Evening star., 1936-03-08

mental attempts to
abolish the armed
international anarchy by embargoing
the total trade in munitions of war
arouse his curiosity. but his erudition
tempers his enthusiasm, for he per-
ceives so many aspects to the problem
of attaining real neutrality, In policy
and law, that he appears unable to
make up his mind what more to do, II
anything, about it.
Lectured Senate 4 Hours.
On the eve of the passage Of the
compromise neutrality bill last month
he delivered a four-hour address to
the Senate, raising so many doubts in
the minds of his hearers as to the
Significance of what had already been
done that the net effect was to un-
nerve confidence and delay decision
in the drive for permanent neutrality
legislation with teeth in it,
Senator Thomas would not 60 be-
youd approving re-enactment of the
statute of last August, with addition
of a provision prohibiting war-loans
and credits, and stipulating that the
act shall apply henceforth to all
states that become belligerent in
war in which the United States Is
neutral The compromise resolution
passed by the Senate February 1s and
singned by the President was origi-
nally introduced by him, although
Senator Pittman, chairman of the
Foreign Relations Committee. spon-
sored the measure on the floor.
Senator Thomas appears to believe
that we have now gone far enough in
our revolutionary" efforts to annul
the war-system and modify tradi-
tional and an irresponsible conception
Of neutrality. While appearing to
favor neutrality as a provisional meas
ure of national safety, he yet declares
that it is without morality as a legal
doctrine. and is "impracticable now
adays, however useful it may have
been in the past"
Occupies Middle Position.
Like the Bible, therefore, Senator
Thomas and his profound address
may be quoted in support of both the
old and the new testament of neu-
trality and in defense of apparently
contradictory and irreconcilable forms
Of national behavior in war time. The
Senator occupies middle f-the-road
position between that of the Munitions
Committee, on the left, and the ma
tional isolationists or do-nothing ira
a fcf ~ -inh Vaf hA
quoted Livy to the effect that There
Is no middle ground" between war and
peace!
He cited Thomas Jefferson's letter
to Robert Livingstone, September 10.
1901, in defense of the old neutrality,
rs follows:
War between two nations cannot
diminish the rights of the rest Of the
world remaining at peace. The doc
trine that the rights of nations re-
manning quietly In the exercise of |
moral and social duties are to give |
way to the convenience of those who |
prefer plundering and numbering one
another Is a monstrous doctrine and |
ought to yield to the more rational
law that the wrong which two ma
tions endeavor to inflict on each other
must not infringe on the rights or
conveniences of those remaining at |
peace Shall two nations turning
tigers break up in one instant the
peaceable relations Of the whole
world?"
To this Senator Thomas added: Il
hold no brief for any one who would
glory in extra profits taken from war;
but am totally unable to see why an
American oil company, or a motor
company, or hot-dog salesman, or
even a student or tourist who wishes
to 60 abroad to study and observe.
should have to suspend his ordinary
pursuits and suffer inconvenience and
loss, simply because some state is
seized with the hydrophobia Of war"
Old Neutrality Dangerous.
A little later, however, he exclaimed:
Neutrality in its old form is dam
serous. If the neutral state thinks
it has rights. it can maintain them
only by fighting for them. We have
been led into two great wars in ex-
actly that fashion. Under the old
law there was no interference at all
by Government in the economic ac-
tivities of Americans. Public mill
tary activity must not be INDUCED
In; but there was private economic
participation Of every kind. We aimed
at political isolation only, and were
impartial in theory, The degree of
impartiality, in fact, depended upon
the state of belligerent control of
the trade-routes. Those facts and
circumstances actually controlled our
neutrality. But there was full diplo-
matte support Of any kind of mer-
chants adventure. That was part of
our scheme"
In regard to the present measure,
he said:
Under the new theory we have
made such q revolutionary change
that there is q contrast in almost
every item. Under the former theory,
private participation in the economic
and financial phases Of war was al
lowed. We not only sold, for ex-
ample. over $4,000, ,000, 900 worth Of
goods to the belligerent countries of
Europe-chiedy the Allies-while we
were neutral but we lent $2,O00,-
o0o, 900 to help finance the selling.
Almost All Rights Abandoned.
Nov there is an almost complete
Of any defense of neutral
rights. We have gone so far that, when |
one analyzes it, he is surprised. Public, ,
and to an increasing degree, private