The New York herald., 1921-10-23

had always been distinguishing charac-
teristics of his public career"
The result Of this lack of confidence.
or lack OF a definitely worked out plan,
according to Mr.. Lansing. was a series
OF lost opportunities. He charges Mr..
Wilson with failure to make suggestions
which might have won advantage to his
own nation and secured for him per-
manently the leadership he held at the
moment Of arrival In France.
when the President ceased speaking,
NJ. Clemenceau would ask my opinion.
then that of Mr.. Lloyd George. then that
| of Mr.. Balfour. and 30 on down the
line Of members. He would then turn
back to the President and ask, Well.
what shall we do?
THE President frequently answered
| Perhaps It would be we'll to refer the
matter to committee Of experts: or,
May ask II any one has prepared a
resolution
III the last question was asked it was
apt to bring a response from Mr.. Lloyd
George. whose secretaries had drafted
a resolution while the discussion was in
progress. A resolution laid before tho
Council after a question had been de-
hated was as a rule adopted. at least
IN principle, though often modified in
language. It was therefore a decided
advantage TO introduce q resolution. The
President put aside this advantage by
falling 20 suggest that the same course
be taken by his expert advisers, who
were naturally not disposed to follow
the practice unless 1t was at his re-
quest Apparently he felt an indepen-
dent personal judgment by him was eS-
sential and that 1t would not be inde-
pendent II he adopted the opinion Of
I hot n IT,
| Lloyd George. who seldom hesitated to
accept the Views Of his experts. intro
cuced most of the resolutions other
than those prepared by the French.
which was generally annexed to the
! agenda."
| Mr.. Lansing expresses great admira-
tion for Clemenceau's ixed purpose.
1 though he does not approve his attitude
In some cases. But he knew what he
j wanted and went after that with all
his might In the Council Of Ten the
French Premier was considerate OF his
associates. But presiding over the larg-
er conference he was the complete au-
tocrat
Clemeneeau ~ an Autocrat.
:. Free debate and actual voting by the
delegates had no place In the proceed
4 ings with N. Clemenceau In the chair.
There was an occasional attempt at dis
cussion. but the Clemenceau method dis
couraged II. After listening with a toll
Grant manner and with half-closed eyes
turned toward the ceiling. the old
French autocrat would slowly rise from
his chair. glare hercely about the room
as II to say. We have had enough OF
this and ask whether any one else de-
sired to speak and then, before another
delegate could collect his wits and get
to his feet, ne would snap out the In
evitable 'Adopte.' That always ended 1t. y
| He Is thus contrasted with the chief
representative Of Italy:
las rule, the impression made by
the debate was that for logic and force
Of reasoning Signor Orlando had the
better of the argument. He seemed to
know his case more thoroughly and to
present Il more convincingly than did
his French adversary. In fact. II the
latter had not been the great person.
ality that he was. he would have been
forced to acknowledge defeat. But he
never did. Clemenceau defeated was
unthinkabie to Clemenceau. and that at
titude had unoestionabiy potent infiu-
ence on his associates. As a conse-
quence Signor Orlando did not triumph
as frequently az he otherwise might
have done In his word combats with the
reros old champion Of France. who
treated him-l believe Intentionally
with far less consideration than he did
Mr.. Wilson ana Mr. Lloyd George"
Here IL the general Indictment of the
Big Four a srhiters OF tho worlds des-
tiny:
II think candor compels one to admit
lhowever much he may admire the supe-
u rior attainmerts OF the Big Four that
it was misfortune for the nations that
the actual formulation of the treaty
with Germany was assumed by them.
I'm the nrst place. the only one OF
them who had the legal or diplomatic
experience necessary for such a task
was Signor Orlando. the least influential
OF the Council. and the one who was
Handicapped by not knowing English. In
which language the proceedings were
chiefly conducted. OF the Others. Presf-
dent Wilson thought like professor ad-
vocating a pet theory and expanded
philosophic IDEAS In n series OF epigrams,
which sounded we'll but which were
difficult Of practical application II not
of definition.
"Mr. Lloyd George. who lacked the
background which only thorough stu
dent Of history could have. was an OPP
portunist, who Jumped 70 conclusions
without going through the reasoning
processes which are necessary for wise
statesmanship. Careless In thought, he
was equally careless In SPEECH. Accu-
| racy OF expression, so essential In the
final settlement Of an international quess
tion. was not one OF his attainments
M, Clemenceau never bothered him
self with the actual wording Of n decf-
sion The general principle was ell that
interested him. THE technical phrase
oIogy he left TO the Serre'ariat General
directing them 20 send the decisions Of
the Council OF Ten 10 ,he drafting COM
nittee. more unsystematlc and loose
way OF conducting business of such mo-
mont can hardly be imagined To term
II lnexpert Is mild charact erization."
Bssed on Personal Knowledge.
Mr.. Lansing has a better basis for
Judgment than many OF those who have
written. for he had personal knoweedge
OF the facts. as he says
II was therefore present at seventy
six meetings OF the Council OF Ten. or
: OF the same body sitting az the Supreme
! War Council. This gave me opportunity
10 become acquainted with the four
heads OF states and TO gain some clear
| impressions as to their personal charac-
teriztics. their intellectual force. and
their methods.
: without dlsparaglng the powers OF
observation Of some who have under
, taken to anayize or to delireatc the
) characters OF the Big Four, cannot but
| feel amasement at their emphatic state
0 ments, which. 30 far as actual hlowl-
} edge Is concerned, are based upon three