DENIAL DISPUTED

Wairarapa Times-Age, 6 February 1939, Page 5

DENIAL DISPUTED

PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT & FOREIGN POLICY

AIRING IN SENATE LIKELY

COMMITTEE MEMBERS STICK TO THEIR STORY.

ALLEGATIONS OF RETREAT. By Telegraph—Press Association—Copyright WASHINGTON, February 4. A full airing on the floor of the Senate of what occurred at the conference between President Roosevelt and the Military Affairs Committee is likely to follow the President’s declaration that it is a deliberate lie to say he put the defence frontier of the United States of America in France.

Indignant Senators stick to their story. Reliable newspapers, after again checking sources of information, have not withdrawn earlier accounts. It is suggested that President Roosevelt sent up a trial balloon, though the “New York Herald-Tribune” observes that such an amiable metaphor can hardly be used when the President “simply eats his words.” It is pointed out that he retreated similarly, though not so far, after his foreign policy speech in Chicago in 1937, and after declaring support for Canada in 1938'.

The “New York Times” comments: “There is reason to doubt whether matters discussed on Tuesday were intended to be kept confidential.” It adds, “It was obviously impossible with 17 listeners. The President chose the worst possible way to further his own foreign policy and followed this up, quite unfairly, with an omnibus attack on the Press. If he will lead the way in proposing an amendment to the Neutrality Act, enabling American influence to be used more effectively in restraining aggression, he will have prompt support from all who agree with him that there are methods, short of war, in bringing home to the aggressor governments the sentiments of the American people.” Declaring that the President has fallen into a ditch of his own digging; the “Herald-Tribune” says: “The present episode is a new record in advance and retreat for this or any President.

A cablegram from Washington on Saturday stated that, addressing a Press conference, President Roosevelt branded as “a deliberate lie” a report that he had placed American’s new defence frontier on the Rhine. He asserted that the foreign policy of the United States was unchanged, and added that the American people were beginning to realise that things they read and heard were "pure, unadulterated bunk.”

Mr Roosevelt restated his foreign policy thus: — (1) No entangling alliances;

(2) Encouragement of the world trade of all nations, including the United States;

(3 Sympathy with any and every effort to bring about reduction of armaments;

(4) National sympathy with the peaceful maintenance of the political economic and social independence of all nations.

Mr Roosevelt pointed to a stack of newspapers on his desk and declared that they all contained articles and headlines giving an erroneous impression of the Administration’s aims and intentions. He described the implications place.d on the secrecy of his conference with the Congressional committees as “100 per cent, bunk.” He asked the pressmen if they thought he should make public information from the United States Intelligence Service on matters which their agents believed true but could not prove immediately.

POLITICAL TACTICS

AVOIDANCE OF DIRECT ISSUE. PRESIDENT AND HIS CRITICS. (Received This Day, 9.10 a.m.) WASHINGTON, February 5. The foreign policy debate this week will turn on the question of whether President Roosevelt intends the United States to back England and France, except with man power, in the event of a European war. Senators regard

this as more important than the controversy which raised it—whether the President put the American defence frontier in France.

Mr Roosevelt’s statement on policy on February 3 was based on the principles of the American tradition, and was completely acceptable to the isolationists. The running attack must be confined to its lack of detail. It is expected that Senator Pittman, chairman of the Foreign Relations Commtitee, will be asked to amplify his statement that the only way to prevent war in Europe “would be by such an equal balancing of military power that neither side would be willing to undertake the chance of defeat.”

The object of the questioning will be to discover whether or not the Administration intends to throw the weight of the United States on the side of this “equal balancing of military power,” on the assumption that this could only mean facilitating the rearming of England and France, while withholding munitions from other nations highly armed.

The bulk of the American Press charges President Roosevelt with muddling, but at least his practice of advancing and retreating has the advantage of preventing a clear issue rising between the isolationists and his own followers. He does not want a decision on a specific issue to be forced while, as now, there is a risk of a setback.

According to the “New York HeraldTribune,” the probability is that there will be no concrete issue unless and until a major war breaks out. The

trouble for the isolationists is that the issue, in such an event, may come too late. Their position has weakened visibly since the Munich outbreak. Thus, although he would like to see the Neutrality Act amended, Mr Roosevelt may continue to talk generalities. A move to amend the Act will certainly precipitate a trial of strength. NAZIS FAVOURED ACCORDING TO LABOUR MAN IN FLORIDA. EXPORT OF RAW MATERIALS. (Received This Day, 9.10 a.m.) MIAMI, February 5. Mr Mathew Woll, a Labour leader, charged the United States with giving preferential treatment to Germany, enabling the Nazi Government to obtain millions of dollars worth of war material. He declared that the Treasury, defying President Roosevelt's policy, had set aside the Anti-Dumping Act by allowing the export of cotton, scrap iron, fats and oils' at 33 1-3 per cent above world prices, Germany paying for these in manufactured goods.