Senator Pittman's views on American Far Eastern policy have already been mentioned. Senator Thomas of Utah spoke with equal frankness during the debate on the neutrality bill—"We probably will nol be neutral if war should break out affecting] that part of the world where the Phillipines are. Tam sure we would, not be neutral if our Interest in the Far East wore being questioned. We should likely refuse to remain aloof funder those circumstances."
'The Seriplures evidently erred in stating "Where your treasure is there will your heart be also" for America's. economic interests in' those paris of the world over which she shows most concern are far less than in these parts of the-world from whicn she strives to associate herself as much as possible.
There are two, considerations respecting America's present neutrality policy which should be born in mind. In the first place it is not final but i still developing. The temporary Jact was only extended til! May 1937. Ils terms represent the highest com: Jmon factor of a whole series of divergent views. Congressional leaders were anxious to avoid pitting rival theories. against each other on the eve of an election campaign. Developments will take place in the future which will be less disappoint: ing to the League of Nations advvoeates. and more in line with State Department ideas. In the second place, while the basle principle of American neutrality remains "impartiality" and the purity of that conception has not been sullled by: Jany moral reflections on the rights or wrongs of the case, nevertheless there has been a great and might almost say revolutionary change in the application of that principle.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.