Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1863-04-02

attempt on their part 10 extend their system any por
continents essentially different Each has an exclusive
right to judge for itself what is best suited own con-
dtlon, and most likely to promote its happiness; bat
her has right to enforce upon the other the esabshent
ct ITS peculiar system THIS declared ia
the face of the world when there reason
appreh@nd that the Allied Powers entertaining de-
signs nimca to the freedom IL not Independence of the
new Governments There ground for believing that the
declaration Of II had considerable Effect in preventing the
maturity II not ia producing the abandonment Of all such
desighs Both principles laid down after much
l0us d. liberation the part Of the late Adminstr
The PRESIDENT. aoho then formed part Of it, continues
entirely TO coincide IN both And you will upon the
Government Of Mexico The utility and expedency of as
serfing the same principles on all proper occasions
Though we could greatly add to the num-
bers who bear tie same testimony on these points,
We can adiuce no authorities who could add to
the weigh. of an Interpretation assigned to the
Monroe doctrine by its originator and by its most
llustrious defender. We append, however, few
extracts, In the same sense, from the famous de-
bate had on the Panama Mission" and in which
the declarations of Mr.. Monroe came up for parlia-
mentary review and explanation.
In that debate Mr.. Webster disclosed the limit
ed scope of the Monroe Doctrine" by holding
the following language:
"We have general interest that through all the vast
territories rescued from the dominion of Spain our com
merce might find lis protected by treaties with Co
Vernments exiting the spot There v-ws and Others
OF similar character rende it highly desirable t. that
these States should as part of their poLicu not
TO duo1 colonization 'oin their respecDe territories
True indeed did not need their aid us main
tanning such course for ourseiUss; but had
IN er assertion and support IF the principle applicable
TO their territories"
Mr.. Van Buren, another Of the Independents
witnesses, after quoting both branches of the Mon
roe declaration relating to the re-subugation
of the Spanish American States and that which
inhibits colonization-proceeded in the course of
this debate to cay:
"Tbe character and effect which have been given to
these declarations full instruction probable
of similar this day To say here that
they did not pledge the United States any would
that declaration the Ereeure could hare that effect
BUT HE HAD NO SUCH INTENTION"
Mr.. Forsyth, of Georgia, spoke as follows:
"Mr Monroe meant to assert-and the official language
Of the Executive to Ministers acting under instructions
fully explained tina. part of his meanng-that right
forward be acquired by discovery In other 0ords that all
the territory Of The american continents already appro
priated, and the title hr inots scd in Of the
Governments or some European Poaoer"
But why multiply citations where the whole de-
bate is of one and the same purport? Let it suf-
fee to recapitulate the points settled by the history
of the circumstances under which Mr. Monroe
proclaimed the principles in question, and which
have been 50 much and SO long misconceved by
those who draw from the rills rather than the
fountain. That recapituation is as follows:
l. The Monroe declaration of 1923, in both
its phases, bad its origin in the changed rela-
tions and new responsibilities imposed on the sew
eral States of tn, American Continents arising
especially from the emancipation of the Spanish
Colonies.
2. The Monroe declaration, in so far as it
related to the threatened intervention of the Holy
Alliance in the concerns Of the Spanish American
States, was intended to meet particular contin-
gency of events, and therefore passed away with
the occasion which called it forth
3. The Monroe doctrine, in SO far as it re-
lates to the colonization Of the American Cont
nents by any European Power, was not intended
to bind the United States TO guard the territory of
the New World from such occupation by European
States but intended to indicate, an impor-
tant principle Of American public policy, that
I" each State should guard by its own means against
the establishment of any future European colony"
within the jurisdiction of its flag That is, the |
American Continents no longer held open to
colonization as derelict territory, capable of oOcu
patton by right of discovery and settlement
4. The "Monroe d,crine' was not in any
of its aspects pledge committing the Government
of the United States to any line Of policy beyond
that which seemed expedient and necessary at the
time of its announcement As Mr.. Van Buren,
well said, " no declaration of the Executive could
have this effect" and none such was intended"
by Mr.. Monroe.
We need not apply the lessons Of this historical
review to the times through which we passing.
The intei gent reader has already done it for him
self, and is prepared, in the light of these memo
randa, to appreciate the injustice as well as the
inopportuncness of the reproaches cast upon the
Administration because it does not, 10 the name
Of "the Monroe doctrine" demand !" the imme-
date evacuation of Mexico by the French troops"
To call for such proceeding at the hands of the
President, under the pretence Of reafhrming that
doctrine" is to commit double anachronism
for it is, in the field Of action, to postpone or
barrsss the paramount duty of the present hour,
and, in the domain Of history, to substitute the