The Morning Tulsa daily world. [volume] (Tulsa, Okla.) 1919-1927, 1920-10-10

Yes. even II Il be n matter Of dis
patching an cxpcdttionary force of u
hundred thousand American boys,
or n half million of tbcih for tiiat
matter, Into the secthfn9 taldrOn Of
central Europe OF the snow w-ciad
stcprrs Of beishevik Russia.
ACCORDING TO THE PRESI-
DENTAL VIEW or THE NATTER
CONGRESS HAS rrs LAS E BAY RE-
GARDtNG A TREATY WHEN 1T
GIVES ITS AssENTTo THE RAT'1-
TfiE 7 ii : ! conMMHITMESTs CON MHrMSTs or THE
TREATY ITSELF. THE DUTIES
IMPOSED OR PRIVILEGES &C
CORDED. ARE MATTERS FOR
THE EXECUTIVE ALONE -.
Unbelievable you say? Only 10
the credulous and unobserving. Let
US look, into this serious assertion.
II has been but q few days since
the president himself enunciated this
doctrine in the Jones shipping act
case, and 1t is atnaxlngA indeed that
the doctrine announcedNhas appar-
emily entirely escaped the notice Of
editors and speakers allie. ..
The congress. 1t will be recalled.
enavted shipping act for the pur-
pose nf encouI aging the new
American merchant marine. In
order to square the q, new
act with previous legislation
concerning American sailors and
make such legislation effective. it
was necessary to abrogate various
trade treaties with various nations,
ana the president was specifically
instructed to give notice prior 20 n
given date that such treaties would
be abrogated, the reason therefor,
and to invite the affected nations to
enter into negotiations for new trade
agreements In harmony with the new
American law.
This bill the president approved.
IL is conceivable that England de-
INJURED 20 both the law and the abro-
CATION OF hs>trade treaty. Indeed II
is considered morally certain that
England did this for II Is typical
Of English statecraft. IL is conceiv-
able, too, that other nations may
have opposed the abrogation Of ad-
vantageous trade treaties and pro-
tested.
But the entire modus operandi OF
the new legislation was in no sense
unprecedented. Congress has acted
in similar manner with other execu-
ttves and the executives have carried
out the instructions OF the, national
law making body without the slight
est question.
Establishing the Precedent.
In this case. however, the presi-
dent failed TO give notice OF the abro-
CATION OF treaties within the time
specified. After that time had
elapsed he boldly announced his de-
cision not to do so. In other words,
for the first time In history the
executive department dcfied the in
strucuons OF the Legislative depart
mcnt BEFORE THE SUPR EN- r,
COURT HAD HELD SUCH LEGIS-
LATlVE ACTION UNCONSTITU-
IT will be remembered that inn
peachment proceedings were insti-
tuted against President Andrew
Johnson for an NQffense similar 20
and no greater than this.
AS startling as the Presidents de-
fiance was his reasons were even
moro so. Here they are:
ON the point OF constitutionalSy,
administration officials assert that
congress lacks competency to en-
force section "a of the shipping
act; that the president cannot in
vest congress with competency that
stitution. and that he cannot create
such competency by merely ap-
proving an incompetent act.
The administration officials" re-
ferrcd to were, OF course. speaking
under the compulsion OF the one
imperious mind of the administra-
ton. and the effort of this argu-
ment was 10 relieve the executive
of having given his executive APP
proval 10 the law.
Had he urged against II at that
time those reasons, and returned
II TO the congress with his veto he
would have been acting well within
his rights. But in this manner of
disposinR OF II he arrogated TO him
self the office OF the supreme court,
an office held by that body and that
alone,
That, however, does not consti-