Mr. REES of Kansas. Will the gentleman reserve his
point of order?
Mr. McREYNOLDS. I reserve the point of order if the gentleman desires to make an explanation of the amendment.
Mr. REES of Kansas. Here is an opportunity, if we really want to stay out of such entanglements as we had in the World War. Let us keep American ships out of belligerent waters, whether they are carrying ammunition, implements of war, merchandise, or whatever commodities they may be.
Mr JOHNSON of Texas. This matter is taken care of in another provision of the bill, section 4 (a), in reference to prohibiting American ships from carrying other commodities.
Mr REES of Kansas. I am not sure the paragraph is clear and definite enough.
Mr JOHNSON of Texas. Yes. I think if the gentleman will examine the bill, he will find section 4 (a) will take care of this situation.
Mr. REES of Kansas. Then I withdraw the amendment. But I still believe that the provision in section 4 does not take care of the situation, for the reason that section 4 of the bill leaves the question at the discretion of the President as to whether any articles or materials are to be excluded from American ships, and then section 4 provides that the President shall from time to time definitely enumerate the articles-and materials which shall be unlawful for American vessels to transport. My amendment makes it unlawful for any American vessel to carry any commodities to any belligerent state that is at war or where civil strife is proclaimed to exist. I believe the law should be mandatory that American vessels should not be allowed to carry my commodities to belligerent nations in time of war.
The amendment was rithdrawn.
Mr. HILL of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike out the last word.
Mr. Chairman, only in Committee of the Whole do we have a chance to vote on these amendments, and that is not a record vote. Therefore, I think it is only fair to those of us who desire that we be permitted to tell the Members of the House and people throughout the country where we stand on these amendments.
I voted for these amendments. I shall vote to recommit the bill, if the question comes up in order to have the Pittman amendment come up for consideration on this bill. If we cannot get that amendment, I am going to vote for this bill, and I will tell you why. It is a step in the right direction toward peact. Even though it is a very weak step, I am willing to take this step with you. I may say here, as I said the other day, I am against what is known as the policy of frt edom of the seas.
I am opposed, secondly, to giving discretion to the President in this case, not because I do not have a great deal of confidence in the present President—I have—but because during war, there is hysteria, there is provocation, there is pressure, and there is propaganda, which even the President of the United States cannot withstand. Therefore I am gainst giving discretion to the President.
Third. I am in favor of ha ing a peace quota on those things which are not war implements. This was the amendment we tried to pass on here a while ago.
Fourth. I believe the United States should refuse to give protection not only to cargoes but also to ships which are carrying implements of war.
Fifth. I am against all profits in war.
Sixth. I will go a step further and agree with my friend the gentleman from Mississippi [Mr. Rankin], who said the only solution is not only to take all profits out of war but to let the Government produce and construct all war implements. I am willing to go with him In that efTort, but until we achieve it I want to take all profits out of war.
Lastly, I want to speak of the amendment ofTered by the gentleman from New York iMr. Fish I, in which he suggested that during peacetime, as well as in time of war, we should refuse to permit people In the United States to send Implements of war into any country. Why? I hear people on the floor of the House cry ‘Teace, peace”, and I vonder if in their hearts they really want peace. Some people want peace but they want it in such a way as to ship supplies to Spain. Let me say if the modern Sancho Panzas and Don Quixotes in Siuon want to ftgnt each other, let them go to it, but I for one want to keep from sending any implements of war to them to enaole them to carry on their fight. It is all right to ship the necessities of life and medical supplies to them, but that is all. As to implements of war, let us prohibit their export in time of peace, as well as in time of war.
The objection made by the chairman of this committee was that the amendment was introduced by a Republican. Mr. Chairman, a great Republican whom all of us, Democrats as well as Republicans, honor and revere, Abraham Lincoln, was charged with being an abolitionist, the epithet of that day. What was his reply? He said, “I will go with the abolitionists as long as they are right, and I will turn from them when they are wrong ”
Therefore, if some Member on the other side of the House, Mr. Fish, in this Instance, introduces an amendment which will prevent the United States from shipping Implements of war during times of peace, I have the right to follow him if he is right, even though he is a Republican.
[Here the gavel fell.]
Mr HILL of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to proceed for 3 additional minutes.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Washington?
There was no objection.
Mr. HILL of Washington. Another thing said by the chairman was that this was not introduced in the committee room. Has it come to such a pass that here on the floor of the House amendments cannot be offered ana supported? I think the mere fact it was not offered in the committee should not preclude us from supporting it.
I am afraid we are forgetting 20 years ago—1917. I am afraid we forget the causes of war and their consequences. The gentleman from Oklahoma got up on the floor of the House here and said:
Our trade must be protected, not only that of the shippers but the trade of the people. Does the gentleman forget that the World War cost the people of the United States $40,000,000,000? Does he forget that the Allies today owe this country $11,000,000,000? Does not this offset all the trade of the United States during war? I am afraid we forget the blood that was shed in thai war. I am afraid we forget our soldiers lying on the fields of France. I am afraid we forget 20 years ago, and since that time, the deception of the European powers when they came begging for money to arm themselves again. I am afraid we forget the ending of the four horsemen of the Apocalypse during that frightful war and for years thereafter. I am afraid we forget the terrible injury to the morale of our whole people. I am afraid that we forget that it almost destroyed our moaem civilization.
Mr. Chairman, a great English poet, Rudyard Kipling, wrote one of the finest poems, I believe, In the English language—The Recessional—and this is the way he closes it:
Lord God of Hosts be with us yet
Lest we forget, lest we forget.
I wonder if we should not remember, and not forget, the years of 1917 and 1918 as a lasting lesson on the futility of war? [Applause]
Mr VOORHIS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the pro-forma amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I am intensely interested in this subject. I am afraid I am being forced to the conclusion that, as a matter of fact, the House of Representatives is really not ready to pass judgment on this question. [Applause.]
I had hope we could amend this measure to make it str ong and frank and clear-cut. Already I know we cannot do so. I shall vote for it, I suppose, as the best thing we can get, but I shall do so with heavy heart.
I believe that until we can come to the place where we can face squarely and honestly the fact that on the one hand, if we insist on trade and freedom of the seas, we have to expect to sacrifice American men in war; and, on the other
