Forest City press. (Forest City, Potter County, D.T. [S.D.]) 1883-19??, 1915-08-25
Export of War Munitions;
LaDful, Right and Expedient.

volve such a neutral country as the Unit
ed States.
what Austria asks of us. therefore, is
not 10 observe law already made, but on
our W initiative and by our own inde-
pendent action to make a special interna-
tional law for her benefit.
But. though the export of arms may BIT
lawful. the question still remains whether
1t Is right. There are some things that the
law allows which are wrong. Is this one
OF them? Those who hold that the maxi
ing or export of arms in time Of war 10
wrong must base their belief on the as
sumption that war itself is necessarily
wrong. for II 1t is ever right to make war
it Is also right to make the Instruments
10y winch war Is waged. We do not be-
lleve that American citizens who cele-
brate with pride the Fourth of July and
memorial day will take the position tina
war is necessarily always wrong. If 1t
was right to make war against the Brit
ISM Redcoats In 1776. IL it was right to
make war In defense of the union in 1861,
II was right to make the muskets for the
continentals and the rifles for the Army
OF the Potomac. And II 1t was right to
make those arms. 1t was right for us to
puy 1hem from others and for others to
sell them to us. The only ground on which
an American who remembers the history
or his country with pride can believe that
IL Is wrong to export arms is that the
particular belligerent to which those arms
are sold Is engaged In an unholy war.
This position an individual can take, but
ne can not ask his country to take that
position without asking his country to be.
come unneutral. So long, therefore, az an
American citizen wishes his country to re-
main neutral. he must hold that 1t is in
accordance with good morals as we'll as In
accordance with law for fellow country
men OF his to HQ11 Qrml fn q ho1ltuoron<
What is both lawful n right, however.
may be inexpedient. Is 1t expedient for
the United States to allow Its citizens to
sell arms to foreign nations at WARP? The
United States cannot advocate in this
matter n rule which cannot be univer-
sally applied. To oppose the selling Of
arms to other nations means to advocate
the rule that no nation shall use any
arms except those that Il manufactures
Itself. This would mean that Switzerland.
a little country surrounded by great ma
lions. would have to tax itself for the
were going to defend itself against enc
mics.
II would mean that so long 40 the pos.
slblilty OF war n the consequent neces.
sIty Of defensive war exist, every country
would have to adopt the milItarlsm Of
krupp works; that every country, no
matter how devoted to peace it was,
would v to keep armed to the teeth;
Il would mean specifically that the United
States would q to deny Itself the rIoht
to buy arms from other alton In time
OF war;. and therefore would have to pre-.
pare at once great stores Of ammunition
and keep those stores Of ammunition not
oniy replenlshed, but also renewed with
every advance In the science Of warfare.
The very statement OF this fact shows
that a rule against he export Of arms
would h0 hfUh1v fnovroAfort
Considerations Of law, morals and AZ
pediency alike. therefore. are all against
the proposition to interfere with the com
merce in arms.