The Washington times., 1937-01-09
Seeking Best
Neutrality
Solution
By j. T. Williams, Jr.

1t is now unlawful to export
to any place, for the use Of either
Of the opposing forces in Spain,
any arms, ammunition or imple-
ments Of war from any place in
the United States or their pos.
sessions.
Congress has made it unlawful
by the adoption on the first day
Of the new session of a Joint
resolution which, the President
having requested, he quickly ap.
proved.
The fact that this resolution
went through both Houses with.
out reference to committee, with
little debate and with only one
vote against it reflects the wide
spread sentiment in favor of
keeping this country clear Of the
armed conflict In which the
Spanish people are now engaged.
This mandatory law applies,
however, only to the crisis in
Spain. Its enactment leaves the
way open for the Congress to deal
deliberately with the larger and
more important questions Of gen.
eral policy involved in new neu.
trality legislation to be taken UP
later in the session.
ADMONITION
AS Congressman KlOeb Of Ohio
reminded the House, when Con-
greSS comes to consider "the
question of setting aside age-Old
principles as established by inter.
national law, when you attempt
to curtail the established prin-
cipleS Of the freedom of the seas,
you are attacking big problems.
This timely admonition from q
member of the House Committee
on Foreign Affairs, who is q law.
year, suggests the wisdom of look.
ing to this committee and the
Committee on Foreign Relations
of the Senate for the most careful
scrutiny of all proposals to amend
existing neutrality laws before the
mind of the country or of the
Congress is closed upon this vital
problem.
More than one European nation
is interested in influencing the
kind Of neutrality legislation that
the present Congress may enact.
If the United States can be
Stampeded into abandoning all
it's rights upon the seas, when.
ever any two nations go to war,
or even when one nation Is visited
by civil war, the world may find
itself the victim Of more and larger
wars. The rights Of neutrals would
then be sacrificed to the rights of
belligerents. The way Of the war.
like nations would be made easier
and the hardShips Of peaceful ma
tions greatly increased.
A century and a quarter ago, it
was believed for a time that one
remedy for war was to be found
in trade embargoes. It was hoped
that these embargoeS would so
cripple the nations engaged in war
that they would be compelled to
stop fighting. When President
Madison tried the embargo plan
the United States suffered such
terrible losses that the popularity
Of this method of diScouraging
warfare quickly waned.
Some Senator or Representative
in Congress when the great debate
on neutrality legislation gets un.
der way will doubtless recall to the
country'S mind what happened
when Madison's embargo was
applied. It's enforcement drove
thousands of American farmers
and other honest citizens into
bankruptcy. History tells us that
sheriff sales were widespread. In
New York alone, 1900 men were
imprisoned for debt. Business up
and down the Atlantic Coast was
paralyzed. Ships were diSmantled,
crews were discharged and Amer.
lea was thrown into economic
chaos. Europe, however, did not
suffer much and warfare there
was not wiped out.
Despite this bitter experience
which the American people went
through more than a century ago
there appear to be those in and
out Of Congress today who would
ignore its lesson and subject Amer.
lcan farmers and other innocent
citizens to similar hardships In
the future.
ALLURING LABEL
Another cure-all for war which
the present Congress will be asked
to apply bears the alluring label
Of the cash and carry" plan. The
application Of this alleged remedy
would apparently mean that if
Hitler and Stain should go to
war they would be allowed to send
their ships to American ports and
carry away to the battlefields Of
Europe whatever American prod
ucts Of the farm or the factory
they required, provided they could
pay for them in cash.
The adoption by the Congress
Of this extraordinary proposal
would have this effect upon the
future Of American foreign policy:
1t would place the United
States on the side Of the strong
nation against the weak, regard
less Of the rights or wrongs Of
the cause in conflict. It would
do this because the strong power
that controls the seas would con.
troll the neutral trade of the
United States. Instead Of being
Independent on the seas, the