Evening Star Newspaper, June 2, 1940, Page 36

THE SUNDAY STAR, WASHINGTON, D. C, JUNE 2, 1940—PART TWO. Lloyd George Blames Leopold For Allies’ Defeat in Flanders Belgian King ‘Opened the Door to Butchery,” Says Ciritic, Weighing Great Britain’s Chances of Repelling Invasion By David Lloyd George. LONDON —As I am writing this ar- ticle, in the tranquillity of the heather- clad moorlands of Surrey, I can hear the thudding of guns fired in what has been justly described as the greatest rear-guard action ever fought in any war, The government wisely has decided to reveal gradually to the public some of the truth about the real character of this battle. It was a fight to enable the Allied troops in northern France and Flanders to withdraw from that area without suffering the enormous losses inseparable from disordered re- treat. The inconceivable and unex- pected treachery of the Belgian King, rendered what was necessarily mm-‘, cult and dangerous operation still more precarious. His government, true to their sense | of honor, promptly repudiated his deed of shame. The army he commanded was defending its native land against raiders who had invaded it without the shadow of a pretext and who mercilessly shot down its defenders. The French and British soldiers whom he betrayed were there at his personal supplication to help him and his country in their hour of distress. Turned on Protectors. They came from two countries that Just over 20 years ago had sacrificed the lives of millions of their bravest sons to kave the libefties and independence of Belgium. And yet when hundreds of thousands of valiant young men from the same countries came at his call once more to fight the same battle against the same foe, without warning he sold them to captivity or death. He cal- lously arranged with the aggressor to clear the road and open the door that would facilitate the butchery of his pro- tectors. What will be the effect of the Leo- poldian treachery? As far as the fate of the encompassed and trapped British and French forces in northern France is concerned, it was wholly ruinous. At the moment of its occurrence they were oftering to the overwhelming masses of the German Armies—in tanks, airplanes and men—fierce resistance. That the Germans themselves acknowledged. There was just a chance that they | would delay the German advance long enough to enable the French offensive in the south first to close the gap and ! then break through to the aid of the | hard-pressed British and French forces ! in the north. It is open warfare. There sre no entrenchments to be stormed. I cannot conjecture how high were the chances of such an eventuality if the Belgians had not surrendered. . But the bare chance of its succeeding cannot be ruled out. The break-through at Sedan was so unexpected that the French were utterly unprepared for it. There were no re- serves to throw in to drive the enemy back before he widened the breach. It was a question of giving time for a sufiicient arrest the flow of German armored divi- sions through the gap. The bombing of the important railway junction at Lyons, simultaneously with the Belgian inva- | sion, delayed seriously the bringing up of reserves from the south of France. Evacuation Only Hope of Allies. The Leopoldian betrayal made evacua- tion our only hope of saving the Allied ' Armies of the north for future fighting | The Germans knew 1t | and there cannot be any indiscretion in | in other areas. saving so now. There is no semblance of a rout. The withdrawing divisions of the British and French fought one of the most superb rear guard actions in history, I met a young soldier who had just escaped from one of the battlefields of French Flanders. He was only 19 years of age and belonged to a territorial bat- talion. He gave me a vivid account of the methods employed by the mechanical columns constituting the German van- guard which tore throygh the vitals of the French, captured Laon, Amiens and Abbeville, and swept along the coast to the Channel ports. There has been nothing like it since Attilla rushed through the cities and plains of Italy | with his swift horsemen. The British battalion—a few hundred | strong—to which this young territorial belonged, was in occupation of a small, unfortified French town. There they were attacked by a mass of huge tanks, 40 in all. They were working in con- junction with a large number of bomb- ing airplanes. They had no infantry eupport. When the German tanks reached the Bravery Is number of French divisions | to be brought up from other fronts to | town they were greeted with artillery and machine gun fire from its defenders. This forced them to seek cover. The airplanes then undertook the task of bombing the British troops out of their sheltered positions. As there were no British airplanes available, the aerial bombardment was terrific and shatterea the' buildings in which the British were intrenched. 3 Germans Revealed Training. He told me that there seemed to be | complete understanding, maintained by a system of signaling, between the | bombers and the attackers. It was evi- | dent that this kind of combined at- tack had been perfected by long and careful training. It must have taken | years of practice to have brought these mechanical columns to such a pitch of perfection in this novel method of pene- | trating through the enemy lines and dis- organizing his forces. A few machine- | gunners issued from the tanks and si- lenced the British artillery by mowing | down _the gunners. Had there been any British fighters in the air, my informant was convinced that this mechanical column could have been driven off. He told me that he had met on the transport men who had suffered defeat in other combats. They | also complained that there was not a | single Britsh fighter in the skies to pro- tect them from the German airplanes. It was not the fault of our gallant air- men. We know how they have to fight against great odds, but we have not enough to go around. What will the Germans do next? Will i they turn to the south and attempt to capture Paris and break up the armies | of France? Or will they concentrate on the destruction of the hated island on | which they cast the blame for this war? They do not really believe it, but that kind of accusation is the unvarying pre- | liminary to every German attack on another country. The stream of abuse directed against England points to Britain as the next object of their special attention. At least, prudence dictates the urgency of our acting on that as- | sumption and taking every measure to | repel attack. Conditions Favorable for Invader. What form will it take? Will the Ger- man Fuehrer make an attempt to invade England? Philip of Spain with his armada failed—so did Napoleon with his specially constructed barges. case they were foiled by the British Navy, The conditions today are more favor, able for an invader. Long-range guns can sweep the channel. Mines can be laid, and there are incalculable possibili- | ties of aerial superiority. One must not forget the “secret weapons” with which | Hitler threatened some months ago that he would destroy England. Nevertheless, | cannot land sufficient numbers of men, | maintain a firm hold on the soil of Britain. A more formidable factor is the menace of the air, with the bombing of ports, airdromes, and more particularly facto- war are being manufactured. Workers are toiling as they never did before and are turning out machines on an un- | precedented scale. All will depend on whether they protection while they are laboring to fill up deficiencies that ought never to have occurred. Ttaly’s Course Is Question. In all this, the attitude and probable action of Italy must not be put out of reckoning. Where does she stand? There can be no doubt of her sympathies, | and certainly none as to her expecta- tions. | journals have repeatedly announced that intervention. But she is still tarrying. Is it due to pressure from President Roosevelt—or from Herr Hitler? The latter suggestion may sound fantastic, but T have heard it made by men whose judgment is by no means to be despised. Why should Hitler ask her to keep out of it? One reason may be that he feels confident that the Germans can finish that he does not wish to be embarrassed in the final settlement by making him- self responsible for the extravagant claims of Italy. She is undoubtedly awaiting the signal from the North, and the Allied govern- ments would add to their mistakes an- other serious blunder if they were not prepared to meet a fell blow from that | quarter. (Copyright, 1940.) Not Enough. In each | I am still hopeful that the Germans | great guns and tanks to establish and | ries and work shops where weapons of | can be given sufficient | Her statesmen, broadcasters and | the hour has at last struck for Italian | it off without any help. Or it may be | U. S. Sends an Expert North Moftat Takes a Keen Eye to Canada THE last American Minister to Canada got the job because he was a good and rich Democrat with New Deal flavor, His predecessor won the appointment because the administration was still grateful to him and because the title of Minister would crown a life devoted to winning political titles, The newly- nominated Minister was chosen for a mission. While James H. R. Cromwell and Daniel Calhoun Roper were our en- voys in Ottawa, relations between the two great North American nations remained under the benign influence of the good neighborliness fostered by President Roosevelt. But now problems have arisen which simple expressions of good will do not solve. It is time for expertness. Jay Pierrepont Moffat is Mr. Roose- velt’s choice as expert successor in the amateur line of Roper and Cromwell, Mr. Moffat is & careerist. For 23 years diplomacy has been his life. He learned the rudiments in the capital of a king- dom which was erased last month in four | days—The Hague, Netherlands. He learned how to be a diplomat under fire in the capital of another missing na- tion—Warsaw, Poland. He was a secre- tary of Embassy in Tokio and in Con- stantinople and of Legation in Berne. During the 1920s he devoted himself to a lost cause, disarmament, acting as technical adviser to the Geneva Confer- ence. He was secretary of Legation in Ottawa and Consul General in Sydney, Australia. For almost three years he has been chief of the State Department’s Di- vision of European Affairs, Moffat Knows Pacific Situation. With special reference to his assign- ment in Ottawa, the particular point of Mr. Moffat’s past on which to center attention is his Australian tour. The | duties of a consul general ordinarily are limited by commercial and tourism con- siderations. He is a character without political importance. Consul General MofTat, however, did not fit on this nar- row shelf. In his commercial clothing, Mr. Moffat took some political sound- ings. The problem was this: The four great Pacific powers were the United States, Canada, Australia and Japan. The interests of the first three were opposed to the interest of the last. A closer relationship between the United States and Australia seemed advisable. On the surface, this was admitted in Sydney, but Australians, with an in- tense loyal leaning toward England, hes- fiated to take diplomatic steps toward Washington. Just a bit over two years after Mr. Moffat left Sydney, Australia they were exchanging Ministers, The Canadian and the United States governments have been represented in each other’s capitals since 1927. The question about Canada which besets this Government is the fact that any policy of “continental solidarity” is incom- plete so long as half a continent remains aloof from it. Canada will not join— certainly she has not joined, despite suggestions and overtures—the Pan- American Union. Canada is part of America, but she leans toward England. That is all very well in normal, quiet times. But in a war which threatens England and which has brought the hint that the crown of England might be moved from London to Ottawa, the task becomes urgent for the United States to enlist a closer working aggreement with Canada. The English capital would be in Canada only if there were no more England for Canada to lean | toward. What Will Canada Do? President Roosevelt already has made it plain that he considers Canada cov- ered by the Monroe Doctrine. “ “I give you assurance,” he said in 1938, a month before the Munich peace, in a speech at Queen’s College, Kings- ton, “that the people of the United States will not stand idly by if domination of Canadian soil is threatened by any other empire.” The Monroe Doctrine is a policy whose defense requires either a show of arms or a vigorous diplomacy. The American and the United States announced that | | treaty | 1 I | Groton, By Blair Bolles. JAY PIERREPONT MOFFAT. —Harris-Ewing Photo. Government is committed to going to bat for Canada. What will Canada do for us? Mr. Moffat will take a sounding. The man who is going north for the accomplishment of the closer rapport with Canada is fitted for his peculiar task not only by his proved diplomatic influence with governments of the Brit- ish dominions, but by his broad experi- ence with the problems raised by the war in Europe for all its participating nations. As chief of the Division of Eu- ropean Affairs, Mr. Moffat is the State Department’s principal working agent for contact with the ambassadors and ministers in the thick of the war zone. When Poland was invaded, Mr. Moffat was among those who gathered for the dawn conference with President Roose- velt. When Undersecretary Welles went abroad to learn the real news in Europe, Mr. Moffat went with him. Even though his journey had its moment of humilia- | tion, when a London newspaper tabbed the United States with exceptional un- derstanding of what the European prob- | lem amounted to. Sixth in Line of Diplomats. The minister-designate is what undip- | lomatic men in undiplomatic moments call a “cookie-pusher.” He was born in Rye, N. Y, in 1897, the descendant of John Jay, who was Secretary of State under the Continental Congress and who negotiated the Jay treaty with England in 1794. He is a diplomat almost by in- heritance, the sixth in line who has | served his country in international af- fairs of state. He was educated at like President Roosevelt and Undersecretary Welles, and like them, | too. attended Harvard. However, he was | there but two years before he left for his secretaryship at The Hague. Three years later he was the jun- ior attache in the new American Em- bassy in Warsaw. the capital of the na- tion plucked back into existence by the makers of Versailles. The new Russia thought the new Poland was out- size, and in 1920 a war was raging be- tween the two countries. Warsaw was shelled and attacking Russians raided the capital's outskirts. One diplomat who stayed when the going was hottest was Papal Nuncio, now Pope Pius XTI, Another was Attache, Designate, Moffat. now Minister- | Five years later Mr. Moffat was far from the scenes of rough warlike danger. His precise mind, his instinct for proe tocol, his natural politesse, his serious feeling for precedent and the firmness of bis diplomacy fitted him, in the opinion of the Coolidge administration, for the difficult post of ceremonial offi- cer, the man in charge of the capital's official punctilio, whe seats the great and the less great in proper gradation at large functions, chiefly White House functions. He operated smoothly and had gone to Geneva for a conference on humane treatment of prisoners of war before the whole world of protocol was shaken from Washington by the grave question whether Dolly Gann should be seated at the place which would have gone without discussion to Vice Presi- dent Curtis’ wife, had he had a wife. Takes Life Seriously. Mr. Moffat already has demonstrated either that he gets things done or finds out why not. He is a hard-working man who takes himself, his profession and his life seriously. His first merit is an orderly mind. He is an analyst who seeks quickly to discover all the parts of any question. He has a good brain | which he suckles on European history. He is a man in all things moderate, courteous but never effusive, amiable but no back-slapper, sociable but no tea- hound. For him restraint‘is a virtue, but he does not carry restraint to the point where it becomes spectacular, as his superior Welles He was among those in the State De- partment content during the 1930s to let Europe go which way it would, trusting in the good sense of England no matter ‘ how strange her policy toward the con- tinent might seem while Germany was arming, expanding and fighting her practice war in Spain. This attitude does not interfere with his present un- derstanding of the meaning of events abroad for this administration’s foreign policy. Above everything, it is a hemis- phere policy, a New World policy. Can- ada is in the Western Hemisphere, is part of the New World. Not only is Canada our neighbor but our sales and purchases from Canada amount to more than our export and import business with any other nation. Canada is the munitions center and the air-training center of the British Empire for the European war, and the United States helps in large measure to supply the raw materials for her munitions and airplanes. We have long taken Canada for granted. but the fortunes of war and our own aim to keep the prace make Canada a major reality in the United him Mr. Welles' “valet,” he returned to | States picture. Economic Threat Seen, The opposition sentiment to closer Canadian co-operation in the Western Hemisphere movements of Pan-Ameri- canism and Continental Solidarity was summed up recently by Reginald D. Trot- ter, professor at Queen's College, the site which Mr. Roosevelt used to extend—or as he feels it, to reafirm—to Canada the | | scope of the Monroe Doctrine. Relations with the United States, Dr. Trotter wrote in the Inter-American Quarterly for | January, are bound by geography to be close, whereas the relations with the British Empire, scattered as it is far | away in Europe, Africa and the South | Pacific, must be cherished. For her size | and population, Canada has a greater interest than any American country in Europe and Asia, too much so to adopt a basically American outlook. Further- more, Dr. Trotter fears the economic consequence of Canadian participation in Western Hemisphere affairs, for he recalls that the United States and Can- ada are competitors for much of the Pan- American market. The essence of the question is the ap- prehension lest an increased and for- malized interest in American affairs dis- | tract Canada from her classical and deep-seated interest in empire affairs. Perhaps the time is coming when Can- ada must choose. Mr, Moffat may be on hand when she makes the choice. | decisions clarifying the sweep of the Sherman Anti-trust Act and shielding “judicial interference.” There also were far-reaching rulings upholding price-fixing by the Federal Government to aid ailing industries, sus- | taining National Labor Board orders and defending civil liberties. Virtually all the major decisions in which the Federal Government was in- volved were in its favor. Appointment of Attorney Generai Frank Murphy of Michigan to succeed Justice Pierce Butler, | vember 16, brought to five the number of justices named by President Roose- velt. This was a majority of the nine- man tribunal. McReynolds Dissents Most Frequently. Only one member regarded by the ad- ministration as “conservative” is now on the bench. He is 78-year-old James C. McReynolds, the most frequent dissenter. Friends say he plans to postpone retire- ment at least until after the November presidential election in the hope that his successor may be named by a non- New Dealer. Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes, also 78, has given no indication of plan- ning to retire. He is generally expected to stay in harness as long as his health and strength permit. In one of the anti-trust opinions, the tribunal applied the 1890 Sherman Act to “any combination which tampers with price structures.” This was in line with contentions of e—-Justice Department, which has brought anti-trust charges against a number of industries and organizations. The Sherman Act prohibits combina- tions or conspiracies which restrain in- terstate trade or commerce. The opinion by Justice Douglas held that 12 major oil companies and five individuals had violated the Sherman Act by conspiring to raise the price of gasoline sold in 10 Midwestern States. | Later, in sustaining the constitution- who died No- | The Supreme Court tomorrow winds | up a historic term that produced notable | Supreme Court Backs the By James W. Douthat, Associated Press Stati Writer ality of the 1937 National Bituminous Coal Act, the court held that the Fed- eral Government and the States could | employ price fixing to aid an ailing in- Federal administrative agencies against ‘ | ties dustry, It repeated, however, that an industry could not take the action itself without violating the Sherman Act. In another decision, the tribunal ruled { that labor organizations are not subject to the Sherman law unless their activi- “operated to restrain commercial competition in some substantial way.” Specifically, the opinion said that & Philadelphia labor union was not liable under the Anti-Trust Act to pay dam- ages resulting from a sit-down strike. Other anti-trust decisions delivered during the eight-month term held that: The 1937 Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act did not bar prosecution under the Sherman law of a group of milk dealers in the Chicago area. The Sherman Act and the patent laws do not sanction “the regulation of prices and the suppression of competition” among the purchasers of patented ar- ticles. This applied to lead-treated gaso- line produced from a patent owned by the Ethyl Gasoline Corp. of New York. Court Check on Bureaus Lifted. Another group of decisions granted to Federal administrative agencies broad power to act without interference by Federal courts. One of the decisions, in the Pottsville Broadcasting Co. case, asserted that “interference by the courts is not con- ducive to the development of habits of responsibility in administrative agencies.” “Courts,” the opinion by Justice Frank- furter said, “are not charged with gen-" eral guardianship against all potential mischief in the complicated tasks of government.” The unanimous opinion held that a Federal Court of Appeals has no right to supervise the administrative action of the Federal Communications Commis- sion. s Other opinions of similar trend ruled that: A Federal court cannot interfere with factual findings by the Labor Board if they are supported by substantial evi- New Deal dence. Only questions of law may be reviewed. Labor Board orders certifying a col- lective bargaining agency or directing | that an election be held to determine | what union has majority support among employes are not reviewable by Federal | Circuit Courts. | A group of steel companies could not challenge in the courts the Labor De- | partment’s action fixing minimum wages that must be paid to obtain contracts with the Federal Government. In decisions dealing with civil liberties, the court: Declared unconstitutional a Connecti- cut statute requiring a permit before money could be solicited for “any al- leged religious, charitable or philan- thropic cause.” This was called “censor- ship of religion.” Another Religious Angle. Reversed the conviction of a New Haven defendant charged with breach of peace as the result of playing on a street to Catholics a phonograph record | attacking their church. The court said there was not sufficient proof of “clear and present menace to public peace and order” to justify conviction. Held unconstitutional ordinances of Los Angeles, Milwaukee and Worcester, Mass., which prohibited the distribution of handbills on the streets and an Irvington (N. J.) ordinance prohibiting the unlicensed canvassing of homes for the sale of booklets. Ruled that the 1934 Federal Com- munications Act bars the use in Federal criminal trials of all evidence obtained directly or indirectly from wire-tapping. Held . unconstitutional Alabama and Shasta County (Calif) legislation limit- ing picketing. The laws had been chal- lenged on the ground that they violated freedom of speech and of the press. Set aside death sentences imposed on four Florida Negroes on the ground that alleged confessions had been improperly obtained. The opinion — delivered on Lincoln’s birthday by Justice Black— asserted that.“all people must stand on an equality before the bar of justice in every American court.” Nazi Victory Would Endanger Much of U. S. Export Trade 43 Per Cent of Total Shipments Formerly Went to Europe; Germans Also Might Gain Edge in Other Markets By Oliver McKee. If the Nazi war machine conquers the Allies, and totalitarian Germany emerges from the present struggle as the undis- puted master of Europe, with Italy, its axis partner, a satellite, the United States will face serious economic prob- lems in adjusting itself to the new order. ‘This is the opinion of Federal experts who are studying the probable effects on our national economy of the subjugation of Britain and France by Hitler’s legions, ‘Though no specific plans for meeting these problems have yet been formu- lated, administration officials, in infor- mal discussions, have been appraising the implications to the United States of & possible Allied defeat. That the fate of the great British and French Empires hangs in the balance seems clear enough. King George, ruler of an empire on which the sun never sets, warned his subjects that they faced a “life and death struggle,” and that Germany sought no mere territorial con- quest, “but the overthrow, complete and final, of this empire and of everything for which it stands.” Defeat of the Allies not only would require a fundamental change in our concept of national defense, but a huge | increase in our expenditures for that purpose. In her war preparations Ger- many has devoted a large part of her national effort to armaments, perhaps as high a proportion as 40 per cent or more. Despite the larger appropriations for national defense in recent years, the United States has been spending only a small percentage of national income on its military and naval establishment. In the years immediately ahead United States, to assure an airtight hemisphere defense, may find it neces- | sary to spend from $5.000,000,000 to $10,- 000,000,000 on air, land and sea defenses. Our national income in 1939 is estimated at $68,500,000,000. Taxes or More Debt Necessary. So vast an expenditure for armaments will have far-reaching effects on our national economy, Federal economists point out. Though these expenditures will create a certain amount of new em- ployment, they will not result in the production of things really needed hy the American people, and in the opinion of many economists will tend to lower, rather than increase the American standard of living. These expenditures can be paid for in one of two ways, or a combination of both—by taxes, or by borrawing against the future earnings of the American people. Increased armaments also raise the question of the public debt, now fixed by statutory limitation at $45.000.000.- 000. If national defense expenditures are financed mainly through borrowing. and the Government continues to spend a great deal more than it collects from the taxpavers, the specter of inflation, too, must be reckoned with. National defense costs are much higher here than they are in Europe, or in Japan. Battleships, airplanes, artillery, bombs, ammunition and other imple- ments of war can be turned out in large In 1938 American exports to Europe were valued at more than $1,300,000,008. In addition to raw materials such aF cotton, the United States ships to Europe large quantities of finished manufac- tures and specialties such as type- writers, office equipment, appliances and foodstuffs, both crude and manufac- tured. Furope, too, in normal times, is & large buyer of American automobiles. In the aggregate, therefore, the European market is an important outlet both for American manufactured products, and agricultural surpluses. Its loss, either in whole or in substantial part, would be a serious though not a crushing blow to the American economy. Europe’s Economy Shattered. If Germany achieves an economic domination of Europe, the United States may lose part of this valuable European market. Whether the Allies win or lose, Europe will emierge from the present titanic struggle impoverished and greatly weakened econornically, The destruction of cities, the bomhing of industrial areas and the human ;and economic losses of | totalitarian war, are 2xacting a heavy toll from the wealth and buying power of | the belligerent ccuntries. the | Unless the war comes to a quick end, Europe may face a shortage of food, if not an actual famine. Millions of men have exchanged the plow for the rifle, and thousands of families have been driven as refugees from their farm homes. In many parts of Europe, in- cluding Germany, ‘crops were short last year. If Germany wins, and if there is a shortage of foodstuffs and raw ma- terials in Europe, the Nazi government conceivably may jlecide that it has need of American foodstuffs, raw materials and manufactured products. The United States exported to foreign countries in 1938 goods valued at more than $3,000.000000 Establishment of a ! German hegemony over Europe probably | though would have important repercussions on international trade in other parts of the world. For Nazi viciory would enhance Germany's economfc power and pres- tige elsewhere. By the same token the United States would face greater com= petition from German goods in the mar= kets of Latin Ameritz, Asia and Africa. By barter arrangements and through other methods Germsny might be able to undersell the Unitpd States in many markets where this gounrry now holds the upper hand ¥ At the end of 1938 .the United States had about $11,000.000.000 invested in for- eign countries. American investments circle the globe. Democracy on Defensive. If the United States' as a result of a Nazi victory, acquired the British West Indies and the American colonies of other European nations the acquisitions would bring us no real economic benefits, their acquisitien would make somewhat easier the pyoblem of hemi- sphere defense. Both the Virgin Islands | and Puerto Rico have cust the Treasury quantities by the United States, but they | are more expensivsf than elsewhere, par- ticularly in the where the government controls prices and labor. In securing personnel, the American Army and Navy must com- pete in the labor market by setting pay rates high enough to attract recruits. totalitarian countries, | Totalitarian governments, on the other | hand, have no recruiting problem, for the state is the supreme master. Com- pared with our standards, their soldiers and sailors receive small pay. Trade Program Threatened. Defeat of the Allies would bring sweep- ing changes in the pattern of world trade, and it seems likely, if not cer- tain, that the United States will lose a large part of its foreign trade. In 1938, Europe, our leading export market, took 43 per cent of our total exports. | Latin America ranked second, with 18 per cent, and Asia was third, wjth 17 per cent; Northern North America fourth, with 15 per cent; Africa fifth, with 4 per cent, and Oceania sixth, with 3 per cent. These percentages pointedly emphasize the importance of Europe as & buyer of American goods. With totalitarian Germany dominating | Western Europe. the Nazis will be in a position to dictate both the exports and | | | | imports of Europe. Controlling produc- | tion, prices and labor, the Nazis, despite the strain of the war effort, have been fairly successful in maintaining a fairly large volume of exports. After the war, if the swastika flies in triumph, Ger- many may be able to und~-~'l the United States in Europe, and perhaps also in many world markets. With the | the national defense and o a pretty penny. In addivion to the cost of administration, this ‘country would have to meet the costs o! defending the American colonies of Eurcpean powers. For upwards of a century and a half, Americans have had an dxiomatic faith in democracy. Defeat of .the two great European democracies, ,Britain and France, would for the fiis; time place democracy, and democratic institutions, on the defensive in the Wiited States. Though there is no reason: for believing that the American people ‘cannot meet problems of a totalitarian world unde, our present form of government. a viciery for the totalitarian c:t abroan and the failure of European democracies to meet its challenge, could hardly fail to have important political repercussinns on this side of the Atlantic. For the world is not made up of a series of watertight, isolated compartments. Ideas. both po- litical and otherwise. recogniz® no terri- torial frontiers. If totalftxrianism, measured by a pragmatic test is a suc- cess, there are sure to h~ (hose in this country who will urg~ (he application of its technique to meet our econbmic and social problems. If Germany emerges the victor from the present titanic struggle overseas, it may take time, and a good deal cf effort, to consolidate her gains in Europe and exploit the spoils of war in Europr. Will the Nazis then seek aggrandizement further afield? This question is heing widely asked in the American Capital. If the Nazis decide to embark on s pro- gram of world expansion, South America, because of its large natural reso\rces, and its supply of raw materials, iz be- possible exception of South America, the | lieved to be a likely objective. A -Nazi United States may find it impossible to | drive on South America, of course, would continue its reciprocal trade agreements j offer a direct challenge to our policy .of program. hemisphere defense.