Evening capital news. (Boise, Idaho) 1901-1927, 1919-02-17

agreement to limit our Notifications
and our means of attack in consider
alton of other nations doing the same
thing. The most famous agreement
that we have made on this point is
the agreement we have with Great
Britain, by which we agree not to
fortify the boundary between Canada
and the United States or to place war
vessels on the lakes.
THAT agreement is of one hundred
years standing and has been praised
by every statesman who has referred
to it.
~"The most extreme position of SEN
ator Poindexter is that the United
States can not consent to arbitration
of issues between it and other coun-
tries because it might affect the vital
interests of the nation. There have
been 100 arbitrations between the
United States and other countries
many of them of very great concern.
The question of the payment of the
Alabama claims related to prin-
ciple of international law and inter-
national safety that was of the high
est importance. The arbitration of the
Alaskan boundary was another.
UTTERLY GRATUiToUS.
1.-THE assumption that either the
court of arbitration or the executive
council of the league by unanimous
judgement would seek to take away
the sovereignty or the liberty or the
independence of the United States is
utterly gratuitous. 1t is so extreme
a view that /. ought not to be given
any weight as an objection to machin-
cry for the peaceful adjustment of diff
ferences by decision of international
courts.
mo reasonable and patriotic and
properly self-respecting citizen Of the
United States can claim that our
sovereignty should have more than a
right to freedom of action within the
limitations Of international law, in
ternational morality, and due re-
gard for the rights of other nations.
The only sovereignty which we ought
to claim is sovereignty regulated BY
these limitations
Now the league does not propose
in any way further to restrict that
sovereignty but only through the joint
compulsion of all nations to keep a
would-be outlaw nation within the
proper and existing limitation. The
league is not a super sovereign. 1t is
only a partnership. Its power is in
joint agreement-not in the estab-
lishment of a government. The sena-
tors objection is fundamental. If It
were analysed and logically developed,
1t is a reactionary doctrine that be-
longs to the German view Of the state
and its needs and its rights. 1t is
not consonant with any hope by in
ternational action of settling differ
ences other than by the power of the
sword. 1t leads directly to the pro-
posal that might makes right
NATIONAL sELFISHNESs.
1T is based on a doctrine of SUI
preme national selflshness. 1t is the
pessimistic and despairing view of any
possibility of restricting war. It con-
templates with entire acquiesence the
prospect of another war through which
we have passed, in the next 10 or 20
years. 1t prevents the. glorious area
of a national sovereignty to keep it
from helping the family of nations. 1t
perverts our grand federal constitu-
ton to render helpless for the good
of the world what under the provi-
dence of God has become the world s
greatest power.
''will the American people acquiesce
in such small view of our RESPONSE
bilities for mankind and of our gov
ernmental capacity Dor international
benefit? We may be confident they
will not"