Wairarapa Times-Age WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 24, 1940. AMERICAN COMPLAINTS.

Wairarapa Times-Age, 24 January 1940, Page 4

Wairarapa Times-Age WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 24, 1940. AMERICAN COMPLAINTS.

WHAT the British Embassy in Washington lias called, m a notably frank statement, “an organised campaign by certain small but determined groups in. the United States to assist Germany” has been directed of late to stirring up leelmg against Britain in the matter of censorship ol: American mails passing through the British territory of Bermuda, and aso perhaps in regard to the detention of ships under the operation of contraband control. As some United States commentatois have admitted fairly, the mail censorship action taken )j Britain is perfectly justified. It certainly is not in doubt that Britain has a. well-established legal, right to seize the large quantities of diamonds which German sympathisers m the United States have attempted to forward to Germany, to be used in establishing credits in South-Eastern Europe. , ( , A New York newspaper has said that Britain s Hat, legalistic rejection” of the American, protest against the censorship of mails,

coupled with the tart if justifiable query: “Why have you not protested against the German method of sinking mails without warning?” is not helpful. The State Department cannot publicly admit that it will protest only to a point where protests hurt one side, but to continue protesting with the mental reservation that it will not be pressed to the point where it embarrasses the recipient is productive only of confusion, bad blood and misconceptions.

Tt may be hoped that a majority of thinking Americans will perceive that the trimming, petifogging and one-sided policy thus indicated is unworthy of a great nation. The essential facts disclosed are that the United States is making no protest against Nazi Germany’s wanton crimes, and is making a protest, of a kind, against Britain’s legal seizure of contraband. of war. Presumably the ill-grounded protest against the British, censorship of mails can do nothing else than die of inanition.

WAR EFFECTS ON TRADE.

A LARGER body of American opinion than has interested itself actively in the controversy over mail censorship and shipping delays may be behind the complaints that are also being made about the effect of British war economy measures on American export trade. Heavily reduced markets and depressed prices are anticipated in the American tobacco and cotton industries and it is stated that the United States is losing ground also to Britain in South American maikeis. Whatever the merits of these detail questions maybe, it cannot be forgotten that the total trade policy of the (united States is that, of a country which has sought and striven by every conceivable means to safeguard and advance its own interests.

Tn spite of “cash and carry” conditions and other intended safeguards, American war time trade appears to be accentuating in some important, particulars the economic difficulties in which the nation was already involved —difficulties most clearly indicated in the existence of an army of unemployed estimated to number some nine millions. The root cause of these diflieiilties, however, rather obviously is the narrow and illiberal trade policy which the United States has long pursued and is still pursuing even in these days when her Secretary ol State, Mr Cordell Hull, is untiringly and earnestly preaching the gospel of trade reciprocity.

There is no doubt, that. Mr Hull, is perfectly sincere in maintaining that reciprocal trade alone will remedy world conditions In which the major part of the purchasing power of many nations is being absorbed in war preparations and that'

Eighty per cent of the world is living on or below the poverty line and neutrals and belligerents are living on half rations.

To a really remarkable extent, the United States is a participant in these disordered economic conditions and the penalties they entail. Since American exports amount to only one-tenth of the total national production, internal rather than external causes must account largely for the measure of economic disorganisation that obtains in the United States and tor the existence within its borders of an army ol unemployed.

In view of the complaints that are now reported to be rile in American business circles, it is interesting to recall that Hie Swedish economist, Professor Gustav C'assel, stated not long ago that. North America was Hie region in which was Io be found the main cause for the reduction in lotal "world production that has occurred since 11)29. Observing Jha I the United Slates had been the chief sufferer, the Professor suggested that no slump at all need have occurred it the 1 ailed Slates had used its favourable balance of payments—an amount of 1,100 million dollars in 1938 —for importing raw materials with which Io keep its man-power employed, instead of applying these resources, as il has done, to the purchase of enormous quantities of gold.

There appears Io be no escape from the conclusion I hat under the restrictive trade policy which Mr Cordell Hull is endeavouring earnestly, but with very limited success, to modify, the United States bears a large share of responsibility for Hie crippling of world trade and production to which Hie warmongering nations oi Europe admittedly also aie making their full contribution. The adoption by the United Stales of a liberal and enterprising trade policy would impart a great impetus to production within and beyond ils own borders and would lay valuable foundations of future peace. It is staled, however,’that Air Hull faces the greatest tight of his career in defending his policy of reciprocal trade —-this in. spite oi the fact that there has been a heavy increase ol American exports to the countries with which agreements have been made.