The Morning Tulsa daily world. [volume] (Tulsa, Okla.) 1919-1927, 1920-08-15

adopted a reservation intended to
cure Article y Of It's most serious
dangers from the American view
point. That reservation reads as
follows:
The United states assumes no
obligation 10 preserve the terri
torlal integrity or political inde-
pcndencc Of any other country or
to interfere with controversies oe-
tween nations--whether mgmbers
OF the league or not--uuder the
provision OF Article X, or 10 en-
ploy the military or naval forces
OF the United states under any
article Of tho treaty for any pur-
pose, unless IN any particular case
the congress which, under the con-
sti,utiun. has the sole power To
declare war or authorize the ,"n-
ploymcnt OF the military or naval
forces ot The United states. shah
by act or joint resolution 20 pro-
vide.
The president, declaring Article Y
80 DO the yo-v heart ~ the cove
nant" Indignantly rejected the reser-
vation and was supported by a suffi-
Client number Of democratic tchatOrs
to prevent the ratification of the
treaty with the reservation in.
Governor Cox, In his speNc OF
acceptance, fully endorses the de-
c.sion of the president and-nis post
ton with reference to the t~raty.
So that now Il can in all fairness be
said that the democratic patty II
committed to the aCCeptan~~ OF the
league without this safe guarding
reservation and is, as an unescaDtole
consequence. opposed to this reser-
vation.
OF course, then, the democratic
party stands for the employment of
the United States army and navy
whenever the league council should
order. and WITHOUT SEEKING OR
REQUIRING THE ASSENT OF
THE UNITED STATE CON
GRESS. II also stands for assuming
an obligation TO preserve the terri
torial integrity of other nations and
their political independence" regard
less of the effect OF such interfer-
cnrc on tho destiny OF this nation
and regardless of the wishes of the
American people at the time such
have the temerity to dispute.
league council.
This must be the position OF the
democratic party and candidates
since they are for the league and
against this safe guarding reserva-
tion.
A To Moral Responsibility.
The president, IN expressing his
willingness to have reservations
adopted explaining but in no wise
changing the obligatio OF the
T,Gt 1pa
visions. admitted that a moral re-
sponsibillty would of necessity be
more binding than legal response
bility--a trueism that no one would
have the tcrmerity todispute.
So that II follows. too, that the
adoption of an explanatory reserva-
ton calling attention to the fact that
the tUnited States did not in joining
the league barter away. its right OF
congressional action, would be utter
ly meaningless. For It would then
be morally bound TO take the neces-
sary congressional action whenever
the occasion for 1t arose through a
finding by the league council
The point is clear to every man
or woman capable of understanding
the mcrest fundamental of logic.
In his speech Of acceptance. Gov.
ernor Cox proposes two reservations
which after discussion the president
permitted him to offer. II is vita
that we should understand the
meaning and the effect Of these
reservations, since they constitute
the only difference, II there Is any al
all between the Cox position on the
league and the Wilson position.
The Cox Reservations.
~" first Cox reservation reads as
follows:
% giving its assent 20 this
treaty the senate has in mind the
fact that the league Of nations,
which it embodies, was devised for
the sole purpose OF maintaining
peace and comfy among the ma
tlons of the earth and preventing
the recurrence OF such conflic
as that through which the world
has just passed. The cooperation
OF the United States with the
league and its continuance as
member thereof, will naturally de-
pend upon the adherence Of the
league 10 that fundamental pur-
pose.
AS legal proposition such a res
ervation is worthless. 1t Is mean
ingless and in no sense protective In