Evening star., 1936-03-02


articles BY Mr.. Allinson on the
"neu neutrality policy OF the
United States.
BY BRENT DOW ALLINSON.
The people of the United States,
expressing themselves through ma
tional peace organizations, churches,
civic associations and discussion
groups, overwhelmingly desire effec-
tive neutrality legislation against the
menace of European or Asiatic war
entanglements, although real neu-
trality may involve departure from
legal tradition and temporary cur
tailment of certain alluring oppor-
tunities of private profit for export
Ing interests and the munitions trade.
A prominent member of Congress
recently declared: mo matter where
I 60 to speak, or on what subject,
sooner or later I am asked to talk
about the neutrality bill" And the
executive secretary Of the Women's
International League for Peace of
Pennsylvania, writes: Il have just
returned from an extended trip
through the Middle West. Every
place 60 I am persuaded anew Of
two things: First, that the people are
almost unanimously opposed to war
and war profiteering; and secondly,
that they have little real understand
ing of what is being done, of how
and why they get thrust into war
against their desire; or that they
have any practical and patriotic
way of helping themselves to prevent
It,"
Realistic Program Drafted.
1t is realized by this time. perhaps,
that realistic program of drastic
assurance against involvement in war
has been proposed by the Senate Mu-
nitions Committee, under the influ-
ence of four Senators-Nye, Clark,
Bone and Vandenberg-ando of Wig
orous group in the House, led by
Representative Fred j. Sisson of
Utica. N. Y; Maury Maverick of
Texas. Louis Ludlow of Indiana,
Charles Tobey of New Hampshire and
perhaps dozen other progressives of
both major political parties.
1t is not SO widely recognized that
this program was Endorsed in large
part by the State Department a
month or so ago, and, with certain
notifications of phraseology in favor
Of potential executive collaboration
with the economic sanctions" policy
OF the League of Nations, against vio-
lators of the covenant and the Kel-
logg-Briand pact, was actually dis
cussed at length in the Senate and
House Committees on Foreign Rela-
tions.
In spite of these Endorsements and
discussions, and of the fact that the
Munitions Committee had accepted
the State Departments phrasing of
the bill, in order to facilitate passage
the measure that was reported out
from the two Foreign Relations Com
mittees-and which passed the House
under the most drastic form of gag
rule February Is, and passed the Sen
later, and which has been signed by
the Presidents a measure from
which the most substantial teeth"
had been knocked out in committee.
When Senators Bone. Pope and Gore
sought to restore these teeth" by
amendment on the floor, as if by
tacit agreement among many Sena-
tors present, the amendments were
Immediately defeated, and the bill thus
emasculated was sent to the President.
Opinion of Act Differs.
Opinion sincerely differs, in and
out Of Congress, as to whether or
not the compromise neutrality law
will prove effective assurance against
war when the test comes. Much de-
pends on the Interpretation and en-
forcement given to it by the Execu-
tive. Judgments as to its probable
effect on American foreign relations
and commercial involvement in bel
ligerent controversy ranges all the
way from those of Senators Robinson,
Vandenberg, Thomas and others, who
believe that it offers substantial pro-
lection against unneutral economic
activity and commercial and political
ENHANCEMENT, to those of Senators
Lewis, Nye, Pope and Clark and Rep
resentatives Sisson and Maverick,
that the compromise neutrality act,
while better than nothing, is totally
inadequate to keep the United States
out Of trouble abroad and makes
little contribution, as yet, to the dis
establishment of the war system and
the peaceful organization of the CIV
1lized world against war.
All of them agree it was necessary
to continue the neutrality and NUM-
tions control act, which was passed
in August, 1885, and expired Saturday,
and to add to it provision making
war loans and munitions credits un-
lawful for the benefit of belligerents
IN the United States.
Strengthening Held Need.
But even these objectives, they in
sist, will not be attained without
strengthening the bill in several par
ticulars-notably by empowering the
newly created Munitions Control
Board, or the Treasury Department.
to withhold licenses for export of
munitions and arms shipments, on
suspicion of their ultimate destination
to q belligerent country, and to re-
quire the exporter, or the banker, to
prove that the shipment or the loan
in question will not. in fact, be en-
ployed for the service or benefit of a
war-making government.
It Is believed, therefore, that fur