The Washington times., 1935-12-21
Final Control
OfFOreign
Policy
By James T. Williams

When Congress reconvenes next
month major questions of foreign
policy will compete with domestic
problems of greater urgency for
the consideration of the two
Houses. And, unfortunately, all
debate and most Of the legislation
will be influenced by "the great
and solemn referendum of 1886"
The Administration will again
seek larger powers in the field Of
foreign policy. It's leaders will re.
new their attempt to obtain power
for the President to determine
when and to what extent the
policy of neutrality shall be fol-
lowed when wars break out abroad.
A group of pacifists will at
tempt to extend that embargo
against munitions of war to In
clude all raw materials that might
be useful in war.
A third group will oppose both
these radical proposals and up
hold the principles on which the
traditional American policy of
neutrality which George Washing
ton first enunciated has been
based.
This group is ready to admit
the wisdom of considering the
modification Of certain applica-
tions of these principles, but not
their abandonment.
TRADITIONAL
Slowly but surely the American
people are coming to realize that
in recent months the Administra-
ton allowed itself to be maneu-
vered into a position where it
seemed to be swerving as a politi-
cal fetch and carry for the Euro
pean powers which dominate the
League of Nations.
Such a role i'll becomes the Gov
ernment Of the United States. To
meddle in the political quarrels of
the Old World is against tradi.
tional American foreign policy.
Equally against it is to permit
foreign powers to make of the
United States an errand boy for
the doing Of their own chores.
The zigzag policy of the De
partment of State in dealing with
the conflict between Italy and
Ethiopia may have satisfied that
American minority which still
favors the entrance of this coun-
try into the League of Nations
and the League Court.
Such a policy, however, is
wholly repugnant to the majority
Of the American people who are
opposed to the political entangle-
ment of this country in the quar-
rels of the Old World.
Under the American system of
government the conduct of foreign
relations is entrusted to the Presi.
dent. His is the initiative in the
negotiation of treaties and in the
declaration of a policy of neutral
ity.
WITH THE SENATE
The final control of foreign pol.
icy, however, rests neither with
the President nor the Congress,
but with the Senate of the United
States, by which all treaties must
be ratified before becoming effec-
tive.
The power to declare war is
given by the Constitution to the
Congress, and the Congress has
always been opposed to delegating
to the President additional power
by the abuse of which he might
be able to involve this country in
war without authority of Con-
gress.
There can be no doubt of the
overwhelming determination of
the American people not to be
dragged into another war. This
does not mean, however, that they
are ready to take away from the
President his constitutional power
to conduct foreign relations or to
exercise the initiative in the ne
gotiation of treaties.
Nor does it mean that the Amer
lean people are ready to take
away from the Senate its final
control of foreign policy and turn
it over either to the President or