Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1880-02-14

most impolitic to permit the establish |
ment, at such point, of great CONNER
cial artery controlled by European powers.
It would be particularly dangerous to
allow the control of such an enter
prise to pass into the hands of the
greatest maritime powers of the world,
namely England and France. Yet
that danger appears to be much more
than distant apprehension even now
The only practical objection to the reas-
sertion of the Monroe doctrine in this con-
nection consists in the awkward fact that
the United States does not possess the
means of enforcing its authority, should
the worst happen. The recent statement
of Congressman Harris respecting the con-
dition of our navy conclusively demon
strates our impotence to do more than pro-
test, in the event of actual hostilities with
either of the two powers named above.
DuG ~ 10 OOSluuS IudI We COul1 IlOU
enforce the Monroe doctrine ~ ct arms, it
by no means follows that it would be use
less or even impolitic, to assert it. For
it may be regarded as certain that
neither England nor France has the
least disposition to involve herself
in war with the United States, and
it may be reasonably concluded that I'M
der the circumstances the assumption by
our Government of firm position on the
canal question would secure us the guaran-
tees which are needed. The French Gov
eminent has indeed somewhat prematurely
declared that it has nothing to do with
the scheme of Lesseps, but it is evident
that if French company dug the canal
it would be entitled to the protection of
its own Government, and that the latter
would be compelled to uphold it agains
any aggressions by other powers. The
same argument would apply to an English
company, and it is therefore obvious that
safety for American interests can only be
obtained by prompt and resolute action at
the inception of the undertaking.
1t is understood that Mr. Evarts favors
policy of inaction, holding that it is best
to do nothing until the Lesseps project is
fully developed. 1t must, however, be re-
membered that such policy opens the
door to all manner of complications with
the Colombian and other Governments, and
that it might lead to an ENHANCEMENT
capable of serious consequences. Great
wars have frequently grown out of dis
putes quite as simple-seeming as this at
the outset, and broad craftsmanship here
demands temperate but strong presenta-
tation of the American foreign policy.
The Monroe doctrine is unquestionably
one which must become more and
more necessary to the safety of the
United States, as they expand and settle
up. A country with so extensive coast
line must be defended by one of two
things the feebleness of its neighbors, or
its isolation from possible attack So far
the first named defense has been preserved,
and the second must also be secured when
ever an effort is made to establish per-
manent footing upon our communications
by European powers. In the present case
the reassertion of the Monroe doctrine
ought not to be regarded as a mere piece of
spread eagleism, but as a wisely cautious
policy. 1t may be that the position neces-
sary to be taken by the Government will
involve the reconstruction of the navy,
but this is reform to be earnestly de-
sired. 1t cannot be expected that power
SO defenseless against the great navies of
Europe as we are known to be to-day, will
always be listened to respectfully when
conflicting international interests are con-
cerned, and all history shows that the best
way for nation to guard against assault
is to be strong enough to defy it. The
interoceanic canal, if it is built, should be
under the control or within the grasp of
the United States and the prosecution of
the enterprise should be most seriously OBJ
jected to by our Government until material
guarantees are obtained for American pre-
dominance in the business