The United States and Europe: From Neutrality to War, 1921-1941
Lesson Plan #2: Legislating Neutrality, 1934-1939
I. Introduction
By the early 1930s Americans became increasingly pessimistic about the ability to
prevent the outbreak of wars through international cooperation. They instead turned
toward measures designed to prevent the United States from intervening in any foreign
war that may occur. The result was a series of neutrality laws passed in 1935, 1936, and
1937, that sought to avoid the reappearance of circumstances that most Americans
believed had drawn the country into World War I—namely arms sales and loans to
belligerent countries. In this lesson students will examine a series of primary source
documents that will help understand why these laws were passed, and how they were
applied in the mid- to late-1930s.
II. Guiding Question
Did the neutrality laws of the 1930s represent an effective U.S. response to world affairs?
III. Learning Objectives
After completing this lesson, students should be able to:
 Explain the “Merchants of Death” thesis and how it shaped the U.S. approach to
neutrality.
 List the main terms of the neutrality laws passed during the 1930s.
 Discuss how these laws were implemented and revised in response to
developments in Europe.
 Identify on a blank map the locations of the major events in Europe from 1935 to
1939.
 Assess the overall effectiveness of U.S. neutrality policy during this period.
IV. Background Information for the Teacher
As seen in the previous lesson [insert link to Lesson #1: The Triumph of Pacifism] during
the 1920s American peace activists sought U.S. participation in international efforts to
prevent the outbreak of war. The most important of these efforts were the Five-Power
Treaty, which was the world’s first successful agreement for the limitation of naval
armaments, and the Kellogg-Briand Pact, in which the signatories renounced war “as an
instrument of national policy.”
Both of these developments had been hailed by pacifists, but by the early 1930s there was
a growing sense of pessimism regarding the ability of arms control and Kellogg-Briand to
stop wars from breaking out. Militant nationalist regimes in Japan and Germany both
announced that they would no longer be bound by prior agreements on disarmament, and
in 1931 Japan invaded the Chinese province of Manchuria. As the critics of KelloggBriand had predicted, there could be no “outlawry of war” without effective enforcement.
These disturbing developments led American pacifists to move away from international
efforts to prevent war and toward measures designed to ensure that the United States
would remain neutral in any foreign wars that might occur. In this they had the
wholehearted support of American nationalists, who rejected pacifism but opposed a
repeat of World War I, when the country eventually was drawn into an overseas conflict
that they believed had not served any vital American interest.
The public’s demand for neutrality surged in 1934 with the publication of Merchants of
Death by H.C. Engelbrecht and F.C. Hanighen. This book, an examination of the
international arms industry, quickly became a best-seller, but its most talked-about
chapter concerned the United States from 1914 to 1917. The country had entered the
war, the authors claimed, because American bankers and arms merchants had a vested
interest in an Allied victory.
The thesis immediately struck a chord among many Americans, including non-pacifists;
after all, this was a time in which President Roosevelt was calling businessmen
“economic royalists,” and accusing them of standing in the way of social justice. Given
this rhetoric, it was not hard to for average Americans to believe that wealthy
businessmen had pushed the country into war for their own selfish interests. A Senate
committee under the leadership of North Dakota Senator Gerald Nye was established to
investigate the book’s charges, and held hearings throughout 1935. While the Nye
Committee never succeeded in proving that banks and munitions firms had led the
country into war, it produced some eye-popping headlines about the vast profits that such
concerns had made during the war.
The tangible results of all this were the Neutrality Acts passed in 1935, 1936, and 1937.
Collectively these laws sought to keep the United States out of foreign wars by banning
the activities that Americans believed had drawn the country into war in 1917. This
meant that, when a war occurred anywhere in the world, U.S. arms manufacturers would
be prohibited from selling their products to any country involved in that war. Further, the
Neutrality Acts barred American banks from extending loans to belligerent countries, and
banned Americans from traveling on ships belonging to such nations. Finally, the 1937
act mandated that all overseas trade with countries at war—aside from arms sales, which
remained illegal—had to be conducted on the basis of “cash and carry.” In other words,
belligerents would have to pay for such materials in cash, and transport them in their own
ships. The goal was to prevent U.S. vessels from coming under attack in any future war,
simply by keeping such ships out of war zones.
The Neutrality Acts were invoked and revised at several points during the 1930s in
reaction to the worsening international climate. By the end of that troubled decade it
seemed clear that a new world war was on the horizon, and most Americans were
confident that they could stay out of it. Others, however, worried that the country’s
neutrality laws could do as much harm as good. Among these was President Roosevelt,
who—even though he dutifully signed each of the Neutrality Acts after Congress passed
them—expressed concern that they might actually help aggressors. After all, a country
that launches an attack on a neighbor might reasonably be expected to have already
stockpiled all the necessary arms necessary to complete the operation. A completely
impartial arms embargo, which applied to both sides in any conflict, might actually have
the effect of hurting the victims of aggression, who presumably were in greater need of
weaponry. This became a particular matter of concern in 1939, when war finally did
break out between Nazi Germany on one hand, and Great Britain and France on the other.
The question was whether a set of laws designed to apply to the international climate of
1914-1917 were appropriate to the circumstances of 1939. It was a question that many
Americans would be asking in the months to follow.
V. Preparing to Teach this Lesson
Review the lesson plan. Locate and bookmark suggested materials and links from
EDSITEment-reviewed websites used in this lesson. Download and print out selected
documents and duplicate copies as necessary for student viewing.
Download the Text Document for this lesson, available here as a PDF file. This file
contains excerpted versions of the documents used in the various activities, as well as
questions for students to answer. Print out and make an appropriate number of copies of
the handouts you plan to use in class.
Finally, study the interactive timeline “America on the Sidelines: The United States and
World Affairs, 1931-1941 http://www.kfallon.com/civ/] that accompanies this lesson.
This timeline will, through text, maps, and photographs, guide students through the major
European events of 1933-1939, and will ask students for each event to identify (choosing
from among a menu of options) how the Roosevelt administration responded to it. The
correct choice for most of these will be “no formal action,” which should illustrate for
students the extent to which the United States remained uninvolved with European affairs
during this critical period.
Analyzing primary sources:
If your students lack experience in dealing with primary sources, you might use one or
more preliminary exercises to help them develop these skills. The Learning Page at the
American Memory Project of the Library of Congress
(http://memory.loc.gov/learn/start/prim_sources.html#) includes a set of such activities.
Another useful resource is the Digital Classroom of the National Archives, which
features a set of Document Analysis Worksheets
(http://www.archives.gov/digital_classroom/lessons/analysis_worksheets/worksheets.htm
l). Finally, History Matters offers helpful pages on “Making Sense of Documentary
Photography” (http://historymatters.gmu.edu/mse/Photos/) and “Making Sense of Maps”
(http://historymatters.gmu.edu/mse/maps/) which give helpful advice to teachers in
getting their students to use such sources effectively.
VI. Suggested Activities
Activity #1: Merchants of Death?
Students will begin the lesson by reading an excerpt from the deeply influential 1934
book Merchants of Death, located in its entirety at the site “Heritage of the Great War”
[http://greatwar.nl/frames/default-merchants.html], which is linked from the
EDSITEment-reviewed World War I Document Archive
[http://www.lib.byu.edu/%7Erdh/wwi/]. The excerpt is available on pages 1-3 of the
Text Document that accompanies this lesson.
Students should read the excerpt as homework, and then imagine that they are average
citizens in 1934. Students should write a five-paragraph letter to their congressman or
senator, in which they give their reaction to what they have just read, and then suggest
some means of ensuring that the United States remain neutral in any future wars. Before
they begin, it may be helpful for students to review (either on their own, or together in
class) what they learned about the causes of U.S. involvement in World War I. This
should provide useful background to help them understand the thesis of the reading.
When students have returned to class the following day, have them exchange essays with
a partner and peer edit each others’ work. To conclude, ask students how this book
would likely have affected Americans’ perceptions of the Great War.
Activity #2: The Neutrality Acts, 1935-1937
In response to public demand generated in part by Merchants of Death, Congress in the
mid-1930s passed a series neutrality laws designed to prevent U.S. involvement in
another war. In this activity, students will look at these neutrality acts and determine
their effectiveness.
To begin, have students read the following, excerpts of which may be found on pages 5-9
of the Text Document. They are located in their entirety at the EDSITEment-reviewed
resource Teaching American History [http://www.teachingamericanhistory.org], and at
“WWII Resources” [http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/index.html], which is accessible via the
EDSITEment-reviewed resource Digital History [http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/].
Neutrality Act of August 31, 1935: http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/paw/049.html
Bennett Champ Clark’s Defense of the First Neutrality Act, December 1935, "Detour
Around War," Harper’s Magazine, CLXXII (December 1935), 1-9.
http://www.teachingamericanhistory.org/library/index.asp?document=1502
Excerpts from an address to the Senate by Tom Connally (D-TX), August 24, 1935
Statement by President Roosevelt, August 31, 1935:
http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/paw/050.html
Neutrality Act of February 29, 1936: http://ibiblio.org/pha/paw/068.html
Neutrality Act of May 1, 1937:
http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/index.asp?document=1564
To help guide their reading, students should answer the following questions, located on
page 10 of the Text Document:






What were the key provisions of the Neutrality Act of 1935? Why do you think
they were included?
Why did Bennett Champ Clark believe that the Neutrality Act was necessary?
Who, according to Clark, were the chief opponents of this legislation, and why?
What problem did Senator Connally and President Roosevelt see in the 1935
Neutrality Act? Why do you think Roosevelt signed it, in spite of this problem?
What provisions were added by the Neutrality Act of 1936? Why do you think
these were included?
What provisions were added by the Neutrality Act of 1937? Why do you think
these were included?
Next, direct students to the interactive timeline, “America on the Sidelines: The United
States and World Affairs, 1931-1931” [http://www.kfallon.com/civ/]. On this timeline,
students will learn about events in Europe between 1933 and 1939, as well as how the
United States reacted to them. Remind students to keep the provisions of the Neutrality
Acts in mind as they go through the interactive. This will take approximately one class
period to complete, so ensure adequate computer lab time.
To conclude, hold a class discussion about the effectiveness of the Neutrality Acts. This
issue should be considered on two different levels. On the one hand, students should be
asked whether the laws had their intended effect of keeping the United States out of war
during the 1930s (the obvious answer to which is “yes”). More importantly, students
should be asked to consider the larger implication of the neutrality laws. How might the
events of the 1930s have worked out differently if Americans had not been prohibited
from selling arms or extending loans to belligerents? How likely was it that the United
States might have been drawn into the Italo-Ethiopian War, the Spanish Civil War, or a
war arising over the Rhineland, Austria, or the Sudetenland? Might the United States
have been able to play a more productive role in European politics in the absence of the
Neutrality Acts?
VII. Assessment
The letter that students write for Activity #1 might be graded as one means of assessment.
As a concluding assessment activity, students should be asked to write an essay in
response to the following question:
 Although President Roosevelt signed the Neutrality Act of 1935, he indicated that
it “might have exactly the opposite effect from that which was intended.” In light
of the actual events of 1933-1939, do you think his concern was warranted?
In addition, students should be able to identify and explain the significance of the
following:
 Merchants of Death
 Neutrality Acts
 Spanish Civil War
 Rhineland
 Sudetenland
 Munich Agreement
Finally, students should be able to locate the following on a blank map:
 Ethiopia
 Spain
 Austria
 Czechoslovakia
 Poland
VIII. Extending the Lesson
For students who wish to learn more about United States foreign affairs during the 1930s,
one could research any of the items on the interactive timeline using the links provided
there. Students could then write an essay, make a poster, or design a PowerPoint
presentation in which they describe the event and the U.S. response to it.
The EDSITEment-reviewed site of the United States Senate [http://www.senate.gov]
includes a brief narrative about the Nye Committee
[http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/minute/merchants_of_death.htm], which
was formed in 1934 in response to investigate the charges made by Hanighen and
Engelbrecht in Merchants of Death. Students might be asked to read this account and
suggest why the Nye Committee’s activities would have helped pave the way for the
Neutrality Acts.
The Document Library at the EDSITEment-reviewed New Deal Network
[http://newdeal.feri.org/index.htm] features an editorial entitled “Pro-Fascist Neutrality”
[http://newdeal.feri.org/nation/na37144p033.htm], which appeared in the influential
liberal journal The Nation in January, 1937. The editorial is useful for this lesson in that
it illustrates one of the chief arguments against how the Neutrality Acts were applied—
that a supposedly “impartial” arms embargo might have the practical effect of helping
one side over the other. Students might read this as an adjunct to the second activity.
They might further be asked whether the same logic might not be applied to other events
of the 1930s, such as the Italo-Ethiopian War.
On October 5, 1937, President Roosevelt gave a speech in Charlottesville, Virginia, in
which he lamented the state of world affairs and suggested an international “quarantine”
in order to fight an “epidemic of world lawlessness.” The speech is available in its
entirety at Teaching American History
(http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/index.asp?document=956). Students might be
asked to read it in light of the Neutrality Acts and consider why the speech was so
controversial.
IX. EDSITEment-reviewed Web Resources Used in this Lesson
Digital History: http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/
WWII Resources: http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/index.html
Neutrality Act of August 31, 1935:
http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/paw/049.html
Statement by President Roosevelt, August 31, 1935:
http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/paw/050.html
Neutrality Act of February 29, 1936:
http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/paw/068.html
The New Deal Network: http://newdeal.feri.org/index.htm
“Pro-Fascist Neutrality,” The Nation, January 1937:
http://newdeal.feri.org/nation/na37144p033.htm
Teaching American History: http://www.teachingamericanhistory.org
Bennett Champ Clark’s Defense of the First Neutrality Act, December 1935:
http://www.teachingamericanhistory.org/library/index.asp?document=150
2
Neutrality Act of May 1, 1937:
http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/index.asp?document=1564
Franklin D. Roosevelt, “Quarantine” Speech, October 5, 1937:
http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/index.asp?document=956
United States Senate: http://www.senate.gov
“Merchants of Death,” September 1934:
http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/minute/merchants_of_death.h
tm
The World War I Document Archive: http://www.lib.byu.edu/%7Erdh/wwi/
The Heritage of the Great War, 1914-1918: http://www.greatwar.nl/
H.C. Engelbrecht and F.C. Hanighen, Merchants of Death:
http://greatwar.nl/frames/default-merchants.html
X. Additional Information
 Grade levels: 10-12
 Subject Areas: U.S. History
 Time Required: 2-3 class periods
 Skills:
o Analyzing and comparing first hand accounts
o Debating key issues and topics
o Interpreting written information
o Information gathering
o Making inferences and drawing conclusions
o Observing and describing
o Representing ideas and information orally, graphically and in writing.
o Utilizing the writing process
o Utilizing technology for research and study of primary source
documents
o Vocabulary development
o Working collaboratively
 Standards Alignment: www.ncss.org/standards/strands/
o NCSS-2—Time, Continuity, and Change: The study of the ways
human beings view themselves in and over time.
o NCSS-3—People, Places and Environment: The study of people,
places, and environments
o NCSS-5—Individuals, Groups, and Institutions: The study of
interactions among individuals, groups, and institutions.
o NCSS-6—Power, Authority, and Governance: How people create and
change structures of power, authority, and governance.
 Lesson Writers:
o John Moser, Ashland University, Ashland, OH
o Lori Hahn, Sheffield Middle Senior High School, Warren, PA
 Teacher/Student Resources:
o Interactive Timeline
o Text Document
 Related EDSITEment Lesson Plans:
o American Diplomacy in World War II
[http://edsitement.neh.gov/view_lesson_plan.asp?id=702]
o “The Proper Application of Overwhelming Force”: The United States
in World War II
[http://edsitement.neh.gov/view_lesson_plan.asp?id=653]
o The Road to Pearl Harbor: The United States and East Asia, 19151941