Evening star., 1922-03-12
BY THOMAS H. MARSHALL.
Former Vice President OF the
United States.

vAAhcE VICE fFebbuenI Ok tuc
United States.
TNHE fortunes Of later-day poll
tics are putting our affairs
as much to the instinct OF
the average man as to
the intelligence Of the trained
representative. Our foreign rela-
tions rest to a certain extent in
the hands of those of our foreign
relations whom We have kindly
naturalized in order that their in
fiuenoe may be used in behalf of
their kin and friends across the
sea. 1t is becoming more and more
difficult to look with an eye single
to the rights and duty OF the
American government. The mo-
mont we approach our relations
with any foreign power. that mo-
ment we find ourselves running
up against blood relationship in
this country.
A goodly number Of Italian clubs
in New York left the democratic
party in 1920 because the attitude
OF Woodrow Wilson. according to
1talo- American leaders. had been
i:imical to the best interests of the
italian kingdom. When our rela-
tions with Great Britain are at the
fore. we must walk as though on
eggs in order not to offend Ameri-
cans Of Irish extraction. Just as
soon again as diplomatic and trade
relations are re-established with
Germany, we shall no doubt see
the Polish falcon swooping down
on the Capitol in Washington.
There was time when ] imag-
ined that American citizenship di-
vested man of every sentiment
save those of loyalty to his coun-
try and justice to the World. That
the races which flowed in our
veins has not been drained there
from. sympathetic chords still run
across the sea.
X \ 4
In the long discussion of the
Senate touching the treaty Of
Versailles. which embraced the
covenant OF the league of nations,
1t was contended on one hand that
the covenant did not require the
United States to go to war in de-
fense of the territorial integrity
Of any other member of the league.
1t was insisted that the delegates
at Versailles well knew that the
power to declare war was a
power which rested exclusively
with the Congress of the United
states. 1t was argued. therefore.
that nothing contained in the
covenant could bind the United
States to make war.
n, tho other hand II was
tended that there was embraced
in the covenant a moral obliga-
ton upon the part Of our govern
ment to Join in any expedition
which might be deemed advisable
by the league in order to pre-
members from assault from with
out. From this 1t was gravely
argued that we would keep our
moral obligation, however unjust
we might believe the cause to be
or however slight our interest in
II. Thus the controversy ragged
over legal and moral obligations.
The work of the arms confer
ence is declared by some to be
merely educative in its character.
permanent results resting largely
on the good faith of the signato-
ries. This IL not to be denied. for
every written document between
nations must Qepenu On the eoou
faith Of the governments that
make them. The documents may
go to the extent Of calling for the
submission of disputed questions
to additional discussion or to a
final court of arbitration. but in
the end, II they were not made in
good faith and are not kept in
good faith, they become scraps of
paper in the mailed hands of war
riors.
The idea has been to impress
the American people with the fact
that there is nothing in the four
power treaty that calls for force
by our government. Again argu-
ment has been repeated that the
Congress is the only power that
could supply force, even though
the treaty contains something that
calls for force.
On the other hand, 1t was con-
tended with equal zeal that there
is a moral obligation upon the
part of our government to use
force II necessary In order to carry