New-York tribune., 1920-10-14
Spencer Clash
Held to Prove
League Peril
Borah Cites Controversy as
Striking Example of the
Fallibility of Memory and
Failure of Basic Theory
Text Quoted by Senator
American People Will Not
Sustain Foreign Quarrels
With Their Lives, He Says

MANCHESTER, N. H., Oct. 1s-Sen-
ator Borah in an address here tonight
said that the controversy between Pres
ident Wilson and Senator Spencer as to
whether Mr.. Wilson promised aid to
the Serbs and Rumanians illustrates Il
the fallibility of memory as we'll as
showing how the League of Nations
works in practice.
They tell US that the league will
bring peace" he said. "Everybody
wants peace, so favors the league. But
when you turn from theory to fact. and
see 1T obllgates us to send our bows
across the sea, 1t creates an uproar of
disapproval and hastens explanations
and denials."
Discussing the version of the Presi-
dents remarks at the May 81, 1919, sit
ting of the peace conference, which the
White House made public as "official. !"
Senator Borah said:
There are two things stated in the
speech President Wilson put out as au-
thorltative which sustain every charge
we have ever made against this eiean-
TIC autocracy based on force. The first
statement reads as follows: And back
OF that lies the fundamental and i'm
portant tact that when the decisions
are made the Allied and associated
poTers guarantee to maintain them
how are you going 20 MAINTAIN them
except by sending the army and the
navy across the sea? We have first
nc solemn guaranty of the Allied and
jsoclated powers to maintain all de-
- ons and all boundaries. AS to how
We are going to do this is answered bv
the President himself in another place
IN the same speech, in which he saws:
If any covenants of this settlement are
not observed the United States will
send her armies and navies to see that
they are observed. -. We must
not close our eyes to the fact that in
the last analysis the military and naval
strength of the great powers will be
the final guaranty of. the peace of the
world
>. when the President was before the
Eoreign Relations Committee Senator
Knox asked this question: Suppose
that 1T is perfectly obvious that there
is an external aggression against some
power, and suppose it is perfectly OBJ
vious and accepted that it cannot be
repelled except by force of arms, would
we be under any legal obligation to
participate? The President replied to
this: No, sir. But we would be under
al dDoolutely competing moral Obllg4-
ton
II take it that it will not make very
much difference to the American peo-
rle, to the sons and mothers of Amer
lea, whether you call it legal obliga-
ton or moral obligation, or what you
call it, if it is an obligation from which
there is no escape
at is a startling proposition that the
American people should be asked to
send boys to Europe to restore every
boundary line which the intrigues and
imperialistic schemes of Europe may
disturb.
"These interpretation taken in con-
nection with Article X and Article XII
and with the power which is conferred
upon the council disclose that we
guarantee the decision of this council.
They disclose that nine men may make
a decision relative to the invasion or
boundary lines which we are under an
absolutely compelling moral obligation
to sustain.
What we have provided by this
league IS that one man shall represent
the whole American Republic. And his
decision in conjunction with his as
sociates places us under an absolutely
compelling moral obligation to send our
money and oNr men across the sea