Evening star., 1941-07-19
Trade Blacklist

IIQQe DIOCkIiSt
Publication by the Government of
a blacklist" containing the names
of 1900 Latin American firms and
individuals believed to be acting in
the interest of Germany or Italy
should be received for what it is-an
unpleasant but nonetheless neces-
sary step in implementing our ma
tional policy of curbing the aggressor
nations.
Two principal purposes are ex-
pected to be served by the publica-
tion of the list. First, it will prevent
any trade with the prescribed firms
or persons except by license, and
that, in practical effect, means no
trade at all. And, second, it will
result in freezing all sources of credit
in this country which have hereto
fore been available to the blacklisted
firms.
In other words, so far as leaks
through Latin America are con-
cerned. we have become a partici-
pant in the total economic war
against Germany and Italy, and we
are using the blacklist as weapon
to deny them access to any Amer
lean goods and to prevent them from
using indirect dollar credits in this
country for propaganda or other
purposes.
In view of the Importance of the
step which has been taken, it is in
teresting to review this Govern
ments attitude on the blacklist
question during and before the first
World War.
Throughout most of 1916-prior
to our entry into the war-we were
engaged in a bitter controversy with
Great Britain over the British black
list then in effect. Persons and firms
in the United States had been
blacklisted, and this, in the judg-
ment of the State Department, was
an action which violated our rights
as a neutral and which called for a
most vigorous protest to the British
government. We fatty refused to
accept the British move to place
Americans on an lex parte" black
list and the Acting Secretary of State
called the attention of the British
government "in the gravest terms to
the many serious consequences to
neutral rights and neutral relations
which such an act must necessarily
involve"
The British replied by pointing out
that their blacklist was not directed
against neutral trade, that it was
part of the general belligerent cam
paign to weaken the enemy, and
that the only disability suffered by
listed persons was that British sub
jectS were prohibited from giving
them the assistance of British credit
and British property.
After the declaration of war by the
United States, however. our policy
underwent complete change. On
October 6, 1917, a Trading With the
Enemy Act was passed which made
it unlawful for a person in the
United States, except with a license,
to trade or attempt to trade, directly
or indirectly, with any person he
knew or had reason to believe was
an enemy or an ally of an enemy.
On December of that year the War
Trade Board, following a study and
possibly a virtual adoption of the
British and French blacklists, made
public an enemy trading list"
containing the names of 1900 firms
in Latin America. In May of 1918 it
was announced that France, Great
Britain and the United States had
adopted practically uniform" lists,
and a new edition of the trading
with the enemy list containing 5000
names of firms in Latin America and
other countries was made public.
Thus, it may be seen that the
blacklist idea is not new. In fact, all
that is new in this Governments
action of Thursday is the seeming
indication that democracies have
come to appreciate the advantages
that lie in taking the initiative in
economic as we'll as military matters.