"Are ideals confined to this deformed experiment upon a noble purpose, tainted, as it is, with bargains and tied to a peace treaty which might have been disposed of long ago to the great benefit of the world if it had not been compelled to carry this rider on its back?"

Henry Cabot Lodge expresses deep skepticism and criticism toward the outcome of post-World War I diplomacy, particularly the Treaty of Versailles and the League of Nations. The “deformed experiment upon a noble purpose” refers to the attempt to create international peace through the League, which Lodge sees as originally noble in intention but fundamentally flawed in execution. He questions whether ideals, the hopes for justice, peace, and progress, are truly contained within or advanced by this practical arrangement, which he sees as compromised and corrupted. The word “deformed” indicates that what was once pure and upright has been twisted by political realities.

Lodge’s use of “tainted, as it is, with bargains” highlights his perception that the treaty and the League are products of political maneuvering rather than sincere commitment to higher principles. The noble aim of lasting peace, for him, has been undermined by backroom deals and compromise, diluting the moral foundation of the whole endeavor. The structure is “tied to a peace treaty which might have been disposed of long ago,” suggesting the world could have achieved a more favorable or practical peace if not for the insistence on complicating matters with the League's obligations. The phrase “disposed of long ago to the great benefit of the world” indicates Lodge’s belief that the peace process has been delayed and made more difficult by the burden, “this rider on its back”, of the League, which he views as an unnecessary and potentially harmful addition.

Lodge laments that instead of achieving purposeful, clear peace, the international community is stuck with a complex, ineffective system that drags down the entire settlement. He reflects a broader anxieties among American leaders who doubted the wisdom of entangling the United States in global institutions and commitments that might jeopardize national sovereignty and dilute the power of American ideals by tying them to the imperfections of international politics.