The daily star-mirror. (Moscow, Idaho) 1911-1939, 1919-06-24
SOME IMAGINARY DANGERS

served.
SOME IMAGINARY DANGERS
In the whole course of American
diplomacy scarcely a treaty has beer
made which did not require further
action by congress to put it in effect
Every treaty in some manner restrict
ed exercise of national sovereignty
by binding US to do something which
we should not otherwise have done
or not to do something which we
should have done. Because this was
SO, the constitutional questions as to
the authority of president and SEN
ate to negotiate and ratify such trea-
ties have been raised, as to nearly
every treaty, beginning with the pres
idency of George Washington, and
it has been held that they acted with
in their powers, and the supreme
court has sustained that view.
These facts of history were
brought out by Senator Walsh, of
Montana, in a recent speech on the
league of nations, and his speech dis
posed of much false alarm about the
league. 1t has been said that the
league would be a super-sovereign
to which would be transferred some
of the sovereign powers that are en-
trusted by the constitution to the
president and congress. There is no
such transfer. All decisions of the
league involving this country would
have to be followed up by action of
congress to put them into effect. That
would be true of any action requiring
appropriation of money, limit of arm
ament, raising an army, boycotting
recalcitrant nation, or of declaration
of war. Nor is it true that treaties
have not heretofore been made bind
ing us to make war. The treaty of
Paris in 1898 bound us to maintain
the independence of Cuba; the Pana-
ma treaty binds us to uphold the in
dependence of that republic; and we
were formerly bound to maintain
freedom Of transit on the isthmus of
Panama, an obligation which we were
often called upon to perform by force
of arms. The validity of these trea-
ties has not been questioned. The
difference between them and the
league is that they were agreements |
with one nation, while the league is
an agreement with thirty-one nations;
the principle is the same.
In giving authority to the treaty
making body to agree to that which
only congress has authority to do, our
is not unlike those of
many other signatories of the cove
lant. They restrict the war-making
power as carefully as we do, and all
# them forbid expenditure of money
without authority from the represen-
ative body, which restriction alone
prevents unauthorized war, but that
Ioes not prevent treaties which bind
hem to war in certain contingencies.
'hough allied with Germany and Aus
ria, Italy through it's parliament held {
hat the contingency requiring it to
Din them had not arisen and re- :
named neutral for eight months. In a
Ike manner congress would decide
yhether its obligation under the COW
nant bound it to declare war.
Danger is conjured up that the Q
United States might be bound to de- {
are war or to proclaim boycott by
ae votes of the other nations, per- o
APPS so insignificant as Liberia. That o
Z impossible under the covenant. B
UGH a decision could be reached only I
= the council, which would consist of ii
10 five principal allies and four al
naller nations named by the assem- p
Y, and must be unanimous. The be
tie of this country alone could pre- Ii
MT unanimity and thus prevent n n
lgue war. Our position is such nc
a+;o would vote With nc eli
only the survival of a narrowly
ular view of our national position
,tinues to draw a sharp dividing IN
. between America and Europe. It
war has proved anything, it is W
t Britain, France and Italy, to 70
nothing of the smaller allies, are G.
oted to democracy as we, and that To
true line of division should have mi mi
a between democracy and autoc- we
' without regard to oceans and a
= the
tinents. tiol
ho +; -vo.,I1 ,]onrar-s that if the lone
neiS 10 sinai the