Evening star., 1926-04-09
Arguments for and Against
Conference on World Court

Discussion of the World Court tan
gle continues. stimulated by plain in
timations from the White House that
President Coolidge does not look with
tation TO a conference for considera-
ton of American reservations.
Asserting that I'VE can best prove
our sincerity by acting rea asonably." "
argues that I'VE don't want one coun-
try to think that our reservations
mean one thing and another country
to interpret them in an entirely differ
ent way" The Lynchburg News
Democratic) adds that ito most nor
NAL persons it has seemed to be very
natural thing that the members of the
World Court should have curiosity
enough TO wish to inquire into the
conditions an applicant for member
ship in their orga MIA tiOn had laid
down."
Against these and similar views is
much strong opposition. For instance.
the San Francisco Bulletin dndepend-
entl holds that there is no reason
that we should be represented at any
discussion of the terms submitted
that they are as plain as the traffic
signals and call for no Interpretation" 3"
The Wichita Beacon independent Re
publican would consider that send
ing delegates to explain these reserva-
tiOns would be like gliding the lily;
the Manchester Union independent
Republican, favors reminding the
Geneva statesmen that the conditions
are not subject to change, and the
Seattle Daily Times independent Re
publican) suggests that If other ma
tions desire Interpretation F may he
obtained by reading precedents
stretching back over period OF
years.
The Chicago Tribune independent
Republican), after contending that 1T
is not consistent with the dignity OF
the country to send representative 10
Geneya to explain what is meant,
suggests, as a plausible explana ton for
the proposal, that lit is the apparent
nurpose of the more important nations
to keep some irresponsible Kid from
hea wing a brick at the rich uncle just
as he is about to drive up and alight. y
The suggestion that what some OF
have. no doubt. would be, explanations
that would interpret the reservations
differentIy from the plain implications
of the words used" is made by the
cha rtestoh Daily Mail dndepen ndent
Repyblicsm, while the Charlotte OBJ
seryer U)emocratic) and the Water
town Daily Times independently look
upon the whole matter as "a State
Department job" The Butte Daily
Post (Republica nj calls attention to the
fact that our deal is with the tribunal !
at The Hague, and not with the
league.
The Kansas City Post independently
warns that IF Europe Is disposed to
dicker over our offer. revulsiOn of
feeling NAV cause America to recon
slider nd to withdraw her Offer" The
Trenton Evening Times independently,
opposing the conference. believes that
Europe will continue ito make ami
able restures with a view to enticing
the United States into the league"
whils the Salt Lake Deseret News fin
dependent) emphasizes its opposition
to going to Geneva by remarking that
Argentina, Brazil and Chile are one
with the United States in regarding
the court as merely tribunal to
which they may voluntarily submit
their differences. to accept or REJECT
its findings as they may zee Mt.
4
''The Presidents motive In refusing
to be represented at the Geneva con
ference" according TO the Springfield
Republican Gndepe ndent,. lis to ap-
pease the Senate irreconcilables," and
the Republican expresses the further
opinion that President Conlidxe's
achievement IN taking the United