The New York herald., 1922-03-09

Powers agree that they will not seek
or support their respective nationals
in seeking any arrangement which
might purport to establish in favor OF
their interests any general superiority
OF rights with respect to commercial
or economic development in any cesig-
rated region of China. or any such
monopoly or privilege as would deprive
the nationals OF any other Power of
the right Of undertaking any legitimate
trade or industry in China. or of par
t!cipatng with the Chinese Government
or with any local authority in any
category of public enterprise. or which
by reason OF its scope, duration or
geographical extent is calculated to
Illustrate the practical application OF
the principle OF equal opportunity.
And, further. the signatory Powers
agree not to support any agreements
by their respective nationals with each
other designed to create spheres Of in
fluence. or to provide for the enjoy
ment OF mutual exclusive opportunities
in designated parts of Chinese terri
tory.
."The negotiation OF this treaty Is In
itself the most formal declaration of
the policy OF the Executive In relation
to China. and supersedes any Executive
understanding or declaration that could
possibly be asserted to have any con-
trary import. If the Senate assents to
this treaty the principles and policies
which the treaty declares will be sup
ported and enforced by binding in
ternational agreement.
No Bearing on Ishfi Agreement.
MY answer then. to your first ques-
tion is that the so-called Lansing-Ishii
agreement has no binding effect what
ever, either with respect to the past or
to the future. which Is in any sense
inconsistent with the principles and
policies explicitly declared in the nine
Power treaty to which have referred.
"As to your second question. / may
say that the four Power treaty does not
refer TO China, and hence does not di-
rectly bear upon the Lansing -Ishii notes
which related exclusively to China. The
four Power treaty, however, Is an essen
tial part OF the plan to create condi-
tions in the Far East at once favorable
TO the policies that we have long ad-
vocated and to enduring peace"
Senator Lodge, speaking for ratifica-
ton, insisted that the treaty involved no
other obligation than to talk things over
and was in no sense alliance.
Il repeat" he said. 'that obligation
to meet and consult Is the only obliga-
tion existing In this treaty. and the main
purpose OF the treaty is attained by the
termination Of the Anglo-Japanese al
lance"
Dwelling on this feature OF the$reaty.
Senator Lodge said the Anglo Japanese
alliance was, In his opinion. ''the most
dangerous element in our relations with
the Far East and with the Pacific"
II have already shown the total DIFF
ference which exists between this treaty
and Anglo-Japanese alliance. There Is
no likeness between that alliance and
this treaty. Far from taking the place
of the other, this treaty simply enables
England and Australia and New Zea-
land to take part In terminating the
alliance"
Concluding, Senator Lodge said:
THE best hope OF the world for
future where peace may prevail and
wars diminish Is in the people OF the
United States. II we fall who can
hope to succeed? We called this con-
ference. We proposed the treaties
agreements and declarations In which
the conference eliminated. Are we now
to stumble and fall at the threshold OF
the undertaking which we designed and
brought to fulflment? Are we 10 sink
back into sullen solitude. prey to
dark suspicion, hermit ration armed
to the teeth and looking forward always
to wars as inseparabe from the exist.
ence OF mankind upon the earth?