The Newark journal., 1922-03-23

during peace. In view of this, and in view of the relation of the treaty to the results of the conference, its failure would be nothing short of a national calamity"
 The senate debate over ratification confirms the wisdom of the Presidents choice of Senator Underwood as con ference delegate. There are those who consider the senator from Alabama one of the ablest men in public life. He certainly had a large opportunity for his skill as Il debater when he at tempted to round up his recalcitrant followers for ratification. The first day he stood for three hours before the Democrats he has led in so many par tisan battles, arguing that they should forget party lines and join with the administration forces for ratification. It was almost exclusively Democratic show with the Republicans sitting on the sidelines and watching the astute minority leader fight it out with his unruly followers The anti-treaty Democrats were trying to trap him into an admission that the treaty in effect constituted an entangling al- liance. But he insisted on conference agreement" Some of them "heckled' their leader. Only the unfailing good nature of the Alabaman staved off stormy session. It was situation that only an experienced and able man could meet.
 Next came an assault on the treaty by Senator Rorah of Idaho and Sena- tor Johnson of California, Republican irreconeilables. They questioned the authorship of the treaty, despite the letter from Secretary Hughes. Senator Lodge of Massachusetts, majority leader, made them admit they had not meant to reflect on the veracity of Secretary Hughes. In effect the two senators assailed the treaty as "quadruple alliance" Senator Lenroot of Wisconsin answered them.
 The pro-treaty forces scored vic tory Tuesday when they voted down an amendment by Senator Joseph T. Robinson of Arkansas designed to wreck the treaty. The Robinson amendment would have had the effect of converting the four-poVer pact into league of nations. It pledged all the signatories to respect each others ter riterial integrity and to commit no act of aggression against any nation out side the pact. Furthermore, it provid- ed, in case of disputes, that outside na- lions interested should be invited to HnI the terms of the four-power pact.
 The vote was 5 to 30. Eleven mem bers were absent. Six were paired. The five impaired absentees are all counted for ratification. Four Repub- licans. committed against ratification, voted for the amendment Borah of Idaho. Johnson of California, La Fol lette of Wisconsin and France of Mary land. Four Democrats voted against it Underwood of Alabama, Pomerene of Ohio, Ransdell of Louisiana and Williams of Mississippi. Later similar amendments by Senators Walsh of Montana and Pittman of Nevada, both Democrats, were voted down by sub stantlally the same vote. Then series of amendments and reservations was dumped Into the hamper to be ready for presentation before the final roll call.
 I IFE to Uncle Sam just now must
 L seem just one treaty after an- other. Anyway, he presented last week to the allied separations commis- sion In Paris bill for $241, ,000, 900 for 1 the expenses of the American army of occupation on the Rhine up to May l, i 1921. The allied commissioners regis 1 tered frozen horror, but thawed suffi- ciently to stick the bill on spindle. You see. they were engaged in divid- ing up among themselves a separations payment of 1000 O00. 900 gold marks by 1 Germany and naturally regarded the | presentation of the American claim which to date Is something like $260.- O00,OO0-as very bad form. They there l fore washed their hands Of the matter and referred 1t to the allied govern l ments.
 1 The French press sets forth what is l presumably the allied view: The Unit l ed States declined to ratify the treaty
 of Versailles. hence 1t has no legal | claim to payment under It's terms. The l United States made its own separate | treaty with Germany: therefore 1t
 should do its own collecting from Ger
 many. The British press-some of It.
 thinks that while Uncle Sam has no
 legal claim, he may have moral
 claim. but why didn't he speak up