Detroit evening times., 1945-10-31
MAI. Gen.
BARROWS
-WorId
In Review

DURING and after the first
~ world war. we loaned 10
other nations huge sums Of
money to aid those nations in
the prosecution of the war, and
10 rehabilitate them after the
war was over.
Nearly all Of these loans were
ultimately repudiated and lost.
Our public nursed strong
resentment over these repudia-
tions. and Congress actually linn
tied its own freedom TO repeat
such a program of loans.
BY 1910, the American people
were becoming apprehensive
that the power unleashed by
Hitler might conquer all of Eu-
rope and over-run the entire
world.
But we were still probably
immovable in our unwillingness
10 furnish loans directly TO the
Allies, TO help them resist the
Axis powers.
SO President Roosevelt recon-
mended and Congress adopted a
plan in a new guise, to aid our
Allies.
1t was known as lend-leaSe. It
differed from an outright loan
in that we were to lend or lease,
not sell or give.
The benefited nations were 10
make return out OF their own
resources as far as possible.
TINDER this name we fur
~ nished aid, mainly to Great
Britain and Russia, to the value
of more than $4,000, 100000.
There has been no public scan
dal in the administration of this
huge sum, although tn ere is
plenty of evidence that there
were extravaganza and waste,
and that our burden was greater
than il needed To have been.
On the other hand, il is clear
that our aid was a decisive fac
tor in enabling Great Britain to
Continue her resistance in her
darkest hours. and without it
there is serious doubt whether
Russia could have stayed in the
war.
As such il did not represent
an unjustitiable proportion of
the enormous cost of this war
to us.
In some respects lend-lease
worked better than the outright
loans between governments in
the first world war.
There was some return made
by the benefited countries in
goods that we needed and that
they were able TO spare.
This was particularly true in
the case of food. shelter, train
ing and bivouack areas. and
other facilities furnished our
troops by Great Britain and
Australia.
All benefited nations made
some returns Of critical materi-
ais, even if only in token
amounts.
And il was double important,
because ii saved us transporting
such materials as we received
over the enormous distances in
volVed in this war.
THIS program was vastly SUI
perior TO our practice in the
first world war. Then, we not
only loaned large sums TO the
French government, but paid in
cash, and at high prices, for
everything we got and for every
service or facility provided by
the French.
Promptly upon the termina-
tion of the war against Ger
many, the President ended fur
ther lend-lease, except to Russia.
which continued to receive some
supplies, reported 20 be equip
ment for the Siberian railroad.
The apparent object of this
continuance was to enable Rus
STA 10 join in the war against
Japan, which she finally did for
the last two days.
The object of this inquiry is
to ask what is TO become of the
lent material which is still un-
used The return of il TO our
possession was certainly implied
in the title of the operation.
The oxford dictionary states
that TO lend is to grant tenn
porary possession of thing on
condition of the return of the
same or its equivalent"
1t is becoming increasingly
clear that there will be no re-
turn of "the equivalent" of all
lend-lease granted to our Allies;
it is unlikely that we shall even
ask for 1t.
A large part Of the goods fur
niShed under lend-lease have
been consumed
This includes great amounts
of food, medical supplies, am
munition and fuel.
But there are still large
quantities of material in the
hands of the borrowers which
still belongs TO the United
States, as lenders, and which in
so far as they are usable, should
be returned TO US for DISPOSE
ton.
THE first reason that they
Il should be returned. apart
from the obvious one that they
are ours. is that We should see
to il that it is utilized TO their
best advantage