Arizona republican., 1921-12-05
MONDAY MORNING, DECEMBER 5, 1921
Fd,th is letting doavn our nets into tue antrdnspdre'ot deeps, at the De- v1ne command, not k,aoaoing aUhat aoe shdU take. -Faber.
An Editorial Error

Editors are not always wise they are some- times held to be they think they are. Editors of the London Times though. have been thought from the time of Walters to be oracles of wisdom. Mr. H. wickham Steed, the present editor of the Times in a public speech in New York on Saturday, gave a display of gross ignorance of not only American situation, but of our fundamental law. We al- ways though. apt to wander into error in speaking of the affairs of neighbors
 Mir. steed declared among other things that the United States had lost credit by 'repudating the Versailles treaty and dishonoring the signature of its legal representative" which he estimated be "one of the fattenng events in the moral history of the world"
 But our constitution provides for just that sort of thing. It is that 1t seldom happens. It often that have had occasion to dshonor the sig nature of legal representative that is American negotiator of treaty. As matter of fact, have in strict such legal representatives. that is. with a power of attorney to bind the nation by his act in agreeing to treaty. He may negotiate treaty but usually takes pains to tain before affixng his signature whether the treaty is likely to be approved by the only power-the United States senate--whch make the treaty effective In this legal representative" neglected ascertain that
 In monarchical countries generally the ratifica- ton of treaty is prerogatve of the The legislature has only indirect influence which is usually exercised only when there is appropriation of money to carry the stpulatons of the treaty So Steeds country the ratification of the treaty Of Versailles foregone conclusion though the Covenant the League of Nations feature of it made the subject in parliament of debate which be- came largely jocular.
 But in the United States, treaty making is in two branches of the government. It is not assumed that every treaty negotiated will be ratified unless there has been definite understanding in advance between the two treaty making branches. In the case the Versailles treaty there dis cussion between the two branches. The legal rep resentative" declined discussion and went his heed less way. When returned with the treaty he found the door locked against 1t.
 Mr. Steed errs again in the statement, .we had to take President Wilson at his value which at that time was being his true vaue'
 We are not sure that understand the meaning of the latter clause. It may that MT. steed believed that at that time MT. Wilson, though not empowered by the constitution to bind the nation, represented the popular sentiment of the nation. We have of knowing ywhat part of the senti- he actually represented then, but we know that first opportunity for expression Of sent- ment. it found to be overwhelmingly dissentient
 Nor do we think that Lloyd George Clemenceau and Orlando made any mistake to the face value of our legal representative rather imnateral to them whether the United States ultimately became A party to the treaty. It enough for them that it should be effective by their signatures and that of Germany They were concerned only with the provisions of the document and 1t in framing the provisions they legal representa- tive" an obstacle which they overcame by yielding to his concerning the League of Nations about which they did not care much way another No doubt they were glad to find him so concentered that
 Whether as legal representatve' Mir. Wilson was at par below nothing to them. They were concerned, since he there, in gaining his assent to the provisions they wanted in the treaty They die mt care how much else put into it or what the fate of would be when it introduced to America