S
i T'
14
The Commoner
... 4r-.
VOL; 15, NO. 2
I)"
12
V T""W";-
Hi:
fc'
&
?.
f
I
I
v
Sr
I'A
Htt
'
)t
5-c
m--
w
The Proposed Embargo on Arms and
Ammunition :l
' It- ' ' .
;.... By Congressman Dan V. Stephens of Nebraska
Tho following speech was delivered in tlio
haise of representatives, Washington, February
2,1915:
Mr. Chairman: I wish to discuss briefly, prin
cipally for tho benefit of many of my constituents,
II. J. R. 377, which proposes an embargo on arms
and ammunition destined for the belligerents now
at war in Europe. There is a very vigorous prop
aganda being waged throughout tho United
States in favor of this resolution, with the re
sult that thousands of naturalized citizens of
this country are being misled into believing that
this nation is not now observing neutrality in its
intercourse with the belligerents.
Tho result of this agitation is the receipt of a
flood of letters and petitions by members of con
gress requesting them to support this resolu
tion. The petitions are nearly all alike, show
ing a common origin. The letters and
petitions almost always, directly or in
directly, ridiculo the president for t his prayer
for peace while we permit the export of arms
and ammunitions. The German-American is
among tho most loyal of our citizenship, and
these printed attacks, paid for no doubt at space
rates, have done him a great injustice by leading
some to believe he is not loyal to his own adopt
ed country. No greater mistake could be made. '
Tho naturalized American is for his adopted
country first, and he wants his adopted country
to keep hands off tho European situation, and
that is exactly what his country is doing.
One of my correspondents had been so inflam
ed by the misrepresentations he had read, he
was led to ask me if I had a son-in-law in 13ng-
land who had told me to oppose tho resolution,
which indicates the methods employed to injure
tho administration in the eyes of our natural
ized American citizens. For the benefit of my
correspondent and for tho purpose of qualifying
myself in the eyes of those who favor this reso
lution, and who usually charge everyone who is
not in favor of it as being a partisan of England,
I will state that I am a full blood German by de
scent on my own account. Upon tho account of
my wife wo have several first cousins, natives of
Germany by naturalized parents, who are now
fighting in the Kaiser's army, if they have not
already given their lives for their country. We
are very much concerned about tho welfare of
these relatives, and our natural sympathies for
Germany are very great. But we have no polit
ical sympathies whatever as between the bellig
erents. Wo refuse to permit the call of the blood
to bias our political Judgment in passing upon
a national policy.
NOT A MORAL QUESTION
Many, if not all, of my correspondents, base
their support of this resolution upon high moral
grounds. My own contention is that it is not a
moral question in a genoral sense at all. It is
purely an economical question at this stage of
our evolution. There is just one class of people
who have any logical right to consider this ques
tion from a moral point of view, and that class
is so small it ia not worth considering. In fact,
I am not certain that such a class exists, except
in theory. I refer to the class that Is in favor
of peace at any price; the class that is ready to
disband tho army, scrap the navy and demolish
our sea coast defenses and undertake to lead a
Christ-like existence in this world of riot, and
ruin, and rapine. Those who have faith enough
to embark tho nation upon tho sea of "Peace at
any Price," have a right to base their support of
this resolution on moral grounds; because if it is
wrong to sell arms to belligerent nations now, it
waB wrong. to sell arms and ammunition to them
in times of peace, when they wore preparing, for
this war. If it was wrong for us to make arms
and ammunition in times of peace for sale to
other nations at peace, it necessarily follows
that it ia wrong for us to make arms and ammu
nition to use ourselves; because If it is wrong
to make arms and ammunition to sell to others,
to bo used with which to kill their enemies, it
necessarily follows that it is wrong for us to
make arms and ammunition with which to kill
our own enemies.
Therefore, if there is any moral side to this
question at all, it leads us straight as a lino to
the absolute prohibition of the manufacture of
arms of any kind or character. And if wo adopt
this end of tho dilemma weare led absolutely to
the peace-at-any-prico program, and to the abso
lute prohibition of the manufacture of arms and
ammunition for war purposes. Wo would then
be led to an abandonment of our army and navy,
and our sea coast defenses, and accept whatever
consequences might follow. Now those who be
lieve in this doctrine of "peace at any price,"
have a right to base their support of this resolu
tion upon moral grounds. Those who do not be
lieve in it have a moral right to continue to sell
arms and ammunition to be used by belligerent
nations, because they contend that it is a moral
right for them to use them in the defense of
themselves. Therefore, I dismiss the moral
phases of this question as irrelevant and imma-'
terial, having no value in this argument. It is
true there will be many, either through super
ficial thinking or hypocrisy, who. will harp upon
our wickedness in permitting a few exports of
arms and ammunition, while at the same time
they will aid and abet their own nation in main
taining a reasonable army and navy against the
day we may want to begin the slaughter of inno
cents on our own account. It is an honest war
when we wage it, but brutal and unjust war when
waged by other nations. Brutal murder when
other nations indulge in the pastime of killing
each other, but when we kill it is ordained by
God. Let a belligerent blow up one of our battle
ships tomorrow, and the nation would blaze with
wrath, and congress would be mobbed if it did
not order the killing to begin at once. We would
pawn our last shirt to raise money to buy arms
and ammunition to revenge the outrage. Our
cla.p trap sentimentality would be shed, as the
skin of a snake is shed, showing glinting armor
beneath, and no doubt those hot headed partis
ans who have a sob in their voices as they plead
for an embargo on arms would be among the
first to grab a gun and start for the front to de
fend their country.
We are now spending about three-fourths of
the government's resource for war purposes
past and present, and the pressure for a larger
expenditure is great. It is not likely, therefore,
that the nation as a whole will suffer much of a
moral shock because some manufacturers of
?8uiP?!,Ifles secures a small order from one of
the belligerents for guns.
The facts are we are all quite human, and it is
most difficult for naturalized citizens of this
country not to favor their respective fatherlands
to the extent of injuring their own by impulsive
acts. I consider it very unfortunate that the dif
ferent classes of naturalized citizens of this
country should permit themselves become par
tisans under any circumstances. They ought not
to contribute to a propaganda in support of their
own respective fatherlands, which can not fail
to greatly injure the administration and embar
rass it in its diplomatic relations with oth'er coun
tries. The destiny of this nation is of more vital
concern to naturalized citizens of this country
who are protected by its laws than can possiSy
be their concern for the destiny of any of the
belligerents. They ought to be willing to . trSS
questfens of diplomacy to their own chosen rep
resolutives, the president and his advisers In
ternational questions can not be settled on tL
farm and in the workshop. They must be set
tled by the people's representatives.
THE PROPOSED REMEDY
It is commonly understood that we are shin
EinS, at juanUtleo of these munitions of war
to the belligerent nations which is entirely er
roneous, and on account of the allies hnvi
practically blockaded the ports of Germany aSd
Austria these countries are not able to 8ecu
any of these supplies. The friends of Ge?manv
and Austria therefore contend that wo H
immediately place an embargo upon Trm i and
ammunition because neither Germany n?r A,?
tria can secure them. The reasoning is not
sound, because whatever the tradesman has to
sell ho has for sale to anyone who has the mone?
and the desire to buy, regardless of whom thov
are or where they cpmo from. The constitution
of tho United States guarantees to our citizens
the right to pursue their peaceful avocations
without interference, and unless the action of
the citizen in his trade activities affects tho
peace and welfare of the natidn, the government
of the United States should not interfere with
him.
This amount of exports of arms and ammuni
tion is of so little consequence to the warring
nations that one is forced to the conclusion that
other motives lie back of this propaganda. The
noise that these propagandists .have made has
been sufllcient to lead the naturalized citizens of
my own district to believe that this country has
turned all of its implement factories into the
production of arms and ammunition for the
slaughtering pen of Europe.
OTHER SUPPLIES THAN GUNS
The motive back of the movement to place an
embargo on arms find ammunition is no doubt
to ultimately stop the exportations of all supplies
that go to support an army in the field. These
gentlemen who favor an embargo on arms and
ammunition know that if the resolution should
ever be considered at all it would certainly be
amended to make it effective by including sup
plies of every kind that an army can use. Such
a law as that would completely paralyze the in
dustry of the nation more effectually than did
the outbreak of war in Europe last August when
we found ourselves without the ships to move our
products. Products of every kind suffered a de
cline in price at that time, and if it had not been
for the general anticipation of the people that
the war would ultimately enhance prices, there
would have been a still greater decline. As ships
were procured and exports again began to move,
conditions improved correspondingly all over the
country. But even now, with ocean freight rates
increased' from three to fifteen times the rates in
force prior to the war, our ports are' still con
gested with products destined for Europe. The
Pennsylvania railroad has refused to take any
more grain for the ports at Philadelphia and Bal
timore, because tho yards are filled now with
thousands of cars of corn and wheat awaiting
ships to carry it abroad.
It requires Only a small amount of business
experience for one to see what would happen to
the prices of products in this country should an
embargo be placed on the real sinews of war
food and clothing, and the factory supplies, au
tomobiles, saddles, harness, tools, etc. The econ
omic disaster that would follow such legislation
would bankrupt the nation and cause widespread
suffering unparalleled in the history of this
country.
There is not the slightest prospect of such
legislation, but that does not dispose of the sub
ject for there are large numbers of citizens in
this country who are pressing for its considera
tion and who must be answered. The question
I wish to put to them is this: Are they ready to
make the sacrifice. There is np doubt about
where the road leads us, nor what the results
of such legislation will be. To place an embargo
on a handful of arms, comparatively speaking,
on the ground of humanitarfanism, and continue
to ship vast cargoes of supplies for the belliger
ent armies would make us ridiculous in the eyes
of the world.
AMOUNT OF OTHER EXPORTS
On the face of it the object of the resolution
is clearly intended to prevent, if possible, further
carnage in Europe. With that object I am
wholly in sympathy, but I do not want to be
fooled into believing that there is any value
whatever in the passage of that sort of a reso
lution. I deny that any such results will follow,
I am opposed to the resolution, and I am opposed
to any resolution that attempts to place an em
bargo upon th,e commerce jf the citizens of this
country who are carrying on legitimate trade. I
wish to call attention to the character of the ex
ports that wo are now sending to Europe. Take
for example the order for fifty thousand auto
mobiles reported to have been received by the
Ford Automobile Company fo one of the belli
gerent nations. These cars are capable of trans
porting a quarter of a million of soldiers, or
their equivalent in weight of provisions for the
army, a hundred miles in a single day over the
hard roads of Europe. There Was nothing ever
sold by a neutral nation to a belligerent in the
history of the world, which, under favorable
conditions would contribute so effectively to a
successful movement of a great nrmy.
inen following these 50000 automobiles will
h