The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1895-12-22
HISTORY OF THE MONROE DOC
Urine.
How IL Originated and where 10 Has
Been Applied.

Detn AVHAAtus
There ought not 10 be. says the Spring
field Republican, need for further setting
forth Of the Monroe doctrine by way of
explanation and description of what il is
and what it proposes. in view Of the fire.
quent explanations and the statement of
his understanding of IL which the Presi-
dent has just given in his message, but it
is probably worth while to freshen our
memories by a review of the circum-
stance which prompted President Mon
roe 10 promulgate IL, and Of its history
since 1873
The Monroe doctrine is historically OF
British origin, and Is an outgrowth Of
what seemed an exigency in
European politics, which touched
British interests closely That ev-
lgency grew out of an alliance
for mutual protection against domestic
revolutions between Prussia, Austria,
France and Russia. These powers had
met IN congress in 1870 and again In 1872,
and had agreed TO support each other in
maintaining the legitimacy of existing dy-
nasues and TO aid each other in suppress
ing armed revolts in each others terri
tory Under this agreement a French
force was sent into Spain to put down a
revolution against Ferdinand VII At
nrst Great Britain consented to this
agreement OF the powers, although not a
party to It; but after Lord George Can
ming succeeded Castlereagh as prime min
lster, ne saw reason to fear that British
AAANNA NSl5 AuASllL De ultHdCeQ Dy the dll-
ance, and assumed an Indifferent attitude
toward 1t, which afterward developed into
an unfriendly one.
About 1910 the American colonies of
SPAN began to revolt and declare them
selves free and Independent, and by the
time OF Canning's accession to power
there were several Spanish-American re-
pubhcs whose Independence had been
formally recognized by the United States
ana ana practically by Great Britain. Great
Britain had built up a considerable trade
with these republics, a trade which was
impossible while they were Spanish col
ONES. and therefore any indications Of a
purpose on the part of Spain to attempt
10 feconquer these former colonies was
regarded as a definite menace to British
interests. In 1923 Canning thought he saw
evidences that Spain intended to claim
the support of the parties to the agree
ment of the year before, in an attempt
TO restore its power in Central and South
America, on the ground that the revolts
OF these colonies had been a direct re-
pudiation of the principle of the legiti-
macy and permanency Of the reigning
dynasties, which the allied powers had
bound themselves to maintain by armed
interference in behalf of the threatened
Canning called the attention Of our min
ister to Great Britain, Richard Rush, to
his suspicious, and asked IL the United
States could be induced to join in a pro-
test against this apparent purpose of the
allied powers and in an attempt to
thwart 1t.
Rush laid the situation, with Canning
then Secretary of State, and Adams re-
ferred the matter to the President and his
cabinet Adams himself being inclined to
make light Of the whole matter. Monroe
and Calhoun and other members of the
cabinet were, says Adams, very much
in fear that the holy alliance would re-
store all South America to SPAIN" and
the outcome Of that fear was the message
setting forth the Monroe doctrine The
message was recognized in Europe as an
important utterance, and Spain tried to
conference In
1924 to consider the regulation of Spanish
American interests, but the refusal of
Great Britain to join caused the abandon
ment of the project. The message pre-
vented the carrying out of any purpose
of interference in SPANS behalf in
America, and led to the early and formal
recognition of the independence of all the
Spanish-America republics by England.
The first appearance of the Monroe doc
trine in our politics was almost immedi-
ately after its PRONUNCIATION, its bearing
on the part this country should take in
the Panama congress of Central and
South American states in 1896 Being much
discussed. The United States was invit-
ed to send delegates to this congress and
did so, and the controversy over the wis
dom of this action lasted for some years,
and was an unusually warm one, but re-
sulta2 in praotioadly Anothing, H LATER
when the Clayton@Bulwer treaty relating
to the Nicaragua canal was negotiated, in
1850, this doctrine was again TO the fore,
and was exploited. in congress. and the
newspaper very much in the style with
which recent utterances have made us
familiar; but the well remembered ms
lance of the French occupation of Mexico
is the only case in which this doctrine has
been officially and positively asserted by
our government.
Napoleon Ill thought he saw in our dis
tress in 1862 an opportunity to establish
a monarchy. in Mexico, and with the
sanction of the pope and the approval of
Austria he sent a military expedition to
set up limited hereditary monarchy,
with Macmillan of Austria as its first
emperor. our government protested sew
eral times, in spite of the Indifference OF
Seward but without apparent effect; but
the end of the war, with the union re-
stored and the whole country aroused,
put different face on the matter. When
Sheridan was sent toward the Mexican
border in March, 1867, there was nothing
left for Louis Napoleon but to withdraw,
which he did, leaving Macmillan to his
fate
Until the present exigency in Venezue-
la there has been no other contingency re-
quiring any positive assertion of this doe
trine on our part, and there is no doubt
but that the outcome of the present stu
alton will be as honorable to the United
States as was the Mexican incident.