Last Stand Against Pact

Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 560, 12 January 1929, Page 7

Last Stand Against Pact

REED MAKES BITTER APPEAL

“ Document Authorises Wars ” (United P.A. —Bi/ Telegraph — Copyright) (Australian and N.Z. Press AssociationJ Received 11.35 a.m. WASHINGTON, Friday. SENATOR REED, staging what may be the last tight of Ills legislative career, due to his impending retirement, opened the final stand against the Kellogg Pact. The reservationists sought to reveal the Pact as recognition by the United States of the old order of things in Europe, established by the Treaty of Versailles.

Senator Reed ridiculed the treaty as a vain effort to establish peace by a document which was in reality an I official authorisation of any wars any nation wanted to promote. His was the last scheduled debate. The only thing now to prevent an early vote would be a filibuster by Senator Reed and his cohorts, some of whom believe they can defeat the treaty if they are able to stretch the debate a little longer; but while Senator Reed marched slowly about the Senate floor delivering his bitter appeal, the Foreign Affairs Committee and leaders were planning what they will do when the treaty battle is closed, and some quarters are hoping that a vote may be reached before to-morrow night. An interesting manoeuvre to make the pact effective after its passage, which in any event seems assured, occurred with the. introduction into the House of Representatives by Mr. Hamilton Fish, Republican member for New York State, of a proposed amendment to the constitution, under which no war save a war of defence could be waged by the United States until the declaration of hostilities was ratified by a popular referendum. Mr. Fish said he was ready to accept further qualifications of his motion, under which war, in a case where an established American policy was involved, could be waged without such a referendum. Mr. Fish characterised his proposal as a logical step for the support of the Kellogg Treaty. He said: “It constitutes another obstacle or check on war, and the responsibility for the i final decision would be placed squarely on those who would carry the rifle as I their burden.”

He asserted that treaties do not create goodwill. They must express a will already formed. The will to peace was not universal. India was rising against the British; China against Japan. Germany and Austria were discontented under the foot of oppression on their soil. Egypt was fretting under the hold of Britain. Attributing the exceptions to the treaty to the efforts of Britain during the negotiations, the senator walked to a large map placed on an easel, showing British possessions and spheres of interest in bright colouring. He detailed the scattered world defences of Britain, dwelling upon Canada, Bermuda, Jamaica and other points • near the United States. He declared that in five hours Britain could destroy the Panama Canal. “In the negotiations, Britain reserved these as spheres of interest in which she is not bound. In the treaty she reserves complete freedom of action. If this country is ever destroyed, it will be by pacifists who shout, ‘Peace, peace, peace,’ when there is no peace of the kind they talk about.”

A MILITANT SPEECH SUSPICION OF BRITAIN MUTILATED TREATY (Australian and N.Z. Press Association) (United ServiceJ Reed. 12.45 p.m. WASHINGTON, Fri. Senator James Reed, Democrat, of Missouri, the famed League of Nations opponent, described the Kellogg Treaty as so mutilated by reservations that nothing was left to preserve lasting peace.