From his point of view a statement, such as I was willing to make, would in no way help the situation.

I would still be on record as opposed to certain provisions of the Treaty, provisions which he was so earnestly defending in his addresses.

While Mr.Bullitt had given an incomplete report of our conversation, there was sufficient truth in it to make anything but a flat denial seem of little value to the President; and, as I could not make such a denial, his point of view seemed to be that the damage was done and could not be undone.

I am inclined to think that he was right.
My views concerning the Treaty at the time of the conversation with Mr.
Bullitt are expressed in a memorandum of May 8, 1919, which is as follows: "The terms of peace were yesterday delivered to the German plenipotentiaries, and for the first time in these days of feverish rush of preparation there is time to consider the Treaty as a complete document.
"The impression made by it is one of disappointment, of regret, and of depression.

The terms of peace appear immeasurably harsh and humiliating, while many of them seem to me impossible of performance.
"The League of Nations created by the Treaty is relied upon to preserve the artificial structure which has been erected by compromise of the conflicting interests of the Great Powers and to prevent the germination of the seeds of war which are sown in so many articles and which under normal conditions would soon bear fruit.