To the Editors of the CRIMSON:

The following is an extract from a note of a conversation between Mr. William C. Bullitt and Secretary of State Robert Lansing, which took place on May 19, 1919:

"The Secretary sent for me.....Mr. Lansing then said that he too considered many parts of the treaty thoroughly bad, particularly those dealing with Shantung and the League of Nations. He said:

"I consider the League of Nations at present is entirely useless. The great Powers have simply gone ahead and arranged the world to suit themselves. England and France in particular have got out of the treaty everything that they wanted, and the League, of Nations can do nothing to alter any of the unjust clause of the treaty except by unanimous consent of the members of the league, and the great Powers will never give their consent to changes in the interests of weaker peoples.

"We then talked about the possibility of ratification by the Senate. Mr. Lansing said: 'I believe that if the Senate could only understand what this treaty means and if the American people could really understand it would unquestionably be defeated, but I wonder if they will ever understand what it lets them in for."

There has been no denial of this conversation. We are therefore justified in assuming that the foregoing summary is accurate. What conclusions should we draw from it?

Obviously, that the purpose of the League is to maintain the settlements made by the treaty. As the Secretary points out, no positive action can be taken by the League without unanimous concent. Further, these arrangements have been made to the satisfaction of the great Powers.

Those, then, who believe that the treaty represents the final world settlement, should vote for it. Those pygmy-minded "little Americans" who do not feel that this country should underwrite the ambitions of European powers, will vote for the preservation of American independence.  C. P. WINSOR '17