Askov American. [volume] (Askov, Pine County, Minn.) 1914-current, 1939-11-02

places this country definitely on the
side of the allied powers in the Euro
pean war. l quote as my authority
for this statement Secretary of State
Hull, who in a letter dated May IL,
1888, wrote Senator Key Pittman as
follows:
Il have received your letter of
May 3, 1888, enclosing a copy of
S. j. Resolution 288 repeating the
Joint Resolution to Prohibit the Ex-
port of Arms, Ammunition and Imple-
ments of War from the United States
to Spain, approved January 8, 1887,
and conditionally raising the embargo
against the government of Spain,' and
requesting my comment.
in recent years this government
has consistently pursued course
calculated to prevent our becoming
involved in war situations. In August,
1886, shortly after the beginning of
the civil strife in Spain, it became
evident that several of the great pow
ers were projecting themselves into
the struggle through the furnishing
of arms and war materials and other
aid to, the contending sides, thus
creating real danger of spread of
the conflict into European war with
the possible involvment of the
United States That there was such
a real danger was realized by every
thoughtful observer the world over.
Adopts NOn-Intervention Policy.
"TWenty-seven governments of Eu-
rope took special cognizance of that
fact in setting up a committee de-
signed to carry out concerted policy
of non-intervention in the conflict.
In view of all these special and usual
circumstances, this government de-
clared its policy of strict non-inter-
ference in the struggle and at the
same time announced that export of
arms from the United States to Spain
would be contrary to such policy.
1.-The fundamental reason for the
enactment of the Joint Resolution of
January 8, 1887, was to implement
this policy by legislation. This joint
Resolution was passed in the Senate
unanimously and in the House of Rep
resentatives by vote of 400 to l.
"In the form in which it is pre-
scented the proposed legislation, if en-
acted, would lift the embargo which
is now being applied against both
parties to the conflict in Spain, in re-
spect to shipments of arms to one
party while leaving in effect the en-
barge in respect to shipments to the
other party Even if the legislation
applied to both parties its enactment
would still subject us to unnecessary
risks we have so far avoided.
1--WE do not know what lies ahead
in the Spanish situation. The original
danger still exists. In view of the
continued danger of international con-
flict arising from the circumstances
of the struggle, any proposal which
at this juncture contemplates re-
versal of our policy of strict nom
interference, which we have thus far
so scrupulously followed and under
the operation of which we have kept
out of inducements, would offer a
real possibility of complications.
From the standpoint of the best in
terests of the United States in the
circumstances which now prevail,
would not feel justified in recon-
mending affirmative action on the
resolution under consideration.
"Our first solicitude should be the
peace and welfare of this country
and the real test of the advisability
of making any changes in the statutes
now in effect should be whether such
changes would further tend to keep
us from becoming involved directly or
indirectly in dangerous European
situation.
Furthermore, if reconsideration is
to be given to revision of our neu-
trality legislation it would be more
useful to reconsider it in its broader
aspects in the light of the practical
experience gained during the past
two or three years rather than to
rewrite it piecemeal in relation to a
particular situation. 1t is evident
that there is not sufficient time to
give study to such questions in the
closing days of this Congress"
Of course, Secretary Hull was 100
percent right in what he wrote to
Senator Pittman. l am wondering
what has caused the Administration
to change its position on this subject.
Is it due to pressure from the inter-
national bankers and the munitions
makers? Just what is the Presidents
objective and what has he up his
sleeve? We are entitled to know.
Would Keep Out of War.
In an address before the New York
Herald Tribune forum on current
problems, President Roosevelt, speak
ing from the White House last Thurs
day, took to task those who "beat
their breasts" and assert that his for
egn policy might send this country
into war. In reply to the Presidents
unctuous assumption of virtues that
I do not feel he possesses, l would
commend to him a careful reading
of the second and fifth paragraphs of
Secretary Hull's letter to Senator Pitt
man.