Jasper County Democrat, Volume 23, Number 60, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 23 October 1920 — INTERPRETER JOHNSON [ARTICLE]

INTERPRETER JOHNSON

Ra A speech, at Chicago Saturday Senator Johnson defended Senator Harding against “the’ men and newsrpapers who pretended to be friends <of Senator Harding and who assert

that he is going to take this country into the league of nations.” Continuing, he said: For reasons of their own, certain interested individuals and newspapers "may misrepresent and misinterpret his words. I resent these Imputations upon the sincerity of the utterances of the candidate ahd the manifest endeavor in certain quarters to distort his plain language. In some cases' the cortlment has been mere rank misrepresentation; in others, disingenuous interpretation. There is nothing ambiguous or uncertain in our candidate’s declaration. He has courageously -taken his stand. He has put the league behind him. He wants neither interpretation nor reservations, but outright rejection. The men and newspapers who pretend to be friends of Senator Harding and who assert that he is going to take this country into the league of nations do him a distinct disservice and pay him a sorry compliment. These words will have a peculiar interest for the eminent Republicans who last week- issued a proclama: tion announcing their intention to support Senator Harding on the ground that the only way for us to get into the league was through the election of Senator Harding. And they proved, to their own 'apparent satisfaction, by his owjn language that he was one of the sincerest friends that the league had. Now Comes Senator Johnson and proves, at least to his own satisfaction, again by the candidate’s own words, that the league has no more determined enemiy. The task of interpretation in this case is, it must be admitted, by no means easy. But one who attempts it can,..not ignore the words of the senator spoken last month at Baltimore, He said:

I’m perfectly frank to say to you that I am without a single program constructive in character about an association of nations. If that be true, neither set of interpreters can be right, for if the candidate is without “a single program constructive in character about an association of v nations,” _ there really is nothing to interpret —unless it be announced at | Indianapolis to call the wise men I together to devise a program which |he . believed France and England j would accept, ... However, Senator t Harding did at Des Moines, on Oct. 7, advance some ideas that seem to support Senator Johnson. He said that he wished no acceptance of the league with reservations, and fthat the proper course would be to reject the pommitments altogether*. “I do not,/ he said, ‘‘want to clarify those j obligations. I want to turn my back. l on them. It jg not interpretation ■but rejection that I am seeking.” Warming to his work, the Candidate said:

The Democratic platform and canI didate' have not declared for “an” association of nations, but for “that” association, and it is that ‘ association and not some other which we are, promised will be ratified within 60 days if the Democratic candidate be elected. *" * * I oppose the proposed league. This seems to be sufficiently definite. Senator Harding -oppose^—or says - he- does —-the proposed league ’

either with or without reservations. As we have tried to show the question is whether we shall get “this” league or none at all. It is the only thing in sight, is already at work, and is composed of 41 nations. To this Senator Harding is opposed—for he has said so in language that is, for him, most positive and clear. The only fair conclusion, therefore, is that Senator Johnson is right, and Messrs. Root, Hughes, Wickersham, Lowell and Bishop Lawrence are wrong. It was Montaigne who said that "there is more ado to interpret interpretations than to interpret things,” while John Morley cruelly remarks that “a great interpreter of life ought not himself to need interpretation.”—l ndianapolis News Rep.).