MINUTES OF CONFERENCE APRIL 9, 1920
Downtown Association, 60 Pine Street, at 12:45
Present:
James G. McDonald
Edwin Bjorkman
Stephen P. Duggan
Robert [H.] Gardiner
Mrs. H. G. Leach
Ralph S. Rounds
Edwin E. Slosson
Miss Lillian D. Wald
Miss Christina Merriman
Mrs. Charles Tiffany
Charles C. Burlingham
George Burnham, Jr.
Mrs. J. Malcolm Forbes
Horace M. Kallen
Sam A. Lewisohn
Howard C. Robbins
Learned Hand
A. A. Berle
Joseph P. Cotton
H. E. W. Fosbroke
Lewis [S. Gannett]
William I. Hull
Norman Hapgood
Chas. P. Howland
Alvin Johnson
David Hunter Miller
Chas. J. Rhoads
J. Henry Scattergood
J. Salwyn Schapiro
Wm. Austin Smith
Raymond V. Ingersoll
Miss C. E. Cumming
Chas. H. Levermore
At the outset of the discussion Mr. Rounds proposed that the conference should agree to the statement that the purpose of this Association should be to “promote a sound and democratic organization of the world.” The proposal was voted down.
It was also voted to pass over points 1 and 2 on the agenda (see Appendix A).
In regard to point 3 (peace by resolution) there was unanimous agreement that it was of doubtful constitutionality and in no event led anywhere, because there was no possibility of the President’s accepting it and just as little possibility of its being passed over his veto. There was a general feeling that the move to declare peace by resolution was meant to cast the onus of maintaining a state of war upon the President. It was felt by some that the President might, in vetoing the resolution, take the occasion of returning the Treaty to the Senate, making some such statement to the effect that he would accept the necessary reservations.
Discussion then centered on point 4 -- as to whether the President should be urged to return the Treaty to the Senate with a constructive statement of reservations which he would accept. The prevailing opinion was that one last perhaps despairing effort should be made to induce Mr. Wilson to return the Treaty to the Senate saying in effect that he was willing to accept whatever reservations might be necessary to secure ratification. It was suggested that this appeal to him should be made not in a public or general manner, but through a carefully prepared friendly statement to be signed by a few men and women, all of whom the President would remember as his personal and political friends. It was recognized that the possibilities of getting such a petition to the President were not very good, and that the possibility of his acting upon such advice was very slight, and yet there was general agreement on the point that at least this effort should be made.
The matter of a separate peace with Germany was not discussed very seriously; the prevailing opinion appeared to be that [page 2] such a move was not now within the realm of practical politics, although there was a strong argument made by some of the persons present for such a movie on the theory that if peace were established in this way there would then be the possibility of making a clear issue in the campaign of the League of Nations Covenant. Every one recognized of course that to carry both Treaty and Covenant into the campaign would be to confuse the issue entirely and make it impossible to get any real mandate from the people for any particular action.
Comments