Daily union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1865-1866, 1866-01-02
The Monroe Doctrine Treated i'm q
New Light.

To the Editors of the Commercial Adyertiser.l
The Monroe doctrine is the negation of
our own rights in foreign countries under
the law of nations, and the virtual extinction
of the national independence of all countries
to which it may be made to apply. 1t is an
assumption of a protectorate on the part of
the American Government, by the mere
force of our own lciu, independent of any
legally established assent ON the part of the
protected party. A protectorate of one gov
eminent over another, applies to the inter-
ests to be protected or affected by it. The
kind of protectorate which the Monroe doc
trine claims to extend over the now indepen-
dent nations on the two continents of Ameri-
ca, applies essentially to the political and
social structure of the whole fabric of society,
extending through its most intimate orsnn-
ization. 1t becomes virtual absorption of
every characteristic of national independence
and self control.
To dictate a form of government to a
country is to dictate to its people all their
civil obligations, their habits of thought and
action.
This process of absorption, according to
the theories of the annexationists, is ulti-
mately to embrace the whole of North and
South America, and by logical consequence
to be made applicable also to the whole of
the West India Islands, and all other islands
in proximity to either shore of these great
continents.
The Monroe doctrine, therefore, in its le-
climate logical consequences, proposes in
the most summary manner to absorb some
dozen or SO of Independent nationalities, by
assuring to them, by our predominant infiu-
ence, certain forms of government for the
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT of the political power and
influence of the United States, and looks pro
td'sto to the establishment of universal en-
pire over the two Americas. But the pre-
tention to universal empire or any APP
proaches TO it. is against the law of nations,
and justifes the armed combination of all
nations to defeat it by war.
National law recognizes, in the normal
and peaceful condition of the family of ma
tions, that each should be independent and
sel(-governing, subject only to the obligation
Of doing justice to each other in their rela-
tions of neighborhood, and their commercial
and political intercourse.
To attempt to break in upon this peaceful
arrangement, existing among a family of
nations, and one by one to render them SUBJ
servient to the single will or the policy of
any one nation, however great or exemplary,
is to violate the fundamental principles of
national individuality, and as far as this
policy of absorption extends, to abolish
both nations and races, and to impose upon
the whole the empire of unrestrained uni
versal dominion.
Such, indeed, was the policy of ancient
Rome, and the proud conquerors of Greece
and Asia in earlier times. Then, whatever
Ofs
had a faint existence in the bosoms of the
most enlightened men, they were found
wholly Intellectual to stay the hand of power
and conquest, or to plant successfully the
germs of equal justice among communities
and races of men. Everything yielded to
the possessor of power, free from the re-
straints of any acknowledged principles of
right or equal justice among nations. All
political institutions, wherever found, were
assimilated to the theories of government
expounded and enforced by the will of the
triumphant conqueror. The Monroe doc
trine templates the accomplishment of the
same ends on the continent of Americn by
perhaps milder, but not less effectual means
What was done in ancient times, when law
and principles of equality and justice were
unknown, in the way of national absorption
and unifcation by the will of single SOW
ereign mind, it is now proposed by the Mon
roe doctrine, shall be carried into practice
by the sovereign will of the American people.
International law does not Justify or tole-
rate such a sweeping humiliation of the
natural rights of either small or great States.
To avow that it does, is to effect the COM
mon sense of mankind, and to justify the
most fragrant violation of all the laws upon
which communities of men are founded, and
individual nationalities protected.
But there is another phase of the Monroe
doctrine which is still more interesting to us
since il at once affects our national pride,
our greatest interests, and our national rights
II, under the mgis of the Monroe doctrine
we are to acquire an ascendant influence and
control over the nations of this hemisphere
for our political or commercial advantage,
and to the prejudice in any way of the equal
rights of nations in other parts of the world,
what is to prevent the great European or
Asiatic nations, if ever they have the power,
from carrying into effect the same principles
of absorption and ascendant influence over
the smaller and weaker States in other parts
of the world for their own advantage, and to
the prejudice of our rights, both political
and commercial? This Monroe doctrine,
therefore, reverses all the laws of common
rights among nations, and carries us at once
back into the barbarism of ancient times.
But we should not submit for single mo-
ment to the results Of this doctrine, if adopted
by Europe, as they NAV naturally and pro-
perry be made to apply, by refusal to us of
common rights with other nations in our in
tercourse with the States on the Mediterra-
mean and the Forth Sea, for example, by the
adoption of a European Monroe doctrine
there by the joint action of England, France
and Spain. What we claim for ourselves we
cannot refuse to others.
These propositions show at glance the
total falsity, absurdity, and impracticability
of the Monroe doctrine-the merest phantom
that ever found its way into diplomatic Ian
guage.
BE thou ghost, or goblin damned,
III speak to iheel n. n.