AMERICAN NEUTRALITY

Evening Star, Issue 23324, 21 July 1939, Page 9

AMERICAN NEUTRALITY

SHELVING OF LEGISLATION ‘‘AH INVITATION TO WAR" OUTSPOKEN PRESS COMMENT Press Association—By Telegraph—Copyright WASHINGTON, July 19. Discussions at White House became extremely heated, especially exchanges between Senator Borah and Mr Cordell Hull. Senator Borah apparently challenged the authenticity or candour of “ confidential reports,” of which Mr Hull and President Roosevelt spoke so much as showing a threat of further crisis in Europe. Senator Boruh said he considered his own sources of information just as reliable as those of the Department of State, whereupon Mr Hull took offence and everybody, including the President, spoke at once. Mr J. N. Garner, tho vice-president, stopped a useless discussion by asking whether there were enough votes to force the Neutrality Bill to the floor of the Senate and everybody was compelled to agree that there were not, whereupon the President laughed and everybody regained good humour. The meeting broke up in a most friendly way, Senator Garner seeing to it that Senator Borah and Mr Hull shook hands cordially before parting. A further canvass of the Congressional situation disclosed that there is little likelihood of action during the present session of Congress with regard to the Japanese embargo proposals. The ‘ New York Times,’ in a leader, labels the postponment an “ invitation to war ” and calls the step a stunning defeat for the Administration and a hard blow for all those who believe tho best hope of keeping tho United States at peace lies in a policy of concerted action to make the outbreak of a general war less likely. “In blunt terms, this is an invitation to aggressor nations to use war or a threat of war to achieve their conquests. There is no use attempting to disguise the fact that the results in the Congress will bring satisfaction in Berlin and Rome. It will be read there as evidence that American foreign policy is still uncertain and confused, and still working at cross purposes to the great disadvantage of our real national interests, but they must doubt whether the result represents the final consideration of the question on its merits and they must note the strong belief on this side of the Atlantic that in any war which they may start tho United States will ultimately play a part. No Neutrality Act can prevent the American people from favouring their natural allies in any ultimate test of strength between democracy and dictatorship. The goodwill and moral support, and in the long run more than likely tho physical power of the United States, will be found on the side of those nations defending the way of life which is our own way of life and the only way of life which' the Americans believe to be worth living.” The leader, which is probably the strongest expression of opinion from any American, newspaper relative to the present neutrality situation, occupies two columns.