considered as subject to the 'most favored nation' doctrine, whether
they contain or do not contain a clause to that effect. It is
specifically declared that it is the purpose of this article not to
limit any power in imposing upon commerce and trade such restrictions
and burdens as it may deem proper but to make such impositions apply
equally and impartially to all other powers, their nationals
and ships.

"This article shall not apply, however, to any case, in which a power
has committed an unfriendly act against the members of the League of
Nations as defined in Article I and in which commercial and trade
relations are denied or restricted by agreements between the members
as a measure of restoration or protection of the rights of a power
injured by such unfriendly act."

These proposed articles, which were intended for discussion before
drafting the provisions constituting a League of Nations and which did
not purport to be a completed document, are given in full because there
seems no simpler method of showing the differences between the President
and me as to the form, functions, and authority of an international
organization. They should be compared with the draft of the "Covenant"
which the President had when these proposed articles were handed to him;
the text of the President's draft appears in the Appendix (page 281).
Comparison will disclose the irreconcilable differences between the
two projects.

Of these differences the most vital was in the character of the
international guaranty of territorial and political sovereignty. That
difference has already been discussed. The second in importance was the
practical repudiation by the President of the doctrine of the equality