The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1936-01-02
HIGH COST OF NEUTRALITY

CELDOM has Congress tackled bigger, more
complex or more important job than the sched-
uled legislation designed to keep out of the next
big foreign war.
1t already has laid the foundation for such legis-
lation BY joint resolution of Aug. 3d. 1885, it was
made mandatory upon the President to proclaim an
embargo on arms, ammunition and implements of
And this the President has done in the case
of Italy and Ethiopia
He has gone even further He has warned Amer
leans that they travel the ships of these belli-
gerents, or engage in any kind of trade with them
at their own peril
This stop-gap measure, which proved quite ade-
quate for keeping out of the isolated Italo- Etho-
plan conflict will have to be broadened and clari-
fled if we are to have neutrality policy that will
be effective in event of another real World War
Congress now proposes to draft such an all-embrac-
ing law Almost certainly loans and credits to bel
hgerents will be barred and the list of taboo war
materials considerably extended.
Right there Congress will bump into one of its
biggest obstacles If we to stay out of the next
big war, declared Bernard M Baruch one of Amer
ica's foremost captains of business, we shall have
to stop trading with foreign nations almost alto
gether.
That would be costly. To many it would spell
disaster unless the Federal government went to their
rescue Cotton and foodstuffs are just as important
to the successful pursuit of as cannon and high
explosives Yet if cotton were enabargoed our South
ern plantations would be seriously hurt. And if
foodstuffs stopped, agricultural prices would
be certain to fall
A SSUMINC, therefore, that Congress passed such
legislation could it stand the strain? The pur-
chasing power of one-third the total population of
America would be greatly essened This would react
on industry. The industrial East would join with
the agricultural West and South in the effort to re-
peal any such neutrality measure
prodgious amount of horse sense will be re-
quired of Congress if a practicable law is to be
framed. To pass one that merely looks good on
paper would be worse than none at ALL 1t would
create for us fools paradise, nothing more.
1t seems pretty clear that the President should
be given power to ban loans and credits and to add
to his list of "key materials" And, if it is neutral
ity seeking, it is likewise plain that any
bargoes applied against belligerent must be ap
piled against all beligerents. Otherwise we would
quickly become partisans, instead of neutrals.
Cotton, foodstuffs and wide range of commodi
ties vital in war might be placed in category apart,
if the neutrality law is to be workable. When not
declared actual contraband, their export might well
be limited to normal peacetime quotas preferably
a cash and-carry basis.
The only alternative to some such arrangement
is to remunerate agriculture and certain other leg
innate activities hard hit by the reduction of for
eign commerce. 1t would cost billions But there
is one consolation Whatver the expense, it would
cost American taxpayers less than the 100 billions
which the late Calvin Coolidge estimated the World
War will cost them before the bill is finally paid
And it may be the means of saving thousands of
American lives.