New-York tribune. [volume], October 20, 1920, Page 2, Image 2

About New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924

Image provided by: Library of Congress, Washington, DC

                
Wilson Advocated League's Adoption to Enforce His Decisions, Root Charges
Justice and the public opinion of the
world. .,?_.?.
Long before the hour for which the
meeting, held under the auspices of the
National Republican Club, was sched?
uled, crowds began to assemble in the
vicinity of Carnegie Hall, and fully ?n
hour before the appearance of the
former Senator every seat in the large :
hall, draped in American flags, was I
occupied. The appearance of Senator
Root on the platform, occupied by dis
tinguished Republicans, was met with
repeated volle> s of cheers, the entire
audience rising to its feet.
Before plunging into his exhaustive
analysis of the League of Nations is?
sue Mr. Root said:
"I should like to talk about some
other things-about the importance of
( ur getting back our constitutional lib
. rty, which we suspended for the pur?
poses of a real war, and are going
without because of the existence ot a
phantom war; about the importance of
having an administration of our gov
. rnment which sympathizes with Amer?
ican business instead of distrusting
and condemning nil successful busi?
ness men; about rebuking the Demo?
cratic party for permitting itself to be?
come the faint echo and the subservi?
ent tool of a dictatorship. And I would
l;ke to talk about courageous, able,
noble James Wadswort h, the ideal pub?
lic servant, who ought to be kept in
office by the votes of all men and wom?
en of whatever party who do not wish
our government to be conducted by
cowards and savants. But I may not
talk about everything at once, and I
am going to talk about the League of
Nations.
Text of Root's Speech
Mr. Root said:
"It is mv purpose to speak this eve
ring of the League of Nations. The
Fubject is too extensivo for anything
like a full or systematic presentation
in such a speech, and it is a subject
that ought to be kept free from the
overemphasis which sometimes makes
campaign oratory interesting. There
arc some observations, however, which
may bo useful.
?T think a large majority of the
American people earnestly wish for an
organization among civilized nations,
through which the nations shall co?
op?r?t?, to prevent future wars, and
that the United States shall do her
full share in that organization. 1 cer?
tainly desire this very strongly, and
1 shall assume that you have the same
feeling.
"The pending contest for the Presi?
dency presents the question: How will
cur votes on one side or the other af?
fect the attainment of that desire?
Shall we promote the peace of the
world by electing Mr. Cox or by elect?
ing Mr. Harding?
"As a basis for considering this
question let me restate the situation.
"After the arniistic?j which ended the
great. War, a conference of all the
?t;>tes which had been at war with the
Central Powers was called in T'aris
for the purpose of agreeing upon the
terms of peace to be offered to Ger?
many and her allies. The terms were
agreed upon, were communicated to
the Germans, and, after some slight
modifications, produced by their pro
tests, were included in a treaty signed
by the Allied and associated powers
on one side and Germany on the othei
on the 28th of June, 1919.
Provisions or Covenant
"In this treaty were, included ?<?
sirles of provisions called 'A Covenant
of the League of Nations.' These pro?
visions did not form any part of ?
contract between the Allied ami asso
ciated powers and Germany, bu
formed a contract of the Allied am
associated powers with each other
nono of the. Central Powers beinj
made members of the proposed league
although provision was made for th?
adherence of neutral powers which hac
n< t been engaged in the war. Tin
general scheme of the proposed leagui
was that there was to be a cour.ci
meeting from time to time compose?
of representatives of five principal Ali
lied and associated powers and of fou
other members of the league. When t
controversy arose between members o
the league and was not submitted to ar
bitration it was to be submitted to ith
council, which was to investigate am
make a report containing a statemen
of the facts and its recommendation?
All parties agreed not to go to wa
until three months after the award o
arbitrators or the report of the coun
cil. which was to be made within si
months after the submission of th
dispute. If the repon was unanimous
except as to the disputing nations, th
parties agreed not to go to war at a
with any other party complying wit
the recommendations of the report. .
country violating these stipulation
against making war pending the cor
??deration of the case or upon a part
which complied with a unanimous re<
ommendation of the council was to I
deemed to have committed an act c
war against all members of the leagu
Such a country was to be subject t
an economic boycott and deprived <
ail financial, commercial or persom
intercourse with the members of tr
league. The council was to recon
mend to the several governments coi
cerned what effective military, naval <
air force the members should several
contribute to the armed forces to I
used to protect the covenant? of tl
league.
There were also provisions for t
assembly, to be composed of a repr
alive of every member of tl
?iague, and any dispute might be trail
jerred by a party from the council
The assembly for consideration, repo
?nd recommendation, with the same e
feet as if the dispute had been le
with the council. There were mai
tother incidental provisions, but the
which ! have mentioned in Articles X
?and XVI of the covenant contain t
gist of the whole scheme.
"It will be perceived that this ph
relied upon the effect of four thin
taken together to prevent war.
"First?Upon delay to afford time f
investigation and for passions to co
and sober judgment to prevail.
"Second -- Upon having the fac
ascertained and determined and ma
public to all the world, so that t
misunderstandings and deceptions und
which the people of a country are
often led to consent to war may
-obviated.
"Third?Upon having a fairly repi
Bentativo body not a party to the d
put? express publicly a responsible a
matured opinion as to how the cc
troversy ought to be settled, a
thus bring to bear upon the action
the parties the well informed opini
the civilized world.
"Fourth?If any party to the agT?
rrent were to violate it by making w
without the stipulated delays necessa
for arbitration or investigation and i
p.-rt, or were to make war in violath
of the unanimous opinion of the oth
nations, then upon the practical ot
lawry ,pf that party from the adva
tages of trade, commerce and custoi
?ry intercourse with the members
the society of nations, with all t'
consequences flowing from such i
outlawry.
Article X Separat? S?beme
"There were other more or leus ?
ridental provisions. One provided th
there should be a future agreement i
to disarmament-?a matter which ma:
ifestly could not have been determin?
upon at that time. Another provide
for a future report by the council <
a plan for a court of internation;
lUftice. t'nder that an effort is no
being mad? to cure th? marked weal
ness of the covenant on the side (
international law and judicial or ?rb
loi decision? on question? of legi
SSfc *im*kw *m?i?*? im m &**
4
national labor organization. Another!
provided for the administration of gov?
ernment in backward states by manda
tories until the inhabitants should be
ready to maintain orderly government
themselves.
"There also was a provision stand?
ing by itself quite. ouUude of tho g?n?
er.?! scheme of the league for the pres?
ervation of peace, and forming no part
of that scheme, but creating indepen?
dently of it a hard and fast alliance
between the members of the league to
preserve in perpetuity the territorial
and political status quo as H was de?
termined upon by the conference at
Paris, and included in the treaty signed
in June, 1919. It was in the following
words, Article X:
" 'The members of the league un?
dertake to respect and preserve as
against external aggression the ter?
ritorial integrity and existing po?
litical independence of all members
of the league. In case of any such
aggression or in case of any threat
or danger of such aggression, the
council shall advise upon the means
by which this obligation shall be
fulfilled.'
"It will be perceived that this obli?
gation had nothing to do with any
delay or investigation or report or
recommendation, or with the public
opinion of the world at the time of the
future controversy. It was an inde?
pendent obligation upon each member
of tho league to enforce for all future
time the decisions of the conference of
1919, which was then parceling out
the vast regions of eastern Europe
among various peoples, and it was
without regard to whether those de?
cisions should prove to have been right
or wrong.
Negotiated in Unusual Way
"When this treaty came before the
Senate for its advice and consent to
ratification, serious objections were
raised both in and out of the Senate.
Because of the peculiar way in which
the treaty was negotiated, it would
have been strange if there had not
been objections. Ordinarily, treaties
are negotiated by ambassadors or min?
isters, or specially appointed pleni?
potentiaries, and their work is super?
vised by the Secretary of State and
the President at home, who looking on
from outside the conference chamber
have the opportunity of independent
judgment und mature reflection free
from the prepossessions and pressure
of the actual negotiation. This is of
the greatest importance in any com?
plicated negotiation. This treaty, how?
ever, was negotiated by the President
himself, and the first responsible in?
dependent judgment of a nature to cor?
rect the mistakes to which every ne?
gotiator is subject came when the
treaty reached the Senate.
"The principal objections may be
roughly classified as follows:
"First? Objections to the general de?
fensive alliance with all members ol
the league established by Article X.
"Second?Objections to submitting tc
the council of the league questions ol
purely American policy, such as th<
Monroe Doctrine, or questions of im
migration, upon which the Europcar
countries, approaching the subjec
.'rom an entirely different point o;
view and with opposing or dilTeren'
interests, would almost necessarily
differ from the American policy.
"Third? Th:it the scheme practically
thrust aside the whole system of de
velopment of international law and o
arbitral decision which had been thi
settled policy of the United States fo
many generations, and depended fo
the treatment of questions of right a
well as questions of policy upon tlv
council, which would be composed no
of judges but of diplomatic rcpre
sentatives of the powers.
Created a Super-Government
"Fourth?That the scheme created ;
super-government which would de
stroy the independence of the Unite*
States,
"Fifth--That tho working of th
plan under the covenant was not s
arranged as to articulate with th
constitutional government of th
United States; that under it the Presi
dent alone could practically carry o
the entire foreign affairs of tho Unite
! States by agents of his own selectio
| to the practical exclusion of the pop?
I lar branch of our government.
"While these objections were bein
developed there was a strong popuKi
pressure for action. The fact that th
covenant was included' in fne treaty c
peace, with Germany, which was nc
? a party to the covenant, made it a\
; parently impossible to have pea<
: without accepting the covenant. Euro]
i was in a desperate condition and
was the common understanding that si
j could not restore her industry an
! peaceful life without the aid of Ame
ica through America's accepting 11
covenant and becoming a member <
I the league. Accordingly, to avoid tl
delay of renegotiating the treaty :
order to meet its objections, the Sei
ate adopted the policy of meeting tl
objections by a series of reservation
and the majority of the Senate votf
to consent to ratification of the trett
with these reservations. It was W?
understood then and is well understoi
now that the other parties to the trea
would have been content to noce
those reservations, and, if Mr. Wilsi
had been willing, the treaty would hf>
been ratified and America would ha
been a member of the league. X
Wilson, however, was not willing. 1
insisted upon the treaty absolutely u
that.god, and a sufficient number
Democratic Senators to defeat the
treaty as modified followed him by vot?
ing against ratification.
Quotes Harding's Viewg
"That is practically where we stand
to-day. Mr. Cox declares that he will
insist upon the treaty just as Mr.
Wilson negotiated it, and upon that un?
derstanding Mr. Wilson is supporting
Mr. Cox for the Presidency. The
Democratic platform says substantially
the same thing.
"On the other hand, Mr. Harding,
who voted for the ratification of the
treaty with the Senate reservations,
declares that he would do it again un?
der the same circumstances.
"The Republican platform saya:
" 'The Republican party stands for
agreement among the nations to pre?
serve the peace of the world. We
believe that such an international
association must bo ba?ed upon in?
ternational justice, and must pro?
vide methods which shall maintain
the rule of public right by the de?
velopment of law and the decision of
impartial courts, and which shall se?
cure instant and general interna?
tional conference, whenever peace
shall be threatened by political ac?
tion, so that the nations pledged to
do and insist upon what is just and
fair may exercise their influence and
power for the prevention of war.'
"Mr. Harding said in his speech of
August 28:
" 'There are distinctly two types of
international relationship. One is
an offensive and defensive alliance
of great powers. . . . The other
type is a society of free nations or
an association of free nations or a
league of free nations animated by
considerations of right and justice,
instead of might and self-interest,
and not merely proclaimed an agency
in pursuit of peace, but so organized
and so participated in as to make
the actual attainment of peace a
reasonable possibility. Such an as?
sociation 1 favor with all my heart,
and I would make no fine distinction
as to whom credit is due. One need
not care what it is called. Let it be
an association, a society, or a league,
or what not. Our concern is solely
with the substance, not the form
thereof. ... I would take and
combine, all that is good and excise
all that is bad from both organiza?
tions (the court and the league).
This statement is bror.d enough to
include the suggestion that if the
league which has heretofore riveted
our considerations and apprehensions
has been so entwined and interwoven
into the peace of Europe that its good
must be preserved in order to stabil?
ize the peace of that continent, then
it can be amended or revised so that
we may still have a remnant of the
world's aspirations in 1918 builded
into the world's highest conception of
helpful cooperation in the ultimate
realization.'
Question of Modifications
"Mr. Harding has reaffirmed these
statements again and again, and they
must be taken as representing the pol?
icy of his administration if he is
elected.
"It is plain, therefore, that the issue
is not between a league of nations and
no league of nations. The question is
whether the agreement creating the
league shall be accepted absolutely un?
changed, or shall be modified to meet
the American objections. If Mr. Cox
should be elected, he would be bound
to continue the old struggle to force
the Senate to accept the league cove?
nant without change, which has kept
| us out of the league for more than a
I year. If Mr. Harding is elected, he
will be bound to say* to the foreign
governments which are already in the
league: 'Here are certain objections to
certain provisions of the league cove?
nant which stand in the way of Ameri?
ca's entering the league. I would be
glad to have the provisions of the
agreement changed so as to obviate
these objections.' Then would follow
an ordinary common sense negotiation
as to the best way to obviate the ob?
jections. Regarding this process I have
to say:
"First?I think the American objec?
tions can be met and obviated without
interfering with the scheme of the
I league or impairing its usefulness.
I "Second- -Without pretending to any
i special knowledge I think there are
? clear indications that the other nations
j concerned are willing to make such
changes as are necessary to meet the
American objections.
"Third?I think the objections ought
: to be "met and obviated. The covenant
contains some provisions which are un
! necessary, unwise, and injurious, and
they ought to be changed.
Nothing Distressing About Changes
"Fourth?There is nothing unusual
] or distressing about negotiating the
i necessary changes. If the other parties
are willing?as they seem to be?it
will be a simple matter. Several
European nations have already given
notice of half a dozen changes in the
covenant which they propose to urge
! at a meeting of the assembly ol
i the league next month. The onlj
| reason why the changes neces
\ st.ry to meet American objection:
j have not already been considered i?
? that Mr. Wilson simply would nol
' negotiate for them.
I "It is a heart-breaking thing for th<
negotiator of a treaty to find somethinf
he has committed himself to and in
sisted upon must be changed. He ha;
I naturally become an earnest partisar
of his own idens. Verv likely he has.
committed himself by arguments and
statements made in one way or another
during the negotiations, so that he
himself cannot very well change. He
is naturally intolerant of those who do
not agree with him. It is almost im?
possible for him to avoid thinking of
them as insects or bruteo, as ignorant
or malicious.
"Yet, the correction of negotiators'
mistakes by independent reviewing au?
thority is a necessity established by
universal international experience.
"This is one of the difficulties inci?
dent to the direct negotiation of a
treaty by a President. Being the nego?
tiator, he cannot review his own work
impartially, and it is very difficult for
him to avoid considering changes pro?
posed by others as something personal
to himself.
"Fortunately, Mr. Harding will labor
under no such disadvantage.
"If the objections to provisions in
the league covenant were frivolous and
without any substantial basis one
might question the sincerity of the
objectors. No such view, however, can
be maintained for a moment. The prin?
cipal objection urged against, the pro?
visions of the covenant is the objec?
tion to Article X. It is this article
which Mr. Wilson declares to be the
heart of the league, and for that rea?
son it is the chief subject of contro?
versy. It is this article above all others
that Mr. Cox will be bound to insist
upon if he be elected, and it is this
article above all others which Mr. Har?
ding will be bound to reject if he be
elected.
Guaranty of Territory
"Let us examine it. It is an under?
taking not by the league but by the
members of the league, not merely to
respect but to preserve as against ex?
ternal aggression the territorial integ?
rity and existing political independenco
of all members of the league., That is
what the United States will undertake
to do if it ratifies the league covenant
with this provision unchanged. Un?
questionably that is an agreement to
go to war in case external aggression
against any member of the league be
of such a character that war is neces?
sary to repel it, such, for instance, as
the invasion of Poland by the Russians,
and, apparently, the invasion of
Ukrainia by the Poles, The agreement
is a guaranty of territory und independ?
ence to be supported by war if neces?
sary.
"President Wilson's own utterances
leave, no doubt upon that. When the
Senate Committee on Foreign Rela?
tions mei the President to discuss the
treaty Senator Knox asked, 'What
would be the obligation of the United
States in case of external aggression
against some power . . . and it is
perfectly obvious and accepted that it
cannot be repelled except by force of
arms?' And the President replied that
Article X would impose '<in absolutely
comnellng moral obligation upon the
United States.' The President added
that a moral obligation is 'superior
to a legal obligation, and has a greater
binding force.' The proceedings of
this meeting were recorded by a sten?
ographer, and the record shows the?c
statements.
"In a plenary session of the peace
conference Mav 31, 1?H9, to considei
the treaty with Austria, which in?
corporated the league covenant, the
representatives of Rumania anc
Serbia objected to having theii
sovereignty limited in the treaty bj
provisions regarding their treatment
of racial and religious minorities
within their territory, and Mr. Wilsor
in an able and impressive speed
urged that they ought to be satisfice
with these limitations, because theii
territory and independence wore guar?
anteed by the military force of the
great powers. There were two sten
ographic records of that proceeding
One was the official record in French
a translation of which has been widelj
published in books and periodical:
and was printed in the Congressiona
Record nearly a year ago, apparentl;
without any question as to its authen
ticity. The other was a somewhat dif
ferent version, produced during th'
present month by an American sten
i ographer who took down what wa
! said, and given out at the Whit
House in answer to a speech by Sen
ator Spencer, quoting the translatioi
of the official version.
"There has been much discussio
I upon the differences between the tw
? reports. Whatever the difference
I may be, there is no difference what
; ever between them in respect of th
j proposition which I am now making
i that the President urged these sma
I powers to accept limitations upo
I their sovereignty because they wer
guaranteed by the armed force of the
great powers.
Protected by Armed Force
"According to the official version the
President said:
"'One of the essential conditions
is the most equitable distribution
possible of territories, in accordance
with the affinities and desires of tho
populations. Once this is done, the
Allied and associated powers will
guarantee tho maintenance of them
as nearly ns possible (under) just
conditions ' which wo shall have
reached. It is they who shall under?
take the engagement and burden
thereof. Inevitably the main re?
sponsibility will rest upon them,
since it is they who, by the force of '
things, have made the most consid- ;
?rable effort during the war. It must
not be forgotten that it is their force
which is the final guaranty of the
peace of tho world. Under these
conditions, is it unjust that in the
language not of dictators but of
councillors and friends they now
say "We cannot guarantee frontiers
if we do not believe, that these fron?
tiers satisfy certain principles of
right and that they will not leave
causes of trouble and conflict re?
maining in the world"?
"'The same reasoning applies to
the minorities. It is with the same
idea in mind that the status of the
minorities has been mentioned.
" 'If you wish that the principal
Allied and associated powers guar?
antee the very existence of the states
is it unjust that they should have
satisfaction on the conditions which
they deem indispensable to avoid
future causes of war? ... If
the world is again perturbed, if the
conditions that we consider as fun?
damental are again put into ques?
tion, the guaranty which is given to
you means that the United States
will send their armies and their
fleet from one side of the ocea* to
the other.'
Burden Upon Greater Powers
"Under the version giver, out at the
White House the President says:
"'Anil back of this lies this funda?
mental important fact that when
the decisions are made the Allied
and associated powers guarantee to
maintain them. It is perfectly evi?
dent upon a moment's reflection that
the chief burden of their maintaining
will fall upon the greater powers.
The chief burden of the war fell
upon the greater powers, and if it had
not been for their military action we
would not be here to settle these
questions, and therefore we must not
close our eyes to the fact that in the
last analysis the military and naval
strength of .the great powers will be
the final guaranty of the peace of
the world. . . . How can a power
like the United States, for example
(for I can speak of no other), after
signing this treaty, if it contains
elements which they do not believe
will be permanent, go 3,000 miles
away across the sea and report to its
people that it has made a settlement
of the peace of the werld? It cannot
do so, and yet there underlies all of
these transactions the expectation on
the part; (for example) of Rumania
and of Czecho-Slovakia, and of Serbia
that if any covenants of this settle?
ment are not observed the United
States will send her armies and her
navies to see that they are observed.
In these circumstances is it unrea?
sonable that tho United States should
insist upon being satisfied that the
settlements are correct?'
"Upon both of these reports it is per
fectly plain that the censideratior
upon which Rumania and Serbia wen
urged to consent to a limitation o
their sovereignty was a guaranty o1
that sovereignty by the United State!
with the justified understanding tha
the guaranty (if need be) would bt
made good by sending armies and fleet:
across tho sea. Tiiat guaranty wa:
contained in Article X, and that i?
what Article X means.
Questions Wilson's Infallibility
"I do not question Mr. Wilson's be
lief that the. dispositions of the treat;
for which he was contending on th
31st of May, 1919, were just and fail
I do not question his belief that all th
other multitude of dispositions o
those treaties which undertook t
make over eastern Europe were fail
or were expedient, or were the bes
that could be done under the circuni
stances; but, without disrespect, I d
question Mr. Wilson's infallibility,
do question the complete control c
abstract justice in the processes b
which the four men who dictated tho =
treaties reached their conclusions,
have an impression that there was th
accommodation of conflicting interest
tha giving of something here to gc
something there, the yielding of some
things In order to avoid losing others,
the shading of justice by expediency
which has characterized such confer?
ences'since history began. At the best
they were not inerrant. It would have
been impossible not to overlook some
things, and to make somo mistakes I
have n strong impression that some
of their conclusions were mistake?.
"And I think it most objectionable
that the American people shall enter
into a solemn and positive agree?
ment to guarantee and maintain
by force of arms for all time the dis- j
positions of territory and sovereignty
which these four men made in the year i
1919. That is a part of what Article X ?
undertakes to do.
"About the worst thing in the rela?
tions between nations is to make a
treaty and break it. To maintain the
faith of treaties is a prime necessity
for the peace of the world. To manu- ;
facture treaties that are to be but ?
scraps of paper is fatal to the moral :
standards through which' alone peace ,
can be preserved. *
"We are told there is nothing in
the covenant which in the least in?
terferes with or impairs the right of
Congress to declare war or not de?
clare war according to its own in?
dependent judgment as our Constitu?
tion provides."
Refusal Would Be Breach
"But, if we have entered into the
guarantee of Article X and circum- !
stancei? arise which require war to
make good its guaranty as described
by the President in bis speech of May
31, 1919, then refusal of Congress to
pass the necessary resolution would be ?
a breach of the covenant, and the |
enly independent judgment of Congress ?
would be whether our government ,
should keep the treaty or break it. '
"What is the probability of the ,
United States making good such a
guaranty?
"Making war nowaday.? depends upon
the genuine sympathy of the
people of the country at the
time when they are called upon i
to tight. It must be a cause the people i
are interested in, believe in, are will?
ing to fight for and make sacrifices for j
at the time. No agreement made, by |
any government years before will carry ?
the American people into a war in I
which they are not interested, or which
they do not at the time deem just.
There was a time when governments
controlled peoples, and could make war
at will; but in these days no govern?
ment of a free democracy can deliver
its people upon the field of battle ex?
cept by the people's will at that time.
"It is a practical certainty that if
the American government enters into
the obligations of Article X, so posi?
tive in its terms, so broad in its scope,
so unlimited in its duration, the time
will presently come (as it has already
come swiftly to western Europe) when
the Inited States will be called upon
to make good its guaranty by force,
and when the people of the United
States will be unwilling to make the
sacrifice of life and treasure to carry
on war in a distant land for a cause
of which they know little, and for
which they care less. The presence
of such a stipulation in the league
covenant is an element of structural
weakness in the scheme, for a cove?
nant violated in any material part
ceases to be enforceable.
"In all efforts to secure united ac?
tion among nations in this world of
widely differing character and opinion
and starraards of conduct and interests
it is a matter of vital importance not
merely to secure agreements which cor?
respond to abstract standards of right,
but to limit agreements so that they
will not violate too suddenly and
sharply existing standards of conduct,
with the result that they are not ob?
served and the whole agreement falls.
"When the peace conference met in
Paris there were two quite separate
and distinct duties before it,
"One of these duties was to determine :
and impose upon the Central Powers '
the terms of peac?. Th? other duty ?
was to propose to the world an organl
zation for tho preservation of future !
peace.
"The first duty was the final stage of
the war itself. It was the imposition
of the will of the conquering nation?,
upon the conquered nations. It in?
volved taking away great territories
from the vanquished nations and dis?
tributing them to the Greeks, and
Serbs, and Rumanians, and Czecho?
slovaks, and Poles, and Italians, and
French, and Danes. It was the exer?
cise of power, through military force,
accomplished through long years of
struggle and sacrifice of the Great
War. It was a necessary part of this
process that the nations to which lands
were distributed should be put in
peaceable possession and established in
possession. The United States was a
party to the process because she was a
party to the war, and the process was
a part of the war. We can all see now
how truly the Senate said long ago
that process should have been tho first
matter of urgent speed and should have
been completed while the armies of the
Allies were in being and the immediate
exercise of power was possible.
AU Neutral? Concerned
"The second duty of the conference
to proposo an organization for the
preservation of future peace was en?
tirely different in its character. All
neutral nations were equally con?
cerned in that. It involved tho pro?
posal of an organization not for the
purpose of making war or of impos?
ing the results of war, but which pre
supposed a world already at pear. ?,.,
which was to be adapted towZJS
the peace already existing. ]? rZV^*
an organization for the exere *? ?
physical force., but by the un'v.-,!,
agreement of the civilized worH it ?,
to be an organization to make efectu
the exercise and dominance of'rr,~i
force in the conduct of natior? tw?
world was tired of alliance* to p??-.?
war by force. We had learned tl
centuries of experience that sue *
anees do not prevent war, but were'-'
vary the combination of the wa-. .'?
elements, and we had learned tha? 7*
good intentions however sincere) i?
the making of the alliance could ever
that inevitable result. The eler*.,?*"
of the problem had beer exhs:
studied and were weil understood fc'y
good and thoughtful people in &:? c .'
lized countries. They realized that ?;-?
world cannot be made good, n.'ira,
peaceable by rompu!?!'-",; that the "r-P.'
opposition of force to force ii
no progress toward better thing?- that
the only line of profrre.-s !s ?
the growth of the moral qualities tha*
make for peace, and that an organe?!
tion must be created which ?.,- .
ford alternatives to wir in tri? oppor.
tunity to secure justice by peaceable
means, which shall edu.-ate tr.or?!
forces through the exercise cf n.or?!
forces, which shall promote refpect for
law, a sentiment for justice, a kr.o*'
edge of truth, a desire for conciliation.
Everybody knew that this "?mild be a
slow process, as ali proces-os of id
vancing civilization ha-, e brer. ?;on;
but it was weil understood that re?;
progress toward peace and justice
(Continued en next ???t.
Anticipatory
Advertising
To have a "distribution" means among sales
managers that a commodity is in stock, ready for
sale in a sufficient number of stores to be con?
venient for the public.
An automobile might have thorough distribu?
tion with one thousand dealers.
A breakfast food, to be equally well dis?
tributed, might require forty thousand retail sales
outlets.
Should a new product be advertised before
securing distribution, or after?
Obviously, advertising is most effective and
economical when every sale it can induce may
be easily consummated in some nearby store.
On the other hand, the average store does not
wish to put in stock new, unknown and unasked
for goods.
"Advertise and create a demand," says the .
merchant, "and then we will stock your lines."
Anticipatory advertising loses some retail
6ales but facilitates the getting of a thorough
distribution economically.
You remember the old question of the priority
of the? chicken or the egg.
Butterick?Publisher
The Delineator The Designer
($e.5o a Year) Everybody's ($s.o<m Year)
Magazine
($2.75 a Year)
%JP 564-566 wo 566 ^if?h^Prnur.?^ 4-6? an* 47? STS
I
If ??,'??? - . " ? ? -?
fOrl EV?./SOvlAL EVENT
| ? EVENING ^?V/NS
! STREET AHO AFTERNOON PESES
DAY AND EVENIMC WRAPS
TAILORED AND COSTUME SUITS
BLOUSES-HATS
AND EXQUISITETURS
Stop One Minute
and take count of what you pay
for meat, vegetables and many
other foods. Then note what you
pay for a large loaf of
WARD'S
Mother Hubbard
BREAD
When you figure the superior food value and
low cost of MOTHER HUBBARD
BREAD as compared with other foods,
you have the real reason why you should
Eat a Pound of
Mother Hubbard Bread Every Day
The Nutritious and Economical Every-Meal Food
1?,-?-?
% A STORE OF INDIVIDUAL SHOPS |?| FIFTH AVE., 37th AND j8th STS. ?>
i f rattbUn Simon & Co. I
i ?
'"? A saving 0/^145.?? as new lozv prices ?
S become effective in // ?
I Hudson. Seal Coats Japl
? For Women and Misses '^^M: $
?> AVw Winter Models Custom-Made t - ;^y ;
g //; our own Fifth Avenue Work- \
S rooms of First Quality Skins \
S HUDSON SEAL COATS (DYED MUSKRAT) ALL
g SEAL OR TRIMMED WITtf GRAY SQUIRREL,
3 BEAVER, SKUNK OR AUSTRALIAN OPOSSUM j
S 36-mch MODEL (Until now 595.00) . . 450.??
g 40-inch MODEL (Until now 695.00) . . 550.??
?) 45-inch MODEL (Until now 795.00) . . 650.??
| The Fur Shop is first to establish clefi
| nitely the new lower prices?prices not
| only lower than earlier in this season,
3 but as low as later this season ....
I
?2 High Quality <J?Caintaived
% J?ovo ^Prices T^egatned!
S FEMININE FUR SHOP?/w/// Floor
J