Great Falls tribune., 1922-03-15
SENATOR JOHNSON ON
FOUR POWER TREATY

FOUR POWER TREATY
WE MUST concede that Senator
F" johnson is at least consistent
in his attitude toward the four
power treaty, presented to the SEN
ate by Henry Cabot Lodge. He
tells the exact truth when he says
that it is open to the very same OBJ
lection which Mr.. Lodge and most
Of the republican senator's urged
against the heart Of the League of
Nations covenant. We did not
think those arguments were sound
then, and we do not think they are
sound now, when they are urged
against the four power treaty. But
we can at least respect Messrs.
Johnson, Borah, Reed and other op-
ponents Of this treaty and the Yer.
sailles treaty for their consistency.
The deduction is justified that they
were not moved by partisan hatred
Of Woodrow Wilson in their oppo-
sition to the League Of Nations,
but by principle, even if we do not
agree with their principles in eth
er case. Senator johnson in his
recent speech in the senate on the
four power treaty makes the iden-
tity Of the principle in both treaties
plain when he says:
"The discussion upon this treaty
illustrates the infinite variety Of
the human mind. The curtain has
only just been rung down upon the
League Of Nations. The storm
center there was an obligation not
unlike that here implied. If ar
ticle 10 touched us so deeply that
in honor bound we would have been
required to act upon the advice of
the council, then article Of the
new alliance does all these things;
and God help US, we have exchanged
world League Of Nations for a
little League Of Nations with the
dominant factor another race with
another civilization.
"How strange it is now to hear
some Of the proponents of this
treaty contemptuously say its ar
ticle two cannot harm us because
we can act only under constitu-
tional sanction and congress alone
can declare war. How we were
thrilled by the same gentlemen
when they were engaged in the
delicate task of safeguarding
American rights. under the League
Of Nations. Then they demanded a
reservation to article 10 by which
the final determination of any ac-
tion should be with congress. To-
day they talk of constitutional sane
tions under which no action could
be taken until congress DEGREES it.
"Now the label is changed. That
which was once democratic policy
has become republican policy. What
I believed menacing and dangerous
to the republic under democratic
rule I decline to accept under a re-
publican administration"
In foreign affairs we recognize
no treaty obligation. Republicans
and democrats should be con-
trolled in their action solely by the
good Of the republic. The repub-
lican senator's as rule did not
rise to that conception of their duty
when President Wilson brought
home the peace treaty from Yer
sailles and laid it before the SEN
ate. Even before they knew what
was in the treaty Senator Lodge
was busy organizing republican op-
position to it, aand too many re-
publican senator's were ready and
eager to follow In his lead and do
everything in their power to dis
credit their president in the eyes of
the world for partisan or personal
malice.
Some democratic senator's seem
now willing to follow that bad ex-
ample. For our part we cannot well
see why a democrat that was will
ing to support the Wilson peace
treaty should refuse to support the
Harding fouru power treaty. Nor
can we understand how a republi-
can who denounced article 10 in
the League Of Nations covenant as
a danger to the republic can swal-
low article 2 in the four power pact.
As Senator Johnson points out,
these two articles are identical, in
their meaning and almost identical