Evening star., 1933-04-29

Comment on the proposed granting
to the President Of the right to de-
clare an embargo on shipments Of arms
to other countries is provoked by the
passage Of the measure by a large mar
Gin In the House. There are wide dif-
ferences Of opinion as to the wisdom
Of such action, one side emphasizing
the need Of authority to act in concert
with neutral nations, while the others
insist that by constitutional provision
Congress should share in such acts as
might lead to belligerency for the
United States.
"The danger Of giving President so
much power" according to the Bir-
mingham Age-Herald, was envisaged
by Representatives when they argued
that 1t would enable Chief Executive
to plunge the Nation into war. Such
arguments are just exercises in ration
alization. If, under the Kellogg treaty,
we are not to be in a position to make
ourselves felt when conflict threatens,
then that fact Is of little consequence.
II such readiness for adequate action
cannot be conferred on the President
because he might misuse it, why do we
permit him to continue as commander
in chief of the Army and Navy, and SO
conceivably capable Of flinging us into
war on his own initiative? If the
value Of an arms embargo is infinitely
multiplied by an understanding with
ether powers, we need not be disturbed
by the yelping of the isolationists."
"The powers that it vests in the
Chief Executive" in the opinion Of the
Buffalo Evening News, ''are needed by
the Government to make effective Ger
tain outstanding foreign policies of the
United States" Answering the argu-
ment that 1T will lead to war;" that
paper holds that the contention lis
clearly absurd" at the same time
pointing out that "even if it had any
validity, the resolution does not give
the President power to declare uni
lateral embargo, which, of course,
would be not only ineffective, but also
dangerous The Evening News con-
tinues: "The measure simply gives
power to the President to negotiate
an agreement with the other arns-pro-
ducing nations. The Government that
Is singled out as the treaty-breaking
state would, therefore, be faced with
the opposition of many powerful coup-
tries, and might, therefore, be forced to
revise its policies. The idea that 1T
would 60 to war against all OF them Is
too fantastic for belief
Unified action on the part Of all
ammunition producing countries" Is
declared by the Hartford Daily Times
as indispensable to practical results"
The Times further comments: "A
truly effective embargo policy, once it
became established as a universal rule,
would remove one alleged factor from
the war-threat situation, namely, the
supposed selfish interest of ammuni-
tion manufacturers in armed conflict
anywhere in the world. The difficulty
about the legislation lies in its en-
forceability as universal policy.
Short of that, it is bound to fall far
short Of accomplishing its purpose as
a deterrent to armed conflict"
"The hideous power of profits as war
makers" declares the Portland Oregon
Journal, "was exemplified in the World
War, when big -chemical-makers in
France sold to Germany trainloads OF
chemicals for phosgene gas with which
to destroy French soldiers. That hor-
rible power was demonstrated again
when German manufacturers sold
barbed wire to France to make bafbed
wire entanglements on which thousands
Of German lads on the battle front
hung and perished." The jersey City
journal points out that "the bill merely
makes the same essential assumption
as did the trainers Of the Constitution
that the President viii use discretion
and will be responsible to public opin-
ion." The New Orleans Times-Pica-
yune describes "fear Of the abuse Of
the embargo power" Is "fanciful."
while the Topeka Daily Capital refers
to harmony with the requirements OF
the Kellogg treaty. The Nashville Ban