The Birmingham age-herald., 1921-05-08
TARDIEU PROVES
 CENSORSHIP WAS
 NOTHING BUT MYTH
CContInucd form Page one)

NUIhlNG bUI WI lH
 CContIuucd form Page one) conference had not then begun. hence this move did not have any precise character.
 SPEECHES PUBLISHED
 I may add, from documentary sources, that from January to October, 1919, all the speeches made by Sem ators Lodge, Knox, Borah, Johnson and others, were correctly reported by Havas to French papers andAwere pub lished without the least objection from the censorship.
 Thus M. Lauzanne's statement ia con tradicted by the facts, and is explain able only as a. political maneuver, rather amusing as coming from a journalist who was one of President Wilson's most ard ent worshippers Be- fore examining this maneuver I wish to mention two others of the same na- ture revealing equally singular concep- tons of Journalism and to which ref erence already has been guardedly y made by well known American writers. M Lauzanne cabled from Washington March 4, last: Senator Knox intends to add new clause to hN resolution, of which he kindly gives me the text"
 Then followed the clause saying that If European peace was again menaced, the United States would consult with the threatened powers and cooperate If necesssry in the defense of civillza- ton.
 This alleged Amendment" simply was the original article Of the Knox Resolution. introduced in March, 1920, and published everywhere. This err TOT also was objectionable.
 hfnally In the same dispatch NJ. Lua . zanne declared that the Knox resolu- ton alone was acceptable to the United States, nothing in the Versailles treaty was to be henceforth considered.
 NEWS" CONTRADICTED
 Twenty-four hours later President Harding's address to Congress categori- cally contradicted this news" Anothe, mistake. as extraordinary as the others Thus illumined with proofs, the man. euver stands out clearly. On the Frencr side it represents retrospective aggres sion against the Clemenceau policy led with certain American help, by those Frenchmen who for reasons which I will reveal some day, have been relent- less enemies for the past two years. On the American side, it represents retro spective aggression against President Wilson's policy, led. with certain French help, by irreconcilsbles who always com bated that policy. On both sides the object entirely Is internal politics. But international relations which ought to be sacred to all parties are used to serve such an object That is the great dan- ger to which l desire to call attention.
 This much said, I will now state with out fear of contraction, what was the French policy toward America in 1919.
 FRANCES POLICY
 1. In law the government negotiated with President Wilson. Considering the American constitution, quoted by Pres ident Harding In his message to Con. gress, we could not negotiate with others, although Knowing that any agreement must be ratified by the Senate. The same situation exists in all democratic coun- tries.
 9 In fact, in the only question wherein President Wilson demanded sacrifice of France, M. Clemenceau took precautions against disqualification in the following manner: President Wilson, backed by Lloyd George, having refused to permit the occupation of the left bank of the Rhine beyond 15 years, M. Clemenceau between April 23 and 3O 1919, secured the adoption of the last clause of Article 429 which provided that if guarantees against German aggression were lacking meaning if Great Britain and America failed to ratify the special military treaty-the occupation of the left bank could be prolonged.
 3 In other respects, President Wilson accepted often, and defended, the French theses.
 Therefore it was the French govern ments duty, dictated by purely French interest to hope that President Wilson would get treaty satisfactirvto to France ratified, and to help him to do so.
 That is what the members of the French cabinet did, notably Clemenceau and myself, in speeches of September ? and 25, expressing the hopa that the treaty would be ratified.
 WASHINGTON HESITATED
 Washington at the time was hesitating Moreover. despite President Wilson's ill., ness, leaving the field free to his adver- saries for six months, the treaty lacked only six votes of ratification in March 1920. Anyhow, whatever the final vote might be, it was not the French govern ments business to assist the opposition which was fighting a. policy undeniably favorable to Frence.
 There is the truth. The peoples of both countries must have 1t if the basis oi their relations is to remain clear and wholesome despite the regrettable efforts of certain politicians to the contrary This truth is summed up in three state ments:
 l. No anti-treaty manifestations of re publican senators ever was concealed from the French All were published Furthermore, it is absurd to think they could have been concealed.
 ?. On the question of the left bank of the Rhine the only point on which the French thesis suffered temporary set back, Clemenceau took effective precau- tions against non-ratification which are operative even If America does not ratify the treaty, namely the prolongation of the occupancy.
 8. On the whole, the Clemcncear gov. ernment. without meddling in American internal debates, in which it was not con- cerned, believed President Wilson's pol icy was based on spirit Of solidarity better for France than the policy of the irreconcilables. as pursued for two years and affirmed by Senator Lodge in his latest speech, in which, abandoning his own reservations. he goes over to Sen ator Knox as against President Harding and Secretary Hughes.
 Consequently, the French government of 1919 steadfastly hoped that the Will son policy would triumph. It had per. feet right to judge and to act thus from the viewpoint of French interests ant subsequent events prove 1t was right. HORTON TO EXPLAIN
 DllpEAIl AnT1NITlEe