The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1893-10-18

Latest advices from Rio de Janeiro indi-
cate that the bombardment of the city by
the rebel fleet caused a much greater loss
of life and property than was at first made
known. 1t is also stated that many for
eigners were killed and wounded. If this is
true it may bring up the question of foreign
interference in a way that will require
prompt and effective action on the part Of
the United States.
1T was stated, a few days ago, that the
European diplomatic corps stationed at the
ton of carrying out their threat of landing
troops from the war ships in the harbor
If Vice President Peixoto did not immedi-
ately come to terms with the rebels. 1t
was also stated that the government au-
thorities OF Brazil looked to the United
States to enforce the Monroe doctrine and
prevent any forcible interference or demon
stration by European governments.
Before talking about enforcing the Mon
roe doctrine it is well to understand dis
tinctly what that doctrine is and what 1t
involves. President Monroe's annual mes
sage to Congress in 1923 contained the fol-
lowing sentences:
We owe it to the candor and to the ami
cable relations existing between the United
States and the allied powers, to declare that
part to extend their system to any portion
of the hemisphere as dangerous to our
peace and safety. With the existing colo
MES or dependencies of any European power
we have not interfered, and shall not inter-
fere; but with the governments which
have declared their Independence and main
tanned 1T, and whose independence we have
on great consideration and just princi-
pies, acknowledged, we could not view an
interposition for expressing them, or con-
trolling in any other manner their destiny
by any European power, in any other light
than as a manifestation of an unfriendly
disposition toward the United States
This is the foundation of the so-called
Monroe doctrine. 1t will be observed, first,
that it only protests against any inter-
ference of European powers in the internal
affairs Of any Independent state on the
American continent with view of plant
ing the European system on American soil
or OF expressing or controlling the Ameri-
can state. Second it does not assert that
the United States should take UP arms to
prevent such interference, but that it
would be regarded as manifestation of
an unfriendly disposition toward this coun-
try. At the beginning the Monroe doctrine
was very vague, but by degrees it has
come to be popularity understood as guar
anteeing freedom from European inter-
ference to all states of North, Central and
South America
The presence of European war vessels in
the port of Rio de Janeiro for the pur-
pose of affording protection to the sub
jects of their several governments is no
violation of the Monroe doctrine. Neither
would it be violation of that doctrine for
the European ships to land troops for that
purpose, If their acts were confined to af-
fording such protection. But if they should
land troops for the purpose of compelling
Vice President Peixoto to come to terms
with the insurgents that would be such
| an Intervention in American affairs as
would call for a prompt and vigorous
protest from the United States. Protection
| to European subjects is one thing and in
| reference in South American affairs i:
quite another.
| If it is true, as stated, that the recent
| bombardment of Rio de Janeiro resulted
| in killing and wounding many foreigners
| it may be seized by the European war yes
/ sells as pretext for landing troops tt
| coerce Vice President Peixoto into sur
rendering TO the insurgents. If they d.
that 1t will be time for the United States
| to he heard from