The Washington times., 1922-12-23

fore the agfta.
= ton began. The
WILLIAM HARD one new thing
that has hap.
pened il, that Senator Borah has
come forward to join the ranks
Of those who would confer with
Europe. Why has he done itf
The reason which he givest 10
very simple. He says that the fact
Is that we are In Europe now and
that the only way ia, which We can
ever get out Of Edsepe 10 to settle
Europe. He says THAT We are
taking part now in the work Of the
reparatiop commission 1t Paris and
In the work Of the conference at
Lausanne and In the work Of the
armies Of occupation on the Rhine.
He says that our participation In
these enterprises means that today
we are, continuously involved in
European. problems and dangers.
He says that the only way in which
we shall ever be able to evacuate
Europe IL to solve those problems
and avert those dangers. Then We
shall not be needed In Europe and
We shall be able to leave.
Broadly and generally. this 10 SEN
ator Borah's present point Of view.
1t means that he has separated him
self decisively from the point Of
view taken by almost all Of the
other Senatorial irreconcilables who
resisted the League Of Nations in
1919, and who have resisted all par
ticipAtion in European affairs ever
since. The controversy which will
now arise between Senator Borah
and these other irreconcilables will
turn upon q certain question of fact
1t will turn upon the question:: Are
we now In Europe or are we not?
The opinion of the mass of the ir-
reconcilables ID that we are not.
They claim that today we are out
of Europe, and that our problem
simply ID to stay out. Senator
Borah claims that we are In. and
that our problem 10 to get out.
Senator Borah and the other ire
concilables are in perfect agreement
still as to what could be called ulti-
mate policy. They all agree that
we ought to be out of Europe. The
quarrel is on the method Of arriv-
ing at the ultimate policy. The
other irreconcilables say that all we
have to do 10 to stay out negatively.
Senator B0rah. says that what we
have to do 10 to get out positively.
His argument proceeds as fol-
lows:
Our unofficial representatives at.
tached to the reparation commits
sion at Paris are In fact partfci-
pating fully in the deliberations OF
the commission and are. In fact
just as active and just as influ-
entail ~ II they were voting In the
commission. The idea that we are
not represented in the commission
IL a delusion. The British and the
French members OF the commits
sion consult our unofficial repre-
sentatives and accept our policies
or after consideration reject our
policies-just exactly as II we were
sitting officially and voting offi-
cially and were officially entered in
the records of the commissions de-
bates. &
Meanwhile our representative In
the conference at Lausanne is par
ticipatinG in the debates OF that
conference just exactly as IL he
were full member Of the confer
ence with full powers. His not
having full powers is only a point
Of technical etiquette or Of techni-
cal optical illusion. It is true that
ne cannot bind the United States.
Neither, however, could President
Wilson In the great peace confer
eAce at Paris. President Wilson,
nevertheless. In that conferences was
undoubtedly a participating repre-
sentative of the United States. and
10 II Ambassador Child In the con.
ference at Lausanne.
Finally. We still have troops on the
Rhine. we have only a few OF them.
n y true. but q few are enough.
They symboiiss the United States;