The Seattle star. [volume] (Seattle, Wash.) 1899-1947, 1919-08-19
American Trade Iilndered

~ wages h"caun" there can DC no
settled conditions of employment.
There can be no easy or normal In.
iustriai credits because there can he
no confident or permanent revival OF
business.
But I viii not weary you with
obvious examples. only will ven.
lure To repeat that every element
n normal life amongst us depends
81 normal life amongst ur deepnda
upon and awaits the ratification Of
he treaty OF peace. and also that we
,annot afford to lose a single sum
ner'H day by not doing all that We
IAN 10 mitigate tho winters suffer.
ng. which. unless we find means TO
prevent Il. may prove disastrous TO
, large portion Of the world and may
Il its worst bring upon Europe con.
iitions even more terrible than those
wrought by the war itself.
Nothing In Way
Nothing. am led To believe,
stands In the way % the ratification
81 the treaty. except certain doubts
with regard to the meaning and Inn
plleation OF certain articles Of the
covenant Of the league OF nations.
and ] must frankly say that I am
unable 10 understand why such
doubts should be entertainer. You
viii recall that when had the
pleasure OF n conference with your
and with the committee
% the house OF representatives on
affairs at tho White House
IN March last. the questions now
most frequently asked about the
league OF nations were all canvaN#ed.
with view 10 their immediate ciari.
The covenant Of the league was
then in It's first draft and subject
10 revision. II was pointed cut that
no express recognition WA. given
10 the Monroe doctrine. that II was
not expressly provided that the
league should have no authority TO
act or to express a Judgment on
matters OF domestic policy. that the
light 10 withdraw from the lsaEu.
was no, expressly recognized and
that the constitutional right Of con-
<ress to determine ali questions Of
peace and war was not sufficiently
safcEuarded. on my return 10 Paria
all those matters wer. taken up
again by the commission on the
lesxue OF nations and every surr.s.
ton Of the United States was nc.
cepted.
The view Of the United States
with regard to tho questions I hav.
had. In fact. already been
accepted by the commission and
there was supposed 10 be nothing In.
with them In the draft Of
The covenant first adoptcd--thc draft
which was the subject OF our dis
russion In March--but no objection
was made 10 saying explicitly in tho
text what all had supposed to be ex.
piicit In H.
There was absolutely no doubt
a. 10 the meaning Of any ono OF
The resulting provisions Of the coven-
ant In the minds OF those who par.
Iicipated in drafting them. and I re-
spectfuiiy submit that there In moth.
ng vague or doubtful In their word.
ng.
The Monroe doctrine In expressly
as an understanding
which is In no way TO be impaired
pr interfered with by anything con.
aimed In the covenant and the CT
,ression. regional understanding
Ike the Monroe doctrine was used.
not because any one OF the conferees
thought there was any comparable
agreement anywhere else In existence
pr In contemplation. but only because
I was thought best to avoid the APP
Dearance Of dealing in such n docu-
nent with the policy OF a single na.
ion. Absolutely nothing n con
,ealed In the phrase.
With regard 10 domestic cues.
lions. Article XVI Of the covenant
expressly provides that. II In case
n any dispute arising between mem.
oers OF the league. the matter in.
volved is claimed by one OF the
parties and II found by the council
20 arise out OF matter which by
International law In solely within the
Jurisdiction of that party,
he council shall so report and shall
make no recommendation an to its
settlement
THE United States was by no
means the only government interest.
ID In the explicit adoption Of this
provision and there Is no doubt in
he mind OF any authoritative student
II international law that such mat.
.ers ms immigration. tariffs and
are incontestibly
domestic questions with which no
body would deal with.
Put expressed authority to do SO. No
OF domestic questions
was undertaken because TO under.
lake II even by sample would have
involved the danger Of seeming to
exclude those not mentioned.
Right Of Withdrawal
THE right OF any sovereign
state 10 withdraw has been taken
Tor granted. but no objection was
made to making II explicit. Indeed,
20 soon as the views expressed at
the White House were laid before
the commission II was at once con-
ceded that IL was best not to leave
the answer to so important a ques-
tiop of inference. No proposal was
made to set up any tribunal TO pass
Judgment upon the question whether
a withdrawing nation had In fact full
filled all it's international obliga.
tons and all its obligations under
the covenant
ut was recognized that the ques.
ton must be left TO be resolved by
the conscience OF the nation propos.
Ing TO withdraw and I must say Il
did not seem to me worth while to
propose that the article be made
more explicit. because knew that
the United States would never IL.
self propose TO withdraw from the