The Bridgeport times and evening farmer., 1919-04-03

tinued in a more definite and binding
 form, and what plausible reason can
 be suggested for losing the tremen-
 dOus asset which the world has there
 by gained? We shall wait in vain for
 a satisfactory reply which impairs in
 the least degree the force of that
 simple question. The crucial test of
 those who discuss the League of Ma
 tions consists in the attitude which
 they disclose. Is the attitude sympa-
 thetic and helpful or is it partisan and
 critical? Is the purpose Constructive
 or destructive? Is an honest attempt
 being made to forward this great pro-
 ject or is it the purpose to hamper
 those who are engaged in the work
 so that the whole plan may fall into
 confusion and become ineffective?
 I observe that some of the sugges-
 tions which I have made with refer
 ence to the League of Nations have
 drawn the attention of Senator Me
 Lean. Some days ago he took the
 trouble to issue a statement in reply
 thereto, which was published some
 what extensively in Connecticut news
 papers. l do not know that it is
 necessary to advert to his statement
 because it is f-destructive and for
 the most part, expresses ideas which
 are being rapidly abandoned by Sem
 ator McLean's associates. The Sena-
 tor is unhappy because I asserted that
 the leaders of the Republican party
 in the Senate had placed themselves
 in opposition to the League of Ma tions' In an attempt to controvert this statement, the learned Senator
 says ''The Lodge resolution commits all those who signed it to a League of NT7+i words a proposal for a League of Nations to insure the permanent peace of the world should be taken up for careful and serious consideration after the terms of peace with Germany have been determined
 The friends Of the league will find little comfort in the Lodge resolution. Stripped of it's verbiage, it is a pro posal of postponement- An unctious approval of the idea that the world should unite to promote peace and general disarmament coupled with the proposition to dismiss the consid- eration of the League of Nations to some remote and vague future, will not deceive even the simplest. The plain people-a term by the way, which the Senator evidently dislikes will have no difficulty in distin- gushing between the real friends of the lea que who want that league es- tablished now. and the spurious friends of the league who plead for delay.
 The Senator endeavors to persuade himself that MT. Taft and Senator Lodge are substantially in harmony, for I observe that he says There is little conflict between them" Quite apart from the fundamental difference that MT. Taft desires League of Ma tions esta bHshed now and Senator Lodge wants the consideration of it postponed, there is still another strik- i ing difference. MT. Taft finds himself 1 able to appear upon the same plat form at the Metropolitan Opera 1 House with President Wilson to unite , with him in a joint appeal to Aneri- ! can patriotism to support the League 1 of Nations. On the other hand, Sen | atOr Lodge appears upon the platform i at Boston debating against President i Lowell, of Harvard. whose positicg1 is | identical with that of MT. Taft. One i must have reached very low mental 1 ebb to be unable or unwilling to see 1 the difference. Mir. Taft is support i ing the President openly and vigor- 1 ously. Senator Lodge, on the other i hand, loses no opportunity to criticize i the President. Of course, l realize 1 that 1t is gall and wormwood to i partisan Republican to know that Mir i Taft Is in mental company with the 1 President, but Senator Mclean will i have to endure the agony of it as best he may. I doubt if Senator Mclean would welcome any words of conso- 1 iation from me- but I submit that I MT. Taft is doing more to save the l responsibility and tho honor and the l very existence of the Republican party | than all of the ST round robin" Sen ators combined No man and no