Daily Kennebec journal., 1919-06-24
ARTICLE x (Continued)
Chances Of War Remote

ARTICLE X (Continued)
Chances Of War Remote
There is third answer to people
who object that Article X is likely
to involve US in wars all over the
world!
Those who look to the successful
operation Of the League do not ex-
pect war at all. The obligation OF
the members Of the League to i'm
pose in the first instance a universal
boycott against a recalcitrant faith
less member constitutes a most
formidable threat against any mem
Der seking to violate Article x or the
covenants of the following Articles.
Such a boycott will be a whitening
ostracism and isolation Of q nation
that few could endure. No single ma
ton, unless It be the United States
or some Of the greater South Ameri-
can nations. could live II denied food
and raw materials from the rest Of
the world, and IL forbidden the use Of
a foreign market for the sale of their
products.
"Minatory" Influence
Second, no nation would willingly
face the Overwhelming force Of the
world organized to punish it for vio-
| lencehpdC ?lashrd
lation Of it's covenants. The NINA
tory influence of world league. with
its members obligated to unite in
economic and military pressure, II
need be, can hardly be exaggerated.
n heS ~ ~ q
tered into a conspiracy to fight and
subdue the rest Of the world. then
this minatory influence might not be
controlling. but In that case all the
members Of the League weuld wish
to Join in the war, just as they did IN
this, and defeat such q conspiracy
and vindicate the power Of the
League for its useful ends.
What we are now answering 10 the
objection that there Will be 4 lot Of
little wars all over the world, IN
which We shall be engaged. which
will claim our money and our men.
It is in restraint Of the smaller war
in which a large nation attempts to
bully a weaker one that the minatory
effect Of the eLague will be SO con-
trolling. The result will be that the
League having the power completely
to suppress the bullying nation will
not need to exercise that power. In
deed it is hardly too much to say
that the nations Of the League will
never need to 60 beyond the effec-
tive discipline Of a universal boycott.
But IL such q war does break out in
which we shall deem it our duty to
intervene under Article K, or the
other articles, one instance Of sup
preston by the joint forces Of the
League will be a lesson for the world.
not needing repetition. It will be
worth all it costs in demonstrating
that the way Of the transgressor who
breaks the, Covenants Of the League
will be hard.
Lessons from History
This conclusion az to the minatory
effect OF the covenants Of the League
and the organization Of its members
to enforce them does not rest merely
on an a priori reasoning. We have
in our own history striking confir-
nation of it. In 1923, the Holy ALI
ance consisting of all the powerful
nations of Europe. except Great
Britain, gave indication OF an ihten-
ton to aid Spain in recovering her
lost colonies in this Western Hemi-
sphere. We had recognized the in
dependence Of those colonies Can
ming, the British Minister for Foreign
Affairs, urged upon President Mon
roe and John quincy Adams. the
Secretary OF State. the wisdom OF
uniting with England In a League to !
resist the Holy Alliance in over
throwing the independence Of these
new American states. Thomas JEFF
ferson was consulted, and he advised
making a League with England,
which he said would not be an en-
tangling alliance against which he
had warned his countrymen, but
would be justified by its great public !
purpose. Monroe and Adams, how /
ever, thought it wiser to act alone.
John c. Calhoun, the Secretary OF
War, advised strongly against sole |
action. Nevertheless. President
Monroe in his Message of that year.
made the declaration which has since |,
been known as the Monroe Doctrine. |
and notified the members of the Holy J