Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-5mhkq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-05T09:07:30.509Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Treaty of Peace with Germany in the United States Senate

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 May 2017

George A. Finch
George A. Finch*
Affiliation:
Secretary of the Board of Editors of the Journal; Member of the Bar of the District of Columbia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

For the second time the United States Senate, on March 19, 1920, refused its advice and consent to the ratification of the Treaty of Peace with Germany, signed at Versailles on June 28, 1919. The first rejection took place exactly four months before, namely, on November 19, 1919. The vote on the treaty in November was 39 for and 55 against, and in March 49 for and 35 against. Both votes were upon resolutions of ratification containing reservations and understandings the acceptance of which by the Allied and Associated Powers was made a condition precedent to the going into effect of the ratification of the United States. A resolution of ratification without reservations or conditions of any kind was presented to the Senate on November 19, 1919, and defeated by a vote of 38 for to 53 against. No resolution of this kind was offered or voted upon in March. The treaty has thus failed to receive in either form the concurrence of two-thirds of the Senators present as required by the Constitution for the making of treaties by the President.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 14 , Issue 1-2 , January 1920 , pp. 155 - 206
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1920

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Statement of Senator Brandegee, Congressional Record, Nov. 19, 1919, p. 8774.

2 Congressional Record, March 4, 1919, p. 4974.

3 Address of the President at Tacoma, Washington, Sept. 13, 1919, Senate Document No. 120, 66th Cong., 1st sess., p. 182.

The original draft of the covenant and the covenant as finally adopted are printed in the Supplement to this JOURNAL for April, 1919, pp. 113 and 128. The alterations made in the original draft are described by President Wilson in his address at the plenary session of the Peace Conference at Paris, April 28, 1919, reporting the final draft for adoption. His address is printed in the Supplement, ibid., p. 124.

4 The President’s address on submitting the treaty to the Senate is printed in this Journal for July, 1919, pp. 554 and 576.

5 Senate Document, No. 106, 66th Cong., 1st sess.

6 Sen. Doc. 106, 66 Cong., 1st sess., p. 500.

7 Ibid., p. 1276.

8 Sen. Doc. 120, 66th Cong., 1st sess., p. 173.

9 Senate Report, No. 176, 66th Cong., 1st sess. Part 1.

10 Ibid., Part 2.

11 Sen. Rep. 176, 66th Cong., 1st sess., Part 3.

12 These substitutes read:

Senator Hitchcock:

That the national policy of the United States known as the Monroe Doctrine, as announced and interpreted by the United States, is not in any way impaired pr affected by the covenant of the league of nations and is not subject to any decision, report, or inquiry by the council or assembly.

Senator Pittman:

The United States does not bind itself to submit for arbitration or inquiry by the assembly or the council any question which, in the judgment of the United States, depends upon or involves its long-established policy commonly known as the Monroe Doctrine, and it is preserved unaffected by any provision in the said treaty contained.

13 Supra, p. 178.

14 Supra, p. 182.

15 See Senate Document No. 193, 66th Cong., 2d sess.

16 See p. 176, supra.

17 See p. 178, supra.

18 See pp. 172, 181, supra.

19 The plan referred to was presented to the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations on Sept. 12, 1919, by Mr. William; C. Bullitt, who stated that “it is the President’s original proposal, written on his own typewriter, I believe, which was presented to me on January 10 by Colonel House.” n Article 3 of the plan is as follows:

“The contracting powers unite in guaranteeing to each other political independence and territorial integrity; but ft is understood between them that such territorial readjustments, if any, as may in the future become necessary by reason of changes in present racial conditions and aspirations or present social and political relationships, pursuant to the principle of self-determination, and also such territorial readjustments as may in the judgment of three-fourths of the delegates be demanded by the welfare and manifest interest of the peoples concerned, may be effected if agreeable to those peoples; and that territorial changes may in equity involve material compensation. The contracting powers accept without reservation the principle that the peace of the world is superior in importance to every question of political jurisdiction or boundary.” (Sen. Doc. 106, 66 Cong., 1st sess., p. 1166.)

20 Supra, p. 182.

21 See pp. 190, 191, 196, supra.

22 Congressional Record, Nov. 19, 1919, p. 8768.

23 Ibid., p. 8775.

24 Congressional Record, Nov. 19, 1919, p. 8768.