New-York tribune., 1922-04-08
Participation

! al dIIN-ipdtiofi
Reports come from Washington
that soon with the Administration
backing, . resolution will be intro
duced into Congress authorizing the
President to name a delegate to the
Reparation Commission.
Whether or rot the prediction is
fulfilled, it may be asserted with con-
fidence that no one sees more clearly
than Secretary Hughes the logical
absurdity and the practical incon-
veniences of holding aloof from
world affairs. This policy, an IN
heritance from the preceding Ad-
ministration, which withdrew from
common councils in pique, has not
been susceptible of easy reversal.
The technical legal situation re-
sultant from the non-ratification of
the Versailles Treaty has been an
impeachment. But Mr.. Hughes has
done what has been possible to draw
near.
One Of the first and most popular of
his acts was to instruct Mr.. Harvey
to sit in the Supreme Council. Then
came the Washington conference.
On both Of its fronts this carried
on an offensive in favor of partici-
patton. The separate treaty with
Germany was interlinked with the
Versailles Treaty. The assumption
was that this country was in effect
Versailles signatory. Mr.. Hughes
took judicial notice, as it were, that
this country objected only to the
covenant-that otherwise it morally,
if not legally, approved the Ver-
sailles Treaty.
In following this course the Ad-
ministration respected it's campaign
pledges. Mr.. Harding over and over
again emphasized that he favored
this country's doing its full share of
common world work. His declara-
tion for an association of nations
meant this participation or it meant
nothing. There was no plebiscite on
the question of aloofness and no
mandate returned to avoid what are
assailed as entanglements. The
facts were quite to the contrary and
contradict the Borah- h-Johnson inter
pretation of the election. Even as
to the League of Nations both Mr..
Harding and Mr. Hughes would
doubtless favor joining if there were
a chance Of securing the Senate s
approval.
So proposal to have America
represented on the Reparation Com
mission would be entirely consistent
with the Administrations past
course. 1t would be but another ap-
plication of the piecemeal principle
Of judging each case as it arises
another step in ultimately arriving
at goal that will satisfy the most
advanced international idealists. The
Hughes tactics are still good. In
stead of general adhesion which
invites all critics of details to
come together in common opposition
he brings forward from time to time
the particular form Of participation
which is most attractive.
At present presentation on the
Reparation Commission is a pro-
posal with many elements, of
strength behind it. 1t is difficult to
uphold in any company the argu-
ment that we as preferred
creditor should a, once collect $241,-
100000 from Germany, a collection
which, of course, would diminish by
that much the sums Germany can
pay to her other creditors. We are
driven by decency to agree that our
elaims be considered in connection
with other claims. This brings us
to the door of the Reparation Com
mission. We can't run away except
at a sacrifice of our own interests.
When concrete issues arise even
Senator Borah finds himself stutter-
ing as he tries to preach aloofness.