The West Virginian. [volume] (Fairmont, W. Va.) 1914-1974, 1922-03-11
Senator Underwood So
Describes Pact in
Senate
GIVES HIS Views
Thinks Treaty Will Re-
move All Chances
for War

|
Describing the four power Pacific
treaty US "the real treaty of
peace" OF the arms conference,
Senator Underwood, democrat
senate leader, and a member of
the American delegation to the
conference, told the senate today
that he would vote for the pact's
ratification In the same spirit
which actuated him 10 support the
treaty of Versailles and the league
of nations.
The real issue, the Democratic
leader declared, was whether the
United States was ready to give its
sanction to an arrangement for
"peace by mutual understanding"
or desired TO continue the oppor-
tunity for war that has threatened
US In the past two decades"
! Mr.. Underwood asserted that he
/, dill not regard siin treaty as IN
alliance, but added that oven IL IL
we've, and were fodnded on aro:-
tratlon rather than force, he
! would support It. To argue, on
the other hand. that because 1t
was not based on force 1t was
vnlueless was declared by the Ala
bama senator to be revertinE to
i the philosophy uf the past ages.
Recountine how ne hal sup
ported the leGsll4 o. n;.t.c:..', lie
said he approached :iI3 wrr.i nf
the arms confaren.:e ready 70 wrl.
come any new effort tH establish
peace by international under
standing rather Than blythe 1wSr
of the sword
1.-THE four power treaty" lie
continued, represents a political
! settlements which undoubtedly
was necessary before the treaty
providing for the Limitation of ar
maments was signed: that is. II
tho agreement, to limit armaments
was intended to mean more than
a saving Of money to the nations
who has engaged in tho wild race
OF building battleships.
1.-THE terms o fthe treaty clear
ly call for a conference 10 consid-
er difficulties that may arise. Just
as the conference on the Limitation
on ornaments was called in Wash
ington. 1t is n conference in
which all OF the four powers. must
agree and none Of the powers will
! be bound In advance In any way.
In other words the agreements
i that are reached must be by the
consent Of all.
"The opponents OF ratification o!
this treaty In the main appearances
| to base their objections on two
grounds, expressing positions that
are opposed one to the other. It Il
asserted that the treaty In effect iH
an alliance between the four great
powers for offensive and defensive
purposes, or at least, it Is contend
ed we will be drawn into that post
tion In the end and that we may be
forced into war without our con
sent. l maintain that there Is moth
ing In the treaty itself that 1ustl
flies such an Interpretation bein4
placed upon It; that an agreement
by a man or a nation to respect tho
rights OF his neighbors Is an obli
cation that relates to his own con-
duct and does not bind him to ag
gressive action because the other
party to the contract, whose rights
has agreed to respect, becomes in
volved in difficulties.
"But the question is not left here
The foreign relations committee ot
the senate have moved a reserva
tion to the treaty, which beyond q
doubt will be accepted by the sen
ate It reads as follows:
"The United States understands
that under the statement in the pre-
amble, or under the terms OF this
treaty, there Is no commitment to
armed force, no alliance, no obliga'
tion TO Join in any defense"
when the treaty II ratified with
this understanding on the part oi
our government what ground is left
TO those who contend that the treaty
is defensive alliance TO stand
upon? None that l can see.
"If the senate Of the United
States ratIfies this pending treaty,
/ am fully satisfied that there will
disappear not only any real Gauss
for war, but there will no longer
exist the opportunity for war that
has threatened US In the past two
decades: aud peace will be estab'
lished between the four great sea
powers that now control the des-
TIMES OF the Pacific ocean"