ARMS EMBARGO

Gisborne Herald, Volume LXVI, Issue 20058, 3 October 1939, Page 5

ARMS EMBARGO

REPEAL EXPECTED SENATE DEBATE 60 VOTES CLAIMED GALLERIES JAMMED THREE WEEKS’ SESSION U-BOAT CAMPAIGN EFFECT (Elec. Tel. Copyright—United Press Assn.) (Reed. Oct. 3, noon.) WASHINGTON, Oct. 2. Opening the debate on the neutrality measure, which is expected to last for more than three weeks, Senator K. Pittman, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, urged the repeal of the arms embargo, declaring that it was not a true symbol of American neutrality. “There is no cause for fear now that we will be drawn into a brutal widening conflict,” he said, ‘‘yet we, as representatives of a peace-loving democratic people, have not the right to refuse to take into consideration that the war or a war that develops from it may not some day be brought to the gateway of our own country.”

The garreries were jammed for the debate early in the day, and large crowds of disappointed men and women thronged the Capitol corridors. Extra police, augmented by G-men, were called on to keep order.

Before the opening, the Democrat leader, Senator Barkley, told the press that he was certain of GO votes for the new measure. A Senate majority is 49. “We should get it through in two weeks,” he declared. Centre of Attack Senator Pittman centred the attack on the provisions of the present Act permitting American ships to carry any goods except arms to belligerents. He declared that the danger did not lie in the types of goods exported but in the fact that American vessels were used. Senator Pittman continued that he was impatient with the arguments that the United States entered the Great War to collect debts. It was inhuman and illegal killing of American seamen that was responsible. “Is there any doubt that Germany, contending that her submarines cannot safely come to the surface and search and, seize contraband, will eventually pursue the same policy as before?” he asked. “Is there any doubt, if the war lasts long enough and the situation is desperate enough, that they will resort to any form* of destruction?”

Little Excuse for Destruction

Continuing, Senator Pittman said: “If our vessels cannot carry on commerce with belligerents and belligerents know it, there will be little excuse for the destruction of American vessels with inevitable loss of life.”

He pointed out that Americans were compelled to make great sacrifices for peace under the cash and carry plan—the most stringent restrictions ever imposed by the Government. He warned the embargo advocates: “We must be careful not to further obstruct our exports. The conditions as regards industry and labour in this country to-day are so deplorable that further obstructions would bankrupt large sections.” Mistaken Belief Senator Pittman said that many Americans mistakenly believe that the prohibition of the sale of American armaments entirely eliminates the United States from any part in the destruction of human lives, but the United States were already participating in mass murder in China, Japan processing large quantities of American raw materials for armaments. If the embargo was necessary to keep the United States out of war it should be placed on all materials for the manufacture of arms and ammunition, but he did not consider the embargo necessary.

Senator Pittman sharply criticised the opposition supporting the granting of 90-day credits, and said that the latter considered the cash payment in international dealings credits would not conflict with the Johnson Act, which prohibits nations defaulting in war debts from floating loans in the United Staics.