The Southland Times. PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. Luceo Non Uro. THURSDAY, MAY 1, 1919. THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS.

Southland Times, Issue 18076, 1 May 1919, Page 4

The Southland Times. PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. Luceo Non Uro. THURSDAY, MAY 1, 1919. THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS.

The publication of the revised text of the covenant of the League of Nations will remove the apprehension that the recent* rifts within the Conference might be a fatal bur to the inauguration of the new system of world-Government on which such high hopes are based. The covenant has undergone radical changes since the first attempt was made to put the ideal of the League of Nations into practical form. ■ The task of giving that ideal practical shape was well nigh insurmountable, particularly since it had to be done as part of the negotiations in connection with the terms that were to be enforced against Germany. The nations have come triumphantly through the great ordeal. There have been serious differences, and at present there is an open breach with Italy, and possibly with Japan, but these have hot been allowed to prevent completion of the great work to which the Conference had set its hand. The main features in the revised text of the covenant may be briefly referred to, although comment is difficult on account of the contradictory nature of some of the messages published yesterday 1 . Some of the expressions of opinion do not tally with the wording of the covenant as cabled to this country, and they are either based on an incorrect reading of the text, or the latter has been mutilated in condensation or transmission to an extent that is most unusual. It has, however, been a feature of press and public references to the work of the Peace Conference so that it is unwise to place overmuch reliance upon the most of them, and we think it likely that events will prove that the summary of the new covenant as published yesterday is substantially correct. The admission of new States, which must be fully self-governing, will now be subject to a two-thirds vote of the Assembly, with a further precaution that the new member gives guarantees of its sincere intention to observe international obligations. Article 8, which deals with the reduction of armaments, provides that such plans will be subject to re-consideration and revision at least every 10 years. The article definitely limits armaments, which are not to be exceeded without the concurrence of the Council. Comment from London states that "there is to be no dictation as to the size of national forces. The Council will merely formulate plans which the Government may accept or reject, and which will be the basis of a subsequent disarmament convention.” This does not tally with the tenor of the article in the official summary, and we are loath to believe that the all important question of armaments is to be left in the unsatisfactory shape suggested. It is universally admitted that the war will have been fought largely in vain if the peace agreement, in which the covenant of the League will be embodied, does not definitely put an end to the competition in military and naval preparation. There is perhaps nothing that will contribute more effectively to prevent war in the future than the limitation of armaments to the most extreme extent consistent with national safety, and the world will be gravely disappointed if this is not secured by the treaty that is now practically ready for signature. Article 12 contains another important provision in the event of a rupture arising between members of the League, and it is beyond question that if hostilities can be "delayed for a period after the events leading up to them have reached a crisis, there is every possibility that better counsels will prevail and recourse to arms will be obviated. This view has been strongly held by President Wilson, and it is the basis of his determination to counteract intrigue by publicity. Mr Wilson holds that if the League of Nations were nothing but a great debating society it would kill intrigue. Speaking on the eve of his second trip to Europe he stressed this point in these words:—

It is one of the agreements of this covenant that it is the friendly right of every nation member of the League to call attention to anything that it thinks will disturb the peace of the world, no matter where that thing is occurring. Germany would never have gone to war if she had permitted the world to discuss the aggression upon Serbia for a single week. The British Foreign Office pleaded that there might be a day or two of delay, so that representatives of the nations of Europe could get together and discuss the possibilities of settlement. Germany did not dare to permit days of discussion. You know what happened. So soon as the world realised that an outlaw was at large the nations began one by one to draw together against her. We know for a certainty that if Germany had thought for a moment that Great Britain would go in with France and Russia she would never have undertaken the enterprise, and the Leaerue of Nations is meant as a notice to all outlaw nations that not only Great Britain, but the United States and the rest of the world, will go in to check enterprises of that sort.

In article 12, it is provided that the time between rupture and war shall be three be three months, during which the Council of the League will endeavour to settle the dispute, and in the event of failure to reach an agreement will publish a statement of the facts together with the recommendations made by the Council. The World would then be able to form an enlightened judgment, and public opinion would ensure the success of whatever steps the League considered it necessary to take. The action, contemplated by the League in Article

16, in the event of a nation resorting to war in disregard of covenants, is both economic and military. The other members of the League will immediately sever all trading and financial relations with the unruly nation or nations, which will be cut off from all intercourse of any kind whatever. This is a powerful weapon, and if it is carried into effect it should do much to prevent the violation of the principles on which the League of Nations is founded. Article 20 covers the point that has arisen in connection with the disputes with Italy and Japan. It requires the members of the League to agree that the covenant shall be accepted as abrogating all obligations or understandings which are inconsistent with the terms of the covenant. Under this article the 1915 treaty with Italy, and the alleged agreement with Japan, would become null and. void, and its inclusion in the text indicates that the signatories to the treaty will not permit any breach of the principle involved in dealings with the Adriatic and the Japan-China problems. American opinion is conciliated by Article 21, which admits the validity of intematonal engagements, such as treaties of arbitration or regional understandings like the Monroe doctrine for the security and maintenance of peace. The next article deals with the mandatories, which will very according to the stage of development of the people, geographical situation, economic condition, and other similar circumstances in the territories that are to be removed from the sovereignty of the State formerly governing them. The other Articles do not contain features that call for comment at the present moment. It will be noted with interest that both Italy and Japan are included among the original members of the League who are signatories to the Treaty 6f Peace, and in the absence of fuller information we take this as a welcome and hopeful sign that the withdrawal of the Italian delegates is not to be regarded as a sign of complete or final rupture. It seems likely that the conclusion of the negotiations will find those nations who were represented at the Conference in a measure of agreement so substantial that it will ensure a successful peace, and will exert a permanenty beneficial influence upon international relations.