Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1920-09-23
Aiand Ru ing Shows
Peril to America
in World League

Washington Sept 23.--Further in
formation received on the decision of
the league OF nations to attempt
settlement OF the Al2nd island dis
pute between Sweden and Finland
| widely hailed as demonstration 81
the efficiency of the covenant. dis
closes that the league council oper-
ated in exactly the manner feared by
the supporters of the Lodge reserva-
| tons.
Finland contended that the A,ana
| island dispute is Finnish domestic.
not an international question and
that the league had no jurisdiction
| thereof. The league council rejected
the Ffnnish>contention pronounced the
question international and appointed
| commission to report findings as
| the basis, of a future league decision
awarding the island to one nation or
the other.
The council decision was based on
the provision of the covenant that 81
| the dispute between the parties is
Claimed BY one OF them. and is found
by the council to arise ont OF mat
ter which by international law is
| solely within, the domestic jurisdic-'
ton of that party, the council sha;ii
so report, and shall make no recon-
| mendation as to its settlement
American opponents of the Wilson
covenent have contended that there
Is no guarantee therein that the
council would pronounce immigrants
domestic question and refuse to
take Jurisdiction, for example, Of the
controversy between Japan and the
United States over the exclusion of
Japanese from this country To avert |
the danger Of the United States being
compelled to submit such dispute
to the league for decision one of the !
Lodge reservations provided that
American immigration and other do
nestle questions should be exempt |
from the jurisdiction of the league. !
Finland has furnished the first ex-
ample of a nation being required to
submit to the league a dispute re-
garded as purely a domestic question.
In this question the Republican |
Publicity Association called attention
today to the movement on foot in |
Japan to bring the immigration dis
pute with the United States before
the league of nationsA If japan |
should take this step and the league
should assume Jurisdiction the United |
States would be invited 70 become
member of the league for the purpose |
Of settling the dispute.
Suppose the United States should |
accept the invitation and thereby as
sumo membership obligations says |
the association. "Assume{ that we |
have temporary representation there
on, and the council~is unable to ar
rive at Il unanimous report regarding
the dispute and the members of the |
league take action and render a ma
jority report which does not meet |
with the sanction of the United
States. We are told by the league of
nations, for example, that we may no
longer exercise our sovereign rights
to exclude Japanese immigrants.
What then? The Pacific coast
states rise in righteous rath and re-
pudiate the findings of the league.
Shall we support them or support ia
pan? Shall we enforce the judgment
of the league as against our own peo-
pie? In the present state of mind OF
the Pacific coast states that might
come perilously near melting civil
war. But how should we conform
our refusal to abide by the judgment
Of the league? By overt act? Then
we shall be deemed to have commit
ted an act OF war against all other
members of the league And if we
shut our doors to Japanese immi-
grafton, would we not thereby crea/
a casus belli. in which the judges in
the case, to make their judgment