WAR DEBTS PROBLEM

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXIX, Issue 21279, 5 September 1932, Page 5

WAR DEBTS PROBLEM

HOPE FROM UNITED STATES , , b \-v MR. BORAH'S CHANGED VIEW NEW YORK JOURNAL'S COMMENT Some signs of changing opinion in the United States regarding the war debts problem are contained in a recent development. Once an emphatic opponent oi cancellation, Senator Borah is now an advocate of consideration of that course. In a broadcast speech on July 23 ho told the people of the United States that there will be a time when it will be distinctly in the interest of the people <jf the United States to consider again the| question of debts, and he definitely predicted the cancellation of war debts upon tlao settlement of "other war problems." Deep-seated Cause of Suffering The full significance of his utterances is learned from a leading article of the New York Times. "The address on the Lausanne agreement and the war debts which Mr. Borah made over the radio," the Times writes, "showed him at his independent best. He boldly disagreed not only with the administration but with his own past position respecting the war debts. Four years ago he suppofted Mr. Hoover in calling for their due and resolute collection. Now he raises the question whether it is not for the real interest of the United States to reduce or cancel them. If there is to be an international economic and financial conference he favours our taking part in it. But he pours scorn upon the timid stipulation of our State Department that reparations and war debts must be wholly kept out of it. This would be like confining attention to trifling symptoms _ rather than dealing with the main and deep-seated cause of the disease from which the whole world is suffering. . "Senator Borah warned his hearers that he was speaking for himself alone. They were not to think of him as chairman of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, or even as an influential politician. But all this matters little. When a voice of reason gains utterance and a wide hearing, as his did on this occasion—awaking echoes instantly in London and Ottawa—the thing to do is to fix attention more upon what is said than upon the consistency, or otherwise, of the public man who said it.

Greater Menace than Asset "Senator Borah took full eognisance of the legalistic view of the war debts. They were contracted in the full expectation, and with the binding promise, that they would be paid. They represent, after their generous readjustment, the willing agreer ment of the debtors. The United States has undoubtedly a lawful right to demand their payment. But not all things that are lawful are expedient. Mr. Borah clearly perceives the futility of falling back upon the letter of our bond, as Speaker Garner would do, as also, - let our Republican friends take notice, Mr. Ooolidge would do. By the march of events the documents signed by our debtors have become, if not entirely obsolete, at least more of_ a menace to our well-being than a financial asset. If it be true, as Senator Borah has come to believe it is, that to cut down or wipe out the war debts would 'start wheat and cotton on the move, give employment to the unemployed and confidence and initiative to it is hard to challenge his conclusion that it would be money in our pockets to 'use the debt in any way, reduction or cancellation,' to make this great programme of recovery a success.' "Mr. Borah now conies forward as an ardent internationalist and an idealist. But lie also makes a strong appeal to common sense and business sagacity. All he advocates is that we be ready to sacrifice a little in order thereby to gain much. This is the true ground on which to call for a revision of our war debts policy. Prove that it is not to the large and long interest ot the United States to insist upon their collection, and you have gone far to show that any man who says or shouts that they must be paid to the uttermost farthing is going in opposition to the general welfare of the American people.",-