The Marietta journal. (Marietta, Ga.) 1918-1944, 1919-04-11
PARIS COVENANT FOR
LEAGUE OF NATIONS
CONTINUED from preceding page)

Continued from preceding page)
comply with the award or unanimous
report, then the plaintiff nation can
begin war and carry out such com
plete remedy as the circumstances
enable it to do. But if the defend
ant nation does comply with the
award or unanimous report, then the
plaintiff nation must be content with
such compliance. 1t runs the risk Of
not getting all that it thought it ought
to have or might have by war, but
as it is asking affirmative relief it
must be seeking some less vital in
terest than its political independence
or territorial integrity, and the linn
itation is not one which can be dam
gerous to its sovereignty.
Penalizing -Boycotting Covenant
The third covenant, the penalizing
covenant, is that if a nation begins
war, in violation of its covenant, then
ipso facto that is an act of war against
every member of the league and the
members of the league are required
definitely and distinctly to levy a
boycott on the COMMUNICATING ma
ton and to cut off from it all COM
mercial, trade, financial, personal and
official relations between them and
their citizens and it and it's citizens.
Indeed, the boycott is compound or
secondary in that it is directed against
any non-members of the league con-
tinuing to deal with the outlaw ma
ton. This is an obligation operative
at once on each member of the league.
With us the Executive Council would
report the violation of the covenant
to the President and that would be
reported to Congress, and Congress
would then, by reason of the coven-
ant of the league, be under an honor
able legal and moral obligation to levy
an embargo and prevent all inter
course of every kind between this
nation and the covenant breaking ma
ton.
The extent of this penalty and its
heavy whitening eqect when the hos
tile action includes all members of
the league, as well as all non-mem-
bers, may be easily appreciated. The
prospect of such an isolation would
be likely to brighten any member of
the league from a reckless violation
of its covenant to begin war 1t is
uncomfortable that any small nation,
dependent as it must be on larger ma
tons for its trade and sustenance, in
deed for its food and raw materials,
would for a moment court such
destructive ostracism as this would
be.
Other covenants of the penalizing
article impose on the members of the
league the duty of sharing the ex-
pense of boycott with any nation
upon which it has fallen with uneven
weight and of supporting such a ma
ton in its resistance to any special
measures directed against it by the
outlaw nation. But there is no spe-
cific requirement as to the character
of the support beyond the obligation
of the boycott, the contribution of
expenses and the obligation of each
member of the league to permit the
passage through it's territory of forces
of other members of the league CO.
operating with military forces against
the outlaw nation.
Use of Military and Naval Force
If, however, the boycott does not
prove sufficient, then the Executive
Council is to recommend the number
of the military and naval forces to
be contributed by the members of
the league to protect the cvenants of
the league in such a case. There is
no specific covenant by which they
agree to furnish any amount of force,
or, indeed, any force at all, to a
league army. The use of the word
recommend" in describing the func-
ton of the Executive Council shows