Evening star., 1933-12-24

n can Conference started at
wv Montevideo, realistic OBJ
servers admitted that, its
contribution to economic
problems being barred by reasons
obvious to repeat, its only chance OF
success lay in the achievement OF some
sort of general accord on the organlza-
tion of peace in the Western Hemi-
sphere.
The very fact that financial and
commercial arrangements were doomed
in advance, increased the possibilities
that the leaders gathered at the Uru-
guayan capital would earnestly try to
offset their failure in economic mat
ters with some constructive, lasting
work in the political field. The most
elementary logic supported that theory
After all. Oriental diplomats have not
a monopoly on Saving face"
At the time of this writing it looks
as If the gentlemen at Montevideo had
not progressed very far in their en-
beavers. 1t may be that in the few
remaining days Of their deliberations
previous experience and present eN-
pectations to the contrary. they might
act on some really worthwhile prop
osition, like the Scott project for an
inter-Ameriean tribunal of justice or
the various suggestions for the trans
formation of the Pan-American Union
into something else than a mere clear
ing house for geographical data and
Latin American music.
Conference Like Others.
So far. however, the Montevideo con-
ference has not substantially differed
from the previous continental gather
ings. There has been much talk about
peace. Beautifully phrased speeches
have been made on the historic bonds
and the community of ideals which
should guarantee everlasting peace in
the New World. The participating gov
ernmentS, unanimously, have reiterated
their adhesion to pacifist endeavorS and
their unfinching love for diplomatic
methods. New plans for the preserva-
ton of American peace have been sub
mitted. Some of them may even be
passed, before the conference Is over,
in the stereotyped form of recon-
mendation to the governments of the
American republics" But all that was
also done In the other six Pan-Ameri-
can conferences.
Before the NIontevideo assembly began
there were already in existence five in
strumentS for the maintenance of peace
on the American Continent-the Gondra
treaty, the conciliation convention of
1929, the Washington arbitration treaty,
the Kellogg-Br pact and the
Argentine anti-war pact. Yet the five
Of them could not prevent two South
American nations from fighting bitterly
for over IS months and two others from
1eSorting to arms for the possession of
minor river port
And, in the face Of such disappoirt-
ing record, what has the Montevideo
conference to offer? Up to now it has
passed a resolution expressing the de-
sirability that all American nations
which have not already done so should
ratify the five treaties or conventions"
mentioned. Of course, final judgment
must be withheld until the conference
is adjourned, but at the time these lines
are being written no other concrete
steps have been taken for the preven-
ton of future armed conflicts In the
so-called continent of peace.
Responsibility of Farley.
If the Montevideo conference finally
adiourns without having done more in
this respect than mildly recommending
the American governments to ratify
the instruments which failed to keep
peace in the past it will have placed
upon itself great responsibility. A few
ratif1cations, more or less, will not fill
the gaps and the shortcomings of those
toothleSs treaties, full of reservations
and exceptions. And the absence Of
political results would be even more
condemnable than the lack Of economic
achievements, because the latter can
at least be explained, if not justified, by
prevailing world conditions, while the
former depend exclusively upon the sin
cerity and the courage of individual
leaders.
Neither will the Montevideo con-
fereeS have the excuse that they had
nothing to act upon, because a number
of interesting projects for the advance
ment of international peace we're sub
mitted for their consideration.
There was an Argentine anti-war