New-York tribune., 1919-11-07

Hitherto the Senate on many important
questions has construed the rules to
meet the exigencies Of the OCCASION IS
the chair looks at the rules The rules
Of the Senate provide that this treaty
shall be considered first in committee
OF the whole, be amended, If desired. b.
a majority of tic Senators, be then re
ported to the Senate with the question::
Shall the Senate concur in the amend
ments made in the committee Of the
wholc?' Then to be amcndehle in THO
Senate. when all the proceedings arc
through the decisions are TO be reduced
to the form Of resolution of retitica-
ton with Or without amendments. as
the case may be.
"If treaties ard the constitutional
rights Of The Senate to advise and con-
sent to the making of them are to be
governed by strict construction OF the
rules, and If it were a matter of first
impression, the chair would be COM
PEELED to hold that if there were no
amendments made IN the committee Of
no form Of resolution Of ratification
other than q straight ratification Of the
treaty required, but that is in direct
violation Of the uniform practice Of
the>Senatc Of the United States.
far~ r~KcachlHS consequence"
Reservations, interpretations end
exceptions have gone into many
trenties. Some Of them have been
published in Senate document, and
il is not ncedful to refer 10 them. The
chair may be pardOncd FOX saying one
thing which is perhaps not needful
in the determination Of this question.
This is the most important treat =
that was ever presented to the Senate
Of the United States. It involves tar
reaching consequences to the people on
this country and to the people OF the
woSd. 1t took six months TO make II
and Il has taken four months of ex-
haustivc discussion in the Senate up
TO the present hour TO consider It,
Recognizing the right of the Senate
and realizing that it will discharge that
duty, whether it is agreeable TO the
the chair is unwilling to make any sort
of technical ruling that will prevent
the Senate Of the United States from
ratifying the treaty either without
reservations or with an sort o. rescr-
vHtions that ma iority chooses to put
into the resolution of ratification.
Reservation in Order
"Ihe chair is unwilling to construs
these rules IN so strict and narrow q
way that the treaty may be pigcon-
holed or hung up by such narrow con-
struction. The chair is going to hold
hat a ajority Of the Senate can
present whenever it Dleases 10 the
Senate in the way Of reservations or
interpretations, and the chair thinks
that these reservations, as they are
called, ought to De considered AS IN
committee Of the whole in justice 20
certain Senators Who have been voting
against amendments with statements
that they voted against amendments
because yhey thought they could pre-
serve their views by way OF reserya-
tons ard interpretations.
"Thc chair is unwilling to rule that
they qhall be put in the position of
waiting until the resolution OF ratitica-
ton Is presented and then fnd them
selves confronted with the necessity of
Voting for "a resolution Of ratification
which contains reservations that do not
meet their views upon this question.
The whole conduct Of this treaty
since it came into the Senate BY the
Senate itself impcls the chair to rule
that reservations are in order as IN
committee Of the whole. 10 the end
that Senator'S who have voted against
amendments may have the opportunity
of again presenting the amendments
and OF voting upon them in th 9 Senate il
the reservations as adopted In the com
mittee of the whole are not satisfactory
to such Senators. The chair accord
lngly overrulea the point Of order"