Pueblo chieftain., 1922-03-12
(By MARK SULLIVAN

must be conceded that If this treaty
stood alone, any senator Republican
or Democrat, would be free to vote up
on it according to his convictions, and
that the convictions of most Demo-
Gratis, a. we'll as the convictions Of
many Republicans would be in opposi-
tion. The facts that make decision
difficult are largely extraneous to the
treaty itself These facts are that his
particular treaty Is one of body of
treaties which as whole are benefi-
cent: that the refusal OF the Senate
to ratify this one treaty might justify
some of the other nations in refusing
to ratify those other portions of the
results OF the Washington Conference
for which we are all most eager, es-
pccially the treaty for limitation of
armament; and finally, that if the
United States Senate should now for
q second time, wreck the results of n
great world conference, the effect
would be to destroy the. confidence of
tho world in America, to make the
world doubt whether 1t is worth while
TO try to have international under
standing with the United States, and
to destroy in the beginning this whole
bsneficient theory of trying to arrange
conference.
The country as a whole Is at this
moment Overwhelmingly in favor of
the ratification OF the four-power
pact. Senators who make 1t a busi-
nssD to test the sentiment OF the coun-
tfy know this. Even those Democratic
newspapers which favored the League
Of Nations and whose faithfulness to
Democratic doctrine Is inquest stioned.
arc strongly in favor Of ratifying the
Horsepower treaty. Irreconcilable Re-
publican papers who opposed the
League Of Nations to the limit of their
susrgy are In favor Of the present
treaty. Oother Republican papers which
favored the League OF Nations. with
reservations. are also now In favor OF
the present treaty. Thruout sho country
the sentiment in favor OF ratification
10 indubitable. This is the factor
which probably will ultimately deter
mine the decision. Failure to ratify
the four-power treaty would result in
very general resentment. both against
tho senate as a whole and against the
party which will be responsible. There
would be a certain amount OF doubt
about tho four-power treaty standing
alone, but as to tho four-power treaty
considered As part OF the general re-
suits OF the Washington Conference,
there IL an overwhelmingly favorable
attitude. That portion of public opin-
ION which is outspoken AGAINST the
four-power treaty and against the re-
suits Of the Washington Conference al
together. Is almost negligible. What
there Is Of It has little weight in con-
grsA.
Viewed strictly a. a party matter,
tho DemocratA could base their oppo-
sition on a Fundamental principle. and
that principle would 60 far toward
ju.tifyinE them IN opposing ratif!ca
tlons. In tho management OF Amer
fees relations with the rest OF tho
world. there nre three possible courses.
They are:
lst. Isolation.-Fefusal to become a
party to any league or alliance what
ever.
3nd-To enter universal alliance
taxing In all nations. BY this is meant
the Iseaguo of Nations. or an equiva-
lent Association Of Nations"
Sfd.-A system OF partial alliances
becoming n party to one group hero
and another group there.
OF these three methods. the first has
now been rejected by both parties. Tho
Democrats rejected Isolation when
they favored tho League of Nations.
The Republicans have now taken
definite and final step away from iso-
lation BY proposing and endore!ng tho
four-power treaty. Tho policy OF i-o-
1ation II gone.
A. to the second method. this II the
enc to which the Democratic party ms
Q party In committed. II they were to
act on strictly party grounds. With
4 v1Sw TO being consistent and with n
NV OF maintaining the integrity of
an important policy initiated by their
party. they would be justified In re-
fuetn9 to become Identified with any
policy IN foreign relations inconsistent
with the Leagus OF Nations.
At this point arises tho question
whether the four-power treaty is or is
not inconsistent with tho League OF
Nationa On this question thcro arc
two positions. In both positions the
Wish 10 father to the thought Most
of those who favored the League OF
Nations claim that the four-powcr
treaty Is one step toward our entrance
into II. or into an equivalent "Associa-
,ions of Nations" Another very con-
siderable group insists exactly the con-
trNry. They insist that our raufica-
tion Of the four power treaty VIII be
a step in = direction away from the
IAAgue Of Nations. What Is more
serious. they insist that 1t will be an
arrsvocabls step. They claim that
this four-oowcr treaty will bo followed
BY similar group treaties in other parts
Of the world. and that we Will become
a rarty to the building up OF n series
Of group alliances OF exactly tho kind
that the League OF Nations was devised
to do away with. So far as the past
Is concerned. II must be admitted that
rroup alliances, balances Of power"
ard the like, have had a most unhappy
history. II We were to base our hope
of future peace In the world on series
o, group alliances. history would
laugh at ua The saving grace on this
point Is that in Harding's mind. 1t Is
fair to infer from frequent utteranccs
OF his, the Washington Conference is
no, step away from a universal as
sociation taking IN all nations. but
Is meant to be the first step in the af-
firmative direction Of what he calls an
Association of Sations''
Many Of the objections made to the
four-power treaty are based on ox-
traneous and relatively unimportant
aspects of IL. one OF the arguments
put forth by Senator Hitchcock, for
example, in opposition to ratiffcntions,
In that the four-powe- treaty was con-
ceivcd and brought forth in secrecy.
This IL true. Tho negotiations which