WORLD COURT OF JUSTICE.

Auckland Star, Volume LIV, Issue 148, 23 June 1923, Page 7

WORLD COURT OF JUSTICE.

SEVERANCE FROM LEAGUE. FOR AMERICA'S ENTRY. MR. HARDING'S SUCGESTIONS. (By Cable.—Press Association.—Copyrigbt.) NEW YORK, June 22. The President, Mr. W. G. Harding, who is en route to Alaska, delivered a speech at St. Louis, suggesting three changes in the World Court designed to sever it from the League of Nations to ease the way for America's entry into the Court. The President proposed, first, that vacancies on the Court should be tilled by the tribunal itself or by member nations instead of the League; secondly, the apportionment of contributions, the supervision of expenses, and fixing of the Judge's compensation should be exercised either by the Hague Court of Arbitration or by a commission designated by members of the World Court; thirdly, abolition of the League's exclusive right to seek legal advisory guidance from the Court or extension of this right to all member nations. Mr. Harding declared willingness to accept the clarifying reservation that the United States' understands that the Court owes no subservience or obligation to the League. He proposed other changes as a basis of negotiation. He declared: "I am so eager for ultimate accomplishment that I am interested in harmonising opposing elements, more anxious to effect our helpful commitment to the Court than I am to score victory for the executive." He hoped that in time Germany. Turkey, and Mexico would adjust their international relations so that they might join the Court. The President dealt at length with various objections by members of the Senate, repeatedly asserting that he would do everything possible to satisfy those fearing that entrance to the Court would involve the United States in League affairs. He added: "In face of the overwhelming verdict in 1920. the League of Nations issue is as dead as slavery; it is not for us."—(A. and N.Z.) President Hardinp, addressing the annual luncheon of the Associated Press of America, recently declared that tho L'nited States' participation in the Court' of International Justice, as the Administration proposed, would be "in harmony with platform pledges, elec-, toral promises, and American aspirations." and would not be the entry into the League of Nations "by the side door, the back door, or the cellar door." The President said that excesive friends of the League had beclouded the situation by the unwarranted assumption that the proposal was a move towards League membership, while irreconcilable opponents of the League had also beclouded the question with the assumption that entanglements with Europe would unavoidably follow. He dismissed the fear of entanglements with the blunt declaration that if the Senate were to consent to any. his Administration would not complete the ratification of such a proposal, and would thereby prevent its becoming effective. President Harding left no doubt of Iris intentions regarding the League. He said, "in compliance with its pledges, the has definitely and decisively put aside all thought of the United States entering the League of Nations. It does not propose to enter nr.-.v by the side door, the back door, or the cellar door. I have no unseemly comment to on the League. If it is serving the Old World helpfully, the more power to it. but it is not for us. The Senate has so declared, the Executive has so declared, the people have so declared. Nothinc could be more decisively stamped with finnlitv." Anticipating one of the principal arguments of opponents to the Administration's proposal, namely, that (he United States would bs. placed at a disadvantage in the election of jwlges to the Court through disparity in the national voting power in the League AssemlMy, President Harding snirl he frankly recognised this as a "political bugbear," but he added that, inasmuch as no nation could have more than one judge, it ivas less of an objection than when applied to the League itself. The President added that ho did not hesitate to say that if the other Great Pownrs without, the American race could accent without fenr the voting strength of the British Dominions, they ought, in view of their English-speaking kinship, to feel themselves free from danger. After outlining the history of the establishment of the World Court, and declaring that an American judcre sits in it. though the United States had no part in choosing him, President Harding said that under the provisions of the Court the United States could apply to it for a decision on any justifiable question in the same wav as a nation participating in its establishment. But he thought, and still thinks,* that the United States ought to be a party to the agreement, assume a part in the maintenance, and "give to it the benefit of such influences as our size, wealth, rind ideals may prove to be. . . The perfected Court must be a matter of development. I commend it because it is a great step in the right direction ■towards a peaceful settlement of justifinjblp questions, towards the elimination of friction which nvicrht lead to war. and a surer agency of international justice through the application of law than can be hoped for in arbitration which is influenced by the prejudices of men nnd tliP expediency of politics. We ran do vastly more to perfect it in the capacity of an adherent than in an aloofness in which we arrogate to ourselves the rieht to say to the world, "we dictate but never comply/ I would yield to none our right, none our nationality, but would gladly give of our influence and co-operation to move fonv.ir'l and upward toward world peac e -nd that reicm of iustice which is infinitely more secure in the rule of national honour than in national or international force.