The daily morning Astorian. [volume] (Astoria, Oregon) 1883-1899, 1895-12-20
Its Text and the History
Leading Up to 1t.

Leading Up to 1t.
lear and Distinct Statement of Facts
1.-Two Declarations Based on
Different Conditions.
In view of the very great and general
interest taken in the present Venezuelan
controversy, the Astorian this morning
presents to its readers the follow ng splen-
did article on the Monroe doctrine and its
application to the Venezuelan question,
appearing in this months Forum and
written by Mr.. A. G. Cassatt.
In a number of international questions
which have confronted our state depart
ment within the past few years, in which
the United States and other American ma
tions have been interested. what is known
as the Monroe doctrine has been ap-
pealed to by a large class of statesmen
and newspapers as being statement of
the settled policy of the United States
as to the ow nership and occupation of the
territory of the Western continents. In
the controversy with England some
months ago as to the collection of an
indemnity from one of the Central Amer
lean states the columns Of our papers
and the speeches of our orators were fun
of intlmations that the Monroe doctrine
was being sadly neglected In the present
Venezuelan question we are assured from
time to time, by part of the pres, that
we may look for speedy enforcement of
that doctrine; while another part bewails
the neglect which has befallen 1t. Many
of the platforms of our political parties,
both Democratic and Republican, have
during the past few years contained de-
larations of approval of the Monroe doc
tline. Speakers of national reputation
have attracted wide attention by dwelling
upon the question, whether or not the
present administration proposes to main
tain and assert that doctrine and rave de-
clared that the Uni ed States So uld stand
ready, with army and navy ard treasury.
to uphold it. It's maintenance has been
said to be a necessary part of vigorous
foreign policy" and administrations
which have been suspected of only mild
enthusiasm in its favor have been called
un-American and unpatriotic.
Now 1t is manifest that political prin-
ciple or doctrine which receives so much
attention and awakens so much feeling
cannot be safely misunderstood. A doc
trine which may require the whole ermy
and navy and treasury of the country to
uphold 1t, and which furnishes the Key
note of our relations with powerful for
eign governments on questions relating to
the American continents, merits the clos
III. 4NN. nj
ing and limitations, its binding force, and
its wisdom
ITS ORIGIN.
First, as to its origin: The Monroe doc
trine is the collective term applied to two
declarations contained in the message of
President Monroe to the congress of the
United States, December 2, 1923 The two
declarations are to be found in diff rent
portions of the message, and are made
with reference to different subject-mat-
ters; the history of one is diffe' ent from
that of the other, and the general prin-
ciples suggested by the two refer to en-
tirely different subjects. ! will consider
them separately. The first declaration is
as follows:
FIRST DECLARATION.
"At the proposal of the Russian Impe-
rial government, made through the min
ister of the emperor residing here. a full
power and instructions have been trans
mitted to the minister of the United
States at st. Petersburg, to arrange, by
amicable negotiation, the respect We rights
ard interests of the two nations Of the
Northwest coast of this continent. A
similar proposal has been made by His
Imperial Majesty to the government of
ftafn MI hO baan
acceded to. The government Of the Unit
ed States has been DESTROYS, hy this
friendly proceeding, of manifesfirg ths
great value which thew have invariably
attached to the friendship Of the Tmper-
or and their solicitude to cultivate the
best understanding with his povo rnnent
In the discussions to which this Interest
has given rise ard in the arrangements
by which they r'ay terminate, tie occa-
sion has been judged proper for asserting,
es a principle in which the rights and
interests of the United states are nvolv-
ed, that the American continents. by the
free and Independent """dit'tn which T. ey
have assumed and maintained. are hence-
forth not to be considered as subjects for
future colonization by any European pow
ers."
The facts that made the occasion "rrop-
er for asserting" this principle are these.
The Only European powers on the north
ern continent at this time were Russia
and Great Britain. Mexico and ntral
America had gained their Independence,
and Spain had ceded to the United States
all its territory in what is now The North
west portion of the United States. The
boundaries of the respective territories OF
tie United States, Great Britain, and
Russia were not clearly defined: but s'nce
the year 1913, under a treaty Tade In that
year, Great Britain and the United States
had Jointly occupied the land claimed by
each in the Northwest coast. Any dis
cussion between the United States and
Great Britain, therefore, as 10 their com
mon boundary, was postponed for a me.
In 1921 an imperial ukase Of the Car
asserted the title of Russia to that por-
tion Of tho continent extending from the
extreme northwest point southwark 20 the
Aftv-frst parallel which included about
half of what Is now known as ihs DO" IN
ion of Canada. Great Britain end the
Irnited States spec'a ally the former-we e
strongly opposed 10 this claim Of the
Cars, and they united in opposition to
1t.
II should be remembered that for three
centuries before the date Of this decara-
ton, the European nations had neen
planting colonies on the American eonti-
nents. The continents were. az the t'"e
Of their discovery by the O'd World. con-
sldered 10 be in a state Of nature, under
the dominion and title OF no civilized
government or people. The European ma
tons, therefore. had right to rlart col
onies 81 any portion OF the New World
70 which to which they cou'd acd"ire title
by discovery or prior occupation TSey
aysiIed themselves Of this opportunity.