SAYS BOK PLAN WILL CLARIFY U.S. PROBLEM

(Mr. Wickersham held the post of Attorney-General under President Taft from 1909-13, and received an honorary degree from Harvard in 1921. As a Republican who has taken a keen interest in promoting the Bok Peace campaign, he is eminently fitted to discuss the Plan from an authoritative and non-partisan point of view.)

It has been a familiar assertion of politicians that the presidential election of 1920 was a national repudiation by the American electorate of the proposal that the United States should join the League of Nations established by the "Covenant" embodied in the Treaty of Versailles and the other Peace Treaties of 1919. Yet the records show that the question was not submitted unequivocally to the people as a definite issue upon which the choice of the president should turn. By its platform, the Democratic Party declared it "favors the League of Nations as the surest, if not the only, practicable means of maintaining the peace of the world and terminating the insufferable burden of great military and naval establishments."

Outlines Republicans' Attitude

The Republican party, in its platform, declared, that it "stands for agreement among the nations to preserve the peace of the world. We believe that such an international association must be based upon international justice, and must provide methods which shall maintain the rule of public right by the development of law and the decision of impartial courts, and which shall secure instant and general international conference whenever peace shall be threatened by political action, so that the nations pledged to do and insist upon what is just and fair may exercise their influence and power for the prevention of war." Thus, the Democratic party declared for "the League", while the Republican platform avowed its devotion to "an international association", whose members should be pledged to use their influence and power for the prevention rof war.

Harding Interprets Platform

Mr. Harding in his speech of acceptance interpreted the Republican platform in the following language: "I can speak unreservedly of the American aspiration and the Republican committal for an association of nations, cooperating in sublime accord, to attain and preserve peace through justice rather than force, determined to add to security through international law, so clarified that no misconstruction can be possible without affronting national honor."

And Calvin Coolidge, in his speech of acceptance, said:

"But our party, by the record of its members in the Senate and by the solemn declaration of its platform, by performance and by promise, approves the principle of agreement among the nations to preserve peace, and pledges if self to the making of such an agreement, preserving American independence and rights, as will meet every duty America owes to humanity."

Thus a confused issue was presented to the American people. The principle of an agreement among the nations to preserve peace was avowed by the Republican party, but the League crested by the Versailles treaty was deneituced as a "Wilson League", and as creating a super state. Moreover, Mr. Harding in the course of the campaign suggested taking what was good in the League and excising what was objectionable, so as to arrive finally at the ideal of "an association of nations, cooperating in sublime accord, to attain and preserve peace through justice rather than force."

There were many other issues in the campaign. The general dissatisfaction with the Wilson administration, without any doubt produced the overwhelming vote for Harding and Coolidge. There was no definite national referendum upon the clean cut issue of American participation in a League or Association to preserve the peace of the world. Out of the contest in the Senate over the Versailles treaty there developed an intransigent frame of mind in the so-called "bitter enders" which made impossible the advancement of any proposition for "the" or "an" Association or League. This state of mind nearly wrecked the treaties negotiated at the Naval Limitation Conference in the autumn of 1921, particularly the four power Pacific pact, which was not ratified until President Harding told the Senate, "Either these treaties must have your cordial sanction, or every proclaimed desire to promote peace and prevent war becomes a hollow mockery." The same state of mind thus far has prevented ratification of the Harding-Hughes proposal that the United States adhere to the Permanent Court of International Justice, on conditions carefully devised to avoid membership in the League of Nations, although Mr. Harding declared "it is in harmony with platform pledges, candidatorial promises, and, I believe, with American aspirations", and added:

"It is not to be classed as a party question, but if any party, repeatedly advocating a World Court, is to be rended by the suggestion of an effort to perform in accordance with its pledges, it needs a new appraisal of its assets."

People May Express Opinion

Mr. Edward W. Bok has devised a way to give the American people an opportunity to express its opinion on the general subject of international relationship, disembarrassed by any other issues. "The American Peace Award" he merely declares "has offered the American people a means of getting its voice to the Government; a direct open way to Washington, as so many termed it."

The winning plan is very simple. It proposes (1) Adherence by the United States to the Permanent Court of International Justice on the terms proposed by President Harding and Secretary Hughes and recommended by President Coolidge; (2) Closer cooperation by the United States with the League of Nations on expressed conditions designed to remove all valid objections to membership in the League.

The Plan deals with actualities, not with imaginary bugaboos or Utopian dreams. Every American man and woman should familiarize himself or herself with the subject and vote on the plan. Whatever their individual views or prejudices, the members of both houses of Congress should be made aware of the actual opinion of the United States upon the great question of America's opportunity and duty to aid with our power, prestige and wisdom in preserving the peace of the world