he Council.

However, the seriousness of these difficulties and the possible troubles
and controversies which might be anticipated from attempting to put the
system into operation induced me, after one of the sessions of the
Council of Ten, to state briefly to the President some of the serious
objections to League mandates from the standpoint of international law
and the philosophy of government. President Wilson listened with his
usual attentiveness to what I had to say, though the objections
evidently did not appeal to him, as he characterized them as "mere
technicalities" which could be cured or disregarded. Impressed myself
with the importance of these "technicalities" and their direct bearing
on the policy of adopting the mandatory system, I later, on February 2,
1919, embodied them in a memorandum. At the time I hoped and believed
that the negotiation of the completed Covenant might be postponed and
that there would be another opportunity to raise the question. The
memorandum, prepared with this end in view, is as follows:

"The system of 'mandatories under the League of Nations,' when
applied to territories which were formerly colonies of Germany, the
system which has been practically adopted and will be written into
the plan for the League, raises some interesting and difficult
questions:

"The one, which is the most prominent since it enters into nearly all
of the international problems presented, is--Where does the
sovereignty over these territories reside?

"Sovereignty is inherent in the very conception of government. It
cannot be destroyed, though it may be absorbed by another sovereignty
either by compulsion or cession. When the Germans were ousted from
their colonies, the sovereignty passed to the power or powers which
took possession. The location of the sovereignty up to the present is
clear, but with the introduction of the League of Nations as an
international primate superior to the conquerors some rather
perplexing questions will have to be answered.

"Do those who have seized the sovereignty transfer it or does Germany
transfer it to the League of Nations? If so, how?

"Does the League assume possession of the sovereignty on its
renunciation by Germany? If so, how?

"Does the League merely direct the disposition of the sovereignty
without taking possession of it?

"Assuming that the latter question is answered in the affi