LET US RATIFY.

Within the next few weeks some definite action must be taken by the Senate on the peace treaty. The question has, by this time, resolved itself into a matter of expediency. Argument over the method of its framing, over personal like or dislike of its framers, over their honest or dishonest intentions, all this is obsolete. We have a treaty before us. We all of us agree that it is not as perfect a one as we could have written ourselves. Nevertheless it is here, to be rejected, amended, or ratified.

Comparatively few men and women would cast aside the whole work of the peace conference. There are a few radicals who are shrieking protests against the "entire wicked business," recalling to mind those opposers of the Constitution who declared that document a "covenant with death." But these may be discounted. The loudness of their talk can only be equalled by the fewness of their numbers. How could a group of self-respecting nations, having fought a war against the impossible conditions then existing in the world have the moral weakness to allow themselves to slip back into the same old rut? And that, coupled with internal confusion and petty wars over boundary and trade disputes, is what the world would face if the treaty were rejected.

Amending the treaty is a theoretical but impractical solution of this great problem. Doing so would, in the end, lead to inevitable turmoil. For, once the United States began offering reservations, other nations would follow suit; and then the whole affair would be amended out of its original conception.

Let us ratify the peace treaty, not because we believe it perfect, but because it offers the only workable basis at hand for adjusting the future.

Last spring, honest opposition to the League of Nations as it then stood--which stand the CRIMSON shared--offered a possibility of some document being evolved of more lasting value. Opposition now can only prolong the chaotic condition of all European countries, and continue the industrial foment of our own country.