Armenia’s cause found a forcible and suasive pleader in Boghos Pasha, whose way of marshaling arguments in favor of a contention that was frowned upon by many commanded admiration.  The Armenians asked for a vast stretch of territory with outlets on the Black Sea and the Mediterranean, but they were met with the objections that their total population was insignificant; that only in one province were they in a majority, and that their claim to Cilicia clashed with one of the reserved rights of France.  The ice, therefore, was somewhat thin in parts, but Boghos Pasha skated over it gracefully.  His description of the Armenian massacres was thrilling.  Altogether his expose was a masterpiece, and was appreciated by Mr. Wilson and M. Clemenceau.

The Jugoslav delegates, MM.  Vesnitch and Trumbitch, patriotic, tenacious, uncompromising, had an early opportunity of showing the stuff of which they were made.  When they were told that the Jugoslav state was not yet recognized and that the kingdom of Serbia must content itself with two delegates, they lodged an indignant protest against both decisions, and refused to appear at the Conference unless they were allowed an adequate number of representatives.  Thereupon the Great Powers compromised the matter by according them three, and with stealthy rage they submitted to the refusal of recognition.  They were not again heard of until one day they proposed that their dispute with Italy about Fiume and the Dalmatian coast should be solved by submitting it to President Wilson for arbitration.  The expedient was original.  President Wilson, people remembered, had had an animated talk on the subject with the Italian Premier, Orlando, and it was known that he had set his face against Italy’s claim and against the secret treaty that recognized it.  Consequently the Serbs were running no risk by challenging Signor Orlando to lay the matter before the American delegate.  Whether, all things considered, it was a wise move to make has been questioned.  Anyhow, the Italian delegation declined the suggestion on a number of grounds which several delegates considered convincing.  The Conference, it urged, had been convoked precisely for the purpose of hearing and settling such disputes as theirs, and the Conference consisted, not of one, but of many delegates, who collectively were better qualified to deal with such problems than any one man.  Europeans, too, could more fully appreciate the arguments, and the atmosphere through which the arguments should be contemplated, than the eminent American idealist, who had more than once had to modify his judgment on European matters.  Again, to remove the discussion from the international court might well be felt as a slight put upon the men who composed it.  For why should their verdict be less worth soliciting than that of the President of the United States?  True, Italy’s delegates were themselves judges in that tribunal, but the question to be tried was not a matter between two countries,