The Morning Tulsa daily world. [volume] (Tulsa, Okla.) 1919-1927, 1922-01-07
INELAsTIC OPPOSITION.

President De Valera. in rcsigning the prcsi-
dency of the irish republic. has suffered the
consequences that must Inevitably bcfnl tho
statesman who takes position OF either In
elastic opposition or inclastic support. Rarely
indeed IL II given to anyone to consult only
his own mind regarding the disposition Of
human relations. And when there are many
minds to bo consulted and accommodated.
which means many viewpoints to be harmon
lied II progress at all Is to be made inclasticity
OF mental processes ia the poorest possible
equipment for tho task
In the fate which has befaon De Valera We
think opponents Of the Pacific pact may read
valuable Lesson for themselves. No amount
OF sophistry can make tho Objectionable Article
III OF tho Pacific pact at all comparable to
Article X of tho Vorsailes pact. when that
impossible task is undertaken, gentlemen will
find themselves without followers for tho
very reason that the American public is dis
eliminating, and no amount OF false deduction
and spccous reasoning can bring that public
TO accept true any statement which is pal
pabiy false.
II the clear, unmstakablo working OF
the Versailles pact with the admitted commit
ments and involvements. which alarmed the
American public and brought about it's final
rejection. There was. there could be. no ques-
tion concerning the objection ably pointed out.
Black 10 black and white is white even In a
document prepared by the so-callod best minds
OF the world. The dangers to the United States
we're specific unmistakable and beyond auea-
tion ACCORDING TO THE SPECIFIC TEXT
or THE LEAGUE COVENANT ITSELF.
The Pacific pact is precisely the opposite.
There is but one commitment either specific
T. a..
position of very estimabie gentlemen. That
commitment is the United statos will Join with
certain powers to meo, and discuss in the light
of the then existing circumstances any attack
from any quarter upon the Pacific possessions
OF any OF the signatory powers.
That commitment leaves this country as free
TO decide against the use of force to preserve
the Pacific possessions OF ono OF tho other pow
ers as II does to use force to protect said pos
sessions. And the ono alternative In as likely
TO be desirous at some future time as is the
other. He who insists on reservation pro-
hibiting tho United States from Joining in such
an undertaking on some future occasion is as
far beside the mark of safe and sane states
manship ms he who would have II specifically
committed to Join in such an undertaking, al
did those advocating the provision OF the Yer
sailles pact. Tho utmost freedom OF action
then as now. remains with the United States
under the provisions OF the Pacific pact.
Inelastic opposition to a formula and not a
principle alone, explains the opposition TO tho
Pacific pact. No authority nor even respect
ability is given the opposition whom It urged
that the treaty marks a backward step 10 the
old balance OF power theory Of the old diplom-
acy. Let that fact be admitted--proudly. The
so-called old diplomacy win prevail In the final
analysis, just as the old principles OF human
society will eventually prevail In Russia before
progress In the direction of constructive nc.
complishment Ia made.
He who opposes the Pacific pact on the
ground that It is an adaptation OF tho old ball /
ance OF power doctrine. and who also opposed
and opposes the league covenant. is the incon-
sistent gentleman, not he who opposed the
league covenant, yet does support the Pacific
pact,