The Meridian times. (Meridian, Idaho) 1909-1938, 1919-08-29

q conference with Your committee and
with the committee of the house OF
representatives on foreign affairs at
The White House in Mnreh last, the
questions now most frequently asked
about The league Of nations were all
cunsassed, with d view 70 their inn
mediate Qualification. The covenant
OF the league WAS then IN Its first
draft and subject 70 revision. II was
pointed out fhut no express recognl-
tion was given 20 the Monroe doctrine,
tliaf Il WAS not expressly provided that
the league should have no authority to
act or to express a judgment on mat
ters OF domestic policy that the right |
to Withdraw from The league was not |
expressly recognized, and that the con-
stitntional rights of the congress to de-
termine all questions OF peace and
war was not sufficiently safeguarded.
On my return 10 Paris all these mat
tiers were take up again By the COM
mission on the league OF nations and
every suggestion Of the United States
was accepted.
"'fhe view Of the United States with
regards 10 the questions ! have men
tloued had In fact, already been accept
ed By the commission and there was
supposed to be nothing inconsistent
with them III the draft Of the cove
nant first adopted, the draft which was
the subject Of Our discussion in March;
but no objection was made to anything
explicitly Ia the text that all had sup
posed to be implicit in it.
| "The Monroe doctrine is expressly
mentioned as an understanding which
III IN no way TO be impaired or inter-
fered with by anything contained id
the covenant and the expression ire
gional understanding like the Monroe
doctrine was used, not because any
one Of the conference thought there
was any comparable agreement any
where else in existence or in contem-
plation, but only because 1t was
| thought best TO avoid the appearance
OF dealing in such document with
the policy of single nation.
with regard to domestic questions,
Article y, Al of the covenant express
ly provides that, II iii case of any
dispute arising between members of
the league the matter involved Is
claimed by one Of the parties and Is
found by the council to arise out OF
ii matter which by international law is
. solely within the domestic jurisdiction
OF that party, the council shall so re-
port and shall make no Recommended
ton as TO its settlements. The United
States was by no means the only gov
eminent interested in the explicit
adoption of this provision, and there is
no doubt IN the mind of any author
ltative student Of international law
, that such matters MS immigration, tar
IFS, and naturalization are incontest-
ably domestic questions with which no
= international body could deal.
.'The right of any state to withdraw
!. had been taken for granted, but ne
objection was made to making 1t eX-
! plicIt Indeed, so soon as the views
! expressed mt the White House confer
q ence were laid before the commission
: ii was at once conceded that 1t was
!. best not to leave the answer TO Sc
! important question to inference. Nc
! proposal was made to set up any trib
4 unal to pass Judgment upon the ques
/, ton whether withdrawing nation has
!. III fact fulfilled all its internationa
obligations and all its obligations un
i der the covenant 1t was recognized
y that that question must be left TO b
= resolved BY the conscience of the ma
= ton proposing TO withdraw, and
y must say that 1t did not seem to M
. worth while TO propose that the articl,
" be made more explicit because ! know
i that the United States would never il
3 self propose to withdraw from TN
n league II its conscience was not en-
i. ltirely clear as to the fulflllment OF al
II its international obligations. II ha
4. never failed to fulfill them and neNe
II. will.
ARTICLE x Is in no respect of doabts'
meaning when read in the light OF the cove
III nant as a whole Tho council of the leagu
at can only "advise upon" the means BY whe
- tho obligations Of that great article are
be given effect to. Unless the United STATE
~ Is party to the policy or action in question
II her own affirmative vote in the eounch
a unanimous vote OF tine council Is requires
~, II she is a party. the trouble is hers anyhow
IA ana the unanimous vote OF the council is on
advice IN any case. Each government
ny free to reject It II Il pleases. Nothing ecu
IA | have been more clear TO the conferences Una
the right Of our congress- under our eonst
IL tuition 70 exercise its independent Judgmei
~ In all matters of peace and war No attem,
- was made to question or limit that right. ~
no United States will indeed undertake. und
ok Article TO respect and preserve as again
the territorial 1nteEfi
Of ali members of the league. and that 9
We garemcnt constitutes very grave and g
q emn moral obligation. But it il mori
no not legal obligation, and leaves cur co
NV gress absolutely free 70 put its own interpr
!, tation upon il in all cases that eau
ne action.
nd ''Artisle seems to me to constitute =
n. very backbone Of the whole covenant Wit
ar out It the league would be hardly more TN
ed an influential debating society.
Ara '.It has several times been suggested
~ public debate and in private conference IN
ial intgrptetations of the sense in which I
FL United States accepts the engagements OF