Evening star., 1939-06-14
Neutrality Progress

The administration sponsored
Bloom neutrality bill embodying all
of the provisions suggested by Secre-
tary of State Hull in his identical
messages recently to the chairmen
of the Senate and House committees
handling neutrality legislation, has
taken its first hurdle in full stride.
The House Foreign Affairs Commit
tee voted its approval of the measure
and Chairman Bloom expects that
discussion of it on the House floor
will begin within two weeks. There
will be strong opposition to the bill
on the floor, judging by resistance
which developed in the committee.
The committee in its final vote di-
vided along party lines, twelve Dem
ocrats voting for the bill and eight
Republicans voting against it. Incl
dentally, it will be hard to convince
many intelligent persons that this
split was mere coincidence, devoid
of partisan considerations. And If
ever there was subject which Con-
gress should consider in the calm
atmosphere of politics-free deliber-
alton, this question of American neu-
trality in a war-threatened world
is it.
The sponsors of the Bloom bill
make no pretense that they have
produced the perfect neutrality in
strument. It represents a sincere ef-
fort by administration leaders to
work out compromise measure that
would stand a reasonably good
chance of getting by the formidable
isolationist bloc in the Senate. This
bloc, led by the able Senator Nye,
OF munitions inquiry fame, is said
to be piling up ammunition for bit
ter-end battle against that part of
the legislation which contemplates
repeal Of the existing fiat embargo
on arms to belligerents. This
phase Of the fight against the bill
will not be drawn along partisan
lines, for there are die-hard adher-
entS of the isolationist school on both
sides of the political fence. Some
opponents will concentrate fire on
the proposal that would give the
President power to designate COM
bat zones into which American ships
and nationals would not be permit
ted to venture. Behind both drives
will be the fear-based on nothing
tangible in history-that the Presi-
dent Of the United States cannot be
trusted to conduct our foreign rela-
tions IN an international emer-
gency-that Congress, by some magic
OF clairvoyancy not heretofore dem
onstrated, can fix a rigid neutrality
formula that will meet every con-
tingency of the future.
Consider the effect of an inflexible
embargo if Germany declared war
on England today. We could then
ship arms to neither England nor
Germany. But Germany, by reason
OF her seizure of the Czech munitions
works, would need no guns or shells
from the United States. Only Eng
land would suffer by our embargo.
There is nothing to recommend
law that in its practical effect favors
an aggressor and penalties the VIC
tim, no security for America in a
scheme that encourages interna-
tional lawlessness. The Hull pro-
gram and the Bloom bill would
return the United States to tradi-
tional policies Of international law,
with sensible restrictions on the
exercise of rights of neutrals. Our
munitions and other goods would be
available to all comers except that
belligerents must take title to all
purchases before shipment and no
American vessels could enter speci-
fed war areas. There is immeasur-
ably greater safety for America
under such a plan as this, with its
additional bans on war financing
and other forms of possible involve
ment, than in retention of the en-
barge remnant Of the 1887 Neutrality
Act with which the isolationists seek
permanently to straitjacket Amer
ica'S foreign relations.