Indiana daily times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1914-1922, 1920-06-28

TO take the place which awaits her In the
league Of nations
What nations stand outside? Revolu-
tionary Mexico, bolshevist Russia, I'M
speakble Turkey and-the United States
OF America.
1t is not yet too late. Let us stand
with the forces Of civilization. The choice
IS plain. II is between the democratic
partys support OF the league OF nations,
with its program Of peace. disaFma-
publican party's platform OF repudia-
ton, provincialism, milttarism and
world chaos
This is great pretensc Of alarm be-
cause the United States has but one vote
IN the International assembly, against
the six votes OF Great Britain, Canada.
Australia, New Zealand, South Africa
and India.
This popular argument against the
league Of nations Is as insincere as 1t Is
superficial. IL Ignores the fact That the
executive council, and not the assem-
bly,. IS the governing cody OF the league,
and that our country is one OF the five
countries having permanent membership
In the council The colonial votes exist
only in the assembly.
Nor should we forget that France has
but one vote; Italy has but one vote;
and Japan has but one vote. IL there
were any injustice Ia the arrangement,
surely these nations would have sensed
III
action can be taken In any essential mat
ter without a unanimous vote Of all
members Of the council of the league.
No decision OF the league, IL America
Joined IL, could be made effective or even
promulgated without Our consent. Like
every other nation, we have veto power
upon every resolution or act of the
lea que. We can be involved in no enter
prise except OF our own choosing; and
IL we are not satisfied with the league
70
upon two years notice. The risk exists
only In the Imagination, the service is
inoalculable.
Moreover, the United States insisted
that Cuba. Haiti Liberia. Panama. Mic
aragua, Honduras and Guatemala shouij
each be given a vote, as well as the ma
lions of South America, great and small
Including the nations which are bound
by vital interests TO the United States,
or, indeed. directly under our tutelage,
we have more votes in the league Of ma
lions than any other nation. How could
we, in good faith, urge that these nations
be given n voice to such self governing
nations as Canada, New Zealand and
the rest, which relatively speaking, made
far more sacrifices in the war than our
own country 1t is desirable that all
countries should have an opportunity
to be heard In the league and the safety
Of each nation resides in the fact that
no action can be taken without the CON
sent of all.
RESPONSIBILITY FOR
DEFEAT OF TREATY.
1t was the design of Senator Lodge,
from the outset. to mutilate the treaty
and to Illustrate the purposes Of the ad-
ministration. And yet Senator Lodge,
with the nelp o; the irreconcilahes, hay-
ing torn the treaty to tatters and thrown
It's fragments in the face of the world,
has the effrontery to. suggest, in his ad-
dress at Chicago, that the president
blocked ratification and postponed peace.
The trouble with the treaty of peace
Is that 1t was ne gotiated by a democratic
president II is not difficult to assess
the responsibility for its defeat. The
responsibility rests, not upon its friends,
hut upon Its enemies
The foreign relations committee. i'm
mediately following the last election, was
recognized with a personnel consisting
of the open foes of the treaty. Amongst
the number was Senator Borah, who de-
clared that he would not be for a league
of nations, were the savior of mankind
to advocate 1t. Senator Johnson, Senator
Knox and Senator Moses, whose hatred
of the president amounts to an obses
sion, were also members; and Senator
Lodge was chairman.
The treaty was referred TO the com
mittee thus studiously prepared for its
hostile reception The members of this
committee adopted every subterfuge to
nisrepresent the document which they
were supposed to be considering as
statesmen. Populations of foreign born
citizens were brought to Washington IN
an effort to color and exaggerate the i'm
preston of popular opposition.
The senate had even begun the dis
cussion Of the treaty months before Its
negotiation was concluded, and did not
terminate it's debate until nine months
after the submission of the treaty. 1t
took the senate nearly three times as
long to kill the treaty by protracted
debate and by confusing and multiplying
amendments and reservations as 1t took
the representatives, of the allied govern
ments to draft it.
II was not the business Of the presi-
dent, when he brought this treaty back
from France, to join with Mr. Lodge
and other republican leaders in their
deliberate purpose to destroy it. Had
he initiated, suggested or assented to
changes which would have substantially
altered its nature, 1t would have been
u distinct breach Of faith with his as
sociates Of the peace council and vlo-