Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1926-09-04
LIMIT ON SENATE
COURT VOTE SEEN
Only President Could Initiate
Move to Abandon Tribunal,
Some Experts Hold.
BY DAVID LAWRENCE.

The interesting theory has been ad-
vanced by prominent international
lawyers here that the United States
Senate may never again have
chance to vote on the question OF
withdrawal from the World Court.
In other words, once the nations now
assembled at Geneva accept the pro-
tocol, which was duly approved by a
two-thirds vote OF the United States
Senate and by the Chief Executive,
it becomes a treaty which can be
abrogated only on the initiative of the
President and then by the concur
renee of the Senate.
II, for example. Mr.. Coolidge should
still be President when q movement
to withdraw from the World Court
were started, he would have to be con-
WINGED that such "a policy should be
followed. He might be requested
by resolution of Congress and might
even be authorized" or directed" to
denounce the treaty whereby the
United States and about As nations
agreed to American membership in
The World Court, but he could not be
constitutionally compelled to de-
nounce the various treaties or pro
tocols that will have gone into effect
WITCH lilc tAHlSIlCdI IcSci NdliOiio ~
the World Court are specifically &C.
cepted by the various governments
which now have them under consid-
Grafton.
Presidents Are Conflicting.
There are many conflicting prece-
dents on the subject. all OF which
tend to obscure the point as to
whether Congress or the Chief
Executive may abrogate treaties or
whether the consent of both Is re-
CURED. The latest presidents would
seem to indicate that the Chief
Executive felt himself unaffected by
the resolutions or acts Of Congress
so far as specific right is concerned.
but President Taft, after declining
to denounce treaty with Russia
over passport violations by the Rus
slams, finally conceded that public
opinion as expressed in an almost
unanimous resolution of Congress
was aH-persuasive and he served no
tice of a denunciation of the treaty.
But three later PARLIAMENTARY,
woodrow Wilson, Warren Harding
and Calvin Coolidge-have declined
In a conspicuous case to regard the
power OF Congress as final This has
occurred in the matter of denouncing
various commercial treaties which
conflict with an act of Congress
whereby importers who ship their
goods In American vessels are to be
given IA discount on the tariff duties
charged at ports of entry. This was
passed as a form Of subsidy to Ameri-
can shipping Mr. Wilson took the
position that this violated the spirit
of treaties in effect between the United
States and foreign countries. and he
was requested to denounce and termi-
nate all treaties that stood in the
way, but he refused.
Harding Also Refused.
The. matter then went to President
Harding. who was advised by Secre-
tary Charles Evans Hughes that the
position taken by the preceding ad-
ministration was correct. And there
the case has rested. with President
Coolidge also refusing to take the ac-
ton directed by Congress.
So. too, in case the World Court
protocol should appear to members Of
Congress as unwise in later years,
they must convince the Chief Execu-
tive that the protocols, which are
really treaties, should be denounced
and terminated If Mr.. Coolidge re-
mains Steadfast in his belief in the
World Court there will be no chance
during his administration for mem
bers of the Senate to vote effectively
for withdrawal from the World Court.
Thus Senators may henceforth say
that if the issue did come up they
would vote thus and SO, but the whole
thing would remain Hypothetical and
academic once the foreign nations
accepted the treaties ratified with
l. ,ix.fVe- nf
ate.
tConyrieht 1925