Staunton spectator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1849-1896, 1895-05-08
The "Monroe Doctrine

The Baltimore San of May 1st, con-
tanned an editorial showing that the
Limoges" who pirate SO much about
the Monroe Doctrine" misapprehend
it's character and purpose, from which
we extract the following
Now, the sober truth of history is
that Mr.. Monroe never proclaimed any
doctrine such as the jingoes ascribe to
him. Nothing that he wrote in his
1923 message to Congress can be tortur-
ed into meaning that the United States
must interfere and offer armed resist
ance to the enforcement of just claim
by any European against any Ameri
can nation. That message was great,
sagacious and timely declaration. Its
distinct object was to prevent the arm
ed invasion of all the young Spanish
American republics which the Holy
Alliance, embracing Russia, Austria,
Germany and France, was then con-
templating for the purpose of crushing
their independence and restoring them
to King Ferdinand, to whom, by their
joint action, those powers had just re
stored the crown of Spain. That OBJ
ject was one that in a large and mo-
mentous way concerned not only the
destiny of other American States, but
our own as we'll President Monroe's
message, written after careful delibera
ton with his cabinet and upon a full
understanding with the British gov
eminent of the day, was undoubtedly
addressed to that object and occasion,
and without reference to any such
trivial disputes over the personal ILL.,
usage of foreign consuls or citizens in
y, t,ak
has now eliminated at Corinto.
We observe that some of the more
frantic lingo journals are quoting
Daniel Webster as indorsing their own
extravaganza and hysterical construc-
ton of Mr.. Monroe's memorable de-
claration. They have, evidently, not
read Mr.. Webster closely. Speaking in
the Panama Congress debate in the
House on April IA, 1925, Mr.. Webster
said: ut is, doubtless, here
that this declaration (Mr. Monroe's)
must be considered as founded on our
rights; and to spring mainly from re-
gard to their preservation. 1t did not
commit us, at all events, to take up
arMs on any indication of hostile feel.
ing by the powers eff Europe toward
South America If. for example, all
the states of Europe had refused to
trade with South America until her
States should return to their former
allegiance, that would have furnished
no cause of interference for us. Or if
an armament had been furnished by
the allies to act against the provinces
remote from us, as Chill or Bqenos
Ayres, the distance of the scene of az
ton, diminishing eur apprehension of
danger and diminishing also our means
of effectual interposition, might still
have left us to content ourselves with
remonstrance."
In short, Mr.. Webster firmly took the
ground. occupied since by all our ad-
ministrations, that the Monroe doctrine
was not an arbitrary, fixed rule of ac'
ton, binding US to interfere on any
and all occasions to prevent EurOpea
armed action anywhere on the Ameri
can continents or seas. but a gene raj
declaration of the principle that Eu-
ropean armed Intervention in the af-
fairs of any American State must, in
every case, be considered upon its own
merits, with a determination not to al
low the honor, the safety or the inter
ests of the United States to be assailed
or endangered. That is the sum and
substance of Monroeism, and it is as
distinctly different from jingoism as
broad and high principled statesman
ship is from narrow and low-motived
| demagogy.