Just as General Smuts had adopted the President's "self-determination," Mr.Wilson seized upon the Smuts idea with avidity and incorporated it in his plan.

It unquestionably had a decided influence upon his conception of the right way to dispose of the colonial possessions of Germany and of the proper relation of the newly created European states to the League of Nations.
As an example of the way in which President Wilson understood and applied General Smuts's phrase to the new states, I quote the following from the "Supplementary Agreements" forming part of the first printed draft of the President's Covenant, but which I believe were added to the typewritten draft after the President had examined the plan of the South African statesman: "As successor to the Empires, the League of Nations is empowered, directly and without right of delegation, to watch over the relations _inter se_ of all new independent states arising or created out of the Empires, and shall assume and fulfill the duty of conciliating and composing differences between them with a view to the maintenance of settled order and the general peace." There is a natural temptation to a student of international agreements to analyze critically the composition and language of this provision, but to do so would in no way advance the consideration of the subject under discussion and would probably be interpreted as a criticism of the President's skill in accurately expressing his thoughts, a criticism which it is not my purpose to make.
Mr.Wilson's draft also contained a system of mandates over territories in a form which was, to say the least, rudimentary if not inadequate.

By the proposed system the League of Nations, as "the residuary trustee," was to take sovereignty over "the peoples and territories" of the defeated Empires and to issue a mandate to some power or powers to exercise such sovereignty.

A "residuary trustee" was a novelty in international relations sufficient to arouse conjecture as to its meaning, but giving to the League the character of an independent state with the capacity of possessing sovereignty and the power to exercise sovereign rights through a designated agent was even more extraordinary.
This departure from the long accepted idea of the essentials of statehood seemed to me an inexpedient and to a degree a dangerous adventure.

The only plausible excuse for the proposal seemed to be a lack of knowledge as to the nature of sovereignty and as to the attributes inherent in the very conception of a state.