Atlanta tri-weekly journal., 1924-12-25
j. s. MUST PAY FOR
''|RRECONS|LABLES"
PEACE PACT FIGHT
BY DAVID LAWRENCE
Especial Leased Wire TO The Journal-Copy-
right 1924.)

WAStIl NGTON, Lee. Col lie
first real penalty tnat the United
States government has had to pay
A for the unfortunate controversy In
y the American senate over the
! League of Nations Immediately fol-
lowing the war has developed at last.
For the British government has
refused to recognize the separate
treaty of peace between Germany
and the United States as having the
validity claimed for it by senatorial
| proponents and even the department
of state. And the Washington ad-
minstration has a lively controversy
ION it's hands which may extend to
France and other allied powers.
The point in question was raised
when the late President Harding
, through Secretary of State Hughes
\ submitted a separate treaty to the
senate as a consequence of the joint
resolution whichApassed congress de-
claring a state sof peace. In that
treaty, the United States claimed all
the rights which it would have en-
joyed under the Versailles treaty,
but renounced the principal oblga-
tions of the latter, including the
SLeague of Nations covenant which
was part of the treaty, The alter
native course was to ratify the Yer
sailes treaty with reservations spec
! ifically disclaiming responsibility for
the league covenant and other pro-
visions, especially the economic
clauses having to do with the claim
Nng Of reparations.
Feared IrrecOncilables
Mr.. Hughes might nave submitted
the Versailles treaty with reserVa-
tions, but President Harding thought
the "irreconcilables" in the senate
would block action. For the sake
of eXpediency, the separate treaty
was made. Not long afterwards,
France indicated unofficially that
she questioned the validity of the
separate treaty, but nothing was
Asaid publicly about it. Great Britain
and the other allies were silent about
it, because the issue was never put
before them. The German govern
ment took the stand that it was not
necessary to get allied consent or
agreement to the Berlin treaty, since
it. was a separate document and had
nothing to do with the allies as such.
Germany in the Berlin treaty gave
\the United States the same benefits
(which she conferred on the allied
powers in the Versailles treaty. |
Having secured Germanys ratifica- |
tion, the United States did not worry |
further about it,
Now, however, the expected argu- |
ment has been made, namely, that |
the contract between Grmany and |
the allied and associated powers for
the division of reparations was an |
\ agreement between the Berlin gov
Sernment on the one hand and part
nership of nations on the other Ger |
many assigned her assets to the
partnership, but as having forfeited |
everything that Germany was In q
position to hestow ON the allied and |
associated powers,
Hughes Argument
Mr., Hughes, however, had been |
\ through n controversy on the man.
sdate system and had ignored the |
Versailles treaty. claiming that the
United states was entitled to rights !
\ In the inundated territories because
Amoriea had been an associate In |
the war and n pai ner in the arml |
sAee, lie could not conceive that |
America would he eliminated from
l the group OF Viotors simply because |
\ form Of settlement known as the |
| Versailles treaty, which contained
| provisions so obnoxious "a TO pre-,
vent It's acceptance as n whole,
Virtually the samo answer now IL
being made by Mr., Hughes to the
! British notes, namely, that the allies |
: catnot shut of the United States |
from receiving payments from Ger.
hA
| more than the allies could he eNclttd. |
ed by the treaty from receiving bene.
NltS which they were promised by |
Germany.
The whole procedure OF the allied |
governments IS IN sense wholly |
incomnrehensible from a diplomatic |
viewpoint, Technically, there may |
he much to say on the subject OF |
whether n contract between Ger.
many and the allied powers can be |
shared In by another nation which |
refuses to he a party to that con.
tract, and whether an equity in as |
Sets delivered under that pact may |
Ntill he retained by non. .sienatory |
power.
Claims to he Delayed
But America has secured recogni. |
tion for her claims in the mandate |
controversy by persuading the allies |
that a spirit Of amity must be APP |
piled. The British and Frehch may |
ultimately agree to that in this in
stance, too, but if they can make a |
case out against the validity of the |
Serlin treaty, they will prevent the
United States from getting any |
priority In collecting war claims from
Germany. Thus the relatives Of
those who lost their lives on the |
Lusltania and in submarine war |
fare will not get early payment, and |
! there will be no compensation for |
yhe property of American citizens
damaged during the war until the
consent of the allies is obtained. |
From legal viewpoint, this is some |
what humiliating, but the ''irrecon |
cilables" in the American senate are
Irresponsible for what has happened, |
land ii will take all the legal wit
of Charles Evans Hughes to secure
Sor America what she Is entitled to
and what the allies, if they choose
to be technical, may insist on with
holding unless they set in return
some other concession. 1t all may
become involved in the settlement of
war debts to America and interal-
lied debts before the controversy is
actually solved,
T 7