has been offered here, or, perhaps I should say the so-called
neutrality bill that lias been offered us.
Our President said at Chautauqua, N. 7., on August 14 of last year:
Industrial and agricultural production for a war market may give immense fortunes to a few men. For the Nation as a whole It produces disaster.
Do not forget that. The President said that to the people during the last campaign, and the people answered him on November 3.
In his address at Chautauqua the President also said:
Nevertheless, If war should break out again In another continent, let us not blink the fact that we would find In this country thousands of Americans who. seeking Immediate riches, fool’s gold, would attempt to break down or evade our neutrality.
I charge we are evading neutrality now. We are violating the promise of the President to the American people in this measure which the Foreign Affairs Committee has offered to you. In this bill we are attempting to take care of those thousands of Americans who are seeking fool’s gold. Let us not deceive ourselves that the McReynolds bill will cause any great heartache to those who desire to sell their goods to nations at war. The McReynolds bill allows this dangerous trade to continue without the least restriction.
This amendment Is for the purpose of correcting one of the evils existing in this so-called neutrality measure. My amendment, simply stated, provides that materials of war can be embargoed. They are just as necessary for the fighting of a war as arms, and the sale of such materials Is Just as dangerous to our peace.
The President further said:
It would be hard to resist that clamor. It would be hard for many Americans, I fear, to look beyond and realize the Inevitable penalties, the inevitable day of reckoning that comes from false prosperity. To resist the clamor of that greed If war should come would require the unswerving support of all Americans who love peace.
You on this side of the House subscribed to that position in your districts before your people. You also supported the Democratic platform, which reads—
We shall continue to observe a true neutrality in the disputes of others; • • • to guard against being drawn by • • • private trade into any war which may develop anywhere.
Now, what do I propose under this amendment? I propose to stop a false boom. If we do not stop this boom, which can develop very easily, through the use of the $7,000,000,000 of foreign money now in this country, such a boom would have dangerous results, for, with the drying up of the funds, a profitable trade would be cut off and hundreds of Americans thrown out of employment. It would indeed be a hard, if not impossible, task to resist this clamor for continuance of this trade. Such action would place us right baefc. where we were in those dangerous years of 1914-17. It was this policy more than any other one which forced us into the World War. We must now take over against any repetition of this disaster. In the words of the President:
If we face the choice of profits and peace, the Nation will answer, must answer. "We choose peace.”
It Is the duty of all of us to encourage such a body of public opinion in this country that the answer will be clear and for all practical purposes unanimous.
This can be done only by having the power to embargo war materials made mandatory.
Mr. LUCKEY of Nebraska. Mr. Chairman, we are facing a very serious situation in this House at this time. We are considering now the most important section in this bill, and here we are gagged, the time cut down, so It is impossible for us to offer the amendments which we in a bona-fide way propose to offer.
When this bill came before this House 2 years ago we were given 20 minutes on each side to debate one of the most important bills that has come before the Congress of the United States, to keep this country out of war. Last year, again, we were gagged to 40 minutes. Today, when this matter is up for consideration, we are again gagged, so that we cannot offer our amendments with sufficient time for debate.
What is the force back of this? Oh, it is the greed and lust to carry on trade and gamer ill-gotten gains from behind the war lines. The American people are calling for a real neutrality bQL Instead of giving them a loaf of bread, we are giving them a stone.
I am sorry the situation has arisen, but the American people will not stand for profiteers rooking profits out of war by carrying on a trade which will make millionaires again, as it has in the past, and gamer tremendous amounts of blood money.
I wish I had had an opportunity to offer my amendment, with adequate time to discuss it. We are here giving the President discretionary power. I have great confidence in the President, but you recall what took place when this problem was put before President Woodrow Wilson in the World War. Finally, he succumbed to the pressure, loans were made to belligerents, and inevitably we were drawn into war. The same loophole is left open here. I do not want anybody, whether he is a Republican President or a Democratic.
President, to have the power to make it possible for us to be dragged into war. I want the Congress of the United States to have that power as the Constitution gives it to us.
Mr. BOILEAU. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. LUCKEY of Nebraska. Yes.
Mr. BOILEAU. As I understand the amendment, which the gentleman will offer in a few minutes, provides for mandatory neutrality. Is that correct?
Mr. LUCKEY of Nebraska. It does.
Mr. BOILEAU. It strikes out the discretionary features and makes the provisions of section 4 mandatory?
Mr. LUCKEY of Nebraska. It does.
This amendment makes mandatory a cash-and-carry policy on all goods exported by sea to any port or place which can be reached only by traversing those waters adjacent to a belligerent nation and which are within the zone of belligerent operations. This section does not in any way apply to shipments of articles and commodities either by land or on the Great Lakes. The reasons for confining our policy to exports by sea alone are simple and are not subject to question.
First. No effective or permanent neutrality policy can be established which has for a fundamental basis the assumption that our relations with Canada can be placed upon the same basis as our relations with non-American states.
Second. The protection of American lives and property during periods of neutrality is one of protecting those lives and that property upon the high seas exclusively. The only two wars in which we have participated that grew out of maritime or neutral maritime difficulties found their basis upon questions affecting sea-borne commerce and sea-borne passenger carrying.
Third. In any future war In which Canada may become a zone of belligerent operations any neutrality policy we might have would go by the boards. The continuance of the Monroe doctrine, the protection of this country, and the protection of vast American commercial interests would alone govern our action in such a war.
This amendment makes mandatory a cash-and-carry policy on all sea-borne commerce to such places as can be reached only by traversing the actual zones of belligerency. The reasons for making mandatory these provisions are simple and undeniable.
First. International law and international practice establish the fact that goods considered by the belligerents to be contraband shall be subject to seizure and that the ship carrying such goods be equally subject to seizure. Limited contraband is subject to detention and requisition by the power seizing those goods.
Second. The head of a neutral state or the government of that state has no power to declare what is and what is not contraband or limited contraband of war. That determination rests solely with the belligerent powers.
Third. The determination of contraband and limited contraband in warfare is made solely upon the grounds of self-preservation and self-interest.
