Montana labor news., 1937-11-04

1895 and 1887 Congress three times passed
a neutrality law, each time strengthening it
in the hope of preventing this country from
again moving down the road to war. The
Administration is refusing to carry out that
law
In the twenty years that have followed the
World War certain facts have become clear.
War does not end war No nation can be
permanently suppressed by force. Although
we might have entered it for other reasons,
it was our war trade and leans from 1914 to
1917 that made it impossible for us to keep
out of the World War
Facing these facts, Congress sought, by
passing the neutrality law, to prevent the
lives of our people being uselessly sacrificed
again in foreign war; When the law was
being considered the administration tried to
keep as much power as possible in the hands
of the President by making it possible for
him to favor one side or the other in a con-
fiict But it was to Congress that the Consti-
tuition gave the war-naking power, and Con-
gress refused to give the President power to
take sides for if he could do that, he, instead
poses have the war-making power. Congress
also took special pains to word the law when
it was revised in 1887 so that it would come
into effect whenever 'state of war" existed.
In spite of all this the neutrality law has not
been carried out in connection with the war
in Asia, apparently on the ground that the
way must be kept open for action against
Japan, for another war to end war A policy
of sanctions against Japan is the only policy
the neutrality law would interfere with It
would not prevent our helping in any other
way to bring the war in the Far East to an
end. The sympathy of the world and of the
people of the United States is undoubtedly
with China in the Far Eastern conflict but
that is no reason for not applying the law
At present, China is cut off by blockade from
getting munitions from this country but pri-
vate ships can carry munitions to either side
at their own risk" and there is no risk in
carrying them to Japan The neutrality law
would prevent American manufacturers from
supplying the weapons with which the war
that we condemn is being fought
The question of lasting importance to the
American people, however, is whether the
neutrality law passed by Congress to protect
the people of this country against foreign
wars is to be followed or whether the Admin
istration is going to be permitted to override
Congress and follow policy which will get
us into another war to end war This is the
most vital of all questions to be settled at
the special session.
In his Chicago speech the President implied
that the only way to stop aggressors was by
force Those who support the neutrality law
say that one world war should be enough to
teach us what war won't do and that if we
want peace we must find some way to give
all nations fair deal At present four ma
tions control over four-fifths of the earthS
resources. Those who are urging that this
country definitely turn its back on war be-
lieve that by forcing the world to accept the
fact that it cannot be counted upon to help
wage war; the United States will turn the
attention of all governments toward policies
that will mean relief of world tensions and
that will offer hope of preventing war
Statements by members of Congress show
clearly that at the coming special session the
first question that will be up is this: are we
going to carry out the neutrality act passed
by Congress and block the road to war or
are we going to let the war-making power
be taken away from Congress and the road
to war kept open?