The sun., 1919-08-20
half banker. Surely Uncle SAM
never before cut so wide swath."


moral aspects Of the entirely personal
use which President WnsoN-not
Uncle SAM made Of property that
was not his own, and of national pres
tige and power that he had no au-
thority from his Government or peo-
pie to employ as trading stock, not In
the national interests, but exclusively
for his self-determined purposes.
All of this bears directly upon the
significance Of the new attitude as
sumed yesterday in the presence Of
the Senator's. Mr.. MAxsE, writing In
the National Repieio for August, tells
the exact truth about British indlffer-
ence to President WILSON'S covenant,
except as it could be used to secure
definite and material advantage for
that nation:
1.-THE League OF Nations would
never have been heard OF on this side
of the Atlantic but for the American
Presidents advocacy Of It. 1t would
not have been discussed in Paris
but for his insfstence"
Insistence backed by the exhibition
of the contents of the portfolio to
which Mr.. WHITE has so feelingly al
luded; property not the Presidents
own, but belonging to the American
Government and the people who, as
Mr.. MAxsE notes elsewhere, had only
few months before repudiated his
policies after direct application from
him for a test vote. Further, from
the same British observer:
THE covenant. whether wise or
foolish, is of transatlantic origin and
Inspiration. 1t has never aroused
any enthusiasm In Europe, except
among the enemy and the friends of
the enemy, who hail II as providing
machinery 70 enable Germany to re-
enter the Comfy OF Nations and. wipe
out an inconvenient past without
changing her heart, her tactics or her
objective"
Departing altogether from his orig
inal idea of League with teeth to
compel the obedience Of Its members,
and likewise from his later plea for
the breakable heart of Europe, Mr..
WILSON yesterday denoted mild sur
prise on his part that Senators should
be willing TO inquire too curiously or
too long into the details OF a project
so perfectly free from any of the OBJ
jections which have been expressed
from the American point of view, in
the Senate and elsewhere. The indi-
vidual interpretations to which he
committed himself in reply to rather
searching questions from some of his
Senatorial conferees were astonishing
If we assume that he really regards
the League as anything more than
"an influential debating society,"" to
use his own phrase.
To Mr.. BoRAH, for example, he
confessed that his Interpretation" of
! the very specific clause in Article l..
requiring that before release from the
ENHANCEMENT there shall have been a
determination that the withdrawing
member has fulfilled "all its interna-
tional obligations and all Its obliga-
tons under this covenant" was that 1t
"means no more than that we should
be the sole Judge of that complete full
filment." "That is as I understand
It." said the President. 1.-THE only re-
strainlng influence would be, the public
opinion OF tine world" Could the review
of the matter of fulfilment of interna-
| tional obligations, asked the Senator,
be referred to the Council in any way,
or could the Council be called into
action? NO" said the President.
| Again, when asked by Mr.. BoRAH
whether there was any moral obliga-
tion-not to speak Of legal obligation
ION the part of the United States to
observe any suggestion made by the
Council, the President answered, per-
haps lifting his eyebrows a little,
"Oh, no."
AS to Article X, which he had just
described in his preliminary state
ment as 1.-THE very backbone Of the
whole covenant" the Presidents "in-
depreciation. was decidedly mystify-
ing, If not sophistical. He said in
reply to Senator HARDING, who asked
what Article X. awaited II there was
nothing more than a moral obligation
implied in 1t:
why. Senator, it is surprising
that that question should be asked.
| II we undertake an obligation we are
bound In the most solemn way TO
carry 1t out
MY understanding. when I speak
of legal obligation. is ono that spe-
cihcally binds you TO do particular
thing under certain sanctions. That
is a legal obligation. Now. a moral
obligation is. of course. superior to
a legal obligation. and. II I may say
SO, has a greater binding force. Only
there always remains in the moral
obligation the right to exercise ones
Judgment as to whether It Is indeed
incumbent upon one in those circum-
stances TO do that thing. In every
! moral obligation there is an element