any one who violates the "world law" must be dealt with as an outlaw, like Dillinger, draws an unfounded analogy between private law and public law, ignoring the sources and processes of both.
The logical deduction is not that the basis of neutrality legislation should be altered but that its detailed provisions should be tightened. The American public was persuaded last August that mandatory neutrality is the only neutrality which will protect this country against becoming involved in a major foreign war, and it has even more reason to believe so now.
All advocates of permissive neutrality under presidential discretion must not forget that, in the diaries of Colonel House and the autobiography of Secretary Lansing, there is now available a complete demonstration that such a burden of moral, political and economic choice is too heavy for any president to bear and leads straight to war. The public demand for mandatory and impartial neutrality is not based on theory; it is based on the bitterest experience in this nation's history--an experience kept fresh in memory by more than seventy thousand graves, by the defaults of the debtor Allies, by the economic prostration from which we are so slowly recovering.
Moreover, picayune as are our export interests in Italy and Ethiopia, there has already been sufficient anger displayed by business interests at the operations of the present mandatory legislation, and at the threat of its extension, to show that, should a major war find this country buttressed only with permissive neutrality, a profit-maddened commercial bloc would make the life of any administration intolerable until restrictions were____________________