The Birmingham age-herald., 1917-03-15
ARMING MERCHANT VESSELS


 Were you opposed to arming the merchant vessels of the United States?'
 T was not opposed to arming ves- sells that were engageN in legitimate business, but did oppose the govern ment arming ships and giving them it's protection when they were carrying immense stores of munitions and arms This is the same as an act of war
 My position in regard to the armed neutrality bill was perhaps not under stood. In a meeting of the House con- mlttee on foreign relations, the bill empowering the President to arm ships was presented for our considera- tion.
 Chairman Flood assured us that the President had given his assurance that ships engaged in carrying munitions of war would not be armed. Inasmuch as the President had giv- en us this assurance. there were seven Of us who thought that the bill should be amended so as to except ships load ed with arms and ammunition from governmental protection.
 MINORITY MADE REPORT The majority of the committee op- posed the amendment Thereupon six or the minority joined in a minority re- port as follows:
 All uHsucceSSIul eHOrI was made in committee to amend section 1 of this bill so as to except from it's provisions ships engaged in carrying cargoes con- slsting in whole or in part of arms and ammunitions. It would be manifestly un- neutral for our government to arm and protect ships engaged in the munitions traffic with belligerents
 Tt is true that there is no inter- national law imposing a duty on neutrals to restrain their citizens from selling arms and ammunitions to belligerents. But the belligerents against wnlcn such arms and ammunition are intended to be used has right to capture the same in transit on the high seas
 If the government of the United States should arm and protect a ship carrying arms and ammunitions con- signed to a belligerent thus itself becom- ing party to the traffic, it would com init an unneutral act-an act of war
 'sThe same amendment excepting muni- 125 members including myself, voted for it. When the amendment was lost, I voted for the bill on it's final passage In fact all but 13 members of the House voted for the bill.
 Had the amendment been adopted, do not doubt that the bill would have received unanimous support of the House. LII tHc ccHdlc, tHc plll was cIlllClZoQ because it gave protection to munitions ships, and Senator Stone, chairman of the committee on foreign relations strongly supported the amendment which had been offered in the House. DISTRICT DOES NOT WANT WAR "The district represent does not want war. l have received thousands of let ters protesting against my supporting any measure that would allow Congress to endow the President with the power to declare war. I have gotten exactly two letters from constituents asking that I back the President fully.
 Do you think that the House will enact any unusual legislation in the spe- cial session? ..The President has the right to order us to convene, but he can't make us adjourn so consequently I do not know what will come up. Of course, we shall pass the appropriation bills. Then the conservation bills, and several other mat ters are to be considered In event of