U.S. ARMS EMBARGO

Greymouth Evening Star, 3 November 1939, Page 7

U.S. ARMS EMBARGO

REPEAL NOW ASSURED

HOUSE MAJORITY SIXTY-TWO

[BY CABLE —PRESS ASSN-. —COPYRIGHT.]

(Received November 3,2 p.m.)

WASHINGTON, November 2.

By a majority of 62, the House of Representatives supported the repeal of the arms embargo, ensuring the swift enactment of Mr. Roosevelt’s Neutrality Bill.

The conferees will meet on November 3, to compose the differences'between the Senate and the House Bills, the main variance being that the House Bill contains a modification of the present arms ban, while the Senate Bill removes the ban. Both measures include the cash-and-carry provision.

The procedure- at the- conference of the two Houses is expected to be merely the formal approval of the Senate’s version, enabling both Houses finally to approve the measure late to-morrow or on Saturday, whereby the Bill will become effective, at the latest, early next week.

The House of Representatives procedure permitted a three-days’ debate on instructions to the conferees, after which the House began voting on the series of instructions, all designed to amend the Senate’s Bill. The first, Mr. Wolcott’s amendment banning Governmental agencies financing belligerents’ purchases, was rejected by 228 votes to 196. The second amendment, moved by Mr. J. M. Vorys (Ohio) was rejected by 244 votes to 179. The third amendment, moved by Mr. Shanley, was rejected by 243 votes to 181. The House rejected a motion de manding the insertion.of the mandatory inclusion of the arms embargo, thus ensuring its repeal.

THREE HOURS’ DEBATE.

The three hours’ debate preceding the voting epitomised every argument offered during two months of national discussion. The" ’ Administration brought influential speakers, including Messrs Bankhead, Wadsworth, Rayburn. The last-mentioned said: The United States is not verging on. war. It is nowhere near war.” Mr. Wadsworth said: “The people of the United States will not go to war. unless they are subjected to a studied and persistent series of overt acts of violence, which is not expected/’

The tenor of all the speeches was the necessity of keeping the United States out’of the war.' Those in favour of repeal argued that'the new legislation decreased the danger, and the opponents -of repeal argued that the urgent danger, by the lifting of the arms embargo, would be increased.

Mr. Fish argued that repeal would tell the world that the United States was taking sides, and actually participating in the war. The repeal was supported was 220 Democrats, 21 Republicans, one Farm Labour member, and one American Labour members, while 36 Democrats, two Progressive and 143 Republicans opposed it.