed constitutional limitation t
a single term of office is highly arbi
trary and unsatisfactory from ever!
point of view. -
"'The argument for, 1t rests upon tenn
porary conditions which can easily b.
removed by law.
presidents, it is said, are effectiv
for one-half of their terms only be
cause they devote their attention durin
the last two years of the term to build
ing up the influences and, above al
the organization by which they hop
and purpose to secure second nomina
tion and election.
at is in this Illicit power, not thei
legitimate influence with the country
that the advocates of a constitutions
change profess to be afraid of, and
heartily sympathize with them.
at is intolerabe that any presiden
fIa,tipuod op pape IN Column 4