The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
A League of Nations SPEECH OF HON. ROBERT L. OWEN OF O K LA H O M A IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES FEBRUARY 26, 1919 WASHINGTON 1919 1107(54— 19405 S P E E C H OF I I OX. ROBERT L. O WE N . A TEAGUE OF NATIONS. Mr. OWEN. Mr. President, the people of Europe and the peo ple of the world are heartsick. Crepe hangs on their doors. Men without arms, men without legs, men without eyes, men who are maimed in every conceivable way can be seen everywhere throughout the world as a result of this last great exhibition of human folly and ambition— the world war precipitated by the Hohenzollerns. The world is anxious to establish world peace, world com merce, world happiness. And every statesman, it seems to me, Mr. President, should feel himself charged with the responsi bility of trying constructively to attain this end. Delegates representing the United States. Great Britain, France, Italy, Japan, Belgium, Brazil, China, Czecho-Slovakia, Greece, Poland, Portugal, Itoumania, and Serbia have submitted for the consideration of the world and of the statesmen of the world a report formulating a plan for a league of nations. No thoughtful man, certainly no thoughtful statesman, ac quainted with the fallibility of man would expect that this first formulation of a draft would be absolutely perfect. It is not perfect, hut it is a beginning and contains many things of very great value. And it can be perfected so as to completely safe guard the world against war and at the same time completely safeguard the sovereignty and absolute independence of eacii one of the member nations. Statesmen anxious to serve the world should deal with this formulated plan in a spirit of helpfulness, o f construction rather than in a spirit ot tearing down or of destruction; much less should they show an intemperate or an ungenerous attitude in criticizing a document, the importance of which to the pres ervation of the future liberty and happiness of mankind is so obvious. Mr. President, modern science, with the mastery of the air, with the submarine, with poisonous gases, with the steel war tank, with the machine gun, with rapid transportation facili ties, with tremendous output of war machinery and the muni tions of war make it unthinkable that the world will permit itself to be destroyed by a repetition of the recent war, which, if it is to be repeated, will be far more terrible than the last war, and which will break down civilization itself. The men and the women and the children of the world who labor to produce the values of the world are entitled to peace and to happiness, and woe be to those blind statesmen who fail now to safeguard the people of the world in their rights to life, to liberty, and to the pursuit of happiness. 110764— 19405 O We liave already seen the effect in Russia, in Germany, and in Austria of the complete failure of government to protect life, and we have seen the great mass of men moving like a terrible ocean sweeping the Romanoffs to their graves and tearing down the standards of government which have failed the reasonable expectation of the people. It was the blindness and the dullness, it was the stupidity, it was the greed, it was the arrogance o f the officials o f France that lead to the French Revolution. These same forces led to the revolution in Russia and then to the extreme form of political madness— the Bolsheviki movement of a class war— the war against those who have property or education by those who suffer from famine. The representatives of the belligerent nations are now as sembled at Paris conferring with the representatives of nations newly born and to be born, with a view to using the great in fluence of the belligerent powers in the establishment of selfgoverning nations, with territories properly delimited and with a view to giving protection to the backward nations oc cupying colonies and dependencies, such as the ignorant blacks of the German African colonies. T H E T A S K IS TH E R E . Mr. President, the immediate peace of the world, the cessation and prevention of actual war between the Balkan States, be tween Bulgaria and Roumania, between Roumania and the Ukraine, between Poland and Prussia, between the various States that are being born and the surrounding States impera tively demand that the conference o f the great powers at Paris lay down the terms fixing territorial boundaries and establish the means by which to keep ambitious States from assailing each other and disturbing the peace of the world. They must con sider the question o f arbitration of international disputes. It was only the power of Germany and her allies which prevented the nations o f the world from agreeing at The Hague to inter national arbitration and international disarmament in 1899 and 1907. The Paris conference must consider the question of disarma ment as a means of protecting the future peace and to prevent Europe again being thrown into an universal war. All the nations of the world are ready to agree to arbitration of in ternational disputes and to disarmament. As far as the United States is concerned the House of Representatives has just voted in favor of reducing our Army to the minimum o f do mestic protection. We have made treaties with nations all over the world to arbitrate our differences. The people o f the United States are in favor of international disarmament. They are in favor of arbitrating differences with other nations, and I say flatly and emphatically that it is better to leave any dispute that might arise between the officials of the United States and the officials o f Brazil or Persia or South Africa or Great Britain unsettled, as some o f the Revolutionary claims are still unset tled, than to fly to arms and kill millions o f men to gratify official impatience, arrogance, or anger. Mr. President, I have read carefully the so-called “ Formula tion of a plan for the league of nations.” It interposes a num ber of obstacles to those who might desire to make war. First. Article 10 pledges all of the member nations “ to respect the territorial integrity and existing political independence” of 110764— 19405 5 all States members of the league. This is a guaranty of all the nations of the world of the utmost importance. Moreover, article 10 pledges all the nations of the world “ to preserve against ex ternal aggression the territorial integrity and existing political independence” of all the States members of the league, whether great or small. This is an undertaking of gigantic magnitude and is a positive bond safeguarding the territorial integrity and existing independence of all States. And no war can happen in the future if this pledge is respected either in the first or second of its provisions. If all nations respect the territorial integrity and political independence of other nations, we will have peace, and if any nation have the temerity not to respect this bond and be guilty of external aggression, it will face all the world pledged to oppose it in its aggression. Aggressive war under such a menace is well-nigh inconceivable. Is not this a mag nificent barrier against a future ambitious or warlike State? Article 11 declares that any war or threat of war is a mat ter of concern to the league, and the high contracting parties reserve the right to take any action that may be deemed wise and effectual “ to safeguard the peace of the nations.” In other words, it is the declared intention of all of the nations of the world to take steps to prevent war, and to take these steps in time. Article 12 pledges every nation that it “ will in no case resort to war without previously submitting the question and matters involved either to arbitration or to inquiry by the executive coun cil, and until three months after the award by the arbitrators or a recommendation by the executive council, and that they will not even then resort to war as against a member of the league which complies with the award of the arbitrators or the recommendation of the executive council.” Is not this pledge under article 12, made by all nations to every nation in the world, of great value as a deterrent and obstacle to war? What official will dare to face the whole world with a breach o f article 12? Article 13 agrees to submit questions to arbitration and carry out in good faith the award. Is not this agreement with all the nations of the world a most important means of preventing unsettled disputes leading to war? If this had been the rule of international procedure it would have prevented the last war. Article 14 provides a permanent court o f international jus tice, which may sit as an arbitration tribunal under article 13. Under article 15 the members agree to refer to the executive council any dispute likely to lead to rupture which is not sub mitted to arbitration, and if the council fails to agree, then to publish the arguments for and against by the majority and minority members, and here is also provided an appeal to the larger “ body of delegates.” In this way the most troublesome cases would be submitted first to the council and, secondly, to the representatives of all the nations of the world for consideration, so that world opinion can be brought to bear upon the merits of the controversy and time ensue in which world opinion may be formulated and dur- 110704— 19405 G ing which the litigants may feel the pressure of world opinion before they venture to go to war. Mr. WILLIAMS. And world prejudice be obviated. Mr. OWEN. And world prejudice be obviated, as the Senator from Mississippi very properly observes. Mr. President, the only objection which I have to articles 12, 13, 14, and 15 is that they permit war as a remedy after having provided these means for conciliation and arbitration. In my own opinion, the making o f war for the settling of a civil dispute is a heinous crime, and it should be branded by the league of nations and by the opinion of mankind as the highest of all international crimes. Nothing could be more wicked or more dastardly than the organized killing of human beings be cause of an odious dispute relative to property or relative to some alleged insult. As long as man remains with passion or with defective reason, so long may the world expect that some man will insult another man. And the bigger the fool and the more arrogant the ass, the more likely he is to offer an insult. But those who have brains and self-control should know how to deal with those who lack brains and self-control. Article 16, air. President, provides a world penalty for any member nation that wages war without previously submitting the matter o f dispute to arbitration and inquiry and determina tion. This penalty is that when such an arrogant, warlike nation wages aggressive war in violation o f the law laid down by the league, such nation— “ shall thereby, ipso facto, be deemed to have committed an act of war against all o f the other members of the league which hereby undertake immediately to subject it to the severance of all trade or financial relations, the prohibition o f all intercourse between their nationals and the nationals of the covenantbreaking State, and the prevention o f all financial, commercial, or personal intercourse between the nationals of the eoveuantbreaking State and the nationals o f any other State, whether a member of the league or not.” What official on the face of the earth would dare face this penalty. The penalty should be directed, however, in my judg ment, against any nation that invades the territorial integrity of another nation. Official murder by aggressive war o f offense should be stopped by the mandate o f the people of the world, and officials who violate that mandate should be held personally responsible. Is it not clear, Mr. President, that the captains of Industry and the great financiers of the country whose support is vital to successful war and whose support in Germany was expressly solicited by William II ns a primary condition to enable him to wage the late war, would never under such a threat as this dare to support an aggressive war which would of necessity mean the instant paralysis o f all their enterprises and their ultimate financial and industrial destruction? And is it possible that any official charged with the authority o f declaring war would feel justified in declaring an aggressive war against all the world? The human imagination can not picture such a prop osition. Moreover, we must now remember that every military dynasty is gone. Where are the Hapsburgs? Where are the Hohen/.ollerns? Where are the petty kings o f the German States? Where is King Constantine of Greece? Where is the 1107G 4— 19 40 5 Romanoff family and the Czar of all the Russia*? Where is the Sultan of Turkey? Where the King of Bulgaria? Where is the King of Roumania? Abdicated all, and tied to cover! What real war-making power has any king on the globe? Not one is left. Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. President, will the Senator permit me to interrupt him? The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Okla homa yield to the Senator from Mississippi? Mr. OWEN. I yield to the Senator from Mississippi. Mr. WILLIAMS. I want, in reenforcement of what the Sena tor has said in the first clause of his last argument, to suggest to his mind this consideration: Why can not we in the treaty of peace take a leaf out of American history? The Senator remem bers that the thirteenth amendment to the Constitution declares that no debt made by the Confederacy or by any State forming a member of the Confederacy should be valid or ever paid. That was passed with the idea of discouraging future projects of that sort. Suppose that in the treaty of peace we provided that all debts made by Germany, Austria, Turkey, find Bulgaria for the furtherance of their objects in this war were declared to be nullified and invalid, and that those respective Governments should issue an amount of bonds equal to the amount thereby nullified and rendered invalid, and that the proceeds of those bonds should be devoted to the restoration of Belgium, of north ern France, and of Serbia, what would be the effect, I want to ask the Senator? Mr. OWEN. I think it is a good suggestion as it would help to deter nations from making aggressive war for pri vate objects. It would prove unprofitable under such circum stances. Mr. WILLIAMS. Moreover, would it not have an effect upon the people who finance wars? Mr. OWEN. Assuredly. Mr. WILLIAMS. Hereafter would not bankers who have financed wars say to the country wanting to finance, an unjust or aggressive war, “ Stop a minute; I must think as to whether or not this war is just, whether it is aggressive or defensive. I f it is not just, the example of the American Republic in the thirteenth amendment and the example of the world in this treaty of peace leads me to suppose that I may lose my money.” And if bankers are threatened with losing their money, does the Senator think they would finance any unjust war in the world? Mr. OWEN. It is perfectly practicable to write into this formulated plan the suggestion made by the Senator from Mis sissippi, and it ought to be done, I think, for it would operate as one of the additional deterrents to w ar; and what we want to do is to deter war making. Mr. WILLIAMS. I am not talking about writing it into these 20 articles of the league of nations, but I am talking about writing it into the final articles of peace. Mr. OWEN. I am agreeable to its b<Mng written into both, to apply to Germany now and to apply to any other nation in the future that dares to make aggressive war on mankind. I thank the Senator for his suggestion. I think Senators ought to consider this matter from a constructive standpoint and help to perfect this formulated plan. 110704— 19405 8 Mr. WILLIAMS. I do not propose to put it in this plan, for I think if you go to amending this plan you will have 14 other people to amend it, and you will never get it through; but I am talking about it as a part of the treaty of peace. Mr. OWEN. Mr. President, the greatest of all democracies, the United States, threw its financial power, its man power, on the side of democracy against autocracy, on the side of right against might, on the side of decency and justice and humanity against those who assaulted the great principles of human life. And autocracy lies in its political grave, never to be resurrected on this earth. Great Britain is a republic, and so are the great dominions speaking the English tongue— Canada, whose border, lying between the United States for 3,000 miles, is undefended except by those who love liberty and justice on both sides of this line; Australia, New Zealand, the South African Union are all republics, and all the colonies and dependencies of Great Britain are in effect republics in greater or less stages of advancement. France and her colonies are republics. Switzer land is a republic. Italy is a republic with a nominal King, who has no power against his parliament or against his people under their structure of government. And so Portugal is a republic, and Spain and Belgium and Holland and Denmark and Norway and Sweden are in substance republics. Mr. WILLIAMS. They are democracies. Mr. OWEN. They are democracies. They have the form of kingdoms, but the substance o f democracies. The nations being born in the Balkans and in Russia are being born as republics. And the subject people of Turkey, under the protection of the great democracies of the world, are being brought into being as embryo republics. China is a great repub lic. Siberia can not be conceived as being anything less than a republic. The Poles, the Jugo-Slavs, and Czechoslovakia are avowedly republics. Even Japan under an Emperor is ruled by a body of elders cooperating with the parliament chosen to represent every class of the people, and Japan, when this war broke out, threw herself at once without hesitation on the side o f the great democracies o f the world. What greater testimony could Japan have given o f her attachment to the doctrines of liberty, justice, and civilization and o f her hostility to dy nastic autocracy? Where is there on earth remaining a mili tary dynastic autocracy that would threaten the future peace of the world? All the Governments o f North and South America, all the Gov ernments of Africa, of Asia, of Europe, of the East Indies, and o f the West Indies are republics or under the patronage of republics. The doctrine that might makes right is dead. The doctrine o f terrorism is dead. The divine right to rule has gone to hell, whence it came. The doctrine of liberty, justice, and humanity is triumphant and is writing its Magna Charta to last for all future time. Let the United States Senate honor itself by lending its very best efforts to perfecting this charter. Mr. President, what was it that protected the liberties of mankind, that protected civilization, that protected the democra cies of the world against the military domination of the Teu tonic dynastic autocracies? It was a league of nations in arms 1107C 4— 19405 0 cooperating as one great league o f democracy against autocracy. It was a league of nations in arms willing to pay the penalty in gigantic sacrifice of property and of human life; willing to die upon the battle field in joint, concerted, cooperative action to protect liberty and civilization. Gen. Foeh, as commander in chief of the armed forces of this great league of nations, directed on the battle line from his headquarters Belgians, Eng lish, Scotch, Irish, French, Italians, Greeks, and Americans, and many others, all of them operating in a league to maintain liberty and to protect human life and organized society through out the world. Shall this lesson bear no fruit? Shall our sons have died in vain who are buried upon the bloody battle fields of Europe? The world wants peace, justice, and liberty, and has shown itself willing to die for this cause. Do not underestimate the demand, Mr. President. Do not deny or ignore this profound aspiration of the human heart. At Paris are assembled repre sentatives— military, economic, political—of all the great democ racies of the world, facing the task of making the world safe against the chaos and disorder of war. The geographical lines of the newborn States must be delimited and agreed upon and authorized. The relations of these nations with each other must be so protected that they do not instantly fly at each others’ throats on some mad issue of geographical boundary or fancied * interest. There must be established by some power somewhere the relations which shall exist between these nations, between them and the balance of the world. The colonies which the Teu tonic dynasty has shown itself unworthy to control must be pro tected and safeguarded by some definite agreement under some safeguard of administration that will establish and maintain peace and order and good conduct, internal and external. This task of readjustment is now being performed at the peace table at Paris, of necessity, by the very nature of the case. Shall all the delegates be withdrawn from the peace conference and the world left in turmoil with the Bolsheviki in control soon to bring on another world war and drag the people of the United States from their peaceful avocations to the havoc and destruction of war? No, Mr. President; there is a better way. The way of order out of chaos. And the proposed league of nations is wise and sound and just in its fundamental principles. It represents the aspirations of the peoples of the world to safeguard the peace of mankind. I have pointed out some of (lie more important provisions, but there are others which must not be overlooked. Article 17 takes care o f the disputes which might arise between members of the league and those who are not members of the league and imposes suitable penalties if a State not a member of the league disregards the provisions of article 12, forbidding it to make war as a remedy because of a dispute with other nations. Article 18 authorizes the league to be intrusted with the joint supervision of the trade in arms and ammunition with the countries in which the control of this traffic is necessary and in the common interest. Article 8 provides for steps to be taken to control the manu facture of munitions by private enterprise, so that private inter110764— 19405-------2 ests may not be made provocative of war, and this article recog nizes the great principle that the maintenance o f peace— “ will require the reduction of national armaments to the lowest point consistent with national safety and enforcement by com mon action o f international obligations, having special regard to the geographical situation and circumstances of eacii State.” Is not article 8 of tremendous importance in removing one of the great dangers to war? Do we not all know that the Teu tonic dynasty for over 20 years was manufacturing on a gigantic scale the munitions of war and organizing armaments far beyond domestic need with the intent and purpose to assail the liberties of Europe and to dominate the world by military force? And shall we not remove this danger from our future by inter national agreement? All the nations o f the world except the Teutonic allies at The Hague in 1907 were ready to agree to disarmament, but were prevented by the King of Prussia and his allies. Now is the most opportune time to write these safe guards by treaty into the international law by the consent and approval of all nations. Article 19 provides a reasonable and just method for ad ministering the affairs of subject peoples and developing them into democracies under charters granted from the league to advanced nations qualified by their resources, their experience, their geographical position to undertake this responsibility as mandatories on behalf o f the league. And the consent, even in these cases, of the backward peoples is recognized, the pro posed formulated plan expressly providing that “ the wishes of these communities must be a special consideration in the selection of the mandatory power,” and “ the mandatory must be responsible for the administration of the territory, subject to conditions which will guarantee freedom of conscience or religion, subject only to the maintenance of public order and morals, the prohibition o f abuses, such as the slave trade, the arms traffic, and the liquor traffic, and the prevention of the establishment of fortifications or military and naval bases, and o f military training o f the natives for other than police purposes and the defense of territory, and will also secure equal oppor tunities for the trade and commerce o f other members o f the league.” And this provision could be further amended to provide that the bill of rights of civilized States, as far as applicable, should be recognized as a part of the principle o f the government of these backward peoples. I suggest the following amendment to article 19— and I feel entirely at liberty to suggest this amendment; and amend ments which are offered or suggested on this floor, I have no doubt, will receive respectful consideration from those who are assembled at Paris, and if they have value I have no doubt that action by our peace commissioners will be taken accord ingly: “ The mandatory must, as far as practicable, recognize the principles of the bills of rights of civilized States in ad ministering the law in such territories, and the charter to the mandatory shall prescribe these principles.” Article 20 provides, as a part of the organization of the league, a permanent bureau of labor, with a view of securing and maintaining fair and humane conditions of labor for men, 1 1 0 7 0 4 — 1 9 -1 0 5 u women, and children by the good offices of the league. Shall we have no means: of objecting when the blacks of the Kongo have their hands cut off because they failed to bring in suffi cient ivory, as we have seen in the bloody days of the past? They, too, must have justice and liberty, and should be educated and civilized as rapidly as circumstances will permit. Mr. President, the happiness of mankind absolutely depends on those who labor; they comprise the world, they are the world. Does this mean that the league of nations, will interfere with the internal sovereignty of member nations? Not at all. Article 10 and article 2ft and other articles protect this vital requirement, and other safeguards can be added. In this mat ter the league would function with no more authority than that of a bureau of publicity— I speak of the particular organization of a “ bureau of la b or”—which coukl appeal to the opinion of mankind for the protection and conservation of human life where it is not adequately safeguarded. Article 21 provides that the high contracting parties agree that provision shall be made through the instrumentality of the league to. secure and maintain, freedom of transit and equitable treatment for the commerce of all members. Is not this decent and just and right? Shall interior nations having no access to. the sea be bottled up without the right to ship their goods under bond in transit to the sea? It was tins denial of an outlet that has been one of the contributing causes for war in the Balkans. Why shall not suitable provisions be drawn up by amendments to the plan to secure and maintain, these rights': Mr. KELLOGG;. Mr. President, will it interrupt the Senator ill I ask him a question? M'r, OWEN. Not at all. The LMvEtSIDXNG OFFICER. Does the Senator from Okla homa yield to. the Senator from Minnesota? Mr. OWEN'. I yield. Mr. KELLOGG. I understood the Senator to say that the proposed constitution of the League did not interfere with the internal affairs of the various governments. I should like the Senator's opinion as to whether articles 12. 15, and 16 together provide for the arbitration of all questions without distinction, and whether or not disputes as to political questions, such as trade relations with other countries, import duties, and so forth, would come under the provisions of the proposed constitution? Mr. OWEN. In my judgment, it only relates to those things which are external, because internal affairs are safeguarded, by article 10; which guarantees to respect and to preserve the territorial integrity and the existing political independence of every nation. Mr. KELLOGG. Does that include all laws pertaining to our dealings with other countries, such as immigration laws, tariff laws, and trade relations? Mr. OWEN. The question, of immigration and tariffs affects the infernal affairs of our own country and concerns our exist ing political independence, and certain *vade relations might do SO; Mr. KELLOGG. Would the proposed constitution prevent us from changing our existing political, eruditions? 11 0 7 6 4 — 19 4 0 5 Mr. OWEN. Not at all. I shall deal with that a little later on. I have not quite come to that, but I am going expressly to discuss that and show what my opinion is with regard to it. Mr. McCUMBER. Mr. President----- The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Okla homa yield to the Senator from North Dakota? Mr. OWEN. I yield. Mr. McCUMBER. I call the Senator’s attention to the fact that article 12 does not require the nations to submit every controversy to arbitration-----Mr. OWEN. That is perfectly obvious. Mr. McCUMBER. But when difficulties arisef it simply pro vides that “ they will in no case resort to war without previously submitting the question and matters involved either to arbitra tion or to inquiry ” by the league. Mr. OWEN. I think that is quite clear. Mr. KELLOGG. If the Senator from Oklahoma will pardon me, the inquiry is enforced in exactly the same way as the judg ment o f the arbitration tribunal. Mr. McCUMBER. I do not agree with the Senator. Mr. OWEN. Article 22 agrees to place under the control of the league all international bureaus already established by general treaties, if the parties to such treaties consent. What objection could there be to this by consent? Is it not better to have a clear ing house between the nations to which all international business may be directed, and where through a common center interna tional relationships may be conveniently adjusted? Having a common center for international business is just as convenient and necessary as having a clearing house for the bankers of New York City, where around a common board they can in stantly dispatch their business with each other. Suppose each nation of 50 nations must transact all business by an inde pendent means, then each nation would have to send 50 rep resentatives to 50 nations, making 2,500 representatives alto gether, at great expense, great confusion, great delay. But, meeting around a common council table, one representative of each nation would meet one representative from every other nation at a common board, and 50 men would transact the busi ness of 2,500 men. This is merely common sense and a practice based upon mod ern science and usage in the business world. Article 23 provides for publicity of international agreements with the penalty that they shall be void unless registered with the league. This prevents secret treaties. It makes them void and an act of treachery to all other nations. It is a powerful deterrent. Article 24 merely provides for the reconsideration of obso lete treaties which might contain some element of danger to the peace of the world. This article is entirely justified, and no man would deny it. Article 25 provides that the high contracting parties agree that the present proposed covenant is accepted as abrogating all obligations as between themselves inconsistent with the great principles laid down in the proposed agreement to safeguard the peace of the world, and contains an engagement that the mem ber nations will not hereafter enter into any engagements incon sistent with the terms thereof. 1107G 4— 19405 13 Is not this a wise provision of importance in safeguarding tiie future peace of mankind? And there is imposed the fur ther duty that new powers admitted to the league shall come under the same rules. Is not this common sense, and in the interest of the world? Article 26 provides that amendments to the covenant of the league shall only take effect when ratified by the States whose representatives compose the executive council and by threefourths of the States whose representatives compose the body of delegates. Mr. President, do you not here observe that this gives a veto upon any amendment to this instrument not acceptable to the United States, and gives a like veto to Great Britain and to France and to Italy and to Japan, and is it not obvious that no amendment would therefore be possible to this proposed agreement betwreen the nations except with the approval and consent of the United States? Is this not a great safeguard against the possibility o f any thing being written in the relations between the member na tions of the league that might at any tim'e be embarrassing to any of the great powers or to the world? But, Mr. President, a great objection has been made by vari ous honorable and able Senators to the formulated plan on the ground that it wras proposed to govern the world by the over lordship of a body of delegates representing the' high con tracting parties and by an executive council and by a perma nent international secretariat. It has been urged with giieat eloquence and zeal that article 1 would invade the sovereignty of the United States. I confess very frankly that article 1 should be left in no obscurity, but it is easy to amend article 1. The interpretation which has been put upon article 1 by its critics could cer tainly not have been the intention of the representatives of Great Britain and France and Italy and Japan or others of the 14 nations who approve this draft. They certainly had no intention of sacrificing the sovereignty of Great Britain or France or Italy or Japan or Belgium or China or of other mem bers. On the contrary, they have taken great pains in the body of the formulated plan to safeguard the territorial integ rity and political independence of all State members of the league as they now exist in article 10, where the members mutually undertake to respect and preserve against external aggression, the territorial integrity, and existing political inde pendence of each other. This is not consistent with the inter pretations o f article 1, that would permit the body of delegates to invade by statutes any domestic concern of any nation. The proposal of Lieut. Gen. Smuts, who represents perhaps the best English thought, was as follow s: “ Tenth. The constitution of the league will be that of a per manent conference between the governments o f the constituent States for the purpose of joint international action in certain defined respects, and will not derogate from the independence of those States. It will consist of a general conference, a council, and courts of arbitration and conciliation. “ Eleventh. The general conference, in which all constituent States will have equal voting power, will meet periodically to 1107G 4— 19405 n discuss matters submitted to it by the council. These matters will be general measures of international law or arrangements or general proposals for limitation of armaments or for securing world peace, or any other general resolutions, the discussion of which by the conference is desired by the council before they are forwarded for the approval of the constituent governments. Any resolutions passed by the conference will have the effect of recommendations to the national governments and parlia ments.” That was Gen. Smuts’s idea. That idea is prevalent all over Great Britain. That is the general conception of the authority to be granted to these delegates who would meet around a coun cil table, representing the nations of the world. It will here be observed that Gen. Smuts only proposed that the resolutions passed by the conference would have the effect of recommendations to the national governments and parlia ments— nothing more. It is perfectly easy to amend article 1 by inserting the following words: “ T h e b o d y o f d e l e g a t e s a n d t h e e x e c u t iv e H A V E NO A U T H O R IT Y TO M A K E L A W S , BU T M A Y c o u n c il sh all PROPOSE IN T E R N A T IO N A L R E SO LU TIO N S TO BE SU B M ITT E D TO T H E M EM B ER N A T IO N S FOR CO N SID E RA TIO N . AND W HEN SUCH RE SO LU TION S H A V E BEEN R A TIFIE D B Y A L L T H E S T A T E S W H O S E RE PR ESE N TATIV ES COM POSE T H E E X EC U TIVE CO U N C IL AN D B Y T H R E E -F O U R T H S OF T H E S T A T E S W H O S E RE PR ESE N TATIV ES COM POSE T H E BODY OF DELEGATES S H A L L H A V E T H E EFFECT OF IN T E R N A T IO N A L L A W .” This is the method proposed in article 20 for amendments to the formulated plan. Any amendment must, under article 20, have the approval of the United States before it can be amended. Mr. President, the peace of the world is too important, the future happiness and security of our people is too important, that we should fail at this wonderfully auspicious time to adopt a plan which will safeguard the future of the world. I am quite willing to agree, and determined as well, that no obscurity whatever should be permitted in the proposed plan, because it is one of the frailties of human nature to have powers construed into a constitution by those who are charged with the duty of its administration, and therefore it is of special impor tance to put in negative proposals, such as our forefathers inserted in the Constitution of the United States. We should insert in the proposed formulated plan that “ n o t h in g CO N TAIN ED IN T H E IN S T R U M E N T IT S E L F SH O U LD BE CONSTRUED A S G RA N TIN G A N Y R IG H T S TO T H E LEAGUE OVER T H E IN T E R N A L A F F A IR S OF M EM BER N A T IO N S , BU T TH AT EVERY M EM B ER N ATIO N SH O U LD BE RECOGNIZED A S H A V IN G CO M PLETE R IG H T OVER ITS E M I GRATION AND IM M IG R A T IO N , ITS IM PO R TS AN D EXPO RTS, AN D A L L ITS DOM ESTIC A F F A IR S W IT H O U T A N Y IN TERFEREN CE W H A T E V E R BY T H E LE AG U E .” Mr. KELLOGG. Mr. President-----The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Okla homa yield to the Senator from Minnesota? Mr. OWEN. I yield. Mr. KELLOGG. That is exactly what I had in mind. As Senators seem to disagree as to the meaning of sections 12, 15, and 16, it does seem to me that it should be made plain, so that no political question can be raised. 110764— 19405 15 Mr. OWEN. I agree with the Senator that an instrument of such importance as this should be made absolutely plain; and, frankly, I should not feel justified in supporting an instru ment of this magnitude and this importance unless it were made plain, and I think the Senate of the United States are in a position to make it plain. They have the capacity; they ought to have the will. As far as I am concerned. I shall stand firmly for seeing that this instrument shall be free from any ambiguity whatever. It is not necessary for the league to interfere with the in ternal affairs of any member nation. I am sure that Great Britain and France and Italy and Japan do not contemplate granting this right to the league of nations. Mr. FRANCE. Mr. President-----The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Okla homa yield to the Senator from Maryland? Mr. OWEN. I yield to the Senator. Mr. FRANCE. I am very much interested in what the Sen ator is saying. Would he care to define what he means by “ internal affairs” ? Would he consider a question arising between Great Britain and one of her colonies— Ireland, for example— as being an internal affair, or not? Mr. OWEN. I would. We can not at this time and in this way undertake to settle the disputes between member nations and the component parts of member nations, unless we want to tear asunder the whole procedure. We can not undertake that. We can not go into it. You might as well undertake to deal between the United States and Texas as a part of this proposal. It i* easy enough to have an amendment that the league of nations shall not exercise any powers except those that are ex pressly granted to the league. But the great principles o f inter national law which are laid down in this formulated plan are vital to our own future and to the peace of the world, and I venture to express the hope that the Senate of the United States will consider this matter constructively, with a view to perfect ing the plan rather than with a view to confusing counsel and exciting suspicion and arousing the hostility of our people on the theory that this instrument is full of pitfalls and dangerous. We assuredly have the wisdom to analyze the formulated plan and to point out how it may be improved and made free from any objection, and this ought to be done. I do not care, Mr. President, to repeat the arguments which have already been presented with such force upon the floor relative to the views of our revered first President in his Fare well Address. 1 am altogether in accord with the principles expressed in the Farewell Address o f Washington. But the day of American isolation has long since ended. Our interests are bound up in the welfare and happiness of mankind. We are no longer isolated. A submarine could come up the Potomac River and blow down the Capitol of the United States, it could drop a gas bomb in the Senate that would smother the most glorious declamation and the most magnificent oratory. We are not isolated; we can never be isolated. We are face to face with the duty and the task of using the influence of this great Nation to bring about the security and peace of the world. 110704— 19405 16 Our people realized this when they determined that the time had come for 11s to engage in suppressing the military autoc racy of the Teutonic allies, and we have just completed that task at a stupendous cost in treasure and in human life. We can not afford to have another world war. The interests of tire American people demand peace, security, stability, in order vliat they may enjoy the rights guaranteed by our Constitution of life, liberty, and the pursuit o f happiness. Mr. President,, may I not be permitted to pray that my colleagues shall consider this mater with very great patience, and deliberation, to the end of perfecting this proposal estab lishment of international law in order that our people may have the peace to which they are so thoroughly entitled? America brought this war to an end. to the imperishable glory of her gallant and intrepid sons, who, over every obstacle of barbed wire, sunken trenches, concealed machine guns, against poisonous gases, against a hurricane of shrapnel, and high ex plosives, never paused and never failed to advance until the German military commanders collapsed. The people of Europe and the people of the world owe to America a debt which can never be paid, and America must not depart from her high standards o f human service. The time is at hand to establish the conditions which will verify the prophecy of a thousand years of peace. The time has come when there shall be established upon the earth the great principles of liberty, of justice, of humanity, and America should take the leading part in that constructive work. I am one of those who strongly advised the President of the United States to go to Europe iit order that the ideals of America might be presented to the-Euro pean statesmen, whom I knew were embarrassed because of their long and painful experience with militarism. I knew that they could not help thinking in terms of strategic boundaries, in terms o f battalions, in terms o f armaments, and I am rejoiced that our President was able to favorably influence European opinion, so that wc now have laid before us the preliminary formulation of a plan which when perfected will effect and maintain forever the peace of the world. Let America take her place in the front rank in this forever-glorious enterprise. I ask permission to insert in the R ecord a quotation from Mr. Roosevelt upon this matter, which he made in his Nobel speech, as an exhibit to my remarks. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so or dered. The matter referred to is as follow s: [F r o m an a d d re ss on “ In te r n a tio n a l P e a c e ” b e fo r e th e N o b e l C o m m it t e e , d e liv e r e d a t C h r is t ia n ia , N o r w a y , M a y 5 , 1 0 1 0 , by d o r e R o o s e v e lt .] P r iz e Theo ( I t a l i c s a r e in s e r t e d to e m p h a s iz e c e r t a in p r o p o s a ls .— R L. O ) N o w , h a v in g fr e e ly a d m it t e d th e lim it a t io n s to o u r w o r k a n d th e q u a l i f i c a t i o n s t o b e b o r n e in m i n d , I f e e l t h a t I h a v e t h e r i g h t t o h a v e m y w o r d s t a k e n s e r i o u s l y , w h e n I p o i n t o u t w h e r e , in u :v j u d g m e n t , g r e a t a d v a n c e c a n b e m a d e in t h e c a u s e o f i n t e r n a t i o n a l p e a c e . I sp eak a s a p r a c t i c a l m a n , a n d w h a t e v e r I n o w a d v o c a t e I a c t u a l l y t r i e d tc d o w h e n I w a s f o r th e t im e b e in g th e h e a d o f a g r e a t N a t io n , a n d k e e n ly je a lo u s o f it s h o n o r a n d in te r e s t. I a sk o th e r n a tio n s to d o o n ly w h a t I s h o u ld b e g la d to se e m y o w n N a t io n d o . T h e a d v a n c e c a n b e m a d e a lo n g s e v e r a l lin e s . F ir s t o f a ll. th e r e c c n be tr e a tie s o f a r b itr a tio n . T h ere a re, o f cou rse. S ta te s so b ack w ard th a t a . ' f u V tv.z e ( * c o m m u n i t y o u g h t n o t t o e n t e r i n t o a n a r b i t r a t i o n tre a ty w ith th e m , a t le a s t u n til w e h a v e g o n e m u ch fu r th e r th a n a t p r e se n t in s e c u r in g s o m e k in d o f i n t e r n a t io n a l p o lic e a c t io n . B u t a il r e a lly t 110764— 19405 c iv iliz e d c o m m u n it ie s s h o u ld h a v e e ffe c t iv e a r b it r a t io n t r e a t ie s a m o n s t h e m s e lv e s . I b e lie v e t h a t t h e s e t r e a t ie s c a n c o v e r a lm o s t a ll q u e s tio n s lia b le to a r is e b e tw e e n s u c h n a t io n s , i f t h e y a r e d r a w n w it h th e e x p lic it a g r e e m e n t t h a t e a ch c o n t r a c t in g p a r ty w ill r e s p e c t th e o t h e r s t e r r i t o r y a n d i t s a b s o l u t e s o v e r e i g n t y w i t h i n th a t- t e r r i t o r y , a n d t h e e q u a lly e x p lic it a g r e e m e n t t h a t (a s id e fr o m th e v e r y r a r e c a s e s w h e r e th e n a tio n s h o n o r is v i t a l l y c o n c e r n e d ) a ll o t h e r p o s s ib le s u b j e c t s o f c o n tr o v e r s y w ill be su b m itte d to a r b itr a tio n . Such a tre a ty w o u ld in s u r e p e a c e u n le s s o n e p a r t y d e lib e r a te ly v io la t e d it . O f cou rse as y e t th e r e is n o a d e q u a te s a fe g u a r d a g a in s t su c h d e lib e r a te v io la t io n , b u t t h e e s t a b li s h m e n t o f a s u ffic ie n t n u m b e r o f t h e s e t r e a t i e s w o u ld g o a - l o n g w a y t o w a r d c r e a t i n g a w o r l d o p i n i o n w h i c h w o u l d f i n a l l y fin d V io la tio n *1 *** ^ p r o v is io n of m e th o d s to fo r b id or p u n ish any su ch th e re is th e fu r t h e r d e v e lo p m e n t o f T h e H a g u e T r ib u n a l, o f th e w ork o f th e c o n fe r e n c e s a n d c o u r ts a t T h e H a g u e . It h a s been w e l l s a i d t h a t t h e f i r s t H a g u e c o n f e r e n c e f r a m e d a M a g n a C’ h a r t a f o r t h e n a t i o n s ; it s e t b e f o r e u s a n i d e a l w h i c h h a s a lr e a d y to s o m e e x t e n t ^ n, , i ' e a U ? e ,d ’ a n l L t o w a r d th e fu ll r e a liz a tio n o f w h ic h w e c a n a ll s te a d ily s tr iv e . 1 he secon d c o n fe re n c e m ade fu rth e r p rogress; th e th ir d s h o u ld d o y e t m o r e . M e a n w h ile th e A m e r ic a n G o v e r n m e n t h a s .b a n o n c e t e n t a t i v e l y s u g g e s t e d m e t h o d s f o r c o m p l e t i n g t h e c o u r t +i, „ v 1 A "■ ‘ V 1 u i d m o v n ana o / A s ia , s n a il s e t s e r io u s ly .t o t h e t a s k o f d e v is in g s o m e m e t h o d w h ic h s h a ll n c tv n ip lix h th is r e s u lt. I f I m a y v e n tu r e th e s u g g e s t io n , it w o u ld he w e ll f o r t h e s t a t e s m e n o f t h e w o r ld , in p la n n i n g f o r t h e e r e c t io n o f t h i s w o r l d c o u r .t , t o s t u d y w h a t h a s b e e n d o n e i n t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s b v th e S u p re m e C o u rt. I c a n n o t h e lp t h in k in g t h a t th e C o n s t it u t io n o f t h e U n it e d S t a t e s , n o t a b ly in t h e e s t a b li s h m e n t o f t h e S u p r e m e C o u r t and in t h e m e th o d s a d o p te d fo r s e c u r in g p e a c e a n d g o o d r e la tio n s a n io h g a n d b e tw e e n t h e d iffe r e n t S t a t e s , o ffe r s c e r ta in v a lu a b le a n a lo g ie s t o w h a t s h o u ld b e s t r i v e n f o r in o r d e r t o s e c u r e , ‘ t h r o u g h T h e H a g u e c o u r ts a n d c o n fe re n c e s, a s p e c ie s o f w o r ld fe d e r a tio n fo r in te r n a tio n a l p e a c e a n d ju s tic e . T h e r e a r e , o f c o u r s e , fu n d a m e n t a l d iffe r e n c e s b e tw e e n w h a t th e U n ite d S ta t e s C o n s titu tio n d o e s a n d w h a t w e s h o u ld e v e n a t t e m p t a t t h is t im e to s e c u r e a t T h e H a g u e , b u t th e m e th o d s a d o p t e d in th e A m e ric a n C o n stitu tio n to p r e v e n t h o s tilit ie s b e t w e e n t h e M a t e s a n d t o s e c u r e t h e s u p r e m a c y o f t h e F e d e r a l c o u r t in c e r u iln c la s s e s ol e a s e s , a r e w e ll w o r th t h e s t u d v o f t h o s e w h o see k a t i n e H a g u e t o o b ta in th e s a m e r e s u lt s on a w o r ld s c a le . In th e t h ir d p la c e , s o m e t h i n g s h o u ld b e d o n e a s s o o n a s p o s s ib le to c h e c k th e g r o w th o f a r m a n ie n ts , e s p e c ia lly n a v a l a r m a m e n ts , b y i n t e r n a tio n a l a g r e e m e n t. N o o n e p o w e r c o u ld o r s h o u ld a c t b y i t s e l f , fo r it is e m in e n t ly u n d e s ir a b le , fr o m t h e s t a n d p o in t o f th e p e a c e o f r ig h t e o u s n e s s , t h a t a p o w e r w h ic h r e a l ly d o e s b e lie v e in p e a c e s h o u ld p la c e i t s e l f a t th e m e r c y o f s o m e r iv a l w h ic h m a y a t b o tt o m h a v e n o s u c h b e lie f a n d n o in te n t io n o f a c t in g o n it . R u t. g r a n te d sin c e r ity o f p u r o f th e w o r ld sh o u ld fin d n o in s u r m o u n ta b le p ose, th e g rea t p o w e r s d iffic u lt y in r e a c h in g a n a g r e e m e n t w h ic h w o u ld p u t a n e n d to th e p r e s e n t c o s t ly a n d g r o w in g e x tr a v a g a n c e o f e x p e n d itu r e o n n a v a l a r m a m e n ts. A n a g r e e m e n t m e r e ly to li m i t t h e s iz e o f s h ip s w o u ld h a v e b een v e r y u s e fu l a fe w y e a r s a g o , a n d w o u ld s t i l l h e o f u s e , h u t th e a g r e e m e n t s h o u ld g o m u c h fu r th e r . F in a lly , it w o u ld be a m a s te r s tr o k e if th o s e g r e a t p o w e r s h o n e s tly b e n t on p e a c e w o u ld fo r m a le a g u e o f p e a c e , n o t o n l y to k e e p t h e p e a c e a m o n g t h e m s e lv e s b u t to p r e v e n t, b y fo r c e if n e c e s s a r y , its b e in g b ro k en b y o th e rs. T h e s u p r e m e d iffic u lty in c o n n e c t io n w it h d e v e lo p in g t h e p e a c e w o r k o f T h e H a g u e a r i s e s f r o m t h e la ck o f a n y e x e c u t i v e p o w e r , o f a n y p o lic e p o io c r , to e n fo r c e th e d e c r e e s o f th e c o u r t. In a n y com m u n it y o f a n y s iz e t h e a u t h o r it y o f th e c o u r t s r e s t s u p o n a c t u a l o r p o te n t ia l fo r c e , o n t h e e x is te n c e o f a p o lic e , o r o n t h e k n o w le d g e t h a t t h e a b le -b o d ie d m e n o f t h e c o u n t r y a r e b o th r e a d y a n d w i lli n g to s e e t h a t th e d e c r e e s o f ju d ic ia l a n d le g is la t iv e b o d ie s a r e p u t in to e ffe c t. I n n e w a n d w ild c o m m u n itie s w h e r e th e r e is v io le n c e , a n h o n e s t m a n m u s t p r o te c t h im s e lf, a n d , u n til o th e r m e a n s o f se c u rin g h is s a fe t y a re d e v is e d , it is b o th f o o lis h a n d w ic k e d t o p e r s u a d e h im t o s u r r e n d e r h is a r m s w h ile th e m e n w h o a r e d a n g e r o u s to th e c o m m u n ity r e ta in th e ir s . H e s h o u ld n o t r e n o u n c e t h e r ig h t to p r o te c t h im s e lf b y h is o w n e ffo r ts u n t il th e c o m m u n it y is so o r g a n iz e d t h a t it c a n e ffe c tiv e ly r e lie v e th e In d iv id u a l o f th e d u t y o f p u t t in g d o w n v io le n c e . S o it is w ith n a tio n s . E a c h n a tio n m u s t k eep w e ll p r e p a r e d to d e fe n d i t s e l f u n til th e e s t a b lis h m e n t o f s o m e fo r m o f in te r n a tio n a l p o lic e p o w e r , c o m p e te n t a n d w illin g to p r e v e n t v io le n c e a s b c tic e c n n a tio n s . A s th in g s a re n o w , su ch p o w er 1 1 0 7 0 4 .— 1 9 4 0 5 18 to command peace throughout the world c o u ld b e s t b e a ss u r e d b y s o m e c o m b in a tio n b e tw e e n t h o s e g r e a t n a tio n s w h ic h s in c e r e ly d e s ir e p e a c e a n d h a v e n o th o u g h t th e m s e lv e s o f c o m m ittin g a g g r e ssio n s. The combina tion might at first be only to secure peace within certain definite limits and certain definite conditions ; b u t t h e r u l e r o r s t a t e s m a n w h o s h o u l d b r i n g a b o u t s u c h a c o m b i n a t i o n w o u l d h a v e e a r n e d h i s p l a c e in h i s t o r y f o r a ll t i m e a n d h is t i t l e t o t h e g r a t i t u d e o f a ll m a n k in d . Mr. FRANCE. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. OWEN. I yield to tlic Senator. Mr. FRANCE. I have been very much interested in the ad dress of the Senator, because I know that he entertains some very progressive political views. I desire to ask him one or two questions, for I know that lie has given much study to the phrase ology of the proposed constitution of the league. Does he ap prehend that under the present phraseology we might be called upon to conscript our soldiers for the purpose of fighting Ireland, for example, if Ireland should desire her independence, or of fighting India, if India should desire her independence from the British Empire? Mr. OWEN. The exact reverse, of course, is true. The con ditions which, under the old regime, made subject nations a military asset will no longer exist if the league be established; and nations would not regard subject nations as an asset, but as a liability, where they were discontented. Mr. FRANCE. I ask that question in view of the state ment of the Senator that he thought the language should be made clear, so that it would be apparent always that member nations should not interfere in internal disputes. Mr. OWEN. There is nothing in this proposed league of nations which would require the United States to furnish her troops on the battle field. It is one thing to have an aggressive nation invading the territorial integrity or political independ ence of a nation, and by that act, in violation of these terms, making war itself upon all nations. We had war made on us a long time before we yielded to the affront and to the danger which threatened us. A nation can make war under the terms o f this constitution without involving us in any degree to furnish any troops. On the contrary, instead of its leading to conscription, Gen. Smuts in his book on the League o f Nations argues that conscription is a potent means o f promoting war, and he is opposed to conscription. Mr. FRANCE. Certainly there is great ambiguity in the language when it is susceptible of so many different interpre tations. Mr. OWEN. I think some of the interpretations of the lan guage used are not justified at all by the language itself, but are quite hypercritical and entirely unjustified by anything in the instrument. Mr. FRANCE. Now, I desire to ask the Senator one more question. What does he consider to be the purpose o f this league o f nations? Is it merely to secure peace, or is it really to secure justice and the advancement of the welfare of all men, including the advancement o f the backward nations of the world? Mr. OWEN. They are coincident. Justice and peace go hand in hand. You can not have peace if you do not have justice. 11 0 7 G 4 — 1 9 4 0 5 19 Mr. FRANCE. I am very glad the Senator is bringing out that thought-----Mr. OWEN. The Senator himself brought it out. Mr. FRANCE. Because, according to the idea that I enter tain, the two things are not always synonymous. Sometimes there can not he justice if there is to he peace; sometimes justice can not he advanced by peaceable means; and it seems to me it should he clearly stated what the purpose is. If it is merely to he a league of peace for the preservation of the status quo, that is one thing. If it is to he a league which is to express the great cooperative spirit for the advancement of the world and for the uplifting of those peoples of the world who are backward and have been kept down because heretofore there has been ex ploitation rather than a desire for elevation, then the league is quite a different thing. Mr. OWEN. Mr. President, so far as Great Britain is coneel 116(1 , I think, the best evidence that she had tried to give justice to her colonies was shown by the loyalty and zeal of her colonies in coming to her support in this great crisis of the war. Mr. FRANCE. To try is not enough. To try for justice is not enough. Justice must be accomplished, flow about the great country of Africa, composing approximately- one-fourth of the earth’s land surface? The same heathenism, the same savagery, exist to-day in the heart of Africa as existed when the pyramids were new. A mere good-natured will is not enough. The liberals of the world to-day demand results, and they wili have them. Mr. OWEN. I am pleased to see the Senator's enthusiasm in favor of justice. I am in accord with his desire. Mr. FRANCE. I believe that the Senator is; but let us keep the gieat purpose to the front, not merely a stagnant universal passivity but a purpose of-progress and advancement That is what I hope to see come out of this great cooperative movement. Mr. OWEN. I think great advancement will come from this league, because the principles-of justice and right are written in the provisions of the proposed league; and when those prin ciples are made the universal law I have no doubt that they will become more and more potent, and that they will become the universal rule. ilr. FRANCE. Mr. President, if I am not disturbing the Senator, may 1 ask him this question: As the Senator from Oklahoma entertains very progressive views, does Ik* not realize that many countries of the world have been in the hands o f re actionary ministries who look with suspicion upon any effort to advance and improve the conditions of the backward nations o f the world? Mr. OWEN. Undoubtedly. That is not altogether untrue of the United States. 1 1 0 7 0 -1 — 1 9 4 0 5 o
@FedFRASER