The American Senate and World Peace. by Kenneth ColegroveReview by: R. MacG. DawsonInternational Affairs (Royal Institute of International Affairs 1944-), Vol. 21, No. 1 (Jan.,1945), pp. 139-140Published by: Wiley on behalf of the Royal Institute of International AffairsStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3019057 .

Accessed: 21/12/2014 23:01

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

Wiley and Royal Institute of International Affairs are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extendaccess to International Affairs (Royal Institute of International Affairs 1944-).

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Sun, 21 Dec 2014 23:01:15 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

UNITED STATES 139

assessing the prospects of collaboration for future peace. The various trends of opinion on this subject, which were apparent during the full and lengthy discussions on these Resolutions, are well brought out in the Summary, as is something of the give-and-take of debate. The great importance of the work done by the Committees of Congress is emphasized by the fact that each Resolution was finally carried, by a very large majority, in the form recommended by the respective committees on foreign affairs.

This number also includes Mr. Cordell Hull's address to Congress on the Moscow Conference, the President's 1944 Message on the State of the Union, discussion of the treaty-making powers of the Senate and of a proposal for a Congressional question period, and a statement on the Joint Parliamentary Conference at Ottawa. Amongst the Appendices is a useful note on the organization, powers and work of Congress.

B. N.

THE AMERICAN SENATE AND WORLD PEACE. By Kenneth Colegrove. 1944. (New York: Vanguard. 7X<" X 5X4". 209 pp. $2.00.) THE purpose of this book is to discover how the United States can play its part

in world affairs without having the will of the people thwarted by the power of the Senate minority to block treaties. The result is a combination of political pamphlet and serious discussion, the former on the whole gaining the upper hand. For although the book contains a fair amount of solid material, this is obscured by attacks on individual isolationists, their personal views, their legislative records and even at times the motives which prompted their activities.

A recurring theme is democracy and democratic methods, but the reader searches in vain for any consistent idea behind these phrases. Majority rule is stated to be democratic, and hence the constitution of the United States Senate is plainly found to be undemocratic; yet when this body by a simple majority acts in association with the lower house it becomes mysteriously purified and the results are approved. Later in the book, however, the submissiofi of trade agreements to a vote of both houses is deprecated because that would lead to log-rolling, which the author apparently ranks with "rancor, delusions of grandeur, and partizanship" as "stumbling blocks to the democratic process." It is surely pertinent to enquire what kind of a democracy this is which excludes log-rolling, partizanship, and even delusions of grandeur. This natural bewilderment becomes even greater when confronted with the author's ap- parent agreement with the defence of the Trade Agreements Act (giving limited powers to conclude executive agreements) as being "in keeping with the legitimate development of the power to govern"-for whatever that high-sounding phrase may mean, it does not have a very democratic ring.

The author is also much perturbed about the quality of political personnel, although this may be attributed, perhaps, to, the "undemocratic" character of the Senate. For the book records in all seriousness that American Senators like to give "ponderous advice on subjects on which their competence is not extensive," and "very few members of the Senate are students of economics, political science, or sociology. Still fewer attend the sessions of learned societies." The "democratic" legislature which Professor Colegrove apparently expects, he will never find in this world, unless, indeed, he innocently believes that the "democratic" lower house is filled with these august personages whom he is unable to discover in the Senate. It is, to put it mildly, somewhat disturbing to find that a book, which is devoted to the theme of finding a way to make the treaty power more a part of democratic processes in the United States, has no clear conception of what this involves and what are bound to be the obvious accompaniments of popular election.

The book is unquestionably opportune, and its purpose is praiseworthy; but its merits as a serious discussion of the problem go little further. One turns with renewed

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Sun, 21 Dec 2014 23:01:15 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

140 INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

pleasure and appreciation to Laski's trenchant and penetrating discussion on the same subject in The American Presidency, which in twenty-four pages does a far better job. Professor Colegrove's book contains a comprehensive bibliography, and although it does not mention Laski's volume, it mentions everything else from Rex Stout and Edith Bolling Wilson to Cooley and the Congressional Record. There is no index.

R. MACG. DAWSON

WHAT Is OUR DESTINY? By Norman Thomas. 1944. (New York: Doubleday, Doran. 8Y$" X 5X2". viii + 192 pp. $2.00.) MR. NORMAN THOMAS believes that the United States can best help in preserving

world peace by solving its home problems. The trouble is that domestic problems are so often inseparable from foreign. His principal bete noir is perhaps imperialism, his hatred of which-consistently extending over his whole mature lifetime-leads him to some unrealistic and wishful thinking. "It is a cause for despair to believe," he says, "that the allies have no other purpose than to hand over Hong Kong, Burma and Malaya, Indo-China, and the East Indies to the empires from which Japan took them." But he fails to indicate what would, or might, happen if these lands reverted to those from whom their erstwhile "rulers" took them.

His other proposals are largely economic and put forth an interesting and con- structive eight-point programme for the rebuilding of the world of tomorrow. It has value not only for itself but as coming from the leader of that American socialism which, between communism and the New Deal, has seen itself, perhaps temporarily, edged out of the contemporary scene. The book is not cheerful reading for either conservative or radical. While Mr. Thomas keeps a tolerance and good temper in argument which is characteristic of his humanitarianism, he seems in the present case not to have taken the time to give his ideas the critical and analytical treatment which their importance deserves.

JULIAN PARK

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Sun, 21 Dec 2014 23:01:15 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions