The New York herald., 1921-09-08
LEAGUE FACES ISSUE
ON MONROE DOCTRINE
IN BOLIVIA BOUNDARY
Serious Problem Raised in
Row Caused by Award
to Chile.
CHALLENGE is MADE
Assembly Told 1t Has No
Jurisdiction Over Affairs
in America.
WILSON POLICY INVOLVED
Committees Begin Work at
Geneva Session-Argentina
Definitely Out.
WILSON POLICY INVOLVED


Copyright. 1891, by THE NEw YoxK HnnArp.
GENEVA, Sept. THE Chilean -Bo-
livian row reached head here to-
day. involving the Monroe Doctrine
clause in the covenant of the League
of Nations and going to the very heart
Of the question of the leagues juris-
diction over the American continent.
Chile. although subscriber to the
covenant, in her case laid before the
assembly to-day explicitly invokes the
American Monroe Doctrine as cover
ing the American continent and pre-
ciuding interference by the league in
disputes belonging exclusively thereto.
Bolivia replied to this contention
and challenged the very fundamental
conception of the league. If 1t is de-
cided by the assembly that the league
cannot intervene in affairs in the New
World she will get out. Furthermore,
the Bolivians assert that a year ago.
before presenting this American
boundary dispute to the league. they
approached the American Government
and obtained an opinion that by ap-
pealing to the league they were not
prejudica ting the Monroe Doctrine.
This opinion, formally given to Bo-
livia. came from the Wilson Admin
istration, which. needless to say, was
then engaged in defending the world
wide scope of the covenant, even if it
possibly imperilled the Monroe Doc
trine.
Chile Makes Issue Plain.
The gauntlet laid down by Chile is
simply this: That the Bolivian dispute
is exclusively an American question.
protected by the Monroe Doctrine: that
il the assembly votes to put it upon the
agenda 1t will be challenging this doc
trine and violating the Monroe Doctrine
clause of the covenant
The assembly. as n matter OF pro-
cedure. must decide by majority vote.
| Deepest significance lies In the fact
that this is one of the few times any
other South American nation has form
ally accepted or invoked the Monroe
Doctrine for its protection in dealing
with Europe.
Recognizing the gravity of the issue
covering a vital Interpretation Of the
leagues scope, Arthur J. Balfour of the
British delegation and Lord Robert
Cecil. representing South Africa, are
striving desperately 10 arrange a COM
promise between Chile and Bolivia that
will avoid the boundary question coming
before the league. They succeeded to-
day in obtaining postponement of 1t.
ostcnsibly to give the delegates more
time to inform themselves before voting.
This is the part OF Chilfs protest to
the assembly which brought up the
leagues right TO interfere In American
affairs:
"A second consideration OF legal
nature shows beyond any manner of
doubt that II Is not within the ccmpe-
tence of the assembly to deal with
Bolivia's claim. This claim concerns
exclusive American affairs. The use.
however. of the expression regional
understandings like the Monroe Doc
trine' in Article XXI. OF the covenant
amounts to formal recognition OF the
principle Of American International law.
according to which non-American States.
and consequently the assembly. cannot
interfere in questions exclusively affect
ing countries OF the New World.
Involves u. q. I'm Controversy.
Chili's acceptance Of the entire Ameri-
can thesis as applying to the South
American continents inviolability from
the league surprises Europeans. il adj
mittedly involves the United States as
guardian and :he future position of all
Latin American States toward the
league.
Furthermore. Europeans call attention
to the fact that should the assembly
vote TO exclude all American disputes
from its jurisdiction. haslng It's action
on Article XXI., Asiatics. particularly
the Japanese, could In disputes with
China. demand the same for Asia, thus
leaving nothing but Europe under the
leagues jurisdiction.
Chile has not yet ratified Of adhered to
the International Court OF Justice prof.
ect. She agreed to postponement of
confederation OF her boundary dispute
with Bolivia to-day only on condition
that the Assembly decide the issue she
had presented In order TO enable her 10
promptly determine her future league
policy. This position vas explained by
Augustin Edwards. head OF tho Chilean
delegation here.
Her other contention Is that the league
cannot revise treaties. or revise the ver-
saiiles treaty.
II she is sustained on this point by the
Assembly II would be unnecessary for IL
-