The Holly chieftain., 1920-09-09

of war upon the RuSSian people, as OF
course, it would, what would result:
what would of necessity have to re-
suit? Nothing necessarily, we are glad
Iy informed, since only the congress
can declare war, and the congress-
might reject the appeal of the execu-
tive. But would the congress do that?
Could the congress do that without
staining indelibly the honor of the ma
ton?
II answer, no. and l say it not ON
my own authority alone Back Of my
Judgment stands the President of the
United States. Upon that point there
= first hand information. In the
course of the discussion which took
place at the meeting of the President
tfons, raised the question by stating
hypothetical case precisely analo-
gous to that which have depicted,
and then inquired whether we might
not rightfully be regarded as q peril
dious people II we should fail to con
tribute an armed force if called to do
80. The President first replied, as I
wouldpbe our own judges as to whether
we were obliged in those clrcum-
stances to act In that way or not.
Pressed further, however, in response
to query incorporating the assump-
ton that the case provided for and pre-
scribed had arisen and that the ex-
traneous attack did exist precisely as
1t does exist today in Poland, the
president admitted specifically that we
would be untrue If we did not keep
our word.
Replying further to- question
which perhaps l ought not to have con-
sidered necessary, the President de-
nounced moral obligation of course,
superior to legal obligation and of
a greater binding force.
''What, then, becomes of the argu-
ment that Congress, not the President,
in this instance at any rate, might
keep us out of warp Technically, Of
course, it could do so. Morally, with
equal certainty, it could not do SO nor
would it ever do so. The American
people would never permit repudia-
,ion of debt of honor.
.'Am 1 not right, my countrymen, in
saying that we needed only the out
break of war between Poland and Rus
sia to make us realize at least one of
the things which, in the words of Sec
retary Lansing, we would have been
let in for but for the restraining
hands of the Senate, and to fetch home
to us the danger of committing our
country in advance to causes that we
know not of.
"One can have no quarrel with those
who have convinced themselves that
our underlying purpose in entering the
great conflict was TO create League
of Nations. The fact remains, how
ever, that no such intent was official
ly acclaimed, no allusion, nor even a
suggestion to that effect appeared in
the joint resolution of Congress which
declared the existence of state of
war between this country and Ger
many. For myself left no room for
doubt of the motives which led me to
cast my vote in favor of that resolu-
ton. 1t so happened that made the
concluding speech upon the war resolu-
tiOn, from my place in the Senate, on
the night of April 4, 1917. These We're
my own words at that time: L want it
known to the people of my state and
to the nation that am voting for war
tonight for the maintenance Of just
American rights, which is the first es-
sential to the preservation of the soul
Of this republic
Il vote for this joint resolution to
if l could choose the language of the
resolution, but a war declared in re-
sponse to affrOntS, war that will at
least put soul into our American life,
a war not for the cause of tie Allies
of Europe, a war not for France, beau
tifu as the sentiment may be In re-
wing at least our gratitude to the
French people; not precisely war for
civilization, worthy and inspiring as
that would be, but war that speaks
for the majesty of Il people properly
governed, who finally are brought to
the crucial test where they are re-
solved to get together and wage con-
flict for the maintenance of their
rights and the preservation of their
covenant inherited from their fathers,
"'We have given to the world the
spectacle of great nation that could
make war without selfish intent. We
unsEeathed the sword some eighteen
years agoafor the first time in the his
4 al IL,