Arizona republican., 1919-04-09
All free governments are managed by the combined wisdom and folly of the people.
 James A. Garfield.
That Hitchcock-Lenroot Debate

The debate between Senators Hitchcock and Len root New York on Monday night on the League of Nations resembled in a general way the discussion of the subject by Dr. Lowell and Senator Lodge Senator Hitchcock's argument was slightly tinctured with partisanshp which appeared in his charge of partisanshp against opponents of the covenant That was perhaps something to be expected, though the senator probably freer from partisanship than any other democratic senator. At any rate he has not earned the distinction of being blind adorer of the administration subservient tool of it. As chair man thte senate committee on foreign relations to which he succeeded on the death of Senator Stone and indeed assumed the functions of that office soon after the outbreak of he was in accord with republican senators and more heartily and solid ly supported by them than by his democratic col leagues We may therefore believe that Senator Hitchcock is sincere. doubt Dr. Lowell is
 And he was equally frank, without perhaps intending to be. Dr. Lowell, though as enthusiastic a supporter as Senator Hitchcock. of the League of Nations admitted the desrabilty of a clearing of the language of the covenant and it's amendment where it lacks defniteness. When MT. Hitchcock stated that much of the opposition to the covenant was based on an entire misconception of what 1t is he made the admission of need of it's remodei- ing The very fact of the misconcepton is evidence Inf the potential peris concealed in it. If capable students of the document such as Senator Lodge, Dr. Lowell and Senator Hitchcock find in it different meanings what cashing interpretations might we not expect from interested and selfish nations, once the league had become fact? It stated by some of the gentlemen who attended conference with the president on his return from France that even he, when questioned as to various passages, was rather hay as to their meaning.
 Senator Ienroots argument was directed against the original covenant faults have generally been admitted His view precisely the same as that of Senator Lodge and think of the republican party and generally the whole country-favorable to a League of Nations in which the United States shall be properly safeguarded perhaps it may be in the amended covenant concerning which MT. Lenroot said, We do not know what the form may be-.
 We think there is a generally wrong impression as to the attitude of the two great parties toward the principle of the League of Nations far as it has been reflected by their leaders There is believe, only one prominent republican who has pronounced against the principle-Senator Borah All the other foremost republican leaders for league, some of them willing accept the original covenant. On the other hand there opposed to a League of Nations in any form, such prominent democrats Champ Clark, Henry Watterson, George W. Harvey and Sen ator Reed, It is ominous, too that very large Der of democratic members of the senate have with held comment Republican senators generally have favored principle of the league with varying grees of enthusiasm.