The Press. — London, England, 1856-06-21 00:00:00

No. 164.—V0L. IV. Ct dress. LONDON, SATURDAY, JUNE 21, 1856. THE foreign policy of President PIERCE'S Cabinet will in all probability be affirmed and continued by that of its successor. The Democratic Convention at Cincinnati has no minated Mr. BUCHANAN as its candidate for the Presidency at the election in November; and from the strength of the party, and Mr. BUCHANAN'S reputation, there can be little doubt that he will be successful. Mr. BUCHANAN'S views on the Monroe doctrine, and on the jealousy with which European interference in the affairs of the American continents is to be regarded, are identical with those of General PIERCE. But he is a much abler man than the present President, and the Convention have, in this instance, shown much practical sagacity in selecting their boldest and weightiest statesman to give effect to their principles. Hence it may be assumed that whatever difficulties exist in our relations with the American Government—owing to the position it has taken up—will continue to exist for years to come. As respects the principle at issue, it will not be a temporary difficulty. Mr. BUCHANAN is not likely to be more compliant than General PIERCE or Mr. MARCY. The people have decided on a policy, and have found men willing and able to give it shape and consistency. Let us see what that policy is. It is necessary to recognise the facts of a case before attempting a solution of the ques tions which grow out of them. The Monroe doctrine, as it is generally un derstood, is supposed to imply a denial, on the part of the United States' Government, of the right of any European Power to inter fere in the affairs of the two American conti nents It is supposed to mean that the two continents shall be entirely cut off from the political influence s of th e Old World, and shall be free from all European authority and control. If this be the principle ishich the Demo cratic Convention and the Government of the United States resolve to " hold sacred," as essential to the interest of the commerce of the United States and the develop►nert of their power, it is a principle which will and must array against them a great European confederacy, as wholly subversive of estab lished rights, and contrary to international law. But such an interpretation is not sup- ported by the terms in which the principle was originally expressed. The Monroe doctrine was first enunciated by President MONROE in his message to the Congress, on Dec. 2, 1823. It is embodied in these words : The occasion has been judged proper for asserting, as a principle in which the rights and interests of the United States are involved, that the American continents, by the free and independent position which they have assunied and maintain, are henceforth not to be considered as sub• jecta fur future colonisation by any European Power. • • • • LONDON, SATURDAY, JUNE 21, 1856. We owe it therefore to candour, and to the amicable relations existing between the United States and European Powers, to declare that we should consider any attempt on their part to extend their system to any portion of this hemisphere as dangerous to our peace and safety. With the existing colonies or dependencies of any European Power, we have not interfered and shall not interfere. But with the 3overninenta who have declared their inde pendence, and whose independence we have on great con• sideration and on just principles acknowledged, we could not view any interposition fur the purpose of oppressing them, or of controling in tiny other mannt r their destiny by say European Power, in any other light than as the manifestation of an unfriendly disposition towards the United States. It was in special reference to the successful re volt of the Spanish colonies that this declaration was made ; and, read by the light of the circum stances and anticipations of that time, it is in teligible that the principle might have as• sumed greater significance, and received a wider in erpretation, than subsequent events have justified. Thirty years ago, there seemed a pro bability that the American continents would shake themselves clear from European dominion. The Spanish colonies had newly declared their independence. The two Canadas, divided in sentiment, agitated by political intrigues, unsettled in constitution, and making little progress under British rule, were held to this country by hut feeble ties. The Washington Cabinet in 1823, viewing the rapid spread of Republican tendencies, and the successes of the Republican party in Spanish America, had some ground for antici pating that the time was at hand when the states of the American continents would have a political system of their own, entirely inde pendent of the political systems prevailing in the countries from which they sprang. But the action to which it looked as likely to render the New World independent of the Old, has had a contrary effect. The commu nities which shook off the domination of Spain have not been able to found free and indepen dent States ; they have degenerated since their separation from the mother country with a rapidity beyond example, while the commu nities which have preserved unbroken Their links with their European Governments, have, with the single exception of the unfortunate British West Indian colonies, advanced in every element of prosperity. Canada is now not a precarious possession of the British Crown, but a mighty and flourishing province ; the rival of the United States in material develop. ment, and appreciating too warmly its close connection with England to think of sever ance. Cuba is firmly attached to Spain. France holds with undisputed grasp her West India possessions. Russia clings tenaciously to her hold on the American continent to the extreme north. The Powers of Europe have possessions and rights in the New World which they will never consent to abandon ; and any attempt on the part of the United States to push the Monroe doctrine to an extreme, would lead to a combination against their Government which it would be utterly unable to resist. But to the general principle that the United States have a fair right to extend their empire in America by all legitimate means, no objection will be made by the sense of the country. The American conti nents are their proper sphere of action. We entreat them to believe that we shall never be jealous of their progress. They will no doubt have quarrels with the feeble States of America as France has had quarrels in Algeria, STAMPED ....SIXPENCE. lINEITAXPED..FIVEPENCE. as England has had quarrels in India, as Russia has had quarrels in Tartary. We know to n hat result such quarrels must inevitably lead. We do not want to oppose the territorial progress of the States, whether it arises from compact with countries which desire participation in the advantages of the Union, or whether it arises from conquest in fair warfare. The enlightened opinion of this country is not unfavorable to the expansion of the power of the United States We have nothing to dread from it. The Union will hold together no longer than is consistent with the interests of the various States of which it is composed. The politics' strength of the Union will be rather diminished than strengthened by ter ritorial extension. Even now the North would be politically stronger if severed from the South. But such considerations do not concern us. We look to other quarters for the development of British forces. While hold ing our own in America, we can afford to look with positive satisfaction on the progress made by the United States. But such is not the sentiment of Lord PALMERSTON. He retains the political ideas of half a century ago. He does not under stand that a changed world requires a changed policy. He regards every acquisition made by the United States with a jealous eye, and is intent on schemes by which England may fetter their progress, and establish military posts to threaten their possessions. On this principle alone is the occupation of Ruatan and Bonacca to be accounted for. We have no business there. We have no interests to protect, and the possessions themselves are worthless. For the like reason is our protec torate of the Mosquito coast insisted on. It is these pretensions which excite the alarm and anger of the United States' Government. It sees in them a protest against the exten sion and safety which they aim at, and the result is continual antagonism to this country, and a conflict of sentiment which, if the cause were removed, would rapidly sub side. Why has the Washington Cabinet so warmly taken up the occupation of Ruatan by the British Government? Because, in the words of Mr. BUCHANAN, it is " the key of the Bay of " Honduras, and the focus of the trade of " the neighbouring countries " Because "such " is its commanding geographical position, that " Great Britain in possession of it could com " pletely arrest the trade of the United States " on its passage to and from the Isthmus." The Washington Cabinet is jealous of a Gib raltar at a point commanding the passage be tween the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. Not England alone, but all the States of Europe, have good reasons for insisting that the region of this pl►esage shall be neutral ground. In the event of a ship canal being formed, the freedom of Stith canal would be an object of importance to the whole' world ; but our interest in Central America is nearly con fined to that one point. It is not oar interest to occupy stations which would com mand the coast or trade of Central America. Towards America we desire repression, but of develop. tility, but of alliance ; a policy maintenance of European way adverse to the expan prise and power of the MID Until that policy is acted that our relations with the .c a policy, not of inent ; not of hos- icy founde se isionwe iced §ta g s 7, on titer ' he • ' , , a • • . id-7. • Ohm ig 4 il l • IP • 8.1%.