New Britain herald., 1919-08-19

mcndatiOn as to it's sediment" The United States was by no means the only government interested in the eX- plclt adoption of this provision, and there is no doubt in the mind of any authoritative student of interna- uonal law that such matters as inn migration, tariffs, and naturalization arc mconteStably domestic questions with which no international body could deal without express authority to do so. No ynum eratiOn of dOmeS- tc questions was undertaken because to undertake it, even by sample would have involved tho danger of seeming exclude those not mentioned.
 Right to Withdraw.
 The right of any sovereign state to withdraw had been taken for granted but no objection was made to making it explicit. Indeed, so soon ;i5 the views expressed at the White House conference were laid before the commission it was at once con- ceded that il was best not to leave the answer to so important question to inference. No proposal was made to set Up any tribunal to pass judg- ment upon the question whether Withdrawing nation had in fact full filled "all it's international obligations and all it's obligations under the cove nant." It was recognized that that question must be left to be resolved by the conscience of the nation pro- posing to withdraw, and l must say it did not seem to me worth while to propose that the article be made more cNploCit because I knew that the United States would never itself propose to withdraw from the league if it's conscience was not entirely clear as to the fulfillment of all it's international obligations. It has never failed to fulfu them and never will.
 Article x Not Doubtful.
 "A Article X is in no respect of doubtful meaning when read in the light of the covenant as a whole. The council of the league can only "ad- wise upon' the means by which the obligations of that great article are to he given effect to. Unless the United States is d party to the policy or action in question her own aftirma~ tive vote in the council is necessary before any advice can be given, for a unanimous vote of the council is re- Quired If she is a party, the trouble is hers anyhow. And the unanimous vote of the council is only advice in
 
 to reject it if it pIeases. Nothing could have been made more clear to the conference than the right of our congress under our constitution to exercise it's independent judgment in all matters of peace and war. No attempt was made to question or limit that right The United States will indeed undertake under Article x to Prospect and preserve as against eX- tcrnal aggression the territorial in tcgrity and existing political inde- pendence of al! members of the league, and that engagement con stitutes a very grave and solemn moral oblication But it is a moral not legal obligation. and leaves our congress absolutely free to put its own interpretation upon it in all cases that call for action. 1t is binding in conscience only not in law.
 Backbone of Covenant.
 Article x. seems to me to constitute the very backbone of the whole cov- enant Without it the league would be hardly more than an influential debating society.
 1t has several times been suggested, in public debate and in private con- ference, that interpretations of the sense in which the United States ac- cepts the engagements of the coVc- nant should be embodied in the in- strumcnt of ratification. There can be no reasonable objection to such Interpretations accom- mpanying the act of ratification. provided they do not form a part of the formal ratification itself.
 Plain Meaning of Instrument.
 Most of the interpretations which have been suggested to me omb0Ly what seems to me the plain meaning of the instrument itself. But if such interpretations should constitute a part of the formal resolution of rati- tication, long delays would be the .n- cVitable consequence, inaSmuch as all the many governments concerned would have to accept, in effect, the language of the senate as the lan- qua Gc of the treaty before ratification would he complete. The assent of the German assembly at Weimar would have to be obtained among the rest, and I must frankly say that I could only with the greatest reluctance ap- proaCh that assem bly, for permission 70 read the treaty as we understand It and as those who framed it quite certainly understood it. If the United states were to qualify the document in any way, moreover, l am confident from what l know of the many con- 1orcnccs and debates which accom- panied the formulation of the treaty that our example would mm ediatcIy be followed in many quarters, in some instances with reservations. and that the meaning and operative force of the treaty would presently be l cloudcd from one end Of it's clauses 1 tO the Ot her