New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1920-04-10
A Waste of Labor


1t is not worth while to spend time
arguing the onsttutionality Of the
Congressional resolution to end the
war, yesterday passed by the House,
244 to $50. The power that has au-
thority to declare war may be as
suned to have authority to declare
its end.
War is fact, a condition, stot tbs,
not necessarily matter Of paper
formalities. History is full of in
stances of fighting begun without
notice and ended without negotiation.
Should the peace resolution be
signed by the President or passed
by both houses over his veto with the
necessary two-thirds the courts
would urquestionably recognize the
act as legal.
1t is true this country has never
technically ended war by resolu-
ton. But never before has the coun-
/ try faced such a situation as now
confronts it, and new occasions re-
quire new action. No less than seven
teen months have elapsed since the
signing of the armistice and the
cessation Of hostilities, and it is obvi-
ously undesirable to postpone indefi-
nitely an attestation Of the truth
that peace exists.
The objections to the peace reso-
luton are not constitutional but
practical. Will the President sign,
and, if not, is it possible to override
his veto? That he will sign is i'm
probabe and that two-thirds
majority can be mustered in both
houses is improbable. So the reso-
luton leads to a blank wall.
Another practical objection lies
against the Porter resolution
namely, that in effect it directs the
President to negotiate with Germany
on prescribed terms, and to levy an
embargo if she does not agree to
these terms. This part of the reso-
luton may or may not be constitu-
tioral, but, whichever it is, no one
has pointed out any feasible way to
compel the President to obey Con-
gress. If he refuses to negotiate it
is not possible to coerce him. Unless
there is a reason for expecting the
President to become cooperative, the
passage Of the Porter resolution thus
promises to be vain exercise.
The best way to bring the war to
formal close, and seemingly the only
practical way to do this, is for the
President to resubmit the treaty and
let it be known that he nc longer de
mands its rejection. Just prior to
the decisive roll call Senator Owen.
who has been stanch supporter of
the Administration, said: II do not
believe that there is single Demo
cratic Senator who would not vote
for this resolution of ratification
the Lodge resolution if it were not
the belief of such Senator'S that the
President Of the United States de-
Tres them to defeat the resolution
now pending and would regard their
failure to do so as a refusal to follow
his view as party leader"
No one has challenged these words
Of Senator Owen and similar words
from other Democratic Senators.
II the President would take his
strangling hands off, the treaty
would be promptly ratified, with the
Lodge reservations. He alone de-
feated the treaty and he alone can
undo the defeat Why he pursues
his course no one who has stood in
the Presence, or even in the Pre-
Presence, has ever explained, but
there is the fact.
The Porter resolution, viewed prac-
tically, may be of value as tendinp to
induce the President to retransmit
The treaty and to take his fingers
from Its throat, but otherwise it
seems futility. In one house or
the other the President doubtless will
be able, for partisan reasons. to COM
mand one-third Of the body and thus
prevent a repassage over his veto.
And even THOUGH there was re-
passage he could, and doubtless
would, refuse to act under the reso
luton.