Grand Forks herald. [volume] (Grand Forks, N.D.) 1916-1955, 1919-11-24

# punlSe0e0 herein s@E ss ES4e@ @& a&@6a Ml
N EVENING. NOVEMBER ,4,slsl,.
THE TREATY AND THE ELECTIONS
Thsrs Il tank in Warrington and elsewhere about
the possibility Of dsferrins further action on the peace
treaty untn next year and having the people render
thsir decision on II st the fall elections. It looks simple
st dsst but It appears more complicated on inspection.
Short Of . direct vote on the subject itself. for which no
provision exists. how are the people to render a decision
, on this question which will not be misunderstood?
The election OF members Of the house OF represen-
tatives has no direct bearing on. the subject, for house
members do not vote on the ratification of the treaty,
and to make their preferences with reference to it>the
governing issue In their selection would be a perversion
OF their duties and a suhordination of their real work to
somethins Of an entirely different character.
II We undertake to decide by the election Of senators
we are confronted by the fact that while the senate has
% members only about one-third Of these are elected
IN any election year. and OF the thirty-odd men to be
elected next year It IL certain that in spite Of anything
that can be done to the contrary. one-halt. or more. will
be elected because they are Republicans or because
they are Democrats. It is difficult to SEQ how the cleo
ton OF perhaps . dozen senators who may be chosen
on that issue could be, understood to indicate the senti-1
ments Of the entire population on the treaty.
Moreover. the senate is not divided. and 1t is to be
assumed that candidates will be divided into several
groups. outright avocates and outright opponents Of the
treaty, and advocates of this. that and the other amend
ment or reservation. The election Of Senator johnson
OF California, whose term Is about to expire, might be-
taken as a declaration against any League of Nations
whatever, for Mr.. johnson has made it plain that that
is his position. II the term Of Senator Lodge, another
Republican, were about to expire. which It is not, and
he were . candidate for reelection. his success might
be interpreted as q vote for radical amendments or
strong reservations. /. Senator Reed Of Missouri, a Demo
crat. is utterly opposed to the treaty. while other Demo-
crats are for It y
II the treaty were to be made an issue In the pFest-
dental campaign We should not be much better OF. II
the Democrats should nominate President Wilson and
ths Republicans Senator johnson, both Of which have
sometimes been ~considered possible. there would be a
rather clear issue Is between straight ratification ana
straight rejectAon. But where would the reservationists,
strong ana mild, At Int What opportunity would there
- for the expression OF the views of those who desire
ehs ratification Of the trsaty, with OF without some form
- 1nodidcsHcn, but who adeplore the tactless manner
tn which Mr.. Wilson has handled 1t, ana who distrust
his ability to handle the general AFFAIRS Of tbs nation
And how about voters who admire Senator johnson Tor
Els courass and ability and respect him for his in
. tegrtty. but whose views on everything pertaining to the
Aeay are dramatically opposed to his?
There Is possible a plebiscite on the treaty direct,
Ind consres4 could, II it desired, provide for such an
sxpresstcn Of opinion. It would be informal. and not
q btndtnG IN law, but Il a. clear expression Of opinion could
BE- obtained. Il would undoubtedly govern. the action of
the senate. We know OF no way wherebyscongress could
require such q vots to he taken, AZ cur elections are
strstly state affairs. regulated by state laws. But con-
grem could undoubtedly recommend to the states that
N advisory vote be taken at the regular election, could
prescribe the forms. and, II necessary, could arrange ia
deAfay the additional expense entailed. And, II this
asWeSs.dpus. the states would probably respond.
nut here again there are difhculues. There are
etassna who would prefer the ratification of the treaty
80 ~ stands who. falling that, would accept any or al
pf the changes which have been proposed. rather than
- the IAssus Of Nations rejected altogether. There
srs others Via would stop short at some Of the reser-
syatlont. and soma who would accept mono Of them. 70
obtain 4 correct index would require q more complicated
system OF voting than = likely to be adopted.
Ths fdsa OF referring action and making the treaty
ssstil psudinx = campaign issue, savors more strongly
.of lrArttys sfrAtssy than Of sound statesmnaship. The
eoasitutiop invests the president and the senate with
Nshs ssspsn.lbiltySo o. dealing with this subject. It Is thei,
u businsn 10 deal with *. They have failed to get to-
SsEsth1r.gS% IL u their business TO got together, to take
s1sanits anA conclustvs action, ana then justify then-
ssfvss bs1prs The people. e they can.
45g
OHTARlOHS UNITED FARMERS
q : AAmeult Tor chose who have not followed the
sgAs0saopmsnAs more elosely than most Of 10 haye done to
anyxhins IKE definite conclusions u 70 the char.
Ha1tss - Al anips af the success Of the Organization
AnoWnssaSt - usitsd Farmers Of Ontario IN the recent
~ 49,