Evening star., 1937-08-24

materials reaching the Spanish gov.
ernment. they fell into the possession
of the insurgent forces and were used
against the Spanish, government.
Strange to say, while the enforce
ment Of the acts as to Spain aroused
the angry protests Of groups residing
in the United States, there never has
been heard any protests or complaint
on the part Of the Spanish govern
ment. The act has served to main
tain the neutrality Of the United
States in that unfortunate conflict.
The act was enforced as to both
italy and Ethiopia during the war be-
tween those countries. 1t is true that
Italy complained on the grounds that,
controlling the sea as she did, the
embargo did not affect Ethiopia and
will exist In every war. The law Is
not enacted for the purpose of aiding
or injuring either the strong or the
weak in the conflict. 1t Is not to be
used for the purpose OF determining
and Furnishing the aggressor. 1t was
enacted for the sole purpose of pro-
tecting the lives and property Of our
citizens and eliminating causes that
have in the past and that might in
the future drag us into 4 foreign war.
Areuses Intra American Criticism.
Some editorial writer's and colum-
nists who are required to write learned
articles daily on every subject Of
present interest ridicule the neutrality
act and criticize the President in re-
lation to the non-enforcement OF the
act toward China and Japan. 1t Is
unfortunate that it is necessary to
answer such criticisms. 1t is obvious
that there has never been a human
intellect in the past, and not In the
present unless it be these editors and
columnists, that can know SO much
about so many different subjects. And
vet there are millions of our people
who do not realize such fact and give
great weight to such criticisms. They
say. "Of course a state OF war exists
between China and Japan"
Undoubtedly desperate and fatal
conflict is being engaged in between
the armed forces OF those countries.
The question is: Does such conflict
constitute a state Of war as intended
by the neutrality act?
1t is realized that every armed con-
flict between the military forces OF
governments does not always result
| in 4 state of war 1t frequently
amounts to but an incident conducted
for the purpose Of defense or retaili-
alton followed shortly by an armBtice
and by peaceful adjustment. Japan in
| 1892 invaded China with large naval
and military forces. A violent con-
f1ict ensued for several weeks around
Shanghai resulting In the destruction
OF Chapel, the ancient city of Shang-
hal, accompanied with great loss ol
property and many lives. For thu
time being it was war with all OF 1t.
horrors and brutality, but it did no
result in q continuing state of war
The conflict ended as suddenly rs Il
was started and peace was restored
1t would have been very unfortunate
if the neutrality act had been in exist.
ence at that time and the President
should have declared that conflict u
constitute q state of war and hae
| placed the act in force and effect q
to Japan and China. 1t would hav.
been misuse of the discretion granted
to him because it would have beer
hasty and his determination woule
| have been erroneous. 1t nigh
even have retarded rather than have
aided in the rapid and peaceful settle.
ment of the conflict. Until there is 9
declaration Of war or until facts de.
velop that make it obvious that such