Evening star., 1924-10-05

as 7 think. unnecessarily linked with
commitments foreign to our institu-
tions.
''As result of this controversy.
the Republican administration had an
inheritance of difficulties. To sur
mount them. to safeguard the inter
ests Of our nationals. TO keep from
being embroiled in foreign quarrel:s
and rivalries, 10 be helpful accord
ing to the American tradition when
ever there was opportunity for help
tulness. to promote peaceful adjust
ments and humanitarian endeavors.
has been our constant aim. What
has been accomplished is so well
Known throughout the world that
detractions react upon the detractor;
and leaves them worse off than il
they had left the subject alone"
The Secretary recounted at some
length the results of the Central
American conference. American with
drawal from the Dominican Republic
and progress made in Haiti. He sum
married his review of Latin American
relations by the statement:
our relations with Latin America
are on better footing than ever be-
fore.
ELECTS World Approval
The Washington arms conference.
he said, had "dissipated the clouds
and suspicion which lad darkened
the eastern sky" and added that it's
achievements had "elicfted the ap-
proval of the world
While there was no direct refer
ence in the address TO the new arms
reduction program launched by the
League of Nations at Geneva, Mr..
IJtrty hEe- =
administration attitude on the gem
eral subject.
We look with qualification at the
new spirit in Europe and at the
progress made toward peaceful solu-
tons" he said. Our attitude toward
reduction of armamentS remains un-
changed and to this end we desire
to cooperate. Our people are de-
voted to the interests of peace. We
propose to perform our obligations
under our treaties and under inter-
national law. We have had a graft
flying leadership in promoting peace
full settlements. our policy hai
established an abiding peace i. : t-
hemisphere. But the people Of this
country would never toler% ''p- sub
mission to any power - .--. of
powers of the determination of any
of our domestic questions. If we
are to Cooperate, we must be per-
mitted to cooperate without the sac
rifice of our right to determine our
own policies
At another point and in answer TO
Democratic attacks for failure to par
ticipate in international conferences,
Mr.. Hughes said:
We believe in international con-
ferences, but conferences are directed
,t oh nd bap no orf fioir 70
it must be to the extent that we can
make good our obligations according
to our system of government and in
accordance with the dominant senti-
ment of our people. The form and
extent of our participation are gov
erned by these principles.
Demand Not Clear.
The Democratic attack seemed to
have special reference to the League
of Nations and it's committees, Mr..
Hughes said, adding that if the de-
mand were that the United States
should join the league and thus fully
participate, that would be an I'M
derstanda BILE demand
But it ia precisely the position which
the Democratic party has refused to
take he continued. "It has declined,
for reasons of it's own, to make the
question OF the league dh ISouC
In this campaign"
Not having joined the league, Mr..
Hughes continued, he failed to see how
the United States could assume to act
as a member of that body and incur the
obligations of members.
What do our Democratic opponents
propose?'' the Secretary said. After
years of discussion. the test came in the
Democratic convention. There was an
acute controversy over the resolutions
on foreign relations and the resulting
plank in the platform. adopted after a
bitter debate, must be deemed to state
the position of the Democratic party. 1t
has been inGorsed by the Democratic
candidate.
when We examine these proposals
we find them to be rhetorical and vague
in their general statements and wholly
impracticable in their conclusions
After reading the section of the
Democratic platform proposing an ad-
visory referendum election on joining
the league, Mr.. Hughes continued:
Calls Proposal Absurd.
Probably a more futile and unsound
proposal has never been made by con-
vention of a great political party.
This is the proposal which the former
Democratic Secretary of War aptly
characterized in the convention itself
as a fanciful, illegal, unconstitutional,
revolutionary referendum 1 need not
pay further attention to this absurd
proposal than to use his words
Mr.. Hughes quoted at some length
from the speech against the league
referendum clause made by Newton
D. Baker at the New York convention
during the platform fight. But aside
from it's merits, he added, it's adoption
was highly significant in another