AMERICAN NEUTRALITY.

Hawke's Bay Herald-Tribune, Volume 81, Issue 69, 14 December 1937, Page 4

AMERICAN NEUTRALITY.

In connection with the Sino-Japanese war there have heen and continue to be of almost weekly, if not more frequent, occurrence, on the part of Japan, incidents of offence against the interests of neutral Powers which fifty years ago, or even less, would have resulted, if not in a declaration of war, then almost certainly in a severance of diplomatic relations. Especially may this be said of the two great naval Powers, Great Britain the United States. The so fre.quent repetition of these offences almost precludes any suggestion of their being really accidental and unintentional. In faet, on the face of them they indicate an indifference to the rights of those Powers that differs very little from complete contempt. And there does not seem to be much likelihood of their ceasing so long as the ' aggrieved Governments are content to accept readilv forthcoming apologies. . ) The latest of these incidents to be reported to us, the actual sinking by Japanese aerial bombs of an American war vessql, with considerable loss of life, is perhaps the most serious that has yet occnrred and cannot but touch very closelv the prestige and susceptibilities of the United States. It will therefore be of peculiar interest to observe how it will "be handled by the Government of that country. In this relation it has to be borne in mind that officially and diplomatically speaking, despite all the carnage, a "state of war" does not exist as between China and Japan, both having so far refrained from making any formal "declaration of war." That in itself only makes the offences that have been committed all the more heinous, because neither can claim as against nentrals the rights they might! exercise as declared belligerents. According to American law, however, it lies with the President at his discretion to proclaim that a "de facto" state of war exists as between any two or more foreign States. Thereupon the provisions of the Neutrality Act passed by Congress early in this year come automatically into operation. - ] These impose upon American citizens the following prohibi- ] tions, among others: 1. Export of "arms, ammunition and implements of war" to any belligerent. 2. Transport of any such material, no matter where from, iu - American vessels, 3. The iending of money or granting of credit to any belligerent. 4. Travel by American citizens on vessels belonging to a belligerent. And also, at the discretion of the President, 5. Transport on an American vessel of any article or commodity of whatever nature to a belligerent State. 6. The export to a belligerent State of goods of any kind until after "all right, title and interest thereiu has been tnansferred to a foreign Government or representative." This, known as the ' 'cash-and-carry" clause, means that while American citizens may sell to belligerents goods other than war material it must be for "cash on the barrel," leaving them with no concern in the goods reaching their destinuatiou. A close reading of these provisions will show how carefully they were designed to prevent any circumstance arising tliat might involve America in war for the proteetion of her nationals and their property. There does not, however, seem to have heen in contemplation any such incident as has now taken place on the Yangtse river, and curiosity, if nothing else, fs aroused as to how it will be dealt with. Notwithstanding submission to an immense expenditure on naval armaments, it is a complete obsession with the great majority of the American people, and probably with most of their Congressional representatives, that the country must be kept from becoming actively • implieated in any war, and to that end they are prepared to make almost any sacrifice. even of national prestige. Of this we have evidence in the rather belated call from several United States Congressmen for the withdrawal of American gunboats from Chinese waters. There would thus appear to bc but a very remote chance of the United States entering upon a war with Japan, thougli a demonstration of naval strength in the Paeific is in prospect. The only real question at issue would therefore appear to be as to whether President Roosevelt will make any move to invoke the Neutrality Act. There will doubtless be a very considerable voiume of opposition to any such decision. for it is quite easy to see that this would mean the forfeiture of a great deal of probably very profitable trade with both China and Japan that would go very much against American eommercial instincts. Probably, too, should any such step be taken it would. in a military sense, be much less detrimental to Japan than to China, with whom Americans are in sympathy and who has been deriving a good proportion of Ker military equipment and munitions, either directly or indirectly, from American sourees.