Staunton spectator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1849-1896, 1895-04-03
MIsusing the Monroe Doctrine.

All dutuOTlJlV0 anu QeuQlCo SUdL6-
ment of the obligations of the United
States under the Monroe doctrine to-
ward the various republics of the West
Indies and Central and South America
is badly needed at present. AS origi-
nally announced its scope was very
narrow. Its formulation was due to a
confidential proposal of Canning, the
British secretary of state. to Mr.. Rush,
our minister in London, looking to the
cooperation CT the United States with
England in 1928 to prevent 1.-The holy
alliance" of Russia, Austria, France
and Prussia from interfering to bring
SPANS revOlted provinces in South
and Central America again into sub
lection to that power. AS Independent
republics the revolted colonies traded
more freely with England than they
had been allowed to do when subject
to Spain, so that then. as now, Eng
land favored their continued indie
pendence. The utterance to which
the name Monroe doctrine" is given
is found in President Monroe's annual
message of 1923 in these words: with
the existing colonies or dependencies
of any European power we have not
1nterfered and shall not interfere, but
with the governments which have de-
clared their independence and main
tanned it, and whose independence we
have on great consideration and just
principles acknowledged, we could not
view an interposition for expressing
them. or controlling in any other man
ner their destiny by any European
power in any other light than as a
manifestation of an unfriendly dis
position toward the United States. y
This eminenlly conservative statement
did not. however, bind the United
States to any particular line of con
duct, and was, indeed, expressly re
pudiated in 1925 by Congress in reso-
luton declaring that 1.-The United
States ought not to become a party
with the Spanish republics
to any joint declaration for the pur-
pose of preventing interference by any
OF the European powers with their in
dependence or form of government
AS recently DIS 1868 the Monroe doctrine
was repudiated by the republican
party when Secretary Seward, refer
ring to the effort of France to establish
a monarchy in Mexico, wrote to our
minister at Vienna that the United
States shave neither a right nor dis
position to intervene in the internal
affairs OF Mexico, whether to maintain
republican government or overthrow
an imperial or foreign one" Only
since our tariff lords have conceived
the idea of extending their markets by
force, rather than by low prices, has
the republican party begun to accept
the Monroe dictum as an authoritative
statement of policy and expanding it
to an absurd extent.
The Monroe doctrine, as stated by it's
author, proposes no policy Of aggres-
sion ON the part of the United States.
1t does not look to the seizure of Cuba
or Canada, to say nothing of far off
Hawaii. There was no jingoism in it,
such as republican politicians are now
constantly preaching under the name
of Monroe doctrine. 1t was merely a
declaration favoring the preservation
of the political situation as it existed in
the West Indies and in Central and
South America in 1928 The republic
of North America sympathized with
the other republics of this hemisphere,
and in a Presidents message declared
itself averse to their suppression by p
combination of European powers that
seemed to have that purpose in view.
The Monroe doctrine says expressly
with the existing colonies or de-
Tendencies of any European power we
have not interfered and shall not inter-
fere." The doctrine" is accordingly
a pledge that we shall not seize or
interfere with Cuba, British Guiana
or the British protectorate over the
Mosquito Coast, recently invaded by
Nicaragua in violation of the treaty of
Managua, as well as q warming to the
continental powers of Europe not to
try to restore the monaFehieal system
OF Europe ia countries where it had
failed.
CLEARLY the Monroe doctrine does not
sanction the sponsor theory which
republican papers have recently
preached 1t does not require the
United States to claim virtually pro-
teGtOrate over all Latin american re-
publics and undertake to manage their
foreign relations. We are not to as.
sumo responsibility for their good con-
duct toward European powers, nor
protect them from the consequences of
their bad conduct toward such powers.
The role of big brother" or bully,
which our iingoes wish this govern
ment TO assume, is not prescribed by
the Monroq doctrine, nor is it one that
the Latin American repu biics have
u
of course, for San Domingo to ask as
20 protect her from the consequences
OF her outrageous treatment of French
citIzens and their property, but that
is no reason why we should interfere
to prevent France from exacting rep
aration. When last month France,
with warshlps and threats of violence,
forced San Domingo to pay 1,225, 900
francs of indemnity and arbitrate
claims of French citizens, we wisely
decided that it was not our affair. The
Monroe doctrine in it's EXTREMIST de-
velopment does not require US to go to
var With every power that demands
reparation for alleged wrongs from the
States of Latin America. If it did,
our sister republics south of US would
be always ready TO presume upon our
gallantry, and we should want an
army and navy ten times as large as
we now have, with taxes to match, to
support our understandable San.
Ordered on Frial