The labor journal. [volume] (Everett, Wash.) 1909-1976, 1919-06-27

81 don't like your coat" says Mr..
A. to Mr.. B. ut has tails and | am
conscientiously opposed to tails"
1--WE aim to please" says Mr.. B.,
and cuts off the tails. Him." says
Mr.. A. 81 don't like your coat be-
cause 1t is gray and the faith of the
fathers, which l profess, demands
black"
Mr.. B. has his coat dyed black.
Him." says Mr.. A, I don't like
your coat because I don't like you"
This is about the way with emf
nent American critics of the Peace
Treaty.
First, they objected to the League
of Nations feature because they said
Great Britain would have five votes
to our one.
This was shown to be a delusion
or a fake.
Then they said they didn't like it
because it would knock out the sa-
cred Monroe Doctrine.
A clause was added specifically
safeguarding the Monroe Doctrine.
Also they said they didn't like it
because the voting arrangements
were not according to Hoyle or holy
precedent.
The voting arrangements were
amended accordingly.
Now they seem reduced to the
point where they don't like it be-
cause they don't like it.
Yet one and all they would de-
clare-and do-that they are in ia
vor of some kind of a League of
Nations, and of course they are in
favor of abolishing war-if that
can be done, they add.
But the sincere among them over
look two points about that.
| The first Is that a League Of Ma
tions is necessary to abolish war
and that in forming any kind of
League of Nations other countries
besides the United States would
have to be consulted. We couldn't
sail in with a scheme that would
please us and compel everybody else
to take it whether they liked it or
not.
Also, We can be perfectly sure the
kind of a League of Nations that
would be patched up by a group of
American Senators, none Of whom
had ever been outside of the United
States is the exact kind every other
nation we should have to deal with
would reject in an instant.
To form a League of Nations is
matter of give and take. Some Of
us seem to think it is nothing but
take. Compromise and concession
are unavoidable. We cannot expect
our partners in a League of Ma
lions to give up everything to please
us. If they did, it wouldn't be
League. 1t would be a dictatorship
and have about as much chance to
survive in these days as any other
dictatorship.
To hit out a working plan by
which twenty-seven nations can CO.
operate for the worlds good is the
hardest task men ever undertook.
No matter what kind of a plan
might be evolved there would be
furious objection to it. The Won
derful thing about this plan is that
the objections are so few and made
on such trivial grounds.
That fact ought to prove that it
is a pretty good thing. More than
four months it has been batted
around the world and looked at
from every point Of view and the
only serious criticisms of it are
concerning things that don't exist.
OF course it isn't perfect; nobody
says it is. But everything must
have a beginning. Whatever faults
there may be in this at least it is a
start; it opens the way, it repre-
sents a tremendous advance over
the old idea of claw and fang, of
snarling and tearing.
The other point that is overlook
ed is that one provision in this
covenant makes wars of any con-
siderable size impossible and if we
are really on the level in what we
say about war that fact ought to
outweigh a thousand defects.
The provision is this, that the
five guaranteeing powers-the
United States, France, Italy, Great
Britain and Japan-guarantee one
another's existing territory.
That disposes of the big war por-
tent. So long as that guarantee
stands there is no nation on earth