WORLD COURT PLAN.

Taranaki Daily News, 4 September 1926, Page 13

WORLD COURT PLAN.

AME RICA N RESERVA T lONS. MODIFICATIONS URGED. I FEELING IN THE STATES. By Telegraph—Press Assn.—Copyright. New York, Sept. I. The New York Times’ Washington correspondent states that a report from Geneva that the League Conference adopted all buFthe fourth and fifth reservations of the United States Senate's World Court resolution, has excited interest here, but official circles have made it dear that the acceptance of part of the reservations would be insufficient to assure American participation in the court. Any desire the interested nations may have in securing a definition of interpretation of the fifth reservation, which is the one to which strenuous objections have been made, will fail of realisation if an appeal is made to the Slate Department, which feels that such would have to come from the Senate alone. The discussion of the fifth reservation in the Senate furnished one of the chief bases of argument against American adherence to the court, and in view of the attitude of Senators Borah and Reed, who are now striving to secure the nullification of the Senate resolution by speeches all over the country, it is considered, unlikely that any limitation of this reservation can be secured. Received Sept. 4, 11.15 p.m. New York, Sept. 2. The New York Times’ Washington correspondent states that it is recognised in political circles here that a very pertinent and striking issue has been raised by Sir George Foster and one that is construed in Washington as being of as of vital concern to the -18 signatories to the Court protocol as to the United States, namely, not only whether the Senate reservations would give the United States the power of veto over any proposed change in the statute, but also whether any other of the signatories possess the veto power. The purpose of the fourth reservation from the American viewpoint is to give the United States the right, not only to object to any amendment of the statute to which it might be opposed, but that no such change should be made in the statute without its . consent while America is a member of the Court, It is interesting to note that during the discussions Senator Swanson took the position that the fourth reservation was not absolutely necessary becausp the United States had tho right to withdraw from the Court whenever it sawfit.