From a policy of all out aid to Britain, perhaps even to the point of sacrificing in the emergency weapons intended for the United States armed forces, this country would be thrown back almost overnight to the necessity of throwing up a new front line of defence in the western hemisphere.
This desire to learn the full scope of Britain's war plans does not betray a suspicion of the British, I was assured in high Washington circles, but is motivated by the Washington Governments insistence "upon building our defences in the most practical long-range manner."
Administration leaders in Washington told me in private conversation that they believe Britain means to fight it out to a finish, particularly now that billions of dollars in United States—anywhere from US$2,000, 000,000 to US$10,000,000.000—is sight, They pointed to the recent statement of the British Prime Minister, Mr. Winston, Churchill, indicating that without formidable American aid, the best Britain could hope for would be a stalemate and a negotiated peace.
But Mr. Churchill added—for the benefit of American opponents to all out aid to Britain—that a negotiated peace would only mean war.again later "on worse terms" and "the "chance of setting the march of mankind along the high roads of human progress would be lost and might never return,"
However, speculation in Washington as to the possibilities of a negotiated peace is not limited to non-interventionist quarters.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.