The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1916-1920, 1919-09-23

assembly upon giving effective guar
antics
'iuarantie that II will accept 'regu-
lations by the league In regard to its
military. naval forces and armaments.'
THE foregoing clause is Immediately
followed by the provision that any
member Of the league may withdraw
after two years notice of Its intention so
to do, provided that all its International
obligations and all its obligations un-
| der thu. covenant shall have been full
filled at the time Of withdrawal 1t will
be noticed that the entire article deals
with the question of membership and
that the only tribunal authorized by the
article to take any action whatsoever rs
the assembly. 1t seems perfectly clear,
! therefore, that the assembly, and 1t
alone has the power to decide whether
a Withdrawing member has fulfilled Its
obligations.
Arriving mt n Decision.
cit being clear that before State
can withdraw the assembly must de-
eide whether or not II has fulfilled all
its national obligations and all its OBJ
ligatiosn under the covenant the ques-
ton arsies must the assembly arrive at
it's decision.
! "(a)-By a two-thirds vote;
| "(b)-By a unanimous vote; or
| "(c)-Is a majority vote sufficient?
Before we can answer this vital
question we must determine whether
the vote is governed by the PROVISIONS
! of Article I. or Article ", and II by
the latter, whether the question is one
involving a decision or whether ii is
a mere matter of procedure in the
former case a unanimous vote being re-
quired and in the latter only a majority
vote. AS has been said, Article i. treats
with the single subject of membership
and contains this clause:
"'Any fully self-governing state, do
minion or colony not named in the
annex may become a member of the
league II its admission Is agreed to by
two-thirds of the Assembly Plainly
enough a two-thirds vote can admit a
member. But does the provision cover
the last paragraph Of Article 1. which
provides for the withdrawal of menu
hers or is the withdrawal covered by
the terms of Article ", which reads:
Except where otherwise expressly
provided in this covenant or by the terms
OF the present treaty, decisions at any
meeting of the Assembly or of the
Council shall require the agreement OF
all the members of the league represented
at the meeting. All matters Of procedure
at meetings of the Assembly or of the
Council, including the appointment OF
committees TO investigate particular
matters, shall be regulated by the AS
sembly or by the Council and may be
decided by majority of the members
of the league represented at the meet
ing
at seems to me that it can hardly be
claimed that the question whether q
withdrawing state has fulfilled all its
obligations under the league. and all its
international obligations can scarcely be
regarded as a mere matter of procedure.
II involves a decision of both law and
fact. and is of a highly judicial charac-
ter. whereas matters of procedure relate
. generally to the manner of conducting
business. In law 1t applies to the meth
DDS Of pleading. Introduction of evidence,
and so forth, and Is substantially syn
onymous with the words practice or
process
at seems TO me, therefore, that we
, must reject any thought that a state can
, be permitted TO withdraw by a mere
majority vote.
Applies to Admission Only.
1T remains to inquire whether the
; two-thirds vote provided for In Article
|. or the unanimous vote required by
, Article " must be obtained.
| Turning to Article l. we find that the
very language itself which provides for
two-thirds vote Is limited to the clause
relating to the admission of members.
1t reads: II the admission is agreed TO
by two-thirds of the assembly. To no
other parts or provisions of that article
does the language seem to apply In
, order to make II apply to the with
a drawal OF members we must change The
! language by writing into 1t: Any fully
self-governing dominion or colony not
named in the annex may become a mem
ber,' or may withdraw from membership
If agreed to by two-thirds vote of the
assembly
Z I'VE are not justified in so altering
/ the language of the covenant. 1t is
! therefore my judgment that the decision
Is governed by the general provision
, OF Article V. and requires a unanimous
: vote.
1T Is clear that IL once we enter this
league we cannot escape its thraldom
unless We can secure the gracious per-
mission of every member of the Assem-
: bly,. In that case any State, however
Insignificant, by the casting of a single
negative vote could deny the United
States the right OF withdrawal by refus-
ing to concur in the unanimous decision
that the United States had fulfilled all
its obligations
Again quotes President.
: ~ am aware of the fact that the
q President in his interview with the
r Foreign Relations Committee took the
: opposite view, holding to the doctrine
which Is to me astonishing that the right
q of withdrawal is absolute, and that II
s is unconditional, so far as the legal OF
8 the moral right (of withdrawaD is con-
: cerned.'"
n Senator Reed then quotes from the
: hearings before the Foreign Relations
: Committee on the treaty:
: Senator Borah-Who passes upon the
question of the fulfilment of our inter
, national obligations, upon the question
n whether a nation has fulfilled its inter.
national obligations?
The President-Nobody.
a Senator Borah-Does the council hav,
q anything to say about it?
The Notwithstanding whatever.
Senator Borah-Then the COUNT
should give notice of withdrawal, 4
would be the sole judge of whether oil
u not 1t had fulfilled it's International OBJ
: ligations-its covenants-to the league
The President-That is as 1 under
9 stand 1t. The only restraining influences
l. would be the public opinion of the world
. Senator Borah-Precisely but II tn,
United States should conceive that 1t haC
fulfilled its obligations, that question
y could not be referred to the council in an!
y way, or the council could not be called
- into action?