The Birmingham age-herald., 1924-10-12
PRESS ON LEAGUE PROGRESS.

Es&s1s95 -1 .,
 Ads Newspapers unfriendly to the League 9lsn1 F of Nations have not failed to seize as im aa occasion for partisan attack the Japanese Hfs provision, for referring certain domestic s6n acts to international jurisdiction, incor-
 porated into the peace protocol. No mo- q 0aie tice is take of the league acts which de- -ha aht serve approval, but each slip in this ns1A} tedious process of working out world sag3 program is hailed with zest by the league 4ess f enemies. 4 srl3NE For example, the Kansas City Times sEi tu exultantly exclaims: "Mr Cox had mere
 ly to explain the League of Nations. MT. .eEf as Davis has the simpler task of explaining ssslea's Japan, and what his party proposes to do 5f3,f when that country cites immigration sss.e law, passed by the American congress, es a.,s to the assembly and council of the league 'sai saofor revision and rectification." The ,nslr Times loses sight of a very serious and sAsF@fe important consideration. The very suc-
 cess of the Japanese effort to inc4uIe the ssyl objectionable provision in the protocol . demonstrates unmistakaBly the danger 4 to this country of having neither voice
 nor vote in these deliberations that shall
 formulate the policies of nations If -stn7s 2 the United States had been represented sfa2l at the discussions as a member in good gfs 5sssl and regular standing, Japan would never saei sf have been able to put over the provision. sh@ s39ssTo be sure, we shall not submit to it's \ 5l71 enforcement as far as we are concerned, Aass4 but it will be more difficult task to maintain our position with the nations s5s n arrayed against us than if they were on
 our side of the question. Even as it is, ssra1 it is not regarded as likely that the sev- 1ee2 neral paraments will ratify the provision. .@ s4sa As the New York Times views the ques- tion: "The delays and difficulties caused Af5 f by the stand of the Japanese at Geneva t1 a.i were seized upon by short-sghted and Aus ,1a narrow-minded people in the United f1 2-a States for the purpose of indulging in
 s,,ki ali 0xyar fho hVoo olr -HOvyY1 of Fl 70 E 64s league. Such rejoicing was highly pre- aEe ss' mature. That the controversy would be 'i's-S ameably settled, as it now has been, was s'14 certain from the first. No country has greater interest than Japan in preserv- ing and magnifyng the League of Ma nS, tions. It is an international organization sI baia 5ii in which she has an unexampled oppor- ,gic3 .tunity to apear and to act as one of the , sAsl great powers of the world. To throw IT 3. away that advantage would be an act of st tz@s folly of which modern Japanese states '+-'' rnanship is incapable. All that has hap ,- pened at Geneva confirms the impression
 --. that if the league had not existed 1t would .,,sa $, have had to be invented, and that it 3Taa.- stands today before the world stronger 'fs: se: and giving greater promise than ever 'sss5:1 A possible entanglement which prob
 ably only the less naturally favored ma @ tions would accept is discussed by the n, n-+ Washington Post: "It is noted that sev- i. .,.- - eral speakers in the assembly of the gd . V, League of Nations expressed the opinion
 that peace would not be attained until ,trs~e, agreements had been reached on certain lH questions heretofore considered to be na- b. tional and not international in character, e such as immigration and the economic dis U 'e tributon of materials. You give 2 us raw materials, and we will give you t ~ peace,' seems to be the idea of the league i.ea,n spokesmen. America can deliver the a.- F. goods, but can the League of Nations de- lgi- liver peace? Americans love peace, but
 they are not in favor of peace at any
 price They do not believe that perma- tLs-1 nent peace is purchasable commodity, a t-a-. exchangeable with raw materials in the h [ market" Yet doubtless many nation 3f17- would be glad to make the exchange, in view of the steadily increasing cost of ,.,'' war.
 a The argument of league opponents is
 exemplified by the New York Herald ,.i.- Tribune: "The protocol envisages sys- tenn of justification not by consent but .a by coercion. The United States is to be "A summoned before league tribunal and
 its mind is to be made up for it there.
 . Our whole tradition of national independ- , l.. ence and freedom of national decision IS
 affronted by the protocols assumptions. ,.5 We shall continue to cherish our sov- ,s -. ereignty and to make up our minds on 4t- questions involving our international e.i ,.e rights as well our duties to world [. peace and to other states" But, as the 5'' Springfield Republican rejoins: "Ratifi-
 cation can by no means be taken for .H granted. From Australia protest has al- ready come, and the insecurity of Mac ., Donalds position shows that British rati- i. fication may be in doubt. There are re- taJ ports too that even the concessions made ra.s to Japan may not satisfy that country d ..-. Reflection of the protocol would not be fa- tai to the movement for the reduction of
 armaments but it would be a serious setback Even at the cost of delay how ever, there should be assurance that the
 right solution has been found" .ssl There can be no doubt that the same
 sentiment regarding the inviolability of