The Washington times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1902-1939, 1929-01-14
ROBIN. BRINGS
TREATYF|GHT
To HEAD
CONTINUED from First Page)

CONTINUED from First Page)
clarifying statement of the Ameri.
can position was vital" They de.
clared their willingness to accept a
report from the Foreign Relations
Committee and pledged themselves
not to seek any action on It, In
event this request should be re-
fused, the IreconcilableS announced
they felt a qualifying resolution
was necessary.
Fear EntanglementS
Probably half OF those Senators.
who signed the round robin" will
not hold out for a resolution of
explanation" but their action in
petitioning for a committee report
indicated the underlying fear that
the treaty may lead to international
entanglements in the future. This
argument has been the backbone of
The irreconcilable fight-namely, that
the British and French interpreta-
tons may lead to trouble in the
future, unless the United States
publicly announces it's understanding
at the time of ratification.
AS leaders on both sides have
stated in debate, one Of the strik-
ing features of the treaty fight has
been the difference of opinion over
its effect. The treaty proper, con-
tanning but two brief para graphs,
merely renounces war as an instru-
ment of national policy and calls for
pacific settlement of all disputes.
There it stops.
In negotiating the treaty, how.
ever, the. original signatory nations
each set forth its understanding
Of what these two paragraphs
meant. The British declared the
treaty could not be interpreted to
outlaw defensive wars, else Great
Britain would not sign it. France
declared the treaty could not be
interpreted to mean that punitive
actions under the Locarno pact
were outlawed, else she would not
ratify it. In each instance. the
United States acquiesqued to the
European viewpoint. There was
never. however, any statement by
the American Government as to
how the treaty should effect the
Monroe Doctrine or our own ma
tional defense.
hG SCAOCA NPSA
this situation as inviting trouble in
the future. Senator James A.
Reed Cd of Missouri, argued that
by ratifying the treaty, the United
States would indorse British rule
wherever the British flag now flies
and would insure the status quo"
among European nations-as de-
manded by France-under the Lo-
carno treaties. He declared that
instead of Outlawing war, the
treaty put the stamp of approval
on every known and existing form
of war provocation.
The treaty advocates have agreed
that all defensive wars are per-
mitted under the compact and that
each nation can determine for it.
self, without violating the treaty,
just what constitutes a self.defense
war. They maintained though that
the treaty was a real step toward
world peace, since every signatory
nation did renounce war and did
pledge itself to the peaceful and
pacific settlement Of all disputes.
Whatever it's faults or limitations,
the treaty advocates said. this
would be a step in the right di.
rection and that the United States
could and would lose nothing by
keeping in step
AS for the explanation Of Ameri'
can terms of adherence. the treaty
advocates announced only that "it
Is not necessary There has been
no other reason given for rejecting
the irreconcilables' request.
The "round robin" may end the
treaty fight at once. If the Ad'
ministration leaders agree to its
plea, a vote may be reached late
today or tomorrow. If 1t Is re.
fused, the fight may be prolonged
again from day to day for another
week.