NEUTRALITY LAW
REVISION HOPES KILLED
COMPLETE ROUT NARROWLY ESCAPED
SENATE OPPOSITION
WASHINGTON, July 1
A rebellious House of Representatives last night killed President Roosevelt's hopes for revision of the neutrality law at this session when they adopted by 200 votes to 188 legislation virtually re-enacting the pi'esent law, including the Repub-lican-sponsored provision for an export embargo from which American warplanes are excluded. The measure will now go to the Senate, where an adamant isolationist bloc has threatened to prolong the session all summer rather than permit the passage of the Bill in the form the Administration desires. Defeated in their efforts to prevent inclusion of the arms embargo clause, the Adminisration leaders in the House narrowly escaped a complete rout. A motion to send the Bill back to the Foreign Affairs* Committee, which would have had the effect of defeating the Bill and continuing the existing neutrality law, was turned down by only two votes. UPROARIOUS SESSION. The harried leaders fought desperately through an uproarious session which lasted far into the night, and made three attempts to remove the arms embargo. Both the Speaker, Mr. William Bankhead, and the majority leader. Mr. Samuel Rawburn, stepped into the well of the House to plead personally for the defeat of Mr. Vorys's arms embargo amendment, which the latter carried by 214 votes to 173. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee will take up the Bill on Wednesday. It is feared that, unless Mr. Roosevelt influences them, they will approve a motion deferring further consideration till January. SUBSTITUTE BILL LOST. The Administration offered a new neutrality measure, but it was lost by 180 votes to 176 votes. It was similar to the Bloom Bill, except that it eliminated: (1) The modified arms embargo amendment written in by the Republicans yesterday: (2) the provision for a Presidential proclamation of combat zones; and (3) all authority for the extension of short-term commerical credits. The manoeuvre was an attempt tokill the modified embargo without resorting to a vote on it. Many- members who were against the embargo would not care to go on record as being against it. The substitute Bill eliminated the embargo without even mentioning it. The new Bill was to operate upon the President of Congress declaring the existence of a state of war, and provided:—lt would be forbidden to sell arms or ammunition to a belligerent; to ship any commodities to a belligerent until the title was transferred to someone other than a United States' citizen; to make loans and credits to belligerents, except ordinary commercial credits and short-term obligations of not more than 90 days; and to solicit funds in the United States on behalf of a belligerent. In addition, the President could deny the use of United States ports or territorial waters to the submarines or armed merchantmen of a belligerent. The major change from the present law was the elimination of the phrase "implements of war" from the embargo provision. Legislators said that this would permit the sale to belligerents of aeroplanes, automobiles, oil, and other commodities which are banned at present. REPERCUSSIONS ABROAD. The Secretary of State, Mr. Cordell Hull,' today reasserted the Administration's demand for neutrality legislation similar to that which the House has turned down. Both Mr. Hull and the Speaker, Mr. Bankhead, expressed the opinion that the refusal to repeal the arms embargo might have serious repercussions on the international situation. Mr. Bankhead said that the action of the House would "cause the troublemakers of Europe to draw the conclusion that there is no concerted action in the United States between the executive and the branches of the Legislature." Mr. Bankhead drew comfort from the modification of the embargo, and said that the terms of the House resolution might permit the export of gunforgings and parts as well as unassembled components of ammunition. Mr. Hull said that the unamended Bloom measure was not only best calculated to keep the United States out of. war, but, what was all important at this time, it was best calculated to make a far greater contribution ! than could the present law to discouragement of an outbreak of war.
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/EP19390703.2.67.2
Bibliographic details
Evening Post, Volume CXXVIII, Issue 2, 3 July 1939, Page 9
Word Count
688NEUTRALITY LAW Evening Post, Volume CXXVIII, Issue 2, 3 July 1939, Page 9
Using This Item
Stuff Ltd is the copyright owner for the Evening Post. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Stuff Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.