Evening star., 1939-10-30

Charles L. Ross. States bears out
the predictions based on informal
polls that the vote in the House will
be close
Sixty-three Senators-about the
number which had been counted for
the bill from the start-voted for its
passage. Thirty were on the other
side. Adding the three who did not
vote but whose views for or against
were announced, the victory for the
revisionists was by IS to 81.
Now it is significant that these 81
votes came from Senators represent
ing exactly half the States of the
Union. Seven of these "a States
Idaho, California, North Dakota,
Oregon, Wisconsin, Minnesota and
Massachusetts - went against the
neutrality bill with both their Sen
ate votes. The lineup here shows
how strong is the sentiment against
arms embargo repeal-for that is
the central issue Ct the controversy
in the West and Northwest. AS to
Massachusetts, where the Republi-
can Lodge and the Democratic
Walsh voted together against repeal,
it is fair inference that Irish-Ameri-
can antipathy to Great Britain
tthough this is not to be taken as
sympathy for Nazi-ism) had It's
weight.
Vote Shows Sectionalism.
Sc en- States is not a large show
ing, but in appraising the opinion
against repeal ana the probable vote
in the House It is important to note
that II other States contributed a
vote each TO the anti-repeal total.
The small part that sectionalism is
playing in the neutrality fight is
shown by the way these votes were
divided. Roughly grouped as to
areas, they came from Maine, New
Hampshire and Connecticut; Michi-
gan. Ohio. Pennsylvania. West Vir-
ginia and Delaware; North Caro-
lima and Louisiana; Missouri and
Kansas; South Dakota, Nevada,
Montana and Washington, and New
Mexico.
Prior to the final roll call on the
bill, there was vote on an amend
ment offered by Senator Clark Of
Missouri to insert an arms embargo
provision. On this test the anti
repealists got three more votes than
on final passage-votes from Iowa,
| Kansas and Colorado. Kansas has
been counted in the above list. but
Iowa and Colorado should be added.
Thus. there were 26 widely scattered
States from which votes were re-
corded against the lifting of the
arms embargo.
This demonstration of the
strength Of the anti-repeal cause
over a wide area helps to explain
why the managers Of the adminis-
tration bill in the House are max
ing no eXtravagant claims. Victory
for the bill by at least 80 votes
is said to be the prospect, but 80
votes are a precarious margin in
body as large as the Eouse-435
mefnhers-and as likely to succumb
to group pressureS.
Record viii Be Written.
On the neutrality issue a record
has been written in the Senate, and
showing how overwhelming is the
feeling in the United States against
our participation in the war Not
Senator spoke on the issue who did
not proclaim his profound convic.
ton that we should keep out. De-
spite the desire of the country for
an allied victory over Hitlerism,
and despite the tightening of the
neutrality bill to provide every prac-
ticable safeguard against our in
volvement in the war, the opposition
to embargo repeal was able to mus
ter the votes of one-third of the
Senate on the theory that no con-
sideration warranted step to-
ward war; This fact, through its
revelation Of the depth and scope
Of the country's desire to stay at
peace, ranks in Importance with the
passage of the bill. Unquestionably,
the debate in the Senate has helped
to put the quietus on any war
party" that may have existed in the
administration and has helped to
end the defeatist feeling that some
how we would be dragged into" the
war. Europe has been put on un-
mistakable notice that the firm in.
tention of this country is to stay out.
One may feel that the anti-re-
pealists had the wrong side of the
argument and rejoice in their defeat,
and yet agree with Senator Clark
of Missouri that in helping to serve
this notice and in strengthening the
n-interventionist cause in the
United States. they have gained a
moral victory"