Evening star., 1939-09-30
Embargo Repeal Held
Step Toward War
Believes U. S. Must
Retuin Bon on Arms
And Munitions
ro the Editor Of The Star.

70 the Editor Of The Star:
have noted that you, together with
various other persons and interests who
desire the United States to lend aid and
assistance to the cause Of England and
her allies in the present war. have CEN
tered your attack upon what you have
termed the "so-called Neutrality Act"
You have chosen to base your argument
for the repeal Of that act upon the Oft
repeated contention that 1t does not
effect neutrality for the reason that Eng
land is in need of munitions, the export
OF which Is prohibited, while Germany
has an ample supply. and, consequently.
that the embargo is unfavorable to Eng
land and favorable in that respect to her
better-situated enemy. You would re-
peal the act and apparently substitute
therefore a compromise plan known a.
cash -and-carry" whereby any belliger-
ent might purchase munitions Of war
from us II 1t paid cash on the barrel
head" and carried the goods away in its
own ships. To those who wish to ally
this Nation with the cause Of Great
Britain the desirability of cash and
carry" over the present law lies in the
fact that 1t would permit England, who
has complete command Of the seas, to
obtain all munitions it desires, while ut
the same time denying that privilege to
Germany, whose ships are safely bottled
up by the British fleet.
On the basis Of these facts, the high
degree OF inconsistency in the contention
that the embargo should be lifted be-
cause it is "unneutral" casts doubt upon
the sincerity Of those who make that
contention. While 1t is true that the
embargo does prevent Great Britain from
obtaining from us the materials of war
which she desires, it imposes q like re-
striction upon Germany and all other
belligerent nations. The act is in itself
absolutely indiscriminatory in its appli-
cation, applying with equal effect to all
nations In state Of war. II because of
circumstances over which we have no
control, the embargo may in a purely
negative way prevent the powers with
which we are In sympathy from using US
as a source Of supply. that is perhaps
unfortunate, but that fact must not
blind us to the more vital interest of
the American people which the embargo
was designed to protect, namely, that of
keeping out Of European wars. Ger
tainly, it can by no stretch Of the imaei.
nation and by no strained Interpretation
OF the rules of international law be
deemed unneutral for one sovereign ma
ton to refuse to contribute the weapons
OF destruction to other nations who are
bent upon destroying themselves. On
the contrary, it might be argued with at
least equal weight that to repeal the
embargo under the circumstances which
now exist would constitute a positive
unneutral act against certain of the bel
hgerent powers. Since Germany cannot
hope to trade with us under any condi-
ton because of the presence of the Brit
Ism Navy, the repeal of the embargo for
the obvious purpose Of permitting Eng
land to purchase the munitions she de-
slres would undoubtedly be a positive
step toward taking sides in the conflict
between those countries, q step which we
may reasonably expect may provoke re-
taliation. Under such circumstances. I
am convinced that the repeal of the
embargo will render more diflcult our
task of keeping out of the war, and this
task rather than that Of rendering aid to
one or more Of the warning nations
should be our chief concern.
That the repeal of the embargo will
definitely and irrevocably place us on
the side Of the allies and thus greatly
enhance the probability of our entering
into destructive and demoralizing war
cannot seriously be denied. It will be
the hrst great step toward making the
cause of the allies our cause, which in the
normal course of events will inevitably
result in making their battles our battles
For that compelling reason, although I
am not blind to the emotional appeal in
the allied cause, the frightful danger
that the repeal Of the embargo will push
US farther along the road toward war
must deter us from permitting our SYM
pathies to sabotage the legislation which
we, at time when our heads were cooler
felt was an essential safeguard to our
neutrality. GUY O. FARMER
Arlington, Va.
September is.