Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1881-10-26
1dmcastcr f,ltelltgenrer.
WEDNESDAY EVENING, OCT. 20. 1881.

AdIlCdSIcC tlltEll9CIlCH[..
WEDNESDAY, EVENING. OCT. 20. 1881. |
The Msnroe Doctrine by Blaine.
The secretary Of state has taken occa-
sion, in view of the European construc-
lion Of the Panama canal, to reaffirm to
Minister Lowell the Monroe doctrine as
he conceives it.; and no one in this coun-
try will be disposed to dispute his view,
though it is easy to understand how it
may not be appreciated in foreign coun-
tries. The doctrine does not commend it.
self, even here, 80 much by its logic as
BY its eminent advantage to us. Briefly
stated, Mr.. Blaine's announcement is
that the United States view with great
cheerfulness the attempt of European
to make a canal at Panama,
and wish the--enterprise in which our own
people have no desire to risk their money
all success. And when it is built
and in operation, we will as cheer
fully concede the right of the ships
of all nations to pass through the
canal in the piping times of peace. But
should war come, in which the United
States is engaged, then her cruisers, but
not those of tho enemy, shall he permit
ted to use the passage way. The United
States of Colombia, in whose territory
the canal is situate, are accorded by the
Monroe doctrine, as explained by Mr..
Blaine, equal privilege with the United
States of America bat just what is to
be done in the contingency of Colombia
being allied with powers at war
with us, is not distinctly pointed
out, the thought of such an oc-
currence no doubt being very absurd.
If it could be admitted to happen
it would seem that the Monroe doctrine
would not be of much practical account.
If England could hire Colombia to join
her in a war with the United States, the
Monroe doctrine would not keep her out
of the use of the Panama canal, since it
accords it to Colombia !; and SO that GEL
ebrated doctrine does not seem to be of
much value to any nation but Colombia,
to which it affords an elegant oppor-
tunity for a fine speculation whenever
the big nations 60 to war.
In truth there is more sound than sub
stance in the Monroe doctrine. 1t only
applies when we are at war and in war
not only are the laws silent, but doctrines
amount to nothing unless they are sus-
tanned by victorious arms. No one can
doubt that if we should be at war with a
European power it would use the Pana-
ma canal if it could, and prevent the use
of it by us if it could, and that we would
only defend our possession Of it by fight
ing for it. No" "doctrine would help
us whit. No DOUBT the Monroe doc
trine is a very good thing with which to
amuse us. We all take to it devotedly.
We don't stop to inquire whether other
nations, il we were in conflict with
them, will be likely to let us have the sole
use Of the canal we are content with
the beauty of the abstract idea that the
canal, being an American institution.
Europeans have no business to NEEDLE
with it {; except, Of course, to build it
for us. Colombia is a sister nation and
Colombia of course will be, as she ought
to be, our friend. If she is not, since
she ought to he we will make
her be. Being weak sister she
will readily yield to our persuasion.
Mr.. Blaine reminds Mr.. Lowell that
away back in 1916, when Colombia was
called New Grenada, we agreed with her
to guarantee positively and efiicacious-
ly" the perfect neutrality of the isthmus.
And he declares that this guarantee
"does not require reinforcement or ac-
cessiOn or assent from any other power .
notwithstanding he thus construes this
"perfect neutrality" ''Dming any war
in which the United States of America,
or the United States of Colombia might
be a party, the passage of armed vessels
of hostile nations through the canal at
Panama, would be no more admissible
than would be the passage of the armed
forces of hostile nation over the rail-
way lines joining the Atlantic and Pa
cific shores of the United States of Co
lombia. And the United States of Amer
ca will insist upon her right to take all
useful precautions against the possibility
of the isthmus transit being in any event
used Extensively against her interests
upon the land or upon the sea-" If
other nations are able to gee that they
have no business to interfere with a
guarantee of the perfect neutrality of
the Panama canal, which leaves us to
use it for our war vessels at our pleasure,
we may be gratified, but we can hardly
help feeling mildly surprised.
The Blaine Interpretation of the Mon
roe doctrine leaves any amount of room
for the swoop of the American eagle,
but does not permit much opportunity
for the display Of American common
sense. The square fact may as we'll be
stated, without any nonsense, that so
far as we have the power we intend to
use the Panama canal in political way
for the benefit Of the United States, and
that if any other nation gets ahead of us
it will just have to whip us. Everyone
understands that. We will take it be-
cause we want it and not particularly
because it is particularly right. Might
makes right (; and that's the Monroe