THE FIRST ASSEMBLY.
Foreword.
“I now declare the first session of the Assembly of the
lLeague of Nations at an end.”
There was a brief catching of the breath as the 1,000 or so people before
President Hymans realised that the five weeks’
labour had come to an end, one of those quiet moments when a large aggregation of
peoppersons suddenly appreciates that the purpose for which they had come together had been achieved and that they must now turn away to something new. Immediately after came a quick rising from the seats of the 120 delegates, from the first gallery
atof the press, and from the top gallery of the general public; people shook hands, said a few words of goodbye, and passed out into the darkened city. Within three quarters of an hour the hall which had held the statesmen of the world was as silent and as empty as the tomb, and the activity was transferred to the railroad station where three special trains were pulling towards
Paris, with others running off through
Germany to
Scandinavia,
Poland and
Eastern Europe, and still others running down into
Italy. But for some of us it still goes on. We who have been with the League through these long months of preparation picked our way out through the reams of paper, documents, statements and reports to wonder what it had all accomplished. Had th
re Assembly, indeed, been worth while? Had it intiated a new procedure among nations? Had it fulfilled any of the hopes with which we had watched it a
ssemble? The answer to those questions is vital to world relations. If the Assembly has failed, the judgment would be sensational, for it would mean the destruction of the dearest hopes of a large section of the world; if it has succeeded, the judgment would be
qequally sensational, for it would mean the initiation of a wholly new process in international relations. That answer, indeed, is perhaps the most important in the world to-day, for until we know whether or not we are to have a Leagu
ge of Nations, we cannot permanently decide any of the deeper problems between peoples.
In these pages I shall
endeavour to answer that question, or rather I shall attempt to winnow out and array the important developments of the Assembly in a way which shall allow the reader to make his own judgment. It will, of course, be absolutely impossible to be without bias, for the Assembly was so big and covered so wide a field that the mere process of selection of facts involves in itself a judgment. Nevertheless, the task is worth attempting, because in the present
itical critical state of the world there cannot be too many viewpoints of the development of international affairs. Perhaps, too, I may add that I approach this task from the viewpoint of having seen the Covenant drawn up at
Paris, of having been present at the League’s first International
Labour Conference at
Washington, at the first Jurists’ Conference at t
he Hague, the first Financial Conference at
Brussels, at the Secretariat in both
London and
Geneva, and at various meetings of the Council, and of having written one book on the League and helped with another.
GENERAL INTRODUCTION.
The great outstanding fact about the First Assembly of the League of Nations is that for the first time in history a large part of the civilized world met under a written constitution. International gatherings there have been before by the hundreds, but never have they met as a broad, legal society bound together by a definite written Covenant and obligated to each other by certain definite legal agreements. In other words the various nations, instead of coming together more or less accidentally and for a specific purpose which would be terminated when the meeting was terminated, came together as members of a definite
organisation and for the purpose of performing certain corporate actions which should lead to the further development of their
organisatieon. This very fact not only increases the importance of the judgment to be passed on their accomplishments but also justifies a considerable latitude in not demanding too great results from a meeting which everyone realized was but the opening session.
But if the seesion started off under a written Constitution, it had very little other structural organization to build upon. This meeting indeed was the first full meeting of all the members of the League and in many ways resembled a Constituent Assembly. While the nations has all agreed to do certain things for the major purpose of cooperation and for the prevention of war, they had not, until the Assembly met, had the opportunity to map out the ways and means by which they were going to accomplish those things. In other words they had agreed on a number of fundamental principles, but had not yet met to agree on methods of action. The first meeting, therefore, had before it the task of constructing large and important parts of the machinery of the League.
This takes us back a little into League history. Up until the signature of the Treaty of
Versailles on
June 28, 1919, the League had been merely a theory. On that day, however, it began to be an actual
organisation, though a purely tentative one, with the naming of a Secretary-General and an informal authorization to him to go ahead with the building up of a small permanent staff. This status continued until January 10, 1920, when with the deposit of the necessary ratifications, the Treaty of
Versailles became a binding international agreement and the Covenant of the League, which composed its first twenty six articles, became operative. From that moment the League had a legal existence.
From that moment, too, the League began to build. Six days later, the Council of the League, consisting of
four Great Powers and
four Lesser Powers met for the first time. As the days went on, the Secretariat increased in numbers, the Council held more frequent meetings, the structure of the League began to take tenative form, and various international conferences were brought about by the sheer necessities of the situation. Thus in the nine months from the date the League came into being until the first Assembly met, the Council had come together ten times, the Secretariat had become a staff of about 150 people, the International
Labour Organisation ha
ed held two conferences, the Jurists Committee had met at
the Hague, the Financial Conference at
Brussels, the Health Conference at
London, the Passports Conference at
Paris and so on.
All this, however, had been done, it might almost be said, on credit. It all flowed directly out of the Covenant, but it still lacked the seal of the League members as a whole. The Council, which after all represented but eight nations, had stepped into the emergency before the Assembly met and had mapped out a series of organizations and methods of work which could have full stature only when approved by the Assembly. Months has thus dragged out, largely because it was not desired to hold a meeting of the Assembly as long as there was a reasonable chance of
America’s early participation. Finally, however the work had so backed up that an Assembly meeting was essential. During those months the League had gone on as best it could, developing such organizations as were essential and meeting the various immediate demands which were thrust upon it. Nevertheless, two factors served largely to keep the League suspended in mid-air, the first the continued bad political situation in
Europe and the Second the increasing hostility of the
United States. The former, centering as it did about the German and Russian situations, prevented that return of confidence and goodwill which are essential to a real League and very greatly heightened the feeling of nationalism which had sprung up in the wake of the war and which tended to perpetuate reliance upon force rather than upon negotiation. The American situation, on the other hand, seemed to destroy that great motive power which had originally called
hthe League into being and immediately raised the challenge as to whether the other nations of the world who had not been so enthusiastic about the League could replace that motive power out of their own strength and enthusiasm. In a real sense, then the great question which arose on
November 15th, when the Assembly met, was whether it would be merely the final, apologetic bow before the League degenerated to the innocuous status of all previous attempts at international co-operation. At the very first day’s session the keynote to the answer was struck. An attempt was made to make
M. Hymans president by acclamation and in a sense as a testimonial to
Belgium’s part in the war. The
sScandinavian countries immediately led a revolt, not against
M. Hymans, but against any such invisible direction of the Assembly from somewhere above. They demanded a record vote, which
M. Hymans, who was presiding temporarily, immediately granted. Forty nations then marched up across the rostrum and cast their votes in one of the most dramatic scenes ever witnessed at an international gathering.
M. Hymans was overwhelmingly elected, as everyone knew he would be, but out of it all the Assembly demonstrated that it ha
ed a firm will and a determination of its own and that any action taken in its name should be taken only by its actual vote. The effect of that somewhat theatrical demonstration did not wear off throughout the whole meeting
It showed in fact that the Assembly was dominant moral force of the League and that it intended to guard its power
hjealously. The new motive power that had been hoped for had come.
This attitude persisted thoughout the long five wee
,ks session. It never flagged or abated. Take, for instance, the single question of
Armenia. It is not too much to say that not a dozen men had any idea when the Assembly opened that it would take any action in that part of the world. Up till then the League had done nothing. But under the inspiration of a few powerful men it drove headfirst into the problem and initiated action through the
United States,
Spain and
Braxzil. Similarly with mandates. That question had been dragging fire for months, despite the plain obligations of the Big Powers. Curiously enough, however, during the Assembly meeting, agreements were reached on many points which were not agreed upon before and the terms of the mandates were submitted by the Big Powers just before the Assembly broke up. Those who have followed the situation ascribe this result to the quickening effect of a meeting of all the world’
’s leading nations.
It is needless to multiply incidents. The upshot of the whole meeting is that the Assembly has proven a tower of strength such as even the most optimistic had not dared to hope. The stimulation which it has given to the development of the League cannot be overestimated. Indeed that stimulation, which cannot be weighed in words but which is measurable only in terms of the spirit, may be said to be its greatest accomplishment, greater far, for instance, than the creation of the Permanent Court or any other single act. For that spirit means that there is a motive power behind the League which whill make it succeed irrespective of written contract or formal agreement. It cannot be disputed that, if there is the right moral purpose and the right desire behind the League, it will succeed regardless of all other things; if there is not that spirit there is nothing in the world, neither Covenant, nor treaty, nor any other device, which can make it function. And that purpose ha
ds been provided, I am sure, by this f
oirst Assembly.
The very good preparatory work that had been done for the Assembly contributed to this result. In the previous nine months the Council and the Secretariat had most carefully laid out the ground so that when the Assembly came together, they found full and complete data before them and were able to begin the work of assesment and judgment without being help up by the preliminaries. That, also, is a valuable feature of League
organisation, for it assures full return in the most efficient circumstances from all future meetings held under the League. It cannot be doubted but that the world has reached a stage where it imperatively needs a permanent international machinery for the preparation of its meetings.
Moreover the organization of the Assembly is sound. It is a democratic meeting place of all the members of the League, big and little, where one vote counts for as much as anot
jher, and where no action is possible until all nations have been brought to agree. Its meetings are held in public and every nation given the full right of the floor. There is not much chance for chicanery or backstairs politics, but there is tremendous chance for a powerful moral appeal. If the League did nothing else than provide a platform for such a purpose it would be very much worth while.
But by far the dominating element at the Assembly was the spirit with which the delegates themselves approached their work. As this was in fact the first full meeting of the League, everyone came to it determined to find out what the League was and what it could do. It must ever be remembered that hardly a man attended this session knew anything of
athe League in detail; for to the great majority the League was still a theory. Consequently the delegates approached it earnestly, vigorously, indeed aggressively. They intended to know all about the League, to approve it or disapprove it with their eyes wide open, and to make it over if need be into a League of the Assembly. Consequently they delved deep into comparatively minor matters such as the budget, which if in itself small, nevertheless represents the first interational treasury, and such as the Secretariat which similarly may be said to represent the first international expert staff.
The effect of this was most salutary. The delegates say with their own eyes, and approved with their own judgment. In some cases they appreciably modified projects for the permanent structure of the League, as when
Canada changed the proposed “Permanent” Technical Organizations into temporary advisory bodies; in other cases, such as the budget where they strengthened them by the very fact of the study they put into them. The sum total of all this work means, however, first that the League may now go ahead with its plans knowing that it has the backing of an Assembly of 40 nations, and second that some of the foremost statesmen from every state in the League have gone through a gruelling course in League organization. In other words the League has become an accepted international mechanism. Also this was the first opportunity of the Small Powers. Hitherto the great majority of the League members had not had a chance to take part in League
organisation work. The Covenant, for instance, had been drawn up by the Allied and Associated Powers at
Paris, practically without the consultation of the neutrals. Then the Council had begun to function as the directing force of the League but only with only eight states represented. Up to
November 15 the other states had not had the chance to take effective part in that association to which they had pledged themselves.
So they came to
Geneva full of ideas and interest. The meeting of the Assembly was the meeting place of the small powers especially. It gave them the opportunity they had been waiting for ever since they adhered to the Covenant. In a sense it was their meeting, where they were to pass final judgment on what had been done or proposed in their name. And they did not hesitate to take advantage of the opportunity. In general the League means very much more to them than to the Big Powers, for they have no great physical force to fall back upon in case of need but must look for their well-being to the extension of the rule of justice throughout the world. It cannot be questioned that they fully rose to the occastion and made of the First Assembly a platform which will afford them the ear of the world whenever they may need it.
But more than this, the meeting was as wide as th
oe world. No less than 42 states were qualified to send representatives, and all did but teo,
Nicaragua and
Hunduras, even though the delegate of
Persia was attacked by bandits en route and his secretary killed. Consequently, it is inaccurate to refer to the League as “European”. By way of example the most
drastic dramatic event of the first day’s session was the tremendous power of
Latin-America with its sixteen nations, and the general power of the whole Latin bl
aock which would include
France,
Italy,
Spain and
Roumania. But if
South America was powerful,
Asia made her voice felt hardly less, for
Japan,
China,
Australia,
New Zealand,
India, and even
Persia and
Siam proved that there is a strong community of interest in that distant part of the world, so strong in
edeed that it was able to unite in order to put
China on the Council.
Probably one of the most important results of the First Assembly will be to universalize the League, or rather to attenuate its interests throughout a wider world field. Immediately after the war and during the domination by the Big Powers the League was tempted to focus too closely on European problems and to neglect the extra-European viewpoint. This tendency received several rude shocks during the Assembly, especially when the
British Dominions attacked the budget and
Canada protested against too frequent conferences at a distant center. Little problems like
Eupen and
Nalmedy, which had bulked large on the agenda of the Council, were never mentioned in the Assembly, but new problems such as the
Tacna-Arica dispute and the
Shantung question gave notice of their forthcoming appearance. All this tends to the great broadening of the League, to the freeing of it from the more petty disputes of
Europe, and to the consideration of the bigger world problems. In a large way the divisions of the future will not be between small, local alliances so much as between widely different civilizations or widely separated territories. The League will gain m
yuch by this attenuation.
But if the First Assembly covered a wide field, it certainly had none of the attributes of a super-legislature. Any fear that it might become so was completely shot to shreds by the actual developments at
Geneva. Certain powers it had over its own
organisation, such for instance as approving the Secretariat and laying out the Budget, but even in these fields the efficacy of its action will hinge upon the support which the member states give to the projects their representatives have voted. One supreme opportunity it had to be a super-legislature, and that opportunity it quickly turned its back on, even at considerable expense to the world. It centered upon the project for the Permanent Court which many able statesment claimed the League could bring into being simply by the action of the Assembly, and without the necessity of ratification by the member states. The contrary opinion prevailed however, despite the fact that it meant a year’s delay. The Statute was simply approved unanimously for submission to all states for their ratification or rejection.
Twice later on this same co-operative characteristic was brought out. The most spectacular demonstration was when the Council asked the four northern neutral States -
Norway,
Sweden,
Denmark and
Holland - if they would be willing to send small contingents to preserve order during the plebiscite about
Vilna. The letter from the Council was a request in the politest form, and not in any sense an order, as has so often been stated in the States would be the case.
Sweden acceded to the request straight-away;
Norway acceded on condition that she could get sufficient volunteers; and
Denmark and
Holland on condition that their Parliaments would pass the necessary legislation.
The second case, of particular interest to the
United States, was Article 10, which is described later on in full, and which, accepted unanimously by the Assembly, destroys the fears that have been so widely felt in the
United States as to the scope of this article. At the same time
Canada’s proposal for its complete elmination from the Covenant was referred without protest to the Amendments Committee which is now being constituted.
The co-operative nature of the Assembly, many people may say, will reduce that body to a mere debating society. That view-point, however, is as false as the Super-State belief, for it takes no account of the fact that the Assembly is composed of Delegates
whic who have received very full and complete instructions on practically the whole Agenda before leaving home. Consequently they speak with the authority of their Government to a very large extent, and in case of new business coming unexpectedly before the Assembly are able to receive instructions by telegraph or cable.
Apart even from this fact, however, the Assembly has all the moral opinion of a body of world statesmen supported by force of world public opinion. You might perhaps call it an international drafting
organisation where the Delegates have instructions to express the views of their Gorvernment and reach agreements subject to consequent ratification. Such work is supremely necessary, for it constitutes the first step towards a common international
view-point. If such a body can work out a world opinion in any specific question, each separate nation will be more willing to act along lines suggested because it believes that the other nations will do likewise. In other words, you have the beginnings of effective international co-operation along common lines.
One other fact about the First Assembly cannot pass unnoticed. It took up absolutely no question whatsoever involved in the Treaty of
Versailles or other Peace settlements. It was in no sense an instrument for the execution of those treaties, and it should be noted that the Assembly not only included all the neutrals; not only admitted two of the four ex-enemy States; but devoted itself largely to building the structure of the new association of nations which had to come after the great war.
It is a very encouraging sign indeed that, even in the present political confusion of the world, an Assembly of forty States can meet simply to work out their own
organisation in the way of co-operative association. While of course the League is doing very important political work as regards the Polish-Lithuanian dispute and the Finnish-Swedish dispute, and while the
Shantung and the
Tacna-Arica questions too may come up within the next year, nevertheless it was fortunate that the First Meeting could concentrate itself on the
organisation of the League, in order to give it that strength which will be essential in meeting the bigger political questions which must later arise. In saying this also it is interesting to note the ev
lolution of international affairs away from the war. an evolution which has gone all the way from the Council of Four to the Assembly of the League of Nations. Slowly, but none the less surely, we are getting away from the war and on to a broader basis.
To-day then, we see the League of Nations as
wa world cooperative
organisation with a membership of 48 states, a written constitution, a developing structure, a permanent staff, a budget, and all the other machinery necessary for a continuing, legally constituted a
association. There is just one word more that I would like to say in this rather rambling introduction to the specific accomplishments of this First Assembly, and that is perhaps the most important word of all, and one which seems strangely enough to have passed largely unnoticed. To me at least it is the measure by which we can gauge both the spirit of the first meeting and the probabilities of the future. That
i, in brief, that the Assembly has decided to meet once a year at least, automatically, regularly, on the first Monday in September. This decision was reached, not in any moment of enthusiasm, not as the result of some striking speech, not when the delegates were off their guard, but quietly, unconcernedly, naturally, after the Assembly had been in session three weeks, after it had had the full opportunity to demonstrate its usefullness, after all the delegates had had plenty of time to say “Never again”. In other words, it is the considered judgment of these men who have come from the four corners of the
bglo
vbe that the Assembly is sufficiently worth while to justify all the pain, labor and expense of coming together once a year every year hereafter. At this point it would seem proper to end this general introduction and enter into an analysis of the more detailed accomplishments of the First Assembly.
ORGANIZATION OF THE ASSEMBLY.
The first problem before the Assembly was, of course, its own
organisation. How were its officers to be elected, its proceedings to be regulated, and its work divided up? These questions arose for the first time, and their solution required a considerable amount of thought and disucssion which will not be necessary at subsequent meetings. To put it in other words, the Assembly has now constituted itself as a parliamentary body with clearly defined rules and methods, and will hereafter be able to begin its deliberations in a direct businesslike way the moment it has come together.
OFFICERS OF THE ASSEMBLY.
The question as to who should be president of the first Assembly was a delicate one, as the post carried much influence and at the same time much prestige.
M. Paul Hymans of
Belgium had been selected by the Council as temporary presiding officer until the Assembly itself could make a final choice, and the selection seemed to offer a good way out of the difficulty.
M. Hymans, after a spirited vote, was named President and
M. Motta, President of
Switzerland, was named Honorary President.
Quite obviously, however, a body of 120 delegates faced by a large amount of work to be crowded into a short time must have some kind of executive or steering committee. To this end it was decided to form a general committee consisting of the president and of 12 vice-presidents, the first six vice-presidents to serve by virtue of their election as president of one of the main committees and the second six as the result of a general election by th
re Assembly. This steering committee was finally constituted as follows: President,
M. Paul Htymans,
Belgium; 1st Committee - The Rt. Hon
AJ Balfour,
Great Britain; 2nd Committee -
HE Tomaso Tittoni,
Italy; 3rd Committee -
HE Léon Bourgeois,
France; 4th Committee -
HEM Quinones de Léon,
Spain; 5th Committee -
Senor Don Antonio Huneeus,
Chili; 6th Committee -
HEM Branting, Sweden; by general election,
Viscount Ishii,
Japan;
M. Jonkheer Van Karnebeek,
the Netherlands,
EE Dr Honorio Pueyrredon,
the Argentine, who was replaced on
11th December 1920 by
M. Blanco,
Uruguay, following the withdrawal of the Argentine delegation;
HE Dr Edouard Benes,
Czecho-slovakia;
Sir George Foster,
Canada;
HE Dr. Rodrigo Octavio Langaard de Menezes,
Brazil.
ORGANIZATION OF WORK.
The work facing the Assembly was so extended, and the time at the disposal so limited, that it was absolutely impossible to do it all in full session. Fortunately, the work fell under six main headings over each one of which a committee was appointed, as follows:
1. General Procedure, and Amendments.
2. Technical Organisations.
3. Permanent Court of International Justice.
4. Secretariat and Budget.
5. Applications for Admission.
6. Disarmament, Mandates, and Economic Blockade.
|
THE COMMITTEE SYSTEM.
These committees consisted of one representative from each state, or about forty members. They became, in fact, six miniature assemblies to prepare the work for the approval of the final body. This system aroused considerable criticism, as it was feared that the real discussions would take place in the committees and the
qAssembly proper would degenerate into a mere rubber-stamp.
Events did not, however, justify this fear. To be sure, the League lost seriously by not having the Committee debates public and thus arousing all the popular interest which would surely flow from such a dramatic meeting, for instance, as that where first
Serbia, then
Greece, then
Roumania all rose for the first time in favor of
Austria’s admission to the League, but at the same time the Assembly debates themselves were very real and always gave signs of strong vitality. They were used in fact by those who had lost out in committees to make their final appeal, and who on several occasions, notably in the admission of
Albania, succeeded in reversing the Committee decisions. In the same way, the full sessions registered a dramatic effort to secure compulsory adjudication for the Permanent Court; revised the committee report on the Secretariat; and appreciably changed the committee resoluti
ions in regard to the technical organizations. In other words, the system, if lacking in immediate publicity, was essential to get through the work and did not in any sense rob the full Assembly of its power of decision.
RULES OF PROCEDURE.
The rules of procedure which had been worked out by the Secretariat were approved with a few changes, so that the Assembly will meet henceforth under a definite system of operation. The most important of the 26 articles provides that the Assembly shall meet automatically on the first Monday in each September, and at such other times as decided either by itself, by a majority of the Council, or by the request of ten members of the League. The agenda is to be circulated if possible three months before each meeting, each member having the right to propose any subject it desires; the meetings are to be public unless in a particular case a majority of the Assembly votes otherwise; cloture may be adopted by majority vote; but all other decisions except those of procedure or unless provided otherwise by treaty shall be by unanimity. At each session of the Assembly, the Secretary-General must present a report on the work of the Secretariat and on the measures taken to execute the Assembly’s decisions.
PUBLICITY.
Greater measures of publicity attended the first Assembly than any previous international gathering. The Assembly itself held thirty sessions, all of which were public, with a verbatim record available for the press within three-quarters of an hour of the end of the meeting. In
additional, practically all documents distributed to the members of the Assembly were similarly distributed to the press so that the journalists had nearly the same original material as the delegates. Every morning a verbatim record of the previous day’s session and an Official Journal of general interest were distributed, together with frequent
Proces-Verbaux of the various committees.
The only place where there was not complete immediate publicity was in the Committees. Though it was understood that these committees were to be private, it was immediately arranged to have a
proces-verbal kept of each sitting and published as soon as possible. It immediately developed, however, first that the
proces-verbaux could not be got out for several days, and second that any journalist who took the trouble could get the news from some of the 40 delegates present. Consequently it was decided to have either the president or the chairman of each commission meet the press after each session. That system, however, f
dell down, because the press could not spare the time to wait about for the sessions to end. Consequently, the Information Section of the Secretariat put one of its own members in each committee to prepare a quick communique and pass the general news on to another official at press he
dadquarters. All this was a rather roundabout, cumbrous system, but it view of the fact that these committees were making only preliminary studies and that not only their recommendations but also much of their arguments would have to come out in the full Assembly within a few days in order to have any validity whatsoever, it seems utterly absurd to talk about “secret diplomacy.” The system of private committees for preparatory work is so deeply rooted in all parliamentary practice that it is not unnatural that the League should have adopted it to enable it to get through the vast amount of work before it. As a matter of fact, the journalists very often had a far better idea of what was going on in the Assembly than the delegates themselves.
Just in this connection it should be noted that the Assembly discussed at some length the arrangements which the Counci
;l had previously made for the publicity of its proceedings and passed a resolution to the effect that the Council consider how it could give greater publicity to the matters which come before it. This resolution was brought in by the so-called “liberal” element of the Assembly, who believe that the life of the League depends on the interest of public opinion which in turn depends on the widest possible publication of all League news. The resolution was passed without protest and the methods of exec
tuting it left to the
Counsil8s own judgment.
POLISH-LITHUANIAN PUBLICITY
Another development in publicity must not be overlooked, namely the Assembly’s demand that all documents in the dispute between
Poland and
Lithuania be forthwith made public. Just as quickly as it was possible to gather the papers together, four complete sets of this most voluminous correspondence were placed on a special table in the Library where anyone, delegate or public, could examine them. This sets an absolutely new precedent in diplomacy, for here for the first time all the d
iocuments of a bitter dispute which is still pending have been set before the public and actually kept up to date from day to day by the addition of any new correspondence that might have come in. That in itself may largely have contributed to the willingness exhibited by
Norway,
Sweden,
Denmark and
Holland to send small detatchments of troops to police the plebiscite provided for in this dispute.
ADMISSION OF NEW MEMBERS.
Applications
cfor admission to the League from no less than 14 nations faced the Assembly at its first session. The questions thereby raised were of the most extreme difficulty and concerned not only the League itself but still more th
ae particular interests of certain members of the League.
Two broad tendencies dominated the discussions. The first was the unanimous feeling that the League could not fulfill its true mission until all states in the world were members. The second was that at the present moment of political instability the League should not proceed too rapidly in giving formal recognition to states not firmly established. Under those two principles agreement was reached without a dissenting voice to admit six states to membership, to admit four others to participation in the technical
organisagions as the first step towards full membership, and to refuse for the present the applications of the remaining four. This solution was generally accepted as both wise and liberal.
Austraiia and
Bulgaria admitted.
Of the four ex-enemy powers, only two,
Austria and
Bulgaria, formally applied for membership. In the case of the former but little opposition was experienced from any quarter, for the reason probably that
Austria is in such a pitable condition that no one can conceive of making it worse for her. Regarding
Bulgaria, however, the
neighbouring states of
Serbia,
Greece and
Roumania at first protested on the score of that she had not carried out her disarmanent agreements, but when the Allied Commission close on the verbal testimony of an
tItalian general, wrote that
Bulgaria had done better in this respect than any of the other former ene
imies, their opposition fell away and they not only agreed to vote for her admission but actually proposed and seconded it. This action was commonly viewed as a first and most healthy step towards healing over the wounds of the war and reuniting the family of nations.
Germany.
The question of
Germany, of course, lay in the background of the whole me
deting. She herself had not applied for membership, probably
realising that the only result would be her refusal at this present meeting and her consequent humiliation. Nevertheless, there were others at the Assembly who openly voiced the hope that
Germany may soon be a member, notably
Barnes, the British
Labour leader,
Cecil, the British liberal,
Pueyrredon of
the Argentine, and
Motta of
Switzerland.
France however, through a speech by
Viviani which was probably the most eloq
yuent delivered during the meeting, made it evident that she could not consider admission of
Germqany until that nation had given more adequate assurances that she intended to live up to the Treaty, and while some powers were anxious to establish a case for
Germany’s early admission, they were not willing to press the issue to an open breach with the French and the other European powers which would have followed
France. The question of
fGermany remains open for the next Assembly, therefore, with the likelihood that if she applies and if she fulfills the Treaty, it will be favorably cons
eidered.
Four Others admitted.
Apart from the two ex-enemies, four other states were admitted.
Luxembourg, though very small, was
recognised as entitled to membership;
Finland, alone of the ex-Russian states was admitted on the understanding that she accept the guarantees accepted by s
veeveral other states as regards minorities;
Costa Rica, which had not originally been invited to join because of the
Tinoco rebellion which happened to be in full swing during the
Paris Peace Conference; and
Albania. The last-named was voted in by the full Assembly against the reccommendation of the committee, which had felt that
Albania’s status was too uncertain and her borders too ill-defined.
The ex-Russian States.
Four other states formerly part of the
Russian Empire,
Esthonia,
Latvia,
Lithuania and
Georgia, presented a far more difficult problem. All of them, though apparently fairly well established, lie close to
Soviet Russia and may at any time become the center of a situation which would prove most embarassing for the League. Consequent
ly it was felt best not to admit them at this moment to full membership but to give their representation on the technical
organisations of the League as proof of the League’s intention to admit tham at the earliest possible opportunity.
Armenia was likewise refused membership, despite the very deep interest which the Assembly had shown in her fate. At the
,moment there was no exact information available as to the actual situation in that country, even as to whether or not it had in reality gone Bolshevik and it was felt to be unwise to undeavor to rush a situation whose eventualities were so uncertain as those of
Armenia. Moreover, while the deepest resentment was felt in some quarters at the reported decision of the Premiers’ Conference at
London against the admission of
Armenia, nevertheless it was accepted as sound that if it should prove desirable to give any state a mandate over
Armenia, it would not be possible if she were a full member of the League. A resolution was approved expressing the hope that
Armenia may be admitted at the next meeting. Finally
Azerbaidjan,
the Ukraine and
Lichtenstein were also refused admission to the League.
Thus, the membership of the League has increased from
January 10 last when thirteen states ratified the Treaty of Versailles to a total of 48 states, with four other partial members.
THE ASSEMBLY and THE COUNCIL.
Probably the most important constitutional problem facing the meeting of the Assembly was the relationship of that body to the Council of the League, which is left undefined in the Covenant. In a sense this relationship is quite anamalous. The Assembly has been entrusted by the Covenant and the Peace Treaties with certain specific powers, and the Council likewise. But outside this limited field lies practically the whole real of international relations. Undoubtedly if either body were actuated by ill-will towards the other, it could produce a most difficult situation.
The original construction of these two bodies at the Peace Conference was one of those inevitable compromises in international relations between what is idea and what is practical. In the aftermath of the world war, when the Great Powers had made their supreme effort and had accustomed themselves to a unified command, they were far less in the mood, even than in the old days of the Hague Conf
derences, to admit the practice of the full equality of all sovereign States which the Little Powers had for years been pressing.
Consequently, an Assembly of all the Powers of the League was created as a general international forum for the discussion of the broader principles of international relations and for the focussing of world public opinion and moral judgment. At the same time a Council was provided to include
the five Great Powers and
four Little Powers, and to sit more or less regularly as a sort of permanent Executive Committee. It may be noted in passing that with the absence of the
United States the Little Powers have as many voices on the Council as the big Powers, this marking the greatest stride forward towards the euality of States which the Little Powers have ever been able to secureWhen the Assembly met there was considerable anxiety to work out a clear-cut definition of powers between the two bodies. It proved, however, quite impossible. The Assembly was content to a
xdopt unanimously a long analytical report which laid down the principle the while each party should be supreme in those matters especially assigned to it, in all other matters neither body should interfere with a subject which has become the special charge of the other.
While this decision in a sense left both bodies sovereign, yet in actual fact they are complementary on
e to the
rother. It is not quite accurate to say that the Assembly is supreme, nor on the other hand that the Council is supreme. They are, on the contrary, quite different bodies, different in composition, in degree of responsibility, and also in temperament. The Council is a sort of executive body of the League, forced to take responsibility through eleven months of the year, while the Assembly meets for but one month of the year to review what has been done during the past months and to give inspiration f
por the coming months.
The analogy of a resp
sible Ministry is not therefore in any sense accurate. Perhaps the nearest example would be the Inner British War Cabinet of five or six members, which sat in steady session while the full Cabine
ut met much less frequently. This Cabinet had its mandate from the British Government, just as the Council is comprised within the Assembly. The action which it took, it took as right, but as the same time subject to certain general review. While this relationship is undoubtedly anomalous, it does not seem to me that at the present stage of international development it is dangerous. It must never be forgotten that it was this compromise alone which made any kind of workable association of nations possible. The Jurists Committee at
the Hague, for instance, last summer found themselves faced by this same apparently insoluble conflict between Big Powers and Little Powers, and it is note
qworthy that they fled with alacrity to the solution which had already been approved within the organisa
gtion of the League itself. Certainly if that group of men could not arrive at a better solution in the field of law and justice where political considerations are reduced to the minimum, the world is not yet ready for any bolder step forward in the political field.
The Assembly and the Council have up to now worked very well together. Members of the Assembly have not hes
titated to
criticise the Council, as they did in the discussion of the Council’s attitude during the Polish advance into
Russia last year, and also as regards the publicity of the Council. Similarly the
vigour with which the Assembly has taken up certain problems has undoubtedly roused the Council to greater activity through the knowledge that any action that it might take would be backed by the enthusiasm of the full membership of the League.
A serious conflict between the two has arisen only once. Certain Assembl
ty leaders such as
Lord Robert Cecil and
Nansen pressed the Council very closely regarding the lack of action as to Mandates. Having undoubtedly driven the Council appreciably ahead, the Assembly then went on to consider a series of Resolutions on this subject. This brought from
Mr. Balfour in the name of the Council a very sharp statement that, under the Covenant, the Council alone was entrusted with the exec
iution of the Mandates Clauses, and that while the Assembly could of course pass any resolution it
aaw fit, the Council would consider them not as a matter of right but of courtesy. This whole discussion was most valuable, both as regards the immediate question of Mandates, and as regards a clear understanding between the two bodies.
The final outcome of this uncertain relationship will probably be a very close working basis. The two bodies, whatever their differences in composition, are absolutely complementary one to the other. The first Assembly meeting, it seems to me, showed that, while the Assembly is the final repository of the moral strength and authority of the League, it is the Council which must in the end work out detailed plans. At this first meeting the Assembly gave an enormous stimulus to all the more liberal principles of the League; it drove the Council on where the Council had been slow, and gave it additional strength where it had been quick; but at the same time it is a fact that in practically every resolution which it adopted, it provided that the Council should be the body of execution. If this precedent becomes practice, it will mean that the two bodies will work in the closest harmony and that each will draw from the other’s strength.
THE NON-PERMANENT COUNCIL MEMBERS.
The most quickening perhaps of any of the questions bef
pore the Assembly was the selection of the
four Little Powers who, with the
four Big Powers, should form the Council of the League for the next year. The
Little Powers were extraordinarily interested in t
rhe outcome, and became very busy seeking to work out favorable combinations. Two different questions were involved, first the selection of the four members for this coming year, and second the general principles of the methods of selection to be followed for the future. Neither of these questions had been worked out in the Covenant.
Regarding the general principles, the Scandinavian countries had proposed an amendment to the Covenant, and the Assembly seemed generally to agree to the principle, to the effect that these four seats should be held by different small Powers under some system of rotation, which would assure all of the
Little Powers a chance at representation on the Council and also provide an equitable representation for the different geographical districts. Once the Assembly began to analyse the methods of obtaining this result, however, it found itself faced by the most complicated considerations which could not be settled off-hand. For instance, should it be provided that an Asiatic Power should always be amongst these four; should the term of service be long or short; should immediate re-election be possible, and so forth? Faced by these difficulties, by the obvious opposition of the
Big Powers to any amendment in any part of the Treaty of
Versailles, and in view of the fact that an Amendments Committee had been provided for, it was felt best to proceed to the election of the four members for this year, and to leave the general principles open for detailed study by the Amendments Committee. This solution had the adva
nttage of allowing the immediate selection for the coming year only, while assuring a really thorough study of the broader principles by the time of the
bnext Assembly.
The elections then took place.
Spain was re-elected not only as a State which had been neutral in the war but still more because of her South American influence.
Brazil also was re-elected as a leading South American Power. The two last places, however, which had been held by
Belgium and
Greece during the previous year, were hotly contested. A very strong feeling prevailed that, as
Germany and
Russia were the two greatest problems before the League, some States such as
Sweden and
Czecho-Slovakia should be selected in order to bring a more intimate knowledge of those countries to the Council sessions. The votes, however, were too widely divided amongst the carious nations to permit of this result, and on the third ballot
Belgium was re-elected, in a large measure as a testimonial to
M. Hymans.
China Elected.
The fourth ballot provided a surprise when
China was s
leelected as the last member of the Council.
Mr Vikyuin Wellington Koo, who has had a wonderful record at
Washington,
Paris and
Genevam, had been very active in seeking to establish the principle that an Asiatic State should regularly be selected amongst those four non-permanent Powers, Not until voting began, however, had there been a general
realisation of the power of the Asiatic States, which include, of course,
China,
Persia,
Siam,
India,
Australia,
New Zealand and, it should be added,
Japan, which also backed the Chinese claim. To this group there was added
Canada, together with a number of South American States.
The Council for the calendar year
1921, then, will include the three great European Powers of
Great Britain,
France and
Italy, together with
Belgium; a European neutral,
Spain; a South American State,
Brazil; and two Asiatic Powers -
Japan and
China. These nations alone represent over a billion people.
TREATIES.
The League activity which has been most overlooked by the public, but which in my judgment is among the most important, is that of the registration and publication of Treaties which, if carried out, means the greatest step ever taken towards the abolition of secret diplomacy. This question had been pressed on several occasions in the Assembly debates, when
Van Karnebeek of
Holland requested the appointment of a special Commission to consider the exact scope and extent of Article 18 of the C
povenant which provides for this registration. It was commonly thought that this action was based on uncertainty as to whether or not the French and Belgian Governments had complied with Article 18 in sub
,mitting their exchange of Notes regarding their Military Alliance without submitting the military terms themselves.
In any case, the appointment of this Committee is very desirable, and should give considerable stimulus to the practice of registration. Up to the end of the Assembly no less than 69 Treaties had been registered, including 15 from
Great Brritain, 12 from
Germany, and 9 from
France. Three numbers of the Special Treaty Series of the Official Journal had already been published, and six more were in preparation, as some of the Treaties requires the use of several different languages. In the German series, for instance, it will be necessary to use French, English, German, Russian, Latvian and Finnish.
American Treaties.
The first American Treaties to be registered were received
during the Assembly meetings, when
Sweden submitted two agreements which she had just signed with the
United States for the extension of copyright privileges and for the modification of the consular agreements. It is perhaps interesting to note that whether
America be a member of the League or not, practically any treaty she signs must be registered with the League by the other contracting party and made public through the League. Of course, this
opolicy of open diplomacy as regard treaties is in line with
America’s best traditions.
ECONOMIC BLOCKADE.
Practically the only positive force that the League of Nations has a fair chance of using against a Covenant-breaking state is the Economic Blockade, which means in brief that if a nation goes to war without arbitration or conciliation, all the other States agree that they will sever commercial and financial relations with her, always with this distinction, however, that it will remain for each State to decide when and how it shall take this action.
Obviously, no Economic Blockade would be effective unless it were joined in by all States. Consequently, the actual method of administration, the time when the blockade shall begin, the ways and means of carrying it out, the question involved when a State not a member of the League is a
neighbour, and very many other questions of detail, must be worked out in a general way before it would be possible to put such a complicated piece of international mechanism into operation.
The Assembly made a very close examination into this subject following a long report from one of its committees. The questions raised were so intricate, however, that it did not seem possible to settle them offhand. Consequently the International Economic Blockade Committee of not over eight members was provided for to report through the Council to the next Assembly.
AMMENDMENTS TO THE COVENANT.
The question as to the amendment of the Covenant was one which had been in the forefront of public consideration for many months, not so much because states which had joined the League had found that in practice the Covenant needed amendment, but because of the hope that the
United States might be willing to join if certain changes were made. As a matter of fact, in all the ni
hne months that the League had been in operation, no amendments whatsoever had been suggested by any League member except the Scandinavian states, which several months previously had submitted proposals amplifying but not modifying the Covenant.
These suggestions, in brief, provide for an annual meeting of the Assembly, a system of rotation amongst the non-permanent members of the Council, a certain relaxation of the otherwise automatic economic blockcade in case of small states endangered by a big
neighbour, and a great extension of the system of arbitration under the League.
During the Assembly, also, two other amendments were brought in,
Canada proposing the complete elimination of Article X, to which she has been opposed even from the time of the adoption of the Covenant at
Paris, and
the Argentine proposing that it be made possible for all sovereign states to join the League if they so desired.
The Amendments Committee.
Several different points of view prevailed as to how best to meet the amendments issue. One favored broad amendments to meet the situation in the
United States; another favored slight amendments simply to establish the precedent; the third believed that, as the League had not been in operation a year, it would be better to proceed more slowly and more carefully and work out amendments in the light of experience through the appointment of a Committee which should report to the next Assembly in September. This third view, which was supported by those Powers which oppose any amendment of the Treaty of
Versailles, finally prevailed in Committee and was practically unanimously approved on the floor. The Scandinavian countries one after the other accepted it and
Canada likewise agreed that Article X could properly be considered in that way.
The Argentine.
It was after this decision that
the Argentine, as though her course had been mapped out some time before, issued a Note practically simultaneously to
Presidemnt Hymans and the Press, that
his her delegation was withdrawing from the Assembly. This action was wholly unexpected and not in any sense preceded by a warning action, unless
Puerreydon’s rising in his seat at the very last moment to vote alone against the proposal be so accepted. The motives of his action were left all the more open to question because the other policies on which he claimed to have based his withdrawal had not even been considered, much less acted upon, by the Assembly. Though the withdrawal caused the greatest interest for the first day or two, it was universally agreed that any kind of international co-operation would be impossible if the nations were to quit even before their requests had been brought up for consideration, and consequently the Assembly went about its work with the feeling that there was nothing it could do in the situation.
The amendments as offered met with a ready welcome amongst nearly all the delegates. The Scandinavian suggestion for an annual meeting of the Assembly was included in the rules of procedure; their suggestion for a rotation in office of the non-permanent Council members was referred to the Amendments Committee; and their suggestion about the economic blockade was incorporated in the report approved by the Assembly to form the basis of the International Blockade Committee’s work. The Argentine amendment for the admission of all sovereign states was tacitly accepted by everyone, with disagreement only as to the time of admission.
Article X.
The amendment of most fundamental importance, therefore, is
Canada’s proposal to eliminate Article X entirely. While no vote was taken on this proposal, it is not going to fay to say that the whole Assembly would be ready to give an interpretation to Article X which would quite satisfy
America’s fears on the subject. Indeed, as has been partially shown in the
Vilna incident, the League has no power to order its member states to contribute troops for any purpose, but may only make a recommendation which the individual states can follow or not as they deem fit. Just along this line, when Article X arose in connection with the future of
Austria, the Committee on the Admission of States unanimously approved the following interpretation:
“It cannot be too emphatically stated that Article X does
not guarantee the territorial integrity of any member of the League. All it does is to condemn external aggression on the territorial integrity and political independence of any member of the League, and call upon the Council to consider what can be done to resist such aggression”.
Action Already Taken.
The Committee of Amendments is expected to be one of the most important growing out of the Assembly. Besides the amendments formally presented and described above, many others were suggested in committee and will undoubtedly be presented before t
he next Assembly. All this material must be very carefully gone ov
er and the necessary changes worked.
Consequently, in conformity with a Council decision of
December 17, the Secretary-General has notified the members of the League to submit all amendments not later than
March 31. The personnel of the Amendments Committee will probably be selected at the Council meeting towards the end of February, and the Committee will be able to get to work shortly after.
The
United States.
It has often been suggested that this Committee would be able to work out a tentative agreement as to any proposals which might come from the
United States. Undoubtedly it could. There are many ways by which direct negotiation might be begun between the proper American authorities and the Committee, it being understood on both sides that an
ty agreement so reached would be subject to the approval of the Senate on the one hand and the Assembly on the other.
Indeed it is through this Committee that many persons see the possibility of an understanding with the
United States. On the one hand the Committee could first explain parts of the Covenant which do not seem clear at home and second weave into its suggested amendments certain proposals from the American viewpoint. On the other hand the corresponding American authorities could explain informally to a competent League body the attitude and desires of the
United States and serve in a real sense as an intermediary between the Senate and the Committee.
SECRETARIAT.
The Secretariat and the Budget were gone into from top to bottom by one of the main Committees which held 12 sessions of about four hours. The net result was the approval of the projects submitted, the suggestion of certain changes, and the enormous strengthening of the status of the Secretariat and the Budget by the thorough examination which such a representative body had put into them.
The Secretariat, it should be remembered, is a wholly new
organisation, in a sense an international staff whose members are not responsible to their own Governments, but only to the League itself. Very strong criticism came from
India,
New Zealand and
Australia, especially as to the salaries of the higher officials, but after most intensive examination the Committee recommended n
o change whatsoever.
The most important question was the length of tenure of office. Two diametrically opposite tendencies prevailed, one to limit that tenure to five years, in order to prevent the creation of a bureaucracy and to bring in fresh inspiration at regular intervals, the other to allow such a tenure of office as would make the secretariat a life career with a truly international spirit and a complete independence of national pressure. While the Committee recommended the f
uive-year limitation, the Assembly itself refused to accept it as a binding principle on the ground that if appointments were for only five years, it would be very hard to induce good men to serve.
Budget.
The Budget for
1921 for a total of
21 million gold francs including the seven millions appropriated for the Labor Office, was similarly approved after criticism confined largely to
India,
New Zealand and
Australia. Very detailed figures had been submitted, showing the cost of proposed Conferences and International
Organisations and the Committee agreed that the expenditures were well justified. A series of resolutions were adopted, however, both to secure more rapid payment of contributions by the various states and to guarantee economy.
To this end a reccommendation was passed that the Assembly request the members of the League to take the necessary measures to ensure payment of their contributions at the earliest possible date and in any case to notify the Secretariat by
January 1 next on what date payment may be e
cxpected. A series of principles was agreed to to the effect that three months before each Assembly the Secretary General should submit to the Council a general draft Budget for the following year, which should be at once communicated to each member of the League, and that the Council at least one month before each Assembly should see that the Budget as approved by it is in the hands of all members of the League. Similarly, at the beginning of each year the accounts of the League are to be audit
oed by a Government chosen by the Council and a report circulated
rto all members of the League three months before each Assembly. The Council is requested to appoint a small expert committee to investigate the
organisation, methods of wor
lk, efficiency, number, salaries and allowances of the Secretariat and the Labor
Organisation, and to have the report in the hands of all members of the League by
June 1 next.
Allocation of Expenses.
Curiously enough one of the phases of League work which caused keened interest amongst some of the delegations was the method of allocating these expenses amongst the various nations. When the question arose at
Paris during the drafting of the Covenant, nobody had any idea how the allocation would be made until it was suggested that the International Postal Union system be used as a basis. This was immediately accepted, but it was found later that this system was not based on any scientific plan, but had, on the other hand been drawn up in a most haphaz
wdard fashion.
While no serious results arose in the limited expenditures of the Postal Union, it was quite to be feared that a different situation would come about in the larger expednitures of the League. For instance, it was obviously unfair that
Australia or
Canada should pay as large a contribution as
Great Britain. Consequently, agreement was general that a better system of distribution must be arrived at. Two methods were open, either an amendment of the Covenant, or a change in the system of the Postal Union.
The latter plan was agreed upon, and the Council was requested to appoint a special committee of five, including the Swiss delegate to the International Postal Union, to attempt to arrive at a more equitable scheme. This Committee is, not later than
March 31, to send the Council its report which will be immediately circulated to members of the League, and, if not accepted by all members, the question is to be placed on the agenda of the
21921 meeting, it being understood that any members which may have contributed this year a disproportionate share according to the new schedule, shall pay a correspondingly less amount next year.
THE REDUCTION OF ARMAMENTS.
The question of the reduction of armaments came before the Assembly at a time of chaos in world relations, when almost no one could clearly analyse the situation. Apart from the intrinsic diffculty of the itself, there were three grat poi
jnts of uncertainty -
Germany,
Russia and the
United States.
Russia, of course, constituted by far the most serious element, because everyone seemed convinced that she would attempt a new offensive next Spring. Not only her open threats to this effect, but still more her sudden interference in the dispute between
Poland and
Lithuania over
Vilna, gave very solid for this fear.
Germany, similarly, was in a very uncertain position for the reason that the Allied Powers feared that it might not be possible to reach an agreement with her over the reparations next Spring, and that consequently some military demonstration might be necessary. The relations be
ytween
France and
Germany have remained highly sensitive, and the least incident is apt to cause serious difficulty.
The American Surprise.
The United States, however, afforded the most surprising element in the situation, not because people on this side felt that the constant increase in American armanents consituted a specific threat against any one Power, but rather because it took away that leadership which had been counted upon to bring about a fundamental change in the relations of States. It cannot be too strongly
emphasised that when the rest of the world got the impression that
America had not only given up hopes of disarmament, but was in fact arming itself very heavily, the great hopefulness which had previously prevailed was dissipated.
Consequently, with the German, Russian and American situations such as they were, the Assembly approached the question of the reduction of armaments without any great hope of
kore more than slightly alleviating the situation. Despite the desperate economic situation, despite the grinding cost of armaments, despit
re the warning of financiers and economists such as met at
Brussels, there prevailed a very general belief that the political situation was not such as would lead to really fundamental results.
Nevertheless, the League set out to do everything that was possible in the circumstances. It is given in the Covenant the power of enquiry and recommendation, and be
tyond that nothing but the moral force of world public opinion.
lLegally, of course, this is very little; actually, however, it may be very much.
The first line of action lay through the Council, which
last August had created the Permanent Military, Naval and Air Commission. This Commission, composed of army and navy officers of states represented on the Council, had held a series of meetings, and drawn up general proposals for the interchange of military and naval information as agreed to in the Covenant. On
November 25 it unanimously requested the Council to ask the
United States to send representatives to sit with it in a consultative capacity.
America invited.
On
December 1 the Council approved a letter to the
United States, asking the Government to name representatives “in a consultative capacity”, and with the understanding that “the presence of representatives of the
United States would in no way commit the American Government to whatever opinions may be finally put forward in the Report of the Commission, nor indeed can that Report itself be more than a basis for the consideration by the members of the League of the measures of reduction in armaments which united action may enable them to achieve”. The Council expressed the hope that the
United States would join in the “preliminary work necessary for ultimate success, and lend to the present effort an assistance which can in no way encroach upon its own perfect liberty of action”.
It was, of course, most earnestly hoped that this invitation would be accepted. On
December 9, however, a reply was received that, “
The President of the
United States is deeply interested in this question, and is most desirous of co-operating to this end, but as the Government of the
United States is not a member of the League, he does not feel justified in appointing a commission to take even a
de facto participation in the deliberations of the commission acting on behalf of the Council in the execution of provisions in the Covenant of the League of Nations”.
This refusal proved a source of deep discouragement, because it meant that the richest nation in the world, and at the same time one of the three naval powers of the world, would not take part in the work. It was most difficult for those here to understand the reasons behind this decision, especially as the news from
America was so directly conflicting. On one day
Mr Daniels would be urging incomparabl
ey the biggest navy in the world; on the next
Senator Borah would make a sensational proposal for reducing the navies of the world 50% during each of the next five years.
The Three Lines of Action.
Despite these handicaps, however, the Assembly went vigorously into the question of disarmament. While probably no one of the delegates would maintain that any very radical result was obtained, I think that in simple justice to the League the political situation of the world must be taken into account in assessing the results. As a matter of fact, if the various nations carry out in good faith the recommendations made at
Geneva, a very appreciable forward step will have been taken, but it still remains, of course, to know whether they will put their hearts and minds behind the possibilities here outlined.
The question was approached from the viewpoint that progress must be affected in three successive stages, first by general agreement amongst members of the League not to exceed their present scale of armaments save at the request of the League or in circumstances
recognised as exceptional; second by general agreement for a proportionate and simultaneous reductions in the scale of armaments or in the existing military budgets; and third by the acceptance of disarmament, by which would be meant a scientific and comprehensive reduction of armaments to the least figure compatible with national security. Essential to these plans are the execution of the disarmament clauses of the Peace Treaty and the collaboration of other great military powers which have hitherto remained outside the League.
No Increase of Budgets.
Accordingly, with the view of preventing increases in armaments, a recommendation was adopted by thirty votes to seven requesting the Council to submit for the consideration of the members of the League the acceptance of an undertaking not to exceed the current military Budget during the next two years unless required to do so by recommendation of the League or by exceptional conditions notified to the League.
The Means of Investigation.
Moreover, in order to take the first steps towards a reduction in armaments, the Council was asked to request the Permanent Military, Naval, and Air Commission to complete its technical examination into the present condition of armaments; to instruct a temporary commission composed of persons with requisite competence in politi
vcal, social, and economic matters to submit proposals for the reduction of armaments; to form within the Secretariat a section for this commission and for the publication and exch
hange of imformation as provided in the Covenant; and to consider the means by which military information so exchanged may be verified, if the principle of mutual verification is confirmed by an amendment to the Covenant.
Private Manufacture.
In view also of the fact that the Covenant formally denounces the evil effects of the private manufacture of munitions and war material, the Assembly requested the Council to initiate the immediate investigation of this problem through its technical commissions and to consider whether the contemplated International Office of Control for the Traffic in Armaments could not co-operate to this end.
Finally, with the purpose of preventing the large stocks of arms and ammunition accumulated
in the recent war from becoming a source of danger to the world through an extended sale throughout the less
civilised areas in
Asia and
Africa, the Assembly declared “its high sense of the gain to civilization which would ensue from a strict control of this traffic” and invited the Council to urge upon all governments the immediate approval of the Convention of
St. Germain for the Control of the Trade in Arms and Ammunition, which has not yet been ratified. At present the greatest exporter of arms has been shown to be
America.
THE PERMANENT COURT.
Beyond all question the greatest single advance which the League of Nations has yet registered in international relations is the practical completion of the Permanent Court o
International Justice, whose adoption by unanimous vote of the Assembly marks the crowning of hopes for many years but u
lp till now impossible of attainment.
Proposals for a world court date far back into history. Not till the Second
Hague Conference of 1907, however, did they assume serious form. There a project was drafted but success was rendered impossible by failure to agree on a method of selecting the judges.
Now, however, as a result of the creation of the League, the Court of practically assured. The delegates of forty nations approved a defintite project; the delegates of 22 nations have actually signed that project; and before another year is over, it is expected that the Court will have become a part of international life, sitting permanently at
the Hague, and deciding all legal cases between nations which may be submitted to it.
The evolution of the Court project with the League structure is in itself an interesting manifestation of how the League functions. First Article 14 of the Covenant provides that there shall be such a Court; then the Council appoints a Jurists’ Committee; that Committee meets at
the Hague for five weeks last summer; its findings are submitted to the Council; the Council considers them at
San Sebastian and at
Brussels and makes certain changes; it then reccomends the project to the Assembly, the Assembly appoints a full Committee, which rerecommends with certain changes; the Assembly adopts the project; the Council submits it to all the states members of the League; the executive of the many states sign, and finally it is hoped that the competent authorities in each country will ratify. When such a process has to be gone through, it does not leave much room for charges that the League is a supergovernment or a superlegislature.
The Assembly, it will be seen, was faced when it came together with a project which had been evolved with the most extreme care by an eminent committee of jurists at
the Hague and modified severely by the Council meeting at
Brussels. The broad outline of the Court, especially the ingenious method of selecting the judges it could, however, leave untouched, but it had to give decision on two vitally important problems.
Compulsory Adjudication.
First, should the Court have the power of compulsory adjudication, or in other words could it, on the plea of one state and in a limited classification of purely legal cases, hale another sovereign state before it, or, in default of the appearance of that state, try the case and render a judgment? Admittedly this was a fundamental question meaning a great increase in the scope of compulsory adjudication and a similar surrender of unlimited national sovereignty.
The Committee of Jurists at
the Hague had said yes. They felt that, at least in certain strictly legal cases, the nations of the world should recognize the principle of compuls
iory adjudication to a clearly defined set of cases already accepted in a general way in the Covenant, the various nations would submit to that check on their sovereignity.
The Council, however, had taken the other viewpoint. They felt that to adopt the principle of compulsory adjudication implied an amendment, if not in the letter, at least in the spirit of the Covenant. They also held that it was advisable to create the Court and establish it firmly before trying to give it too much power. In a general way the Big Powers were unwilling to
recognise the principle of compulsory adjudication at the present moment, while the Little Powers, whose great hope lies in the development of law, favored it.
The Assembly found itself unable to do otherwise than take the same view as the Council. Despite the fervent pleas of the Little Powers, unanimity could not be reached on any kind of compulsory adjudication. Nevertheless, a supplementary protocol was adopted whereby those states so desiring may accept the principle of compulsory adjudication, either on the broad basis provided in the original project or with such limitations as they desire.
Was Ratification Necessary?
The second fundamental question before the Assembly was whether the Assembly itself could bring the Court into being by a mere unanimous resolution or whether following that resolution the ratification of the individual states was necessary. Despite the long delay that ratification would mean, it was decided to submit it to all states in the form of a protocol and for ratification as a distinct international agreement, the Court to come into being when a majority of the members of the League ratify.
The adoption of the Statute by the Assembly means that the Statute as approved by it is final; that states subscribe to it as it stands; that the cost of the Court will be met out of the general League funds; and that the members of the League, whether they ratify or not, have both the right and the obligation to take part in the organization of the Court as soon as it has been put into operation by a majority of the other states.
Twenty-two Sign.
The form of the protocol of signature was drafted by the Council the day after the Assembly’s approval of the general project and was immediately opened for signature. Before the Assembly broke up, twenty-two nations signed the project, exactly the right number, therefore, to bring the Court into being as soon as the signatures have been followed by ratification. Many other states are expected to sign in the near future, and it is hoped to have a number of final ratifications early next year when the various parliaments meet.
It is interesting to note that among the twenty-two nations to sign were all
four Great Powers,
Great Britain,
France,
Italy and
Japan. It is also interesting to note that amongst the other powers four signed the protocol for compulsory adjudication, namely
Portugal,
Switzerland,
Denmark, and
Salvador. Many others are expected to sign this protocol as soon as they get powers from their home governments.
It is hoped that the sufficient ratifications of the Court will be completed by Spring to bring it into actual being. If so the machinery for the selection of judges will be set in motion so that the nominations may be made in the summer and the actual selections at the Assembly in
September. This would bring the Court into being within a year.
The Court is to sit permanently at the Hague and to consist of eleven judges chosen for a period of nine years. The hitherto insoluable problem of the method of selecting the judges is overcome by having the Assembly and the Council of the League vote separately on a list of candidates prepared mainly by the Hague Court of Arbitral Justice, those names selected by both bodies to be declared elected. After the most fundamental argument, the proposal to give the Court the power of obligatory adjudication in a limited classification of purely legal cases failed of unanimous approval but a supplementary protocol was adopted and immediately opened for signature whereby those nations so desiring may accept this principle either for the four classifications in Article 13 of the Covenant or in a more limited way.
America May Sit.
The United States may ratify the Court Statute if it sees fit. This question first came up amongst
the Hague Jurists when it was unanimously agreed that though the Court would be a League Court, created by the League and maintained by the League, nevertheless it shou
dld be open to all nations which might care to join it, the theory being that the League Nations aims, not to be a closed co-operation to preserve peace only amongst its own members but rather to promote peace and goodwill throughout the whole world, irrespective of whether certain nations may or may not have joined it. Of course, after the
United States at the second
Hague Conference converted the hitherto nebulou
ds idea of a world court into a living, practical international problem, and after Mr Root and Dr Scott practically laid down the essential outlines of the present plan during the Jurists Committee at
the Hague, it would be an anomaly indeed if
the United States should hold itself apart from participation in whst is probably its basic international conception.
TECHNICAL
ORGANISATIONS.
During the past year it has become very obvious that certain permanent international organizations should be created to deal with questions of health, transit, economics and finance. The various conferences and negotiations which have already taken place between states, as well as the necessity of coordinating existing
organisations under one head has made it clear that there must be one central
organisation in these three broad international field.
Consequently, the work which up till now has been done along these lines became
crystalised at the time of the Assembly meeting into a proposal to create three Permanent Commissions each empowered to have a permanent staff and an annual meeting. These Commissons were to be autonomous in internal matters but subject to the Council or the Assembly in matters of broader.
A most unexpected attack on this project, however, was initiated by
Mr Rowell of
Canada, who pointed out that the League would make a mistake, first in creating an elaborate and expensive machinery and secondly in calling for too many conferences which necessarily must be held far away from many of the countries in the League. After considerable debate the three
organisations were given a more temporary and advisory character with the thought that they could function fully during the coming year and have their status definitely determined at
next September’s Assembly in the light of fuller experience.
Economics and Finance.
The first and most important is the Advisory Economic and Financial Committee which grew out of the
Brussels International Conference and which in a sense is the successor of the Supreme Economic Council. This Committee, to which the leading financiers and economists in the League are to be invited, is charged with considering the immediate application of the
Brussels Conference recommendations, with preparing the agenda for the next International Conference which the Council may summon at its discretion, and with the examination of any economic and financial problems which may be submitted to it. Th
jus is provided a continuing,
centralising Economic and Financial
Organisation within the League.
Freedom of Communications.
Second in importance is the Advisory Committee on Freedom of Communications and Transit, which is to deal with one of the most vital subjects for the economic reconstruction of
Europe. This Committee is to be
organised at a General Conference which has been set for
February 21 at
Barcelona when the whole of the transit phase of the economic problem will be considered and the agreements necessitated by Article 23 of the Covenant and the various Peace Treaties as regards the problem of transit togther with the General Convention on the international regime of ports, waterways, and railways will be drawn up.
The United States has been invited to this Conference as it was invited to
Brussels. It is hoped that she will be represented not only because the clearing of the lines of transportation in
Europe is of vital importance to the preservation of world peace and to the extension of American trade, but also because it is felt if she could send men of the experience of a number of the Inter-State Commerce Commission, she could contribute greatly to the unification and
centralisation of
EuropeIs transportation system. The work of amelioration which could be done by such a Conference has been amply demonstrated by the restrictions which have already been removed as a result of a similar League Conference in
Paris on the question of passports, customs formalities, and through-tickets.
Health.
The third Technical
Organisation is the International Health
Organisation, which is the outcome of a series of health conferences already held under the League. Its purpose is to co-ordinate the various existing international health
organisations, to bring the health authorities in various countries into closer contact, to co-operate with the International
Labour Organisation,
the Red Cross and other bodies, to organise a more rapid interchange of information, to hasten action in cases of epidemics, and to prepare international health conventions. The Office
Interational d’Hygiene Publique in
Paris is to form the foundation of the new organisation. In addition there is to be a General Committee comprising members of the League of Nations who are not members of the Office, a Standing Committee, a Medical Secretary, and personnel of the League, the last named sitting at
Geneva.
MANDATES.
The question of Mandates for the thirteen million or so people in
Asia Minor,
Africa and
Australasia who have been freed from
Germany and
Turkey during the war is certainly one of the most important and also at the time the Assembly opened one of the least advanced of all the problems before the League. The full execution of the Mandates Clauses would mean the introduction into certain colonial territories of the revolutionary principle that the government of backward peoples is given over to more advanced peoples, not for the exploitation of the natives but for their advancement and development, and not as an outright possession but as a trust from the rest of the world.
In the nine months which has passed from the time of the birth of the League to the meeting of the First Assembly, the League had been able to do almost nothing for the fulfilment of the Mandates Clauses, for the reason that the Principal Allied and Associated Powers had not taken the preliminary steps necessary to enable the League to begin its work. Under the Treaties these former enemy territories were surrendered, not to the League, but to the victorious powers. It had been their contention, and that contention had been accepted by the League, that it was for the powers themselves to select the Mandatory States and to draw up in the first place the terms of the Mandates. Only after these steps had been taken could the League apply the principles of the Covenant, having full right, of course, to refuse to accept any action taken by the Powers which might be inconsistent with these provisions.
Up to the meeting of the Assembly, however, the Allied Powers had not been able to agree amongst themselves on the terms of the Mandates which they would submit to the League. This, despite the fact that on
August 3, 1920, and on
October 27, 1920, the Council of the League had addressed very explicit letters to the
four Prime Ministers involved, requesting immediate action before the Assembly. As this delay seemed to put in jeopardy the whole Mandates principle of the League, the Council
lon
November 30 sent still another telegram to th
we effect that as the failure to submit the draft Mandates “has stirred the public opinion of the world, the Council takes the liberty of urging the extreme importance of a prompt solution”.
American German Notes.
At the same time pressure began to come from other quarters. Early in the Assembly
Germany sent the League a very threatening Note to the effect that as the provisions of the Covenant did not seem to have been carried out as regards Mandates she must reserve full li
hberty of action as regards the whole colonial settlement. At about the sam
te too, the Assembly at
Geneva began to hear indirectly that the
aUnited States had sent a sharp Note to
Great Britain protesting that the principles of the Mandates has not been lived up to in
Mesopotamia, notably as regards the oil supply.
The Perman
tent Commission.
While the Council was waiting for a reply from the Allied Powers, it went deeply into the question of the constitution of the Permanent Mandates Commisssion, which the Covenant provides for the purpose of examining the annual reports of the Mandatory Powers and advising the Council as regards the execution of Mandates terms. On
November 29 a full agreement was reached on a detailed plan which leaves nothing further to be done as regards this Commission except the choice of the actual personnel.
The two vital facts about this Commission are, first that all its nine members are to be appointed, not by Governments, but by the C
ouncil, and second that the majority of them must be from non-Mandatory Powers. This means in other words that the Mandates com
mission as finally established will be an International Commission appointed by and responsible to the Council and drawing its strength from States not having a selfish interest in the mandated territories.
The First Mandates.
Just about this time the Allied Powers began to send in the draft Mandates. First to come were the “C” group in
Australasia where the conflict between
Australia and
Japan had been gotten around by means of a Note from
Japan reserving full rights as regards immigration into the colonies taken over by
Australia. In the last hours of the Assembly, the “B” Mandates for
Africa and the “A” Mandates for
Asia Minor were also received, so that before the Assembly broke up the whole Mandates questionhad been put into the hands of the League where it belonged.
The “C” Mandates as submitted by the Allied Powers were in fairly good shape. The Council made certain changes in them, notably in refusing to allow modifications in the mandate forms when demanded by a simple majority of the Mandatory Powers. Also instead of “accepting” the drafts it “defined” the terms of the Mandates in order to leave no doubt that the authority comes from the Council and not from the Powers themselves.
Meantime the “A” and “B” Mandates are being submitted to a close scrutiny. Wile they are not badly drawn, nevertheless certain changes will undoubtedly be made. The Council will consider the questionat its forthcoming meeting in
late February and probably take a final decision at that time.
The Assembly Conflic
yt.
Just in the closing hours of the Assembly there arose a rather serious constitutional conflict between the Assembly and the Council. A Committee of the Assembly, headed by
Dr Nansen and
Lord Robert Cecil, had been pressing the Council very closely on the whole Mandates situation, especially in demanding copies of the draft Mandates before the Council approved. On the final day this Committee brought before the Assembly a series of recommendations which
Lord Robert Cecil asked the Assembly to adopt.
Mr Balfour, speaking for the Council, pointed out in no unmistakble terms that the execution of the Mandates problem was a function not of the Assembly but of the Council and that the Council could not assume the rights of the Assembly and interfere in duties specifically entrusted to it by the Covenant. There can be no doubt that the Covenant does entrust the Council with this work, but at the same time the
rfeeling of members of the Assembly is very strong that that body, as a meeting place for all members of the League, must maintain
n certain control and oversight, and certainly the right of review and criticism.
In conclusion, by the end of the Assembly, the Allied Powers had submitted the terms of all Mandates to the League; the Council had approved and published the terms of the “C” Mandates and had undertaken the study of the “A” and “B” Mandates in preparation for their February meeting; the constitution of the Permanent Mandates Commission had been fully approved, with the selection of the personnel alone remaining. In other words, the whole execution of the Mandates Clauses has now passed over into the hands of the League of Nations; the mandated territories will shortly change their status from territories occupied by military forces into territories administered in trust for the benefit of the natives and the world; and the central machinery necessary
gfor the supervision of this work has been set well on its way towards completion.
America’s Interest.
All this is of particular importance to
the United States. Whe
htther or not it is a member of the League, it must appreciate that the nations of the world have entrusted this duty to the League. If there is a violation of the mandates principles, correction may be had, not through the individual goverments involved in the mandate, but through the League which is responsible for their fulfillment.
America’s Note to
Great Britain on Mesopotamian oil would find a far less ready welcome amongst the British, who can with some reason reply that
America has no right of prote
cst to her, than it would find amongst the other powers of the League which are as interested as is
America to see that no violation of the Open Door takes place. As a matter of fact
America’s not being a member of the League complicates her position as regards mandates, even to the extent of obtaining information, as it is just now reported that the S
ytate Department has sent another Note to
Great Britain requestion the draft mandates for
Africa and
Asia Minor which have been in the hands of the League for some two weeks. It is hardly open to question that the full execution of the mandates principle is directly in line with
America’s cardinal policies towards these backward parts of the world and that in this field, at least, the interests of the
United States and the aspirations of the League go hand in hand. Were
America a member of the League, her power would absolutely assure the execution of these principles, whereas outside the League she stands alone, without information, and with very doubtful lega
kl position.
THE FIRST INTERNATIONAL FORCE.
The most interesting single action of the League taken during the meeting af the Assembly and by decision of the Council was the preparation of the first international force which the League has so far attempted to bring together. The principles underlyi
nhng the despatch of this force are so absolutely vital to any understanding of the functioning of the League that it is well to consider them with some care.
Poland and
Lithuania, it will be remembered, had for months been in dispute as to the frontiers between them. This dispute had been referred to the Council of the League and had been gone into in great detail. As a matter of fact a Commission of the League was actually on the spot when
General Zeligowski made his spectacular raid
imto the district around the city of
Vilna. The Council immediately made representations to the Polish Government which completely disowned
Zeligowski and his army. It then, after long deliberation, proposed that the fate of this district should be settled by a plebiscite to be held under tha auspices of the League. Both
Poland and
Lithuania accepted and by the time the Assembly met there remained but the question of working out the ways and means.
The most serious question before the Council was the preservation of law and order in a very large district after the withdrawal of the Polish and Lithuanian forces, which had been agreed to in order to make the plebiscite a fair one. Obviously, the district could not be left without troops of some sort. The Council therefore decided to ask certain nations in the League whether they would be willing to send a small number of troops to keep order and to act as police during the election.
Great Britain,
France,
Belgium and
Spain, who were represented on the Conucil, agreed without much delay to furnish small contingents.
Italy and
Greece took the matter under consideration with the probablility that they too would accept. Thus the participation of six nations seemed assured.
The Neutrals Invited.
It was desired, however, to make this force still more international if possible. At the most it was planned to send 1800 men only but it was hoped to be able to draw these men from different countries. Consequently, on
November 21 the Council sent to the Norwegian, Swedish, Danish, and Dutch delegates to the Assembly, a letter, the purport of which is shown in the following paragraph:
-“The Council requests me to inform you that it would be extremely happy if the . . . . . . . . . . . Government should find it possible to furnish a contribution to the formation of the Expeditionary Detachment. Such a decision would have the double advantage of increasing the effectives at the disposition of the Plebiscite Commission by demonstrating that the difficult work undertaken by the League of Nations find full support amongst other governments and that the Council can rely upon effective aid from them”.
This letter, it cannot be too strongly stressed in view of the misunderstanding of the League in
the United States, was a request to these governments to send troops and in no way an order to them to do so. It could hardly be made more plain than it is made here that the Council has no power of compulsion whatsoever but can only rely on the co-operation of the various states to which it appeals.
It remains for these states to say whether or not they will acced
de to the request of the Council. In this particular case the results have still further demonstrated the method of operation of the League. They cannot be too carefully examined in the light of queries which have been raised in
America.
They Accept.
On
November 29 Branting replied, “The Swedish Government, which is glad to accede to the wish expressed by the Council of the League of Nations, agrees, under the conditions laid down in your Note, to co-operate in the formation of an Expeditionary Force by furnishing a contingent of ICO men”.
Hagerup on December 5 replied, “
Norway is prepared to furnish a contingent consisting of one Company of 100 rank and file and from four to five officers towards the formation of the Epeditionary Force which it is intended to despatch in order to safeguard the expression of the popular will in the territory in dispute between
Poland and
Lithuania. The sending of this contingent must, however, depend upon a sufficient number of volunteers coming forward for the purpose”.
Zahle on
December 1 replied, “The question of the despatch of a Danish Corps has been submitted by the Royal Government to the leaders of the political parties in the Danish Parliament and the proposal has been accepted by them. In order, however, to settle definitely the formalities
oinvolved by this question it is necessary for a law to be passed by the two chambers”.
Holland’s Parliament.
Holland made a similar reply and immediately introduced a Bill into her States General to this end. This Bill caused most widespread interest throughout
Holland and has already drawn considerable socialist opposition. Its fate is not yet settled as these lines are being written but the indications are that it will be passed.
Thus it will be seen that
Sweden agreed to send troops outright;
Norway agreed to send troops if she could raise sufficient volunteers; and
Denmark and
Holland agreed provided they could get the necessary legislation through their parliaments. It is hard to imagine any more complete demonstration of the actual mechanism of the League and of the impossibility of the Council ordering any nation to supply troops against its will.
It is still uncertain what the final outcome may be, indeed whether the detachment will be sent at all. The situation between
Poland and
Lithuania is very complex, especially because of the sudden interference of the Bolshevists, but the important question from one point of view has already been decided, namely that the Council may request, but cannot order, members of the League of Nations to send troops for the work of preserving peace, and that the various states may accept or reject this request in whatever way they desire.
HUMANITARIAN.
Several projects of very wide humanitarian appeal for which it would be impossible to find anything but approval were also taken up by the first Assembly. They were in general subjects which lay in the field of no one government but which could be approached only by the co-operation of several or all governments. The whole outcome showed the great value of having a common international meeting place where such subjects of world concern can readily be taken up.
Armenia.
First, of course, came
Armenia. Here was a tragedy which could be called the especial charge of no one nation but which the combined judgment of the civilised world had decided must stop. Promises had been made by many statesmen but despite that the extermination of the Armenian people still went on. When the Assembly met, it is not too much to say that not a dozen men present had any idea that
Armenia would be considered. The subject was not on the agenda but was brought up by a few liberal leaders who had behind them all the support of world public opinion.
tThey succeeded in securing the ready approbation of the Assembly, which passed two resolutions, one creating a committee of its own, and the other requesting the Council to approach the nations of the world with the hope of bringing hostilities in
Armenia to an end.
No one knew exactly what measures could be taken. As a result of the Council’s invitation, however,
the United States,
Spain and
Brazil agreed to use their good offices to end the Armenian horrors. An investigation was immediately started by
the Great Powers through their representatives at Constantinople to find out the best methods of approach. At the present moment the situation is still is suspense but whatever the final outcome may be, the fact remain
ds that there was in existence a world assemblage which could appeal to all the nations and that as a result of that appeal three nations definitely came forward as mediators backed by the support of all the other nations. It is, of course, unmistakable that no nation has yet offered to use physical force, and that for that reason all efforts to save
Armenia may be abortive. Even so, however, it is a considerable advance over the previous situation to have in existence a forum from which at least a strong moral effort can be launched.
Typhus in
Poland.
Second was the scourge of typhus in
Poland which has been raging in
Eastern Europe for over a year and which carried the threat of contagion to all the rest of
Europe and incidentally to nations whose ships go to
Europe.
Poland ha
sd done everything possible with her limited resources but the flood of war prisoners back and forth across the frontiers, the military upheaval of the Bolshevist invasion and the shattered finances of the State itself have made these efforts quite insignificant to the necessities.
The co-operation of many states was obviously essential. The Council had previously sought this co-operation and attained it in good but not sufficient measure. The question was still open whether the world would have to confess that it could not meet the danger by common action. The answer was most encouraging. One after the other various states agreed to make contributions or to release the conditions which they had placed on contributions already made. No less than fifteen nations offered definite financial assistance of whom the most interesting perhaps are
Canada,
Persia,
Siam,
Austria,
Bulgaria and
Germany. Following the Assembly an urgent and immediate appeal was sent out to all other countries and definite steps taken towards efficient administration of this aid.
Traffic in Women and Children.
The international traffic in women and children is undoubtedly one of the great blots on civilisation which can be cured not by the action of any one state but only by the co-operation of all states. A great increase in this traffic, which had largely been overcome by passport difficulties during the war, is expected now that hun
dger and privation are driving so many thousands of people from home. Obviously, some concerted attempt must be made to stop it at th
he various frontier
ds.
Consequently, a whole series of measures were elaborated by the Assembly, beginning first with a questionnaire to be sent to all governments as to what measures they have taken or plan to take to combat this traffic, and leading up to an international conference to be held this summer. Special attention was given to the ghastly situation in
Armenia and
Asia Minor where a Commission of
Enquiry is to be appointed by the Council to consist of three qualified residents of the district, one of which shall be a wom
ean.
I cannot refrain from recalling just at this point that during the Campaign in the
United States a woman charged that the League of Nations was
legitimatising the White Slave Traffic. How any honorable could so pervert a sincere effort to combat this most terrible evil is almost impossible to understand. Yet the gross misrepresentation injured the League very appreciably in many quarters.
Opium.
Another horrible blot on
civilisation is the trade in opium and other dangerous drugs, especially in
China where unfortunately it has been greatly on the increase in recent months, especially because
Japan and the
United States have not taken full precautions against it. Previously, the suppression of this trade had been attempted by co-operative action under control of
the Netherlands Government, which, however, was very glad to turn the whole problem over to the League.
The Assembly accepted this transfer and directed the Secretariat to gather all data regarding the production, distribution and
cconsumption of such drugs. It also provided for an Advisory Committee to be appointed by the Council from the countries especially interested, assisted by representatives of certain other states like
the United States, and by not over three individuals especially qualified, this Committee to report to the Council three months before each Assembly. Immediately after the Assembly a well known Chinese, wh
lo had received his education in
the United Statesm, was put in charge of this work.
CONCLUSION.
This in rough is the work of the first Assembly, almost wholly a work of international organisation free from immediate politi
vcal issues. On the very afternoon that the Assembly was holding its final session, the Council was meeting to consider what action was necessary to make all this
awork effective, for the Council had been entrusted with the responsibility for it throughout.
The Secretariat was ordered to prepare a complete analysis of all these duties in time for the next Council meeting which was set for around
February 20. It was found that not less than twelve special committees or organisations had been provided for covering nearly every phase of League interest, namely Amendments, Tr
tea
aties, Blockade, Secretariat, Allocation, Economic and Financial, Transit, Health, Armaments, Traffic in Women and Children, Armenian Women and Children and Opium.
The next Council meeting, therefore, will have before it the very difficult and complicated task of setting all this machinery into operation. It requires a very great deal of thought and consideration to select the personnel for the various committees of this sort because it is necessary to consider not onl
ty the specific question to be handled but also the va
trious national susceptibilities. Consequently, it cannot be done too quickly.
The work of the League, therefore, instead of letting up now as everybody had expected, is going ahead with even greater intensity because in a sense it is becoming more sharpened. The months between now and
September are going to be full of very careful and detailed study of every phase of League interest. And then at that time, which fortunately is the most beautiful of the year in
Geneva and quite in contrast to the situation which prevailed during the first Assembly, will be held the second great meeting of the League, which will come together with all its work carefully prepared beforehand by experts and fully considered by the various governments, so that it should be not only the most efficient but also the quickest-moving international gathering ever held.
December 30, 1920.
