The Rock Island Argus and daily union. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1920-1923, 1922-02-25
The Consent of the Senate.


president Harding's capacity for
.n work and the frank, friendly |
~ in which he sought the sem
IS cooperation have won the
s.ht for ratification OF the confer
80 treaties, in the opinion OF
sost American papers. The Har- !
.,.burg Patriot Dem.) pictures
-. - president as bringing before
:. senate" in his personal appeal
!. that body for ratification, and in
..ader phrase the New York Times
Ind DEM represents MIN as be-
.aacbing the senators to behave,
ii anot to be so unreasonable, so
e.ntious. so partisan as they were
40 wears ago" The Pittsburgh
sbronicle Telegraph (Rep) how
srsr expresses a more widespread
sstinate of the presidents address
when it says that it had in it
esther supplication not dictation,
mat II was in fact the personifica-
don of one branch of the federal
soyernment speaking to another
oossessing equal authority in a
ssnirit of the utmost friendliness
and confidence and inviting co.
oneratiop in a noble and necessary
work"
There is much recalling of an
other scene in which an American
president presented a treaty for
Inc approval of an American SEN
ATE. but a strong contrast is noted
nv many writer's, especially, of
course, among Republican papers.
Mr.. Harding's approach is in strik
ing contrast to Mr.. Wilson's, says
the New Haven Journal Courier
aud), the former seeks ratifica-
ton" the latter demanded it." In
the presidents address there is
no order to sign here" and more
important, to both the Manchester
Union Gnd. Rep) and the Boston
Transcript Qnd-Rep.), because the
treaties as they go to the senate
are accompanied by all the official
documents bearing on them, there
is also ne steel box" Nor is there
any demand, the Washington Post
Qnd.), adds, that the treaties
shall be ratified without the dotting
Of an 81 or the crossing of a t.
The senate, in short. is not dealt
with as rubber stamp"
Democrats Pick Flaws.
However, in presenting them Mr..
Harding used some very bad ar
DEM, thinks, to support very
good treaties or, as the Christian
Science Monitor ,Qnd) expresses
the same idea, the treaties are
much more admirable than tie ar
gument he advanced in pleading
for favorable action on them" The
arguments thus called into ques-
ton are those in which the presi-
dent emphasizes the assurance
that nothing in any of these treaties
commits the United States, or any
power, to any kind of an alliance
entanglement or involvement" and
that there is mo surrender OF
sovereignty" That is pure make
believe" declares the Newark News
Qnd), spells and incantations,
the World adds, to secure votes
IF we take the words of the pres
ident to mean what they mean in
everyday English. the Charlotte
News (Dem.) thinks we must ar
rive at the conclusion that 1.-The en-
tanglements of the Versailles treaty
we're not more intricate and involv-
ing in any detail than is this pact,
since on the presidents own testi'
mony ''it makes the United States
answerable in any enterprise
growing out of an affront to sig
natory
In fact, the Winston Salem Jour
nal Dem.) interprets the new
treaties as involving more numer-
Gus and more definite surrenders'
than those necessitated by the
League of Nations. But the New
York Herald (Ind) and the Phila-
delphia Bulletin Und. Rep) insist
in the words of the former, thai
each nation is "left as free from
entangling alliances and as SOW
ereign in its powers as on tht
opening day of the conference.