U.S. NEUTRALITY.

Auckland Star, Volume LXVIII, Issue 31, 6 February 1937, Page 9

U.S. NEUTRALITY.

LOOKING TWO WAYS. Eminent Economist Criticises Policy. CONFLICT OF IDEAS SEEN. United Tress Association. —Copyright. WASITIXGTOX, February 3. The well-knoivn banker and economist, Jtr. B. M. Bnruch; appeared before the Military Affairs Committee of the House of Representatives, which is dealing: with neutrality resolutions. He said tin. . United States was trying to travel in opposite directions at the same time by endeavouring: to build up her foreign trade through reciprocal agreements and simultaneously voting for strict neutrality. Mr. Baruch paid this conflict of ideas must make certain countries hesitate to establish economic relations with the

United States, when they might be deprived of vital supplies in times of war. He advocated strong armed neutrality. "Who can believe that had we been ready to fight in 11117 we should have been subjected to the British interference and the German insolence which finally made us fight," said Mr. Biiruch. He uttered a warning that the cutting off of supplies of raw materials from belligerents would result in retaliation which would deprive the United States of such essential products as tin, nickel and rubber. The chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee of the Senate. Mr. K. Pittman, stated yesterday that reports to the effect that when' the I , resident of the British Board of Trade, Mr. Walter Runeitnan, was in Washington he received assurances that there would be no interference with shipments to Britain in the event of her being involved in war here, in his opinion, entirely without foundation. Such an attitude would be inconsistent with the policy of the Government, namely, noninterference in the affairs of other nations.