New-York tribune., 1919-08-08

resolution would have to be permitted.
There is strong suspicion that to-
days move was feeler, put out by
Administration Senators, not SO much
II the ho2e OF getting together with
tion, as to demonstrate to the Prrsi-
dent the hopelessness of cffecting a
compromise so much in the Presi-
dents favor.
This is believed because under the
surface, in the last few days, Admin
stration Senators have been sounding
out the Republicans on what sort of
compromise could be reached, and this
compromise was frankly conceded to
be in the form of reservations in The
resolution of ratification itsclf-4not
an Independent resolution, as proposed
by Senator pittman.
These Democratic leaders privately
conceded majority of tho Senate for
reservations. Several Democratic SEN
ators are understood to be wavering
In their opposition TO reservations, in
addition to those whose names already
have become public. The loss of Sena-
tor Walsh, of Massachusetts, from the
Administration phalanx was considered
severe blow, and the publicly ex-
pressed doubt of Senator Thomas as to
whether he could support the treaty
apparently has removed much Of the
confidence which characterized the Al-
ministraton leaders two weeks ago.
kellogg for Reservations
Senator Kellogg, of Minnesota, in a
strong speech declared. himself in favor
of the four reservations supported by
the majority of the Republican Sena-
| tors. He did not mention Shantung
except that, when questioned about Ar
ticle X by Senator Hitchcock, he in
quired whether Mr. Hitchcock thought
America would ever send troops to de-
tend Japanese interests in that prov
ince.
~ state unqualifedly that l am in
favor of every reservation the Senator
has put forward" said Senator Pitt
man. "However, think it is important
to determine what the effect would be
if they were included in separate res
oluton or if included in the resolu-
tion of ratification. l am satisfied
in my own mind that if included in a
separate resolution it would serve as
notice to those with whom we are
dealing of the position we will take if
the construction of the treaty comes in
| question.
III am satisfied, also, that the powers
that might be constituting the treaty at
the time of the question would take
into consideration that reservation, but
they would only consider it as inter
preting the language already in the
treaty. The only way you could make
tho reservations or interpretations
substituting other language in the
treaty, and this is done in the ratifi-
cation"
"a resolution passed after the treaty
has been ratified would, of course,
serve, notice upon them of our posi-
tion," said Senator Kellogg. at might
be considered, and probably would, as
indicating our objection, or rather our
construction of the language, but It
should be contained in a reservation
for ratification for this reason, because
if the language is what some Senators
claim it ought to be changed, and it
would then be changed" .
Want Signers to Agree
Senator Pittman insisted that a
reservation would not be binding un-
less it were agreed to by the other sig
natories to the treaty. He said that
whether he would vote for reservations
or not depended upon whether the