New-York tribune., 1920-08-08

Root, Secretary Of State under the
Roosevelt Administration. At meet
ing of the Council of the League of
Nations, February H.. an organizing
committee of twelve Of the most emf
nent jurists in the world was selected.
The duty of this group was to devise
plan for the establishment of a
Permanent Court of international JUS
tice, as branch of the league.
This assignment has been concluded
by unanimous action. This augurs we'll
for world progress. The question Is
whether we shall or shall not join in
this practical and humane movement.
President Wilson, as our representative
at the peace table. entered the league
tive authority permitted. Senator
Harding as the Republican candidate
for the Presidency, proposes in plain
words that we remain out Of It.
AS the Democratic candidate. favor
going in. Let us analyze Senator Hard
ing's plan of making q German-Amer-
lean peace, and then calling for
new" relationship among nations,
assuming, for the purpose of argu-
mcnt only, that the perfidious hand
that dealt with Germany would pos
sess the power or influence to draw
twenty-nine nations away from a plan
already at work and induce them to
retrace every step and make a new
beginning. This would entail our ap-
pointing another commission to assem-
Bile with those selected by the other
powers.
With the Versailles instrument dis
carded the whole subject Of partitions
and divisions Of territory on new lines
would be reopened. The difficulties in
this regard, as any fair mind appre-
ciates, would be greater than they were
at the peace session, and we must not
attempt to convince ourselves that they
did not try the genius, patience and
diplomacy of statesmen at that time.
History will say that, great as was the
Allied triumph in war, no less VIC
tory was achieved at the peace table.
The Republican proposal means dis
honor, world confusion and delay. 1t
would keep us in permanent company
with Germany, Russia. Turkey and
Mexico. 1t would entail, in the ulti-
mate, more real injury than the war
itself.
Democratic Position
The Democratic position on the ques-
tion, as expressed in the platform, is:
eve advocate immediate ratification
Of the treaty without reservations
which would impair its essential integ-
rity, but do not oppose the acceptance
of any reservation making clearer or
more specific the obligations of the
United States to the league associates"
The first duty of the new Admins
the treaty. The matter should be ap
preached without thought of the bitter
ness of the past. The public verdict
will have been rendered, and I am
confident that the friends of world
peace, as it will be promoted by the
league, will have in numbers the con-
stitutional requisite to favorable Sena-
torial action.
The captous may say that our plat
form reference to reservations is vague
and indefinite. Its meaning, in brief,
is that we shall state our interpreta-
tion Of the covenant as matter Of
good faith 10 our associates and as a
precaution against any misunderstand-
ing in the future. The point is that
after the people shall have spoken the
league will be in the hands of it's
friends in the Senate, and safe index
as to what they will do is supplied by
what reservations they have proposed
in the past. Some months ago. in
contributed article to "The New York
Times" I expressed my own opinion
duce it here:
"There can be no doubt that
some Senators have been conscien-
tious in their desire to clarity the
provisions of the treaty. Two
things apparently have disturbed
them: First, they wanted to make
sure that the league was not to be
an alliance, and that it's basic pur-
pose was peace and not contro-
versy. Second, they wanted the other
powers signing the instrument to un-
derstand our constitutional limitations,
beyond which the treaty making power
cannot go. Dealing with these two
questions in order, it has always
seemed to me that the Interpretation
of the function of the league might
have been stated in these words: