Daily Kennebec journal., 1919-07-24

In Q small body like that Of the coun-
ell It would be unfair to have . home
government represented and also one
of its dominions or colonies and
cannot think it was the intention OF
the trainers Of the covenant that this
might happen. Yet ! am bound to
say that such result is not excluded
by the present language Of the cows
nant, in Article X and Article ". nor
does the language of Article XIV nee
essarily exclude from the tribunal to
recommend a settlement of a dis
pute home. e.government where one
of its dominions or colonies is
party, nor does It necessarily exclude
q dominion or colony from such tri.
bunal where the home government
may be a party; yet have no doubt
that both OF these exclusions were
intended by the trainers Of the cove
nant. Nor Is there any express de.
scription OF the function to be per-
formed by the council or the Assent
bly, under Article XIV so as to re-
Quire that it should act judicially
and according to international law
or equity and justice. have no
doubt that it was intended that the
language Of the preamble should
characterize the function OF the du-
ties of the council or Assembly un-
| der Article XIV and therefore that
the language 1 have introduced in
the second Interpretation is merely.
giving expression to that which
ought to be inferred as the intention
OF the trainers of the covenant. I
may say that it supplies that which
Mr.. Root forcibly represented as a
| defect of the covenant.
"The third Interpretation Is an
| exact legal construction Of the ef-
feet of Article x and I do not see
| how any Of the signatory powers can
object to it. The conclusion in re-
spect to the function of Congress un-
der this article is the necessary re-
suit of the distribution of power un-
der our constitution, to which none
of the associated members Of the
league can object.
THE fourth Interpretation is
mere statement of international and
the proper construction Of the sew
enth paragraph Of Article XIV which
is only inserted to satisfy criticism
CT t hat paragraph based upon
the unfounded assumption that some
tribunal of the league will be found
, which will declare issues in respect
to immigration or the tariff to be
, something other than a question Of
! domestic policy. If. as all authori.
| ties show. immigration and tariff un-
affected by the treaties are purely do
| mestic questions. then it can not in
! jure the league to say that which is
undoubtedly a maxim of information
al law and remove any concern of
| those who suspect sother nations nf
being In constant and unprincipalled
conspiracy against the interests of
| the United States. We may deplore
this attitude of mind. but where it
costs nothing in the effectiveness Of
the league we may we'll insert a pro-
vision to remove the fears it prompts.
The fifth Interpretation defines
the Monroe Doctrine. AS the express
sion Monroe Doctrine is used in Ar
ticle XXI and as the United States
is the author Of the doctrine and has
maintained it for 96 years. it is fair
| ~ within the limit of an interpretx-
ton FOR 1T to state what the doctrine
| has been made to be in the history of
its development to the present day.
AS the time has come for its world
! recognition. the time also has come
for its definition. and I believe the
language used correctly states what.
We have right to claim, it to be and
all that we have the right to claim
,, Il to be.
These interpretations, It seems to
| me, reasonably answer all the rea-
sonable or sincere criticisms made
against the league except as they are
met by the single reservation as 20
Article Y which is suggested at the
close. Mr.. Root, in his letter to Won.
proposed that the operation of Ar.
ticle X be limited to five wears
when the settlements of the war
should be re-examined with the view
to the further operation Of the ar
tlcle after a re-settlement. Influ-
enced by come direct information
that l have as to the attitude IF
france in respect to Article X I an
confident that the period of ive years
IS not long enough for this stabfliza-
ton and does not offer the security
which France eagerly seeks under
the league or by supplemental treaty
think. therefore. that the caution
ary influence of the league would be
greatly strengthened by lengthening
this period from five to ten years.
1t seems to me that ought to be
done by the formal exercise Of the
right to withdraw as a member "
the league after ten years by giving
notice 70 that effect
The nations Of the league can Re
sure that, should the league work
we'll, the United States will withdraw
the notice and continue to bear its
part of the worlds burden in secur-
ing the benefits of the league. If these
benefits are apparents after ten
years trial
THE provisions. however, may
tend to satisfy doubters in respect
to the league by requiring for its ex-
tension beyond ten years the AFFIRM
ative action of the president and
two-thirds of the Senate in favor of
such extension after the trial Of q
decade. Meantime. should the fail
ure Of the league be apparent before
the expiration Of the ten years, the
withdrawal clause gives US full Cd.
portunity to end our relation to the
league by t@o years Eotice.
Il venture to think that my, sur-
1eStions are not. m endmenfs huk -