¹ Covenant of the League of Nations, Article XXII.

² See assertion that he favored a policy of annexation in Scott, A. P., Introduction to the Peace Treaties, Chicago, 1920, p. 68Google Scholar; it will also be noted later that Smuts did not, in his plans, extend his idea of mandates to the former German colonies (see text of Smuts plans, below, second suggestion). See also Baker, R. S., “War Spoils at Paris,” in New York Times, 28 May, 1922, sec. 7, p. 2, col. 1.Google Scholar

³ Smuts, J. C., The League of Nations: A Practical Suggestion, London, 1918Google Scholar, reprinted in the United States by The Nation Press, 1919. The plan was also circulated privately in mimeograph form among the leading representatives at Paris. The edition of The Nation Press is cited hereafter.

⁴ Smuts, pp. 9–19.

⁵ Wilson arrived at Brest on Friday, 13 December, 1918.

⁶ Wilson's plan was first made known to those near the President and ordered printed on 7 January, 1919, and at that time it did contain the “Supplementary Agreements” covering, among other things, colonies and mandates. But, as Lansing believes, and as we shall see by reference to internal evidence in the matter, these “Supplementary Agreements” had only recently been added to the draft. Lansing, R., The Peace Negotiations, New York, 1921, pp. 77–81, 82–83, 86.Google Scholar

⁷ Italics mine; the words italicized occur in the Smuts' proposals and in the same order in which they occur here.

⁸ For one important aspect of these conferences of 10–18 January see testimony of Bullitt, W. C., before United States Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, 12 September, 1919, in United States, Senate, “Treaty of Peace with Germany,” being Senate Document No. 106, 66th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 1165, 1214.

⁹ Miller, D. H., “The Making of the League,” in House, E. M., and Seymour, C., What Really Happened at Paris, New York, 1921, pp. 411–412.Google Scholar

¹⁰ On 23 January; Baker, , “War Spoils,” as cited, New York Times, 28 May, 1922, sec. 7, p. 1, col. 1.Google Scholar

¹¹ Miller, as cited, p. 412; also Hudson, M. O., “The Protection of Minorities.” in same, p. 225.

¹² There were, of course, several plans for the league beside those of Smuts and Wilson. They are described, with what the present writer is compelled to believe are some errors, by Mr. Ray Stannard Baker in an article entitled “Beginning of the League Fight,” a chapter from his forthcoming work entitled “America and the World Peace,” printed in New York Times for 14 May, 1922, sec. 8.

¹³ Above, p. 565.

¹⁴ Above, p. 565.

¹⁵ Miller, p. 412; Lansing, p. 150.

¹⁶ Bullitt, pp. 1214, 1218.

¹⁷ United States, Senate, “League of Nations: American Draft,” being Senate Document No. 70, 66th Congress, 1st Session, Washington, 1919.

¹⁸ Miller, as cited, p. 402.

¹⁹ Fayle, C. E., The Great Settlement, New York (and London), 1915, pp. xii, xiii, 194, 195–196.Google Scholar

²⁰ Brailsford, H. N., The War of Steel and Gold, New York (and London), 1915, p. 336 (3d edition).Google Scholar

²¹ Grant, A. J., and others, International Relations, London, 1916, Chap. V, by Kerr, P. H., pp. 170, 171, 179, 181.Google Scholar

²² Hobson, J. A., Towards International Government, New York (and London), 1915, pp. 138–141.Google Scholar

²³ Hobson, p. 141.

²⁴ Hobson repeated these ideas—less clearly, however, in 1916: Hobson, J. A. H., “The Open Door,” in Buxton, C. R., ed., Towards a Lasting Settlement, New York, 1916, pp. 85–109, esp. 106–107.Google Scholar

²⁵ Smuts, work cited, pp. 14–16.

²⁶ Above, pp. 565–566.

²⁷ Above, pp. 566–567.

²⁸ Bishop, J. B., Theodore Roosevelt, and his Time as told in his Correspondence, New York, 1920, pp. 489–491, 493–495, 495–497, 497–499.Google Scholar

²⁹ Hobson, p. 141. The writer feels entitled to record the fact here that he was familiar with the Root-Sternberg correspondence, including its invention of the mandate system, before he read Mr. Hobson's reference to the Act of Algeciras.

³⁰ Above, pp. 565–566.

³¹ Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Division of International Law, “Official Statements of War Aims and Peace Proposals, December 1916 to November 1918,” being Pamphlet No. 31 of the Division, Comp. by Potter, P. B., pp. 234–239.

³² Same, pp. 225–233, especially p. 228.

³³ In Points VI, VII, IX–XII; same, pp. 237, 238.

³⁴ Wilson had said on 2 April, 1917, in asking the United States Congress to declare war on Germany.: “We desire no conquest, no dominion‥‥. We seek no indemnities We are‥‥ champions of the rights of mankind,” and these rights he had just described as “the rights of nations ‥‥ to choose their ways of life and obedience” (same, p. 91); and in asking for a declaration of war upon Austria Hungary on 4 December, 1917, he used “the formula ‘No annexations, no contributions, no punitive indemnities’” to express the war aims of the Allies (same, p. 195).

³⁵ No official statement of war aims made before the address of April 2 comes anywhere near the formula; on May 19 there occurred in a statement of war aims made by the Russian Provisional Government the statement that that government did not seek “a peace with annexation or indemnity and based on the right of nations to decide their own affairs” (same, p. 102).

³⁶ It has been claimed that Wilson's Fourteen Points (of 8 January, 1918) were devised directly to meet a demand for a restatement of allied aims cabled on 3 January to Washington by American propagandists in Russia. The evidence is inconclusive and the claim has been denied by Mr. George Creel, who is alleged to have been in charge of the action in Washington. On the other hand, the internal evidence in the address of 8 January is strong: the Russian negotiations at Brest-Litovsk are made the occasion for the speech and the share of Russia in the settlement is given great prominence, being placed ahead of Belgium and all other territorial questions. It is almost certainly true that the address, even if composed in the main as early as 1 January, as Mr. Creel says, was strongly influenced by the Russian situation. See The Nation, (New York), Vol. CXI, p. 30 (10 July, 1920); Russian-American Relations, New York, 1920, pp. 67–74. It may not be without point to note that the Fourteen Points also corresponded very closely to a Russian statement of peace aims made on 19 October, 1917; see Ross, E. A., The Russian Bolshevik Revolution, New York, 1920, Chap. XXIV.Google Scholar