Evening star., 1941-01-31

duIllOl l1C IllC oCCI CICpdly VI WAL
to lease property, over which the
Secretary of War has control,
which would not be revocable at
the option of the Secretary of
War.
The expression "notwithstand-
ing the provisions of any other
law" when read together with the
whole Of the bill, as amended,
does not in any way modify,
repeal or change such legislation
as the Walsh h-Healey Act, the
wages and hours law, the eight
hour law, the Wagner Act, or
other similar provisions of do
mestic law because there is no
inconsistency between them and
this bill. These laws continue in
full force and effect and are in
no way affected by this bill. In
sofar as the powers granted by
subsection Cd of section 3 are
concerned, giving the Secretary
of War, the Secretary of the
Navy, or the head of any other
department or agency, when
authorized by the President, the
power to manufacture or procure
defense articles, no discretion is
given to waive domestic legisla-
tion of the kind mentioned.
Bill Authorizes No Extension
OF Credit to Defaulters.
The expression "notwithstand-
ing the provisions of any other
law" does not repeal the Johnson
Act. BY it's specific terms and by
its spirit, that act does not apply
to this Government or to public
corporation created by special
authorization of Congress or to
public corporation controlled by
the Government. The Johnson
Act only prohibits the extensions
of credit by individuals or private
corporations to a foreign country
which has defaulted on its debt
to the United States. This bill
does not in any way authorize the
extension of credits by private
individuals to any foreign country
which has defaulted on its debt
to the United States; it simply
sets up a method for supplying
material aid, in the interests OF
our national defense, on straight
acknowledgements basis.
Nor does this bill repeal the
provisions of the Neutrality Act
of 1899, which by its terms is
applicable to private persons and
corporations ana not to the Gov
ernment itself. Section is the
only provision of the Neutrality
Act which might possibly apply
to the Government.
That section is not by its eX-
press terms made applicable to
this Government, although 1t
does apply to Government cor
porations such as the Export
Import Bank. 1t should be noted,
however, that in the course of
the discussion of that section
on the floor of the Congress on
the Neutrality Act of 1899, some
of the members of Congress
thought that it would apply to
the extension of credit by the
Government. See Q939) IS Cong.
Rec. 1855, D. l.; Q939) IS Cong.
Rec. "a. D. I. However, even If
it should be assumed that the
spirit of section 7 of the Neu-
trality Act makes it applicable
to the Government, it should be
modified by this bill in so far as
extensions of credit by the Gov
eminent may conceivably be IN
volVed and only to that extent.
Paragraph % of section 3 ca
of the bill empowers the Presi-
dent, when he deems it in the
interest of the national defense,
to authorize the Secretary of
War, the Secretary of the Navy
or the head of any other depart
ment or agency of the Govern
ment "D to manufacture in
arsenals, factories and shipyards
under their jurisdiction, or other
wise procure, any defense article
for the Government of any
country whose defense the PreSi-
dent deems vital to the defense
of the United States"
At the present time, the Gov
eminent has no statutory author
ity to manufacture military and
naval equipment in its arsenals
or to procure such equipment
from private manufacturers di-
rectly on behalf of any foreign
government, except for the Amer
can republics pursuant to the Act
of June IS, 1910 Pub. Res. No. 83,
18th CongJ. This paragraph
proposes to enlarge the Govern
ment's power in this respect to
meet the present situation.
International Law Justifies
Principle of Self-Defense.
This paragraph does not vio-
late international law insofar as
the manufacture or procurement
of defense articles may be carried
on for belligerent country whose
defense is vital to the defense of
the United States. In the first
place, it is a firmly established
principle of international law
that nation is justified in acting
in its own self defense. Second
ly, mutually is an accepted prin-
ciple of international law as we'll
as of equity, and a nation which
violates the basic rules of inter-
national law is not in a position
to claim that another nation, in
the interests of its own defense,
is not complying with the less
basic rules of international law.
Furthermore, the Kellogg-Briand
pact, which is part of inter-
national law, not only was in
tended to outlaw force as means
of resolving international dis
putes, but its violation has also
been regarded by many distin-
guiShed international lawyers as
giving any signatory the power:
ITO decline to observe toward
the state violating the pact the
duties prescribed by international
law. apart from the pact for a
neutral in relation to a belliger-
ent; land to- supply the state
attacked with financial or ma