New Britain herald., 1930-03-21
ions is the suggestion oAa con.

Sioho 10 tiC cuS Sootioh of~d Coiout- tative pact between the five powers when an emergency should arrive above the horizon. We instigated both the League of Nations-then refusing to join it-and we originat- ed the Young Plan and the Kellogg Briand pact. Why should we hesi- tate regarding a consultative pact which would amount to no more than pledge to consult with the other powers as means toward preventing war At best, it would be d gesture; but in certain emergen- cies even gesture has the effect of stilling passions and staying the dogs of war.
 Our representatives at London are opposed to any such pact, it is believed, upon instructions from Washington. The fear is uppermost in the minds of the Administration that such a pact would not meet with the approval of the Senate. which would have to ratify it. Still. there is an element of doubt regard ing this fear; the isolationists and irreconcilables may not be as sNong as they once were in the Seitate.
 So far as the peace of Europe is to be insured-by sanctions if neces- sary-a pact with teeth in it is neces- sary. The only kind of teeth that would bite in such an emergency are those involving the right of blockade Of an offending nation. From time immemorial Great Brit ain has been the nation able most effectively to provide the blockade.
 But the American, nation for a hundred years has insisted upon her right when a neutral state 10 deal with all others, including belliger. ents. It is evident that the chief weapon of a European agreement to force an offending nation to keep the peace--the blockade-cannot be utilized effectively with the United States reusing to concede this right of blockade. With the American navy on d parity with that of Great Britain this power of ours to chal- lenge any blockade is more pro- nounced and effective than at any time in modern history.
 France, for instance, realizes fully that Great Britain, confronted with a European emergency, will not risk war with the United States over blockade. Regardless of whatever understanding there may be between France and England. the statesmen on the Seine realize fully that there is no aid of consequence to be eX- pected from Britain so long as the risk referred to exists. It may be claimed that during the early years of the World War England insti- tuted the blockade while the United States was still a neutral; but there were grumbings and complaints in the United States and there were claims registered against the Brit ish government, claims which were not pressed as strongly as might have been the case under other circumstances, the American Ad- ministration at the time being in. clincd to give the Allies the breaks" A similar situation might not arise in the future; and in 1872, 1t will be remembered, there actual ly was war between the two Eng lish-speaking nations over that very item of dispute.
 By refusing to take part in con- sultative part the American dele gates perhaps unwittingly make it more difficult to arrive at an agree ment at the London barley, for the two nations standing in the way of an unanimous agreement are France, who greatly desires such a pact, and Italy, which is demanding parity with France.
 We have had idealistic motives in entering upon this barley, but we also have brought with us certain traditions bound up in American history which it is difficult for Europeans to take as seriously as