The times-herald. [volume] (Burns, Harney County, Or.) 1896-1929, 1919-09-06
IN the way Of the ratification OF the
trcaty except doubts with regard 10

| III tuV Why VI tuv ThutICutou W Wv
treaty except doubts with regard u
tho meaning and Implication of certain
articles OF the covenant of tho League
Of Nations. and must frankly say
that | am unable to understand why
| nch doubts should be entertained
You will recall that when I had the
| pleasure OF conference with your
committee and with tho committee oi
the house OF representatives on for
| cign affairs at the White House In
March last. the questions now most
| frequently asked about tho League Of
Nations we're all canvassed, with q
view to their Immediate clariflcation
The covenant OF the league was then
In It's first draft and subject % row
sion. II was pointed out that no OK.
press recognition was given 10 the
Monroe Doctrine that II was not OK.
presaly provided that the league should
have no authority TO net or To express
Judgment on matters of domestic
policy. that the right 10 withdraw
from tho league was not expressly rec.
ognizcd and that the constitutional
rights of the congress to determine all
question: of peace and war was not
sufficiently sofoguatdcd. ON my 70
turn 10 Paris all thc8c matters wor,
taken up again by the commission on
the League Of Nations and every sug
gestion OF tho United states was &C
ceptcd.
American Views Accented
"The Wow OF the United States with
regards To tho questions l have men
toned had. In fact. already been ac
ceptcd by the commission aud there
was supposed TO be nothing inconsls
tent with them In tho draft OF IN,
covenant first adoptcd--the drsft
which was the subject of our discus
sion In March-but no objection wa
made TO anything explicitly IN the tcx'
that all had supposed To be implicit
In II.
"The Monroe Doctrluc In cxprcasi,
mentioned as an understanding whici
Is In no way TO be impaired or inter
fcred with ty anything contained n
the covenant and the expression 'ro
gional understanding like the Monros
Doctrine was used. not because any
one OF the conference thought there
Will be-. any comparable agreement
anywhere elso In existence or IN con
temptation. but because it was thought
best TO avoid the appearance of deal
ing In such document with policy OF
n single nation.
Domestic Issues Not Affected.
with regard 10 domestic questions
Article XVI of the covenant cxpressl;
provides that, " In case OF any dlr
puto arising between members of IA,
league the matter involved is claimed
by one OF the parties and In found b,
the council 20 arise out of IA matte
which by international law IL aolol
within the domestic Jurisdiction q
hat party. the council shall 80 rcpor |
and shall make no recommendation |
A. To It's settlement. The United State
VAS by no means the only govcrnmru |
Interested In the explicit adoption O.
his provision. and there In no douhl |
IN the mind Of any authoritative stu
lent OF International law that suol
matters as immigration. tariffs. an1
are incontsstabIy dc
nestle questions with which no inter
rational body could deal
The right Of any state TO Withdraw
rad been taken for granted. but no oh
.e,lon was made 20 making u explicit
he White House conference were lat l.
'eIors ". eommishionl u was al one
oneeded that !, was best not 60 ieay'
inference No proposal was made TO ~
2 any tribunal 10 pass lndFmsnt ape
on ns aSs.ns Ss: IL s;'nsa s.s, sS.s All
'ndsr the covenant IL
Withdrawal Matter os conseIsses. oil,
IL wa. recognised that that question
must be left 20 be resolved by the con !,
raw. ana % r' ma., '. say s'IRSs'' 'Ss' % sS 1s no
sem 20 me worth while To propose tina I,
h. article b. made more explicit beeauN
ever itsslf propose 10 withdraw from IN,
.asue IL its conscience MAS not sntif-l, (,
lear AZ 10 the fulfiiment of all Its Inter (
ailonai obligations n has never failed
D fulfli them and never viii /,
Article y In la no respect Of doubtful
,sanink when read ~ the llshi of ths
ovenant as whole. The council of 'hs
y which the obligations of that great I
rticie are Co be given effect, Unless the
'nlted states ~ party 10 the policy ot
elton ln question. her own affirmative
ote In the council is- necessary before
ny advice can be given. for a unanlmoui
ots OF the council IN required. lls
Obligation Moral Only. II,
III she ~ a party. the trouble 10 hert
nShow, and the unanimous vote Of thi I
Duncll In only advice In any case Fact !
ONefnment IN free To reject u VI 4
leases. Nothing could have been mad, I
'oTe clear 20 the conference than th, Z
Kht OF our congress under our consu
ition 10 exercise its Independent Judg I
Ieni IN all matters of peace aud wal ! I
nit that right, The United states will 4
deed, undertake under Article X 10 re-
pecL and prcseryu as against external 4
sisiinE political Independence OF All I
embers of the league aud that engage.