U.S. FOREIGN POLICY

Grey River Argus, 21 September 1944, Page 5

U.S. FOREIGN POLICY

Both Parties Divided

QUESTION OF ENLARGED PRESIDENTIAL POWERS. (Rec. 9.0) NEW YORK, Sept. 19. The “New York Times” Washington correspondent says: Senator’ Hull, Secretary of State, indicated to the Press that it would be fair to expect Britain, America and Russia to reach a full agreement quickly on all points raised at the Dumbarton Oaks Conference. He did not discuss the reasons for the delay of an agreement, but emphasised that the first phase of the conference might take longer than was anticipated. The correspondent adds: It is noteworthy that two Republican Senators, Messrs Ball and Burton, whom Senator Hull summoned for a conference last week, addressed the Senate today in favour of the American plan for an international security organisation. Senator Ball, who is reported to have presented Senator Hull’s viewpoint, especially stressed: (1) The necessity for the rapid creation of a security organisation; (2) the desirability of .authorising the Administration to use United States forces to prevent and repel aggression without specific Congressional approval; (3) the need for American support of a security organisation, even if we do not get a perfect solution of all of the political boundary problems throughout the world. Senator Ball said the necessity of seeking Congressional approval for the use of United States forces against an aggressor would defeat the purpose of the proposed organisation. because.it would take Congress ,at least a month to reach a decision, whereas the Germans conquered Poland in 26 days. The “New York Times” says: The debate was the prologue of another’ great Congressional debate ton United States foreign policy, .and it confirmed that both the Republicans and the Democrats are internally divided on the question.