New-York tribune., 1919-11-17
The First "knife Thrust"

tIIi uSI dt Cnc UeGIt Ol L!lG CONeTdnC.
They forget that the knife" the
Senate is accused of using was long
ago whetted by the President him.
self.
Mr.. Wilson's own ideas of the
nature Of the obligations which the
United States ought to accept under
Article X are embodied in the Sem
ate's reservation. What he said at
Salt Lake City may be dismissed as
an impulsive judgment, made in q
moment of irritation What he told
the Senate Foreign Relations Com
mittee at the famous conference of
August 19 last remains unretracted
It expresses his convictions as writ
ten into the official record.
Article x obligates each member
Of the league to respect and pre-
serve, as against external aggres-
sion, the territorial integrity and
existing political independence of all
the other memSers The fact of ag-
gression or of threatened aggression
is to be certified to by the council,
which is, moreover, to advise MEM
Der nations as to the means of full
filling their guarantees.
Members Of the Senate committee
were very anxious to ascertain the
Presidents views as to the binding
character of the general obligation
and the legal and moral force of
recommendation from the council.
On the first point the question was:
Does a notification of the existence
Of aggression or of threat of ag-
gressicn automatically compel the
United States to act? Answering
This question, the President first
drew a distinction between a legal
ard moral obligation to fulfill the
engagement contained in the first
clause of Art Gle X. There was no
legal obligation, he said. only Il
moral one. Pressed to define the
moral obligation, he explained that
it was not an absolute one, since it
permitted liberty Of judgment as
to whether the state of agrees on
really existed and whether, if it did
exist, the United States was re-
1uired to respond to the councils re-
quest for intervention.
Such an Interpretation completely
destroys the automatic character Of
the original obligation. 1t leaves the
United States at liberty to act or
not to act in any case arising under
Article X. without mourning the
charge of bad faith toward it's asso-
ciates or of disloyalty to the cove
nant. 1t is exactly the same inter
probation as that which the Senate
has embodied in the second reserva-
ton. Yet Mr.. Wilson's spokesmen
in the Senate say that he now be-
lieves it "cuts the heart out of the
treaty"
On the second point the question
was: What may the United Stat S
do with recommendation received
from the council? Such a recon-
mendation would, of course, have to
be approved by our representative in
that body. But the President held
that such action on the part of our
delegate could not bind either Con-
gress or the Executive. Illustrating
the freedom of Judgment which the
United States would exercise in each
case presented, he said to Senator
Brandegee:
I'VE are first free to exercise II in
the vote OF our representative on the
council. who will. of course, act un-
der instructions from the home gov
crnment; and, in the second place
we are to exercise it when the Pres
idsnt. acting upon the recommends
tion OF the council. makes his recon-
mendation to Congress. Then Con-
gress is to exercise it's judgment as
to whether the instructions of the
Executive to our member of the
council were we'll founded or not, and
whether this is case of distinct
moral obligation"
Further on this exchange of views
occurred with Senator Brandegee:
SENATOR BRANDEGEE-On a
call by the council for us to perform
our international contract under
Article X, if Congress does not favor
performing it, you think we would
not be subject to criticism by the
other members of the league!
THE PRESIDENT oh, we might
be subject to criticism. but I think
Congress would be at liberty to form
it's own Judgment as to the circum.
stances.
SENATOR BRANDEGEE-I agree
~ 3ta entirely, and under cur