New-York tribune., 1920-09-19

and specifying atrocities committed by
an American government on American
soil in the course Of pretended vindi-
cation Of American institutions by the
Department Of Justice.
"How swiftly autocratic pretensions
run to tyrannyl No one can be
trusted to save democracy by methods
which dsplace liberty and due process
in favor Of administrative caprice. Do
we believe that we are facing troublous
times? Then let it be known that we
shall always secure ourselves against
the forcible overthrow of government
will swiftly meet the entire force of
government for the immediate repres-
sian of every such effort. But let it
! also be known, as our surest protec-
ton, that with calnness and sanity we
propose to maintain the guarantees of
free speech, free assembly and the
right of representation, and that no
one, however poor, friendless or ac-
out due process Of law.
Must Cease War Powers
"When Congress conferred extraor-
dinary authority upon the President
in order to secure the unity Of action
essential to the war enterprise it was,
of course, assumed that there would
always be sound and adequate rea-
son in relation to the actual conduct of
war when this authority was used.
There is no demand for the impossible,
Manifcstly, reasonable time had to
be allowed for the winding up Of war
undertakings. But winding up is one
thing; the stretch of authority to con-
troll actual peace conditions is quite
another. 1t is no answer to say that
our economic conditions are the after
cape the direct influences of the war?
Probably not for generation. If En-
ecutive autocracy is to be correspond
ingly continued, we may as we'll bid
goodby to the Republic. The war pow
ers were for the conduct of war, not
for peace. 1t was the plain duty Of the
Executive when actual peace was re-
stored to relinquish the exercise of
war power. If we are to respect our
fundamental! law, and check tendencies
whlch constitute grave menace to our
liberties, we must end war powers
without delay
we recall the surprise and justified
resentment which was evoked by the
Presidential demand for partisan
victory at the elections Of 1918. This
was the extraordinary return for the
zeal and sacrifices of Republicans in
support of the Administration in tie
conduct OF the war. But it would have
been fitting and nianifestly wise to
AVOID opportunity for partisan advan-
tage. The rebuke was decisive. Hav-
ing submitted the question to the test,
1T would have been in accord with
democratic profession to accept the re-
suit After the election of 1918 lit was
apparent that the country was "ot dis
posed to give blank check
1T would have been we'll to recog-
nlze the fact that the President has
not no. the exclusive treaty making power.
~ ~ " was 3: wrong to give to foreign peo-
pies the impression of an authority
which did not exist. 1t was a highly
dangerous role for an American Presi-
dent, virtually to appeal to foreign
peoples against their governments. It
was still more dangerous to excite
hopes which could not be satisfied. and
TO give rise to general sentiment IN
Europe that, by reason of expectations
ccreaIed { by our representative and un-
~ l9'nled' we had been guilty Of breach
"Was the covenant a proper doom.
ment to be accepted? This does not
mean, Is an association or league of
Irce nations to aid in prom otine the
peace OF the world desirable? We have
no no very serious controversy about that.
There is no real issue as to names or
general aims The question is one of
method, of particular plan and it's
essential import. This is not subor-
dinate question; it is the primary ques-
tion' so tar as there is any real con-
tToversy. When you pass beyond vague
phrases OF aspiration and get down to
documents and agreements you cannot
permit yourselves to be lost in a cloud
OF words about the peace of the world
and Americas obligations. America
mas her duty to her own institutions as
we'll as to the world 1t has always
been possible, and it is possible now, to
discharge both.
Duty to Oppose Ratification
"Oplnions have differed as to the wis
dom of attempting to establish an as
soclation of nations in connection with
the making Of the treaty, so important
was it that the latter should be accom-
pllshed with the utmost speed. Blu. it
is clear that, if this attempt were made,
=; was incumbent on our representa-
tlves to see to it that the proposed
agreement met two essential conditions
--ilrst, that it was compatible with
American principles and with funda
mental American interests. and, second,
that Its provisions were appropriate to
the profcsscd aim of promoting peace.
Had the President proposed such an
agreement the result would have been
most welcome, and the opposition, if
any, negligible. But the proposed cove
nant was not of this character, and.
holding this view, it was the duty of
Senators to oppose the ratification If
the treaty unless amendments or res
ervations obviatng the most serious
objections were suitably made. TIE
attack upon the performance of this