tions today, I say again it is an important omission in the
bill of the importance of the measure that is before us
today.
I ask the Members to give respectful attention to this most important corollary. Here is something that we are writing into our permanent statutes.
I have been reluctant to come to the belief that we should give discretionary power to a Chief Executive, not because I lack faith in the great man who now occupies that seat, but because some others may follow and because someone may abuse the power that we today give to our President if we pass the bill in its present form and it eventually becomes law.
I do now ask the membership of this body, and I do ask the conferees that may try to reconcile the differences between the Senate concept and the concept of this body as to what should be final law, to consider this matter of the control of communications and propaganda, radio, and correspondence, and cables in time of great emergency or in times of actual war.
The idea Is not original with me. I am a diligent reader of the Philadelphia Record, because I like its frank enunciation of editorial policies and because I like its complete analysis in its financial page. This idea was born at about the time this controversy started in the mind of the editor of the Philadelphia Record, and to him I am indebted for it.
I have given it a great deal of thought since I first saw it, and I have spoken to some of the thinking members of the press and to some of the thinking citizens of my own district and of this body since that time. I think it Is something that deserves our careful and close attention. I telephoned this afternoon to the librarian of that paper, and I hope to include that editorial as a part of my remarks, and I shall withhold them until such time as I receive it. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to incorporate in my remarks a copy of the editorial to which I have referred.
The editorial is as follows:
[From the Philadelphia Record of Oct. 19, 1936]
NEWS MUST BE NEUTRAL, TOO
What are the pillars of American neutrality?
No shipment of munitions.
No credit to belligerents.
No American protection for citizens who Insist on traveling in war zones.
To these add one further important factor—
The most strenuous efforts on the port of the Government to see to it that the American people are kept fully informed as to both sides of any foreign conflict.
For the same reason that there must be an embargo on goods, the State Department must make every effort to circumvent any nation which, for propaganda purposes, tries to put an embargo on European news to the United States.
During the World War the British held the European end of the trans-Atlantic cable and censored all war and diplomatic news. For that reason only the allied side of the case could be presented here and the atrocity stories faked by the Allies, as well as the soft pedal on the American dispute with the British over our neutrality rights, were powerful factors in leading this country into war with Germany.
That situation must not be allowed to arise again.
We must stand ready to accept the fact that the British shall control the sources of most American newspaper information on Europe.
Although Great Britain is not at war, it Is already exercising that power to further its own propaganda interests here.
The refusal to allow the Italian spokesman, Baron Pompeo Alois!, to relay a radio address: to the United States is a flagrant example of the British method.
The State Department, the Navy Department, and the Communications Commission in Washington are reported agreed that the British action was a violation of a treaty with the United States. The State Department is contemplating sending a note of protest to London.
More to the point than such a protest would be an official statement to the American people by Secretary Hull and the President, pointing out that the British have violated a treaty and warning the public to be very cautious about taking sides on the basis of what news is allowed to filter through from Europe. The State Department should also use its embassies and legations more for the purpose of informing the American people concerning the true state of affairs abroad. Some newspapers, such as the Record, do their best to present both sides of all foreign conflicts. But the task is difficult, especially in any case involving Britain. British propaganda methods are so much more subtle and effective than those of any other nation, that foreign news, almost invariably, takes on a pro-British tinge.
The ties of language and the similarity, superficial at least, between our institutions and those of Great Britain form another hold which the British have upon American public opinion. During the World War there was a little group of well-informed citizens who believed that President Wilson could have kept America out of the war simply by keeping the public informed as to the true state of our relations with Great Britain during that period. The British systematically, flagrantly and defiantly violated American “rights” during the war, and in the opinion of many there existed at least as much basis for our going to war with Britain as for going to war with Germany. Secretary Lansing deliberately obscured the diplomatic struggle with the British in a mist of legal verbiage, although the causes of conflict were very real. At present we must pursue exactly the opposite course. The public must be kept informed of every international move affecting the United States.
It is folly to expect that the British will not establish a censorship over news cables in event of another war. It is up to the American State Department to see to it that such a censorship does not accomplish its object.
The CHAIRMAN. The Chair states to the gentleman from Minnesota that the gentleman will have to get that permission when we get back into the House. The time of the gentleman from Minnesota has expired.
Mr. KLOEB. Mr. Chairman, I insist on the point of order.
The CHAIRMAN. For what reason?
Mr. KLOEB. For the reason that the amendment offered by the gentleman from Minnesota is not germane to section 4. Section 4 deals entirely with the export of articles and materials other than actual munitions of war. The gentleman’s proposed amendment deals with communications, radio and otherwise, and, therefore, is not germane to the section to which it is sought to be applied.
The CHAIRMAN. Section 4, subsection (b), deals with the exportation of commodities. As stated by the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Kloeb] this amendment Includes communications, cables, radio, and mail dispatches, and it is certainly not germane to section 4 of the bill. For that reason the Chair sustains the point of order.
Mr. FERGUSON rose.
The CHAIRMAN. For what purpose does the gentleman from Oklahoma rise?
Mr. FERGUSON. Mr. Chairman, to offer an amendment.
Mr. McREYNOLDS. Mr. Chairman, let us see if we cannot come to an agreement in respect to time for debate upon this section and all amendments thereto.
Mr. FISH. I would suggest not less than half an hour.
Mr. McREYNOLDS. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that all debate upon this section and all amendments thereto close in 30 minutes.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection?
Mr. LUCKEY of Nebraska and Mr. KOPPLEMANN reserved the right to object.
Mr. McREYNOLDS. Mr. Chairman, I move that all debate upon this section and all amendments thereto close in 30 minutes.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the motion of the gentleman from Tennessee that all debate upon this section and all amendments thereto close in 30 minutes. The question was taken; and on a division (demanded by Mr. McReynolds) there were ayes 82 and noes 61. So the motion was agreed to.
Mr. KVALE. Mr. Chairman, a parliamentary inquiry.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will state it.
Mr. KVALE. Will the Chair advise me if the amendment which I offered, and which was ruled out of order, will be in order if offered as a separate section at the proper time?
The CHAIRMAN. The Chair, of course, cannot pass upon that until it has actually been offered by the gentleman. At the proper time, if it is offered, the Chair will attempt to rule on it.
Mr. KOPPLEMANN. Mr. Chairman, a parliamentary inquiry.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will state it.
Mr. KOPPLEMANN. Earlier in the afternoon I submitted an amendment, and the Chair ruled it out of order under
