The daily Gate City and constitution-Democrat. (Keokuk, Iowa) 1916-1922, 1920-08-28

Iunder this head The Daily Gate
City will publish communications on
any and all subjects of interest to the
people generally, reserying the right
] to reject unworthy articles or those
| inspired by personal animosity or
malice All communications must be
accompanied by the names OF the
writers. The Gate City does not as
sumo responsibility for opinions or
sentiments expressed in any com
imunication.
ConstitutionaIity Of the League.
To the Editor of The Gate City:
At a political tea" given this week
by the women of Keokuk, the constf
nationality of the league of nations
WAS attacked. AS an upholder of the
league and a member of the League
to Enforce Peace, | ask permission
Ito use your columns to refute that
idea The speaker said that the
adoption of the league OF nations
would mean the giving up of con-
stitution which had served success
fully nearly one hundred and fifty
years" and the impression was gained
that the adoption of the league would
be contrary to the provisions OF the
constitution.
Everyone knows that the league Of
nations is part one of the peace
treaty with Germany and that it was
embodied in that treaty. whether
wisely Or no, to help carry out the
provisions of that treaty. The league
of nations is therefore nothing but a
treaty, treaty of broader kind
than we have ever made before, but
simply a treaty comparable to our
treaties of arbitration, and to our de-
lcision at The Hague tribunal.
| There is no doubt that our national
government has the right to make
treaties under its constitutional priyi,
leges The treaty making power and
it's enforcement were weak spots IN
the limping government which car
ried us through the critical period
just before the making of the consti-
tuition. Knowing well the difficulties
which the government had expert
enced in dealing with foreign affairs
under it's limited powers during this
period, the trainers of the constitu-
ton specified that the government
should make treaties and that they
should be "the law of the land" Law,
as we have been told, can be en-
forced and the government was thus
given the right to enforce the treaties
it should make.
! Another point raised against the
constitutionality of the league is that
the president had no right to make
such a treaty. You may differ with
Mr. Wilson about the wisdom of his
course in making the treaty, or about
the wisdom of the treaty itself, but
you can not question his constitu-
tional right to make that treaty.
Article II, section 2, clause Of the
constitution reads: He 1.-THE presf-
dentJ shall have power, by and with
the advice and consent of the senate
to make treaties :"
! But the argument against the
league which has the greatest weight
is the argument based on article X
of the league-an article which
creates tribunal to carry out the
provisions OF the league. 1t is COM
monplace to repeat that no treaty
can be successfully executed without
some especial enforcing power.
Article X reads: 1.-THE members of
the league undertake to respect as
against external aggression the ter
ritorial integrity and existing political
Independence of all members of the
league. In case of such aggression
or in case of danger of such aggres-
sion, the council shall advise upon the
means by which this obligation shall
be fulfilled" There are also in the
covenant provisitions for boycotting
rebellious nations and promise that
the member nations will all work to-
gether against refractory nation.
/ In all the treaties made by the
United States there is hone which
does not carry an enforcing power.
AS has been said before, it was the
lack of such enforcing power in the
matter Of treaties which crippled our
foreign policy between 1871 and 1887
and was one Of the defects remedied
by the constitution. Whether you