New-York tribune., 1919-03-20
The Perils of Defining

driven from other positions, now seem to
rest their case on the proposition that
the executive council which it is proposed
to establish will not have power, either
legally or morally, to bring pressure on
any constituent nation to agree to con-
certed action.
The council, it is pointed out, will con-
sist in the permanent majority of it's
membership of delegates named by the
governments of the five powers now
dominant; each delegate will be recallable
if he does not do as his home government
instructs him to do, and thus in fact
be merely an ambassador, without
liberty of action, and that, even though
he should temporarily misrepresent the
government for which he appeared, his
action may be disavowed by the home
government. So, it is said, there is no
merit in the contention that the cove
nant impairs national sovereignty.
Here, in brief, is what may be deemed
the official interpretation of an ambigu-
ous part of the covenant. Mr.. Taft
blprted it out, and The World, apparent
ly not fully realizing what it implied,
adopted it. The World declares there is
ndthing binding in the acts of the council
and denies that even it's recommended
tions, if it makes any, possess any moral
sanction. The United States, it is said,
gives, first, notice that it retains full lib
erty of action, and, second, other powers
may be assumed to know of the character
of our government and that it's funda-
mental laws forbid cession of it's SOW
elseignty.
The argument, it is scarcely necessary
To remark, reduces the covenant to a
ndllity The league, as SO described, is
without sanction, in this respect being
duplication of The Hague convention. It's
machinery provides merely a central
place where ambassadors may meet and
talk if their home governments wish
them so to do. What is done and is not
ddne will be dictated elsewhere-by the
foreign Offices of the respective govern
ments as now. Here, surely, is not any,
thing resembling a league of peace as the
phrase is understood
But it may be asked, Why, if this is all
there is to the league, should any one
object to it? The query is comforting to
that body of our citizens who say: "Well,
i'll the scheme does not do any good, it
will not do harm. An expression of
pious hope is worth while sometimes" ,"
Nevertheless, even though it be true, as
Mr. Taft and his co-workers practically
now admit, that the covenant is but an
other Hague convention, it may do harm.
The lawyers have a maxim that when
a problem is of a nature unkindly to def
nition it is wise to avoid definition A
partial definition limits and often is
gravely embarrassing. The principle
applies in the political field. For ex-
ample, in our Revolutionary days things
went well when no one exactly knew
what powers were possessed by the Con-
tinental Congress, an informal body. 1t
raised armies, borrowed money, entered
into foreign alliances in the name of
the nation. Then along came the Arti-
cles of Confederation, with some emu
N''~@ '%"A~'i va PVWCASy anu affairs went Ill.
Directors, formerly kept in order, point
ed to some provision in the articles as
forbidding something, and there was a
dispute over legalities to the sacrifice of
more essential matters.
4 John Fiske, the best of our historians.
justly says that the half-defned articles
OF confederation weakened the national
government So it may turn out, if a
crisis in world affairs arises, that the dis
pute Will be over what the league NAV
DO, to the neglect Of more pressing mat.
ters' II discretionary power is, in fact
70 De left TO future governments. it Is
well to have the responsibility plainly
lodged with them.
Ihe acceptance of bogus plan will
postpone the adoption of genuine plan
The world has entertained high homes ot
an organization for peace. and it is hard
to give this hope up Who has right tc
say the world would not have received a
better thing If offered? 1t is not yet toe
late to retrace steps and create an agency
70 which it may be worth while to sur.
render portion Of traditional nationa
soyereignty. The covenant bars the pos
sible attainment of a reality.
Finally. the argument in favor Of thu
good in the expression Of pious aspira.
tlons IL Offset by the feeling that support
q . fraud seldom does good. The cove
nanf, not being what it was advertised
= wotald be, gocs through the motions OF
aoipg scn'etxng yet does nothing, and
sa's snd shf lishonest way It's false pre-