New-York tribune., 1919-08-05
Writes Borah Article X,
Implying Guarantee of
Territorial Integrity,
Should Be Eliminated
No Harm i'm Article XII
Obligation to Make War
Is Not Assumed Under
This Section, He Says

In letter to Senator William E..
borah given out yesterday, Charles E.
Hughes, former Republican candidate
for President, further states his posi-
ton with reference to making reserva-
tlons to the league of nations covenant.
The letter, which was written at Mr..
Hughes's summer residence at Bolton
Landing, N. Y, replied to a query from
the Senator. The letter reads:
My Dear Senator Borah: | am glad
to receive your letter Of July 20, which
has been forwarded to me here. In
my letter to Senator Hale | did not
think 1T necessary to suggest an addi-
tlonal reservation with respect to
Article XII of the covenant of the
league of nations.
THE proposed reservations with re-
gard to domestic questions and the
matters Of national policy embraced in
the Monroe Doctrine apply to all the
operations of the league and thus quail
lfy Article XXI, as we'll as the other
articles of the covenant, by withdraw
ing these matters from the considera-
ton of the league or of any of its
agencies.
"Wise and Effectual" Action
"Article XII declares that ANY wal
or threat of war is "a matter Of con-
Germ to the whole league But if it
be matter of Concern, still the
league is to act only as provided in
the covenant. 1t is further provided
in Article XI that the league shall
take any action that may be deemed
wise and effectual to safeguard the
Of he
deemed to be wise and effectual
must, of course, be determined at the
time and in the light of the situation
as disclosed. In short, there is no
present undertaking beyond an agree
ment to confer in order to determine
what is wise and effectual,' the course
of action being dependent upon the
result of the conference"
81 find in Article XI no guaranty of
territorial integrity or of the political
independence of any state. or any as
war, or to declare or maintain an
economic boycott or blockade, Or to
take any other action whatever unless
the United States. availing itself of its
privilege as q member of the council,
concurs in decision that such a course
is both wise and cffectual. The United
States, as it seems to me, will be en-
trely free to reach its conclusions
according to the merits of the case, and
see no injury to our interests in this
provision.
The Vice of Article x
"Article X, as / view it, presents a
different question. The vice of Article
is that, unless a different view is
clearly set forth as a part of the in
strument of ratification it would seem
70 ,y,,v, ,c,{ t,o 4
guaranty with respect to the territorial
Integrity Of all members of the league.
"My objection to Article X is that,
unlike Article XI, it is not properly
limited to an agreement to confer and
to decide in the future upon the course
of action which would then seem to be
IN accordance with the dictates of JUS
tice and our views as to what as ma
ton we should undertake, but (unless
we now otherwise declare) might be
taken to bind us to an immediate and
torial integrity Of all members Of the
league, and thus expose us to the
charge of bad faith or of having de-
faulted in our promise if Congress re-
fused to recognize the obligation and
to provide the means Of fulfilment
Hence, think that Article X should
be eliminated, or, if retained because
its advocates insist that it imports no
such obligation, the ratification should
be, accompanied by clear reservation
and interpretativc statement that the
United States makes no promise and
assumes no obligation whatever to en-
gage in any military undertaking un-
less it is authorized by Congress, and
that Congress is entirely free to exer-
else it's exclusive authority in deter
mining for the United States whether
in any. future exigency there is any
obligation on the part of the United
States under this article and the means
by which any such obligation shall be
fulfilled"