The daily Gate City and constitution-Democrat. (Keokuk, Iowa) 1916-1922, 1920-05-29

people generally, reserving the right
I 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
assume responsibility for opinions or
sentiments expressed in any com.
munication. n
An Opinion From J. o. Boyd.
To the Editor of The Gate City:
You will pardon reference TO your
editorial of the twenty-seventh instant
quoting from Senator Reed to the eff
feet that: "Of all the heresies, absur-
dities, intellectual monstrosities that
have ever fallen from the lips of man,
the worst is that a president by mere
utterance, by mere word of mouth,
can bind a people to policy
knowing your disposition TO be- fair
in political matters has caused me
some surprise that you should be led
astray, relying on the authority of Sen
ator Reed. Senator Reed is not
profound international lawyer; is not
an accurate historian, has no record
/ of excellency in craftsmanship; he is,
! however, a master in invectiye, wiz
gard in sarcasm, and master genius
in marshalling words in whatever
cause he may espouse, irrespective Of
its worth or merit
Perhaps the most common policy OF
4 the United States is that of the Mon
roe doctrine. The Monroe doctrine
4 is not found in the acts of any legis-
! lature of the union; ii is not found in
the resolution or any act Of congress
/ it rests purely and solely upon the ut
terance of President Monroe, who was
pesident at the time of its utterance.
He is undoubtedly an Inaccurate his
torian who would urge that President
Monroe did not bind the United
States TO policy by his uttered word
in fact, some OF US nowadays have
more respect for the Monroe policy,
which was purely the statement OF
president than we do for the consu-
tuition and treaties made in pursuance
thereof.
In more recent times President
cleveland bound the United States 10
a policy with reference to Venezuelan
matters Still later, President Roose-
welt bound the United States to poll
! y with reference to Panama, and con-
gress recognized the poiicy to which
the president had committed the
country and made a treaty by which
the independence and territorial in
Itegrity of Panama was guaranteed as
against the claims of the whole
world.
/ Instance after instance could be
cited in our history in which the presf-
dent, the executive, has bound the
country TO policy, and, In numerous
instances, without any consultation or
reference of the matter whatever TO
congress
( President Jefferson bound the
United States TO a policy with refer
ence TO the Louisiana purchase long
before the matter was ever presented
to congress.
President Wilson is not claiming 10
have committed the country TO any
policy except those policies that were
expressly stated in public utterances
BIZ him before the congress OF the
Z United States, and which were re-
cefyed by the congress Of the United
States at that time without dissent
ing protest No one in congress
raised a single syllable against any of
President wilson's policies TO which
he was committing the country until
a month or SIX weeks after the sign
ing of the armistice. Not only that
but those who are most~ loudly con-
.Edemning the presidents policies now,
were then joining IN universal approx
al of those very identical policies.
/ For instance Senator Lodge, Ii the
Forum magazine In December, 1918,
stated:
1 The president, who delivered
the war message. and congress
/ who voted for war, would be gull
4 ~ of the blacklist crime II they
were willing TO make peace on
the status quo ante bellum and re
create the situation which existed
before the war II we send our i
armies and our young men abroad :
10 be killed and wounded in
norteFn France and Flanders with
no result but this. our entrance
into war with such an intention
was a crime which nothing can
| Justify. The intent Of congress
and the intent OF the president
was that there could De no
peace until we could create
situation where no such war as
| this could reoccur. We can
! not make peace in the ordinary
way. We cannot, in the first
place. make peace except in COM
nany with our allies 1t would
brand US with everlasting dishonor
] and bring ruin to US also if we
undertook TO make separate
peace
A similar situation with reference
Ito the adoption of treaty came
Iup at the close of the Spanish war.
The democrats opposed the adoption
of the Paris treaty because OF the
fact that it required US to accept
mandate for Cuba and to pay Spain
twentymilIion dollars for the privilege
Of exercising a mandate over the
Philippine islands. The democrats
urged that this was projecting our in
fuence into oriental and eastern al
fairs, and that the country was for
saking the principles of Washington
and jefferson While the treaty was
pending in the senate and hanging in
the balance as to whether two
thirds vote could be procured Tor ITS
ratification, Senator Lodge, in
speech in the senate on the question,
made the following appeal;