Evening star., 1935-01-06
BY WILLIAM r. CASTLE, JR.

BY WILLIAM r. CASTLE, JR.
Former Undersecretary of State OF the
United States.
vt IS difficult to understand the
sudden emergence on the Wash
ington scene of the question of
i neutrality. 1t is an academic
matter, at the moment, and If
there should be another war, agree
ments as to trade and travel would
have to be made with the belligerents
at the time. Let the professors of the
Department of State discuss the mat
ter theoretically to their hearts con-
tent; but let them do 1t as they dis
cuSs other matters which are not i'm
mediately pertinent-without publicity.
Neutrality is dangerous subject be-
cause we ordinary citizens still think
that two and two make four and that
there is no reason to tell the country
that neutrality is being earnestly dis
cussed unless war is expected.
The disputants of the department
must remember, also, that interna-
tional law Is not made to order in any
foreign Office but is the cumulative re-
suit of national and international ac-
tion over a series of years. If in con-
sequence of the studies which ap-
parently are going on there should be
issued a presidential ukase covering
the exact attitude of the United States
toward neutrality in the next war, 1t
would give possible belligerents-if
any-the opportunity to make their
ip rr,ffI,
nounced stand-and in all probability
we should ignore the decision, what
ever it was, when the time came.
Realistic Adviser.
According to the press, Charles
Warren is advising the Department of
State in this matter. On subjects of
this nature he is logical and realistic
thinker. He made his own position
clear in an address before the Society
of International Law year and a half
ago. At that time he said:
There are no rules or laws of naval
warfare affecting neutral trade as to
which the great powers are in agree
ment." Continuing, he said that since
this was the case we might as well
admit that beligerent will not ac-
knowledge neutral rights and will
only concede such privileges to trade
as 1t believes will be compatible with
its own victory" He then added.
quoting Admiral Rogers with evident
approval, that the Government should
treat each war as it comes along, on
its own basis"
This conclusion Is sound sense be-
cause nobody can foretell what condi-
tions may be present in any war, nor
what the attitude of the United States
may be toward the belligerents.
think Mr.. Warren would stand by the
principle today, but that some one,
eager for publicity or wanting to di-
vert public attention from the failure
Of N. r. A. or some other organiza-
ton, has unwisely permitted the fact
to leak out that discussion of this
ticklish problem is proceeding, and
worse than that-the direction in
which it is tending.
If 1t is true-and I agree wholly
with Mr.. Warren that it is-that there
is no generally accepted rule govern
ing belligerent treatment of neutral
trade, 1t is obvious that when a war
breaks out the United States must try
to strike the best bargain possible with
The belligerents. To announce in ad-
vance that we claim no rights; to an
nounce in advance that American citi-
zens and ships shall 60 into the danger
zones only at their own risk would be
fatal to American interests. We
should have nothing to bargain with
It would look, also, like an admission
Of cowardice.
No Bargaining Power.
After such an announcement. If war
broke out, the American Government
would have no cash or credit with
which to approach the bargain coun-
ter. To announce now that we would
not protect our traders would seem to
betray them at the very time when
the Government is talking most earn
estly of its support of international
trade. For, after all, trade is matter
OF long-term contracts, not of single
shipments.
To announce that on the outbreak
OF war the American Government
would withdraw protection from
American trade would be looked upon
by the business world as another step
toward the desertion of foreign trad
ers at all times. 1t would be taken as
a sign Of retreat to the idea of MIR.
Bryan that an American citizen de-
serves the support of his Government
only If he stays at home. Further
more, trade continues even in war,
and it is obvious that what we should
lose to the greater resourcefulness of
other nations would be lost forever.
To the average man promotion and
deSertion seem incompatible.
II the terms Of the Covenant of the
League Of Nations are lived up to, it is |
clear that in future war there will be
no neutrals, at least among members
of the League. actually. all except
the belligerents will be neutral because
the conflict will not be called war.
Witness the fights of the last few
yearsD It is clear, also, that If the
United States declares In advance
that 1t renounces what used to EScon-
sidered neutral rights 1t will be throw