certain purpose its powers as to making war and regulating commerce,
I do not think that it could constitutionally do so. It is only in
the event of war that powers conferred by the Constitution on
Congress can be delegated and then only for war purposes. As a state
of war would not exist at the time action was required, I do not
believe that it could be done, and any provision contracting to take
measures of this nature would be contrary to the Constitution and as
a consequence void.

"But, assuming that Congress possessed the power of delegation, I am
convinced that it would not only refuse to do so, but would resent
such a suggestion because of the fact that both Houses have been and
are extremely jealous of their rights and authority.

"Viewed from the standpoints of legality and expediency it would seem
necessary to find some other method than coercion in enforcing an
international guaranty, or else to find some substitute for a
guaranty which would be valueless without affirmative action to
support it.

"I believe that such a substitute can be found."

The foregoing memorandum was intended as an introduction to the negative
guaranty or "self-denying covenant" which I desired to lay before the
President as a substitute for the one upon which he intended to build
the League of Nations. The memorandum was suggestive merely, but in view
of the necessity for a speedy decision there was no time to prepare an
exhaustive legal opinion. Furthermore, I felt that the President, whose
hours were at that time crowded with numerous personal conferences and
public functions, would find little opportunity to peruse a long and