The sun., 1919-09-10

the Senate and committing himself to
the series Of vigorous reservations re-
ported by the Foreign Relations Com
mittee.
Spencer Speech a Shock.
Although It had been known for some
time that there was no ground for the
cheerful anticipations with which the
Administration forces had claimed to re-
gard Senator Spencer's attitude, his ad-
dress was a shock to them because of
the unqualified position which the Mis-
sourtan took. It's significance was ac-
centuated by the news which came from
Missouri during the day that the re-
turned soldiers are circulating a gigan-
tic petition in opposition to the League
OF Nations on which they now have 1O0.-
600 names and expect to double that
number before they forward It to WASH
ington.
Along with this a high officer of the
Republican organization in the State re-
ported that a recent canvass Of the Or
ganization personnel had discovered just
4 three persons in official positions in the
party that were in favor of the league.
The rest were declared against It.
Senator Spencers speech was a pre-
sentation of strictly American reasons
why this country's interests in connec-
ton with the world settlement must be
protected by rigorous modification. He
declared at the outset that the Presi-
dent is raising a false issue in his
speeches throughout the West.
The President" said Mr.. Spencer,
presented to the people of my State
an issue in regard to the League of
Nations which does not exist. The is
sue before the American people in con-
nection with the treaty of peace and
the covenant of the League of Nations
Is not, as the President indicates, a
choice between acceptance or rejection OF
the treaty. We are not necessarily
called upon to choose between the
treaty precisely as 1t is written or
falling thus to accept 1t to face abso-
Lutte rejection of the entire negotiations
l am frank to say for myself IL j were
| forced to make that choice. l should
| vote against the treaty as 1t now stands
A One Man Document.
The real issue before the American
people Is as to whether they prefer to
take the treaty precisely as 1t Is written
| or to have such reservations migrated
| into 1t as will absolutely safeguard
our American rights. constitutional do
nestle and traditional, and fully protect
our independence of action as a nation
in the future. 1t is not unfair to state
in the light of known facts that the
treaty of peace which we are now con-
sidering Is peculiarly, and It seems to
me, unfortunately. SO far as the United
State is concerned. one man document.
1T does not necessarily follow that
because treaty has been the result Of
the judgment and will of a single man
that 1t ought to be rejected, but II GER
tainly is true that there can be no just
complaint IL such a one man treaty is
subjected TO the most careful examina-
ton and consideration and particularly,
when as in the present instances 1t is
treaty that concerns the interests of
this country and the welfare of the
world more greatly than any document
ever before penned by the hand of man."
Senator Spencer declared It was in
conceivable why as an American and
particularly as an American who had
announced in lofty phraseology which
has never been excelled and rarely
equalled the great principles that should
control his actions. the President when
informed of the secret treaties with re-
spect to Shantung did not demand of
the allied Powers the immediate can
collation. of the treaty. He said that In
view Of the comm anding Importance of
the United States at the Peace Con-
ference such a demand would have been
complied with and we should have ct
least been saved the humiliating dis
grace Of having our representatives
voluntarily enter an arrangement which
they themselves are unable to defend
and which the nation looks upon with
shame.
II say with all the conviction in my
power that the treaty of peace as II is
Nuin Ia rot NV he
Senate, and that before 1t ever receives
the sanction of the representatives of the
people here assembled reservations
similar In effect TO those which the
Committee on Foreign Relations has
already reported must be inseparably
interviewer with the ratification itself
Concerning the inherent merit of the
reservations themselves there can be no
difference of opinion. Every one OF
them announces an American doctrine
which is essential to the preservation OF
the Republic. The principles which they
enunciate are principles about which az
Americans we are all agreed.
1.-THE only answer that has been made
or that can be made to them Is either
that they are unnecessary because the
rights which they seek to protect are al
ready safeguarded in the treaty itself or
because to engraft them into the ratif-
other nations more disastrous than the
advantage of the reservations could pos
sibly be.
1.-THE answer to the first proposition ia
simple and complete. If there is no OBJ
lection to the inherent merit of the prin-
ciples announced by the reservations
then at the most they can be nothing
more than mere surplusage. amplifyins
OF calculating that which is already pro-
vided in the treaty itself and as expect
by a single illustration TO demonstrate
TO the Senate that the principles safe.
guarded by these reservations are no,
protected In the treaty as It ia now writ.
; ten, that the essential rights of our
country are In real, not imagined, jeop.
: ardy by the provisions OF the League OF
Nations. and that not alone because OF
; that candor and fairness which Is due tc
, other nations. but In order 10 insure con.
fdence and understanding at home, It Il
essential that our established rights b
indicated In language that cannot be mis-
understood.
1.-THE answer 20 the second defense Il
precisely the same, for II, as I believe
and assert, reservations concerning oui
, right OF withdrawal and the safeguard
ing Of the Monroe Doctrine and the
! protection OF our domestic and internal
! affairs and our position before the work.
!, that no other nation or combination Of
J nations can ever be allowed to dictate