Why did America not join the League of Nations? Historians like Alexander de Conde argue that the answer to this question relates to isolationism, a melancholy into which the republic periodically descends, a desire to remain aloof from world events. Such an attitude, so the argument goes, is a fundamental part of the American character.
Yet consider the response of Senator Park Trammell to Wilson's Fourteen Points. Trammell was a Florida lawyer who represented his state in Washington from 1917 to 1936. When Wilson's Points were first debated in 1919, Trammell voted nay--but not because he felt America had no place in world affairs. His concern was that the Fourteen Points failed to specify if 'Great Britain and her independent colonies shall have any greater vote or any greater power in the assembly of the league of nations than the United States'. In other words, Trammell thought that Wilson's proposal did not offer America a part in the European state system equal to that of Britain.
The following year, when an amended version of the Fourteen Points was proposed, Trammell changed his vote. He explained himself in this way:
'I have come to the conclusion that in order to try and preserve at least a part of the purpose and the object of the establishment of a League of Nations I shall vote for a resolution of ratification with these reservations, although some of them are objectionable to me. I do this because I think, Mr. President, that we have yet something of the league left. The President, when he forced it and brought about this concerted effort on the part of the Nation to bring about a condition which it was hoped would result in peace for the Nation, result in a new order of affairs, instead of continuing the old order of settling your difficulties with a shotgun, performed a great service by his own country and by the nations of the earth. It is true it has been changed more or less. I have favored some of the changes. But I still believe, Mr. President, that there remains enough of the good in the plan of the League of Nations for us to give it a trial.'
The novelty of the League of Nations, according to Trammell, was not the fact of American intervention but its nature. The shotgun would be set aside, at least for a time.
Read more about Trammell--and his mention of the Monroe doctrine--here.
Yet consider the response of Senator Park Trammell to Wilson's Fourteen Points. Trammell was a Florida lawyer who represented his state in Washington from 1917 to 1936. When Wilson's Points were first debated in 1919, Trammell voted nay--but not because he felt America had no place in world affairs. His concern was that the Fourteen Points failed to specify if 'Great Britain and her independent colonies shall have any greater vote or any greater power in the assembly of the league of nations than the United States'. In other words, Trammell thought that Wilson's proposal did not offer America a part in the European state system equal to that of Britain.
The following year, when an amended version of the Fourteen Points was proposed, Trammell changed his vote. He explained himself in this way:
'I have come to the conclusion that in order to try and preserve at least a part of the purpose and the object of the establishment of a League of Nations I shall vote for a resolution of ratification with these reservations, although some of them are objectionable to me. I do this because I think, Mr. President, that we have yet something of the league left. The President, when he forced it and brought about this concerted effort on the part of the Nation to bring about a condition which it was hoped would result in peace for the Nation, result in a new order of affairs, instead of continuing the old order of settling your difficulties with a shotgun, performed a great service by his own country and by the nations of the earth. It is true it has been changed more or less. I have favored some of the changes. But I still believe, Mr. President, that there remains enough of the good in the plan of the League of Nations for us to give it a trial.'
The novelty of the League of Nations, according to Trammell, was not the fact of American intervention but its nature. The shotgun would be set aside, at least for a time.
Read more about Trammell--and his mention of the Monroe doctrine--here.
