In response to:
A Special Supplement: Impeachment from the June 28, 1973 issue
To the Editors:
Usually, the clarity and precision of I. F. Stone’s writing never leaves doubt in the reader’s mind.
However, in the Special Supplement on Impeachment [NYR, June 28], I must ask if Mr. Stone meant to imply that Raoul Berger holds to the white-only interpretation of the Constitution apparently held over the years by Senator Ervin? The frequent references these days of Watergate to the Senator’s virtuoso understanding of the Constitution ignore that to the Senator the Constitution was written by whites for whites, and usually men. Since the 1950s when he signed the Southern Manifesto, he has cited the Constitution as his reason for opposing any change in the legal, economic or social status of blacks.
Surely Mr. Stone did not intend to cast the Senator’s cloak of racism on the shoulders of Mr. Berger.
Ganesville, North Carolina