Evening journal., 1920-01-12
at all. A treaty obligation that re.

uicub IMPOSES Nle uuIy OF lldt Iuillll-
ment in the legislative department OF
the government. and the good faith OF
the United States pledged in a treaty
can only be kept invlolate by That de-
partment Of the government whose
functions are appropriate for that pur-
pose. II Is true, the Congress- OF the
United States has the power to refuse
to respond 10 such obligations, and rs
records are full Of instances In which
protest is made against the exercise OF
the treaty making power, In such wise
as to impose legislative duty upon that
body. They have frequently, in par
liamentary discussion, claimed the right
OF the expedlency OF responding 10 the
demand mane for IN appropriation
made by a treaty. but there are, be-
lieve, no instances I'm which the obli-
gallon has been squarely remedied, or
In which the Congress has failed 10
recognize the Obligation by its final
action.
''rhere has been some confusion. !
! think, In the public mind I'm distln-
/ gushing between power and duty. I'm
questionably Congress has the pow
er. either with or without iustinca-
tlon, TO repudiate the obligations OF a
treaty which IL Is called upon 30 full
I'LL, or IL may abrOgate the treaty by
repeating II as a part OF the law OF the
land But in either case a violation
OF the treaty by the United States Is
involved a violation which may or
may not afford just cause for war.
there being no other sanction (it that
can be so called to a treaty but q
moral one.
I'm this view the conclusion ls IN
avoldable that the second reservation.
which distinctly says that the United
states assumes no obligation 10 pre-
serve the territorial integrity or po-
litlcal Independence OF any other coun-
try, etc, unless in any particular case
the Congress, which under the Con-
stitution has the sole power TO declare
war or authorize the employment OF
The military or naval forces OF the
United states, shah by act or Joint
resolution so provide amounts to a
declaration that the United States will
do as IL pleases when an occasion FOR
fulfilling the obligation arises.
Il can see nothing i'm this but an abso-
lutte population OF the Obligation
sought TO be imposed by Article X of
the covenant, and the whole reserva-
tion is thus futile for any other pur-
pose. A direct delelion OF the whole
article Is, In my opinion, preferable 10
an amendment which implies such
serious derogation from the treaty
making power and one which may
prove an unfortunate precedent In fu-
ture negotiations with foreign nations.
or course either the deletion or the
adoption OF the reservation involves a
resubmission to the signatory powers"
me third reservation, 20 the effect
that no mandate shall be accepted by
the United States under Article xxi.
Part I, except by action OF the Con
gress or the United States, is, | am OF
opinion, a mere interpretative resolu-
tion, and not open to objection.
'"Ihe fourth reservation Is also. In
my opinion. interpretative and requires
no resubmisslon, and is otherwise un-
Objectionable.
THE NTH reservation. excluding the
Monroe Doctrine from the purview OF
the treaty, is also unobiectIonable.
THE sixth reservation. providing
that the United States withholds its
assent 30 Articles 1856, i57 and i5s, and
reserves full liberty Of action with re-
speot TO any controversy which may
arise under said articles between the
Republic Of China and the Empire Of
Japan, has been the subject Of heated
debate, and as It withhOlds absolutely
the consent of the United States TO the
articles named, it cannot be adopted
"a 20 a TOE
tory Powers, involving what cannot
fail TO be The occasion OF a serious diff
ference with Japan, who cannot avoid
considering this action OF the United
states as offensive, in the light of her
stipulation TO return the Province Of
Sh ing to China within some reason
able timc.
The seventh and eighth reservations
may or may not require re-negotiation.
They are, in my opinion. unnecessary,
but unobiectionable, except as they
may cause delay or confusion.
"The ninth reservation is as follows
The United States declines TO be OBJ
ligaled to contribute TO any expenses Of
the league, or Of any commission or
committee OF conference, or other
agency organized under the league or
under the treaty for the purpose Of
carrying out the treaty provisions, IN
less an appropriation of funds available
for sue expenses shall be made by the
Congress Of the United States. This,
Of course, is amenable to the criticism
made of the reservation as TO Article
y. It is a refusal to assume any obli-
CATION whatever in the premises, un-
less the United states hereafter shall
decide TO do so by one Of its govern
mental departments or agencies. IL Is
highly Objectionable, il seems to me,
on this ground, and because il is un-
worthy Of the dignity and self respect
Of The United States.
81 do not see that the tenth eleventh
and twelfth reservations amount to
amendments requiring rc-ncgoliation, Il
not anlrmatvely disapproyed by the
other signatory Powers.
The thirteenth reservation, referring
% very important and elaborate pro-
visions for intcrnationalizing The la
bor interests OF the world, declares that
the United states wthholds its assent,
unless dhc Congress. by Act or joint
resolution shall hereafter make provis-
ION for representation in the Organiza-
lion established by Part XIII articles
3S5 to i27 inclusive) The subject mat
ter of Part XlII is too important. novel
and complex in its provisions to be dis
cussed in This paper. The reserva-
ton in regard to II, however, is amen
able 10 the same criticism as that made
on the reservation as TO Article y. It
is reputation Of an obligation which,
il seems to me. necessitates a renegoiia-