Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

U.S. NEUTRALITY

SHIPPING RESTRICTIONS [by CABLE —PRESS ASSN. —COPYRIGHT.] WASHINGTON, October 20. The Senate group which framed the amendment to liberalise the shipping restrictions has started a movement to compensate American shipping companies for any losses imposed by the shipping restrictions. They say they have planned to submit such a measure to the next session of Congress. Meanwhile two Republican representatives have proposed legislation to curtail the possible discretionary powers of the President in dealing with the European war situation; but there is no indication that it has the backing of a solid minority. Mr. Jesse P. Woolcolt (Republican, Michigan) has introduced a Bill intended to prevent disguised lending by the Government to belligerents. It specially places Government agencies under the Johnson Act and prohibits the investment of the Stabilisation Fund in currencies and securities of belligerent Governments. Mr. John McDowell (Republican, Pennsylvania) has submitted a resolution to create a committee to table a report on the emergency powers the President possesses under various existing laws. Senator Barbour then assumed the cudgels, noting that the United States I cannot help Canada under the existing neutrality law, and he contended that an attack on Canada would not only violate the Monroe Doctrine, but would force the United States into war. “Under the present law, the United States can sell aeroplanes to Russia for re-sale to Germany, while they are barred to Canada, with whom we have lived in peace for a century.” HITLER “MAD DICTATOR” Senator Ellenden violently attacked Flerr Hitler as a mad dictator, and an insatiable despoiler of men and nations, and a violator of treaties. He then asked why should America be afraid of offending him, by doing what it wishes in the way of sales of munitions? Senator Johnsen (California), who opened the debate, labelled as idiotic the assumption that, if Herr Hitler were to conquer Europe, “we will be next.” He added: “Again England in the play of Power politics has no equal, and when this war is over she will be at the same old' game, at which snobbish Americans will still be trying their hand.” Senator Johnson concluded: “The repeal of the embargo will place us in the shadow, walking down the bloody path of war.”

BAN ON SUBMARINES. (Received October 21, 11.30 a.m.) NEW YORK, October 20. Mr. Roosevelt explained the submarine ban. He envisaged territorial waters as being to the three-mile limit, but insisted that it was flexible, and could vary up to hundreds of miles, depending on the circumstances under which the limit was created. The President declined to discuss the possibility of placing the same ban on surface warships. He said that submarines and warships are not alike, and it would be like tryirig to add apples and pears. He said he had no indications that the other Pan-American countries would follow the submarine ban.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/GEST19391021.2.35

Bibliographic details

Greymouth Evening Star, 21 October 1939, Page 7

Word Count
475

U.S. NEUTRALITY Greymouth Evening Star, 21 October 1939, Page 7

U.S. NEUTRALITY Greymouth Evening Star, 21 October 1939, Page 7