Speaking for the whole Canadian people, the Government of Canada
welcomes the outcome of the discussion initiated almost a year ago
between the Governments of France and of the United States. It is
pleased to find that in this attitude it is in entire accord with
all His Majesty’s other governments. The proposals of the United
States Government, by their directness and simplicity, afford to the
peoples of the world a new and notable opportunity of ensuring
lasting peace.
[Enclosure]
The Canadian Secretary of State for External
Affairs (Mackenzie King) to
the American Minister (Phillips)
Sir: I have the honour to acknowledge
your note of May 22nd, extending to His Majesty’s Government in
Canada, in the name of the Government of the United States, an
invitation to become one of the original parties to the treaty
for the renunciation of war now under consideration.
The Government of Canada is certain that it speaks for the whole
Canadian people in welcoming the outcome, in the proposed
multilateral pact, of the discussion initiated almost a year ago
between the Governments of France and of the United States. It
is pleased to find that in this attitude it is in accord with
all His Majesty’s other governments. The proposals of the United
States Government, by their directness and simplicity, afford to
the peoples of the world a new and notable opportunity of
ensuring lasting peace.
The Dominion of Canada, fortunate in its ties of kinship and
allegiance as well as in its historic and neighbourly
friendships, and with half a continent as its heritage, is less
exposed to the danger of attack or the temptation to aggression
than many other lands. Yet the Great War, with its burdens of
suffering and of loss, brought home
[Page 78]
the danger which all countries share, and
led Canada to turn with hope to the efforts to build up
effective barriers against war which took shape in the League of
Nations; it will welcome the present proposals as a
manifestation of the same striving for peace.
The question whether the obligations of the Covenant of the
League would conflict in any way with the obligations of the
proposed pact has been given careful consideration. His
Majesty’s Government in Canada regards the League, with all its
limitations, as an indispensable and continuing agency of
international understanding, and would not desire to enter upon
any course which would prejudice its effectiveness. It is,
however, convinced that there is no conflict either in the
letter or in the spirit between the Covenant and the
multilateral pact, or between the obligations assumed under
each.
The pre-eminent value of the League lies in its positive and
preventive action. In bringing together periodically the
representatives of fifty states, it builds up barriers against
war by developing a spirit of conciliation, an acceptance of
publicity in international affairs, a habit of co-operation in
common ends, and a permanently available machinery for the
adjustment of differences. It is true that the Covenant also
contemplates the application of sanctions in the event of a
member state going to war, if in so doing it has broken the
pledges of the Covenant to seek a peaceful solution of disputes.
Canada has always opposed any interpretation of the Covenant
which would involve the application of these sanctions
automatically or by the decision of other states. It was on the
initiative of Canada that the Fourth Assembly, with a single
negative vote, accepted the interpretative resolution to which
the Secretary of State of the United States recently referred,
indicating that it is for the constitutional authorities of each
state to determine in what degree it is bound to assure the
execution of the obligations of this Article by employment of
its military forces. The question of sanctions has received
further consideration by later Assemblies. It is plain that the
full realization of the ideal of joint economic or military
pressure upon an outlaw power, upon which some of the founders
of the League set great store, will require either an approach
to the universality of the League contemplated when the Covenant
was being drawn, or an adjustment of the old rules of neutrality
to meet the new conditions of co-operative defence.
In any event, if, as would seem to be the case, the proposed
multilateral treaty does not impose any obligation upon a
signatory in relation to a state which has not signed the treaty
or has broken it, any decision taken to apply sanctions against
a member of the League which has made war in violation of its
Covenant pledges would not appear to conflict with the
obligations of the treaty.
[Page 79]
His Majesty’s Government in Canada will have pleasure in
cooperating in any future negotiations with a view to becoming a
signatory to a treaty such as is proposed by the Government of
the United States in the invitation which it has extended, and
to recommending its acceptance to the Canadian Parliament.
Accept [etc.]
