The Washington herald., 1921-09-25
Treaty With a Reservation.

THERE is something of paradox in the
i reservation tackled by the Senate committee
to its favorable report the Berlin treaty. This
reservation provides that representative shall
be named on any allied commission without prior
approval by act of Congress. Yet the President
has named four persons, two of them members
of the Senate, to represent this government at
the Washington conference and Congress has had
no part in calling the conference, defining the
agenda, or in the choice of the delegates.
The Foreign Affairs Committee, however, had
little ground for protest of the reservation as 1t
is but duplicate of number of the Lodge
reservations to the Versailles treaty. This had
the favor of a solid Republican vote and OF seven
teen Democrats 1t but part of that
growing lack of confidence shown by the legis-
lative branch in the executive division Of the
government which has been evident for years
1t abandoned during the war in its express
sion, but grew in intensity.
1t is distinct approach to the British system
of executive accountability, responsibility. II
is in lieu of the right to vote of confidence
which is denied by constitutional fixed period
of executive authority 1t clearly indicates lack
of confidence disapproval through hedging
about executive authority. This reservation takes
away what is plainly executive privilege. The
objection to empowering the Secretary of the
Treasury to fund the foreign debts is of the same
Is
ment.
1t all points to period of the dominance OF
the legislative branch, somewhat after the man.
ner of the British commons. Congress would
merely assure its power in advance, and by hold
ing to it, rather than after the act. There is the
difference in result in that it may hamper
freedom of action and tie the hands of respon-
sibity from taking its chance Whether it will
have national approval not remains to be seen
The issue between the executive and Legislative
branches has seldom been sharply drawn, but
when it has been the verdict has usually been with
the executive.
In all matters the executive has the last say
through the Veto AS to treaty it rests with the
executive to make it operative. Even to this
treaty, while the Senate might as of course re-
quire any representative commission, named
by the President, to be confirmed by the Senate
that there shall be representation without act
OF Congress, seems much like expression of
want of confidence. 1t will be rather interesting
to students of constitutional government and
raises another question: This is separate treaty;
it is not the treaty of Versailles. The reparations
and all other commissions are provided in and by
the treaty of Versailles, which this governmen,
has refused to ratify and to which it is not a
party.
We may then, gain the right to have mem
Der of commission only, it were, by suffrance
A President gaining the consent of the allies
must also gain that of both houses of Congress
In this instance neither probably would be diff.
cult, yet President might prefer unofficial am.
bassadorial representation, and the allies might
not be impressed with the need of more than
executive consent to what would be their acts
and in no sense those of the United States.