The Washington times., 1920-02-08
FINAL TREATY
|MPENDS IN SENATE
Debate Opens Tomorrow on
Passage or Rejection Of
Famous Pact.
Continued from First Page.)

Continued from First Pase.)
liability instead of an asset In the
treaty struggle.
Meanwhile Senate officials are pre-
pairing to handle record crowds OF
spectators at tomorrow's session. J
Many visitors now arriving In WASH
ington timed their journey to be pres
ent in the city during the coming
battle.
The Presidents letter to Senator
Hitchcock. defining his attitude on
the treaty, reads:
my Dear Senator Hitchcock:
81 have greatly appreciated your
thoughtful kindness in keeping me
in formed concerning the conference
you and some of your colleagues have
had with spokesmen of the Republic
an party concerning the possible rati-
fication of the treaty of peace, and
send this line in special appreciative
of your letter OF
the 22d. return the clipping you
were kind enough to inclose.
ITO the substance of II, i. of course,
adhere. am bound to. Like your
self, I am solemnly sworn to obey
and maintain the Constitution OF the
United States. Bat I think the form
Of II very unfortunate. Any reserva-
ton or resolution stating that the
United States assumes NO, obligation
under such and such an article uniess
and except would. I am sure. chill
our Relationship with the nations with
which we expect to be associated III
the great enterprise of maintaining
the worlds peace.
Accepts Reservatiea.
"That association must, in any case.
my dear Senator, involve very serious
and far-rcaching implications OF
honor and duty. which I am sure we
shall never in fact be desirous OF is-
| noring. 1t Ia the more important not
| to create the impression that we are
trying to escape obligations.
But I realize that negative criti-
cism is not all that Is called for in so
serious q matter. I am happy to be
able to add, therefore. that / have
| once more gone over the reservations
proposed by yourself, the copy OF
which I return herewith. and am glad
| to say I can accept them as they
stand.
.T have never seen the slightest
| reason to doubt the good faith OF
our associates in the war. nor ever
had the slightest reason to fear that
any nation would seek to enlarge our
L
League of Nations, or seek to COM
NIT us to lines of action which. un-
der our Constitution, only the Con-
gress of the United States can in the
last analysis decide.
| Possible witharawal.
May / suggest that with regard
to the possible withdrawal of the
United States, It would be wise to
give the President the right to act
upon our resolution of Congress in
the mater of withdrawal?
In other words, It would seem to be
permissible and advisable that any
resolution giving notice of with
drawal should be a joint, rather than
a concurrent resolution. doubt
whether the President can be de-
! prived of his veto power under the
| Constitution, c even with his own con-
| sent
The use Of a joint resolution would
permit the President who 10, Of
course, charged by the Constitution
with the conduct of foreign policy, to
merely exercise q voice In saying
whetser so important a step rs with
drawal from the League Of Nations
should be accomplished by q majority
or a two-thirds vote.
The Constitution itself providing
that the legislative body was to be
consulted in treaty making and hav-
ing prescribed a two-thirds vote In
such cases, 1t seems to me that there
should be no unnecessary departure
from the method there indicated.
II see no objection to a frank state
| ment that the Uited States can accept
a mandate with regard to any terri
tory under Article XIII, Part 1. or
any other provision OF the treaty of
1 A.L
action of the Congress of the United
States.
'I hope, my dear Senator, that you
| will never hesitate to call upon me
for any assistance that / can render
| in this or any other public matter.
CORDIALLY and sincerely yours,
WOODROW WILSON"