The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1896-01-22
where all the kindred of the capulets

country ar the time the Monroe doctrine
was announced, and looking to the then
threatening position of~~the European
powers and the feeble condition of Mexico
and the South American States, it might
well have been our duty to ourselves and
our own interests would have demanded
that we should have interviewed to pre-
vent the reconquest of the revolted
colonies by the Spanish Government. 1t
may have been well also to give notice
to all the world that we could not abide
the appropriation of any portion of either
North or South America by European
power by way of colonization as un-
occupied territory, but / cannot see any
ground for maintaining that this Govern
States that in Controversies with Euro
pean powers we would and must neces-
sarily intervene and assist them by our
European power. AS Mr.. Webster states
it, that, as it appears to me, would raise
contingency in which we should then
have to decide whether our interests and
our safety were involved or not.
THAT also appears to me to be the true
rule which should be applicable in the
IS the s integr!ty Of + our our @ instifutiona en-
dangered by reason of this controversy
between Great Britain and Venezuela?
L appears to me that at the dSctrne which
upon which the Administration bases
the extreme position it has taken, is far
templated by the Monroe doctrine or which
has ever yet been acted upon as a part
of our national policy.
The controlling reason as presented by
the President is not the acquisition or ex-
tension of territory merely, whereby we
are to be endangered. But it is the taking
possession of the territory of one of iour
neighboring republics against its will, and
in derogation of its rights" That the
mere acquisition or extension of territory
is not the gravamen of the offense is
shown by the following language taken
from the Presidents message
Great Brfain's present proposition
has never thus far been regarded as ad-
missible by Venezuela, though any adjust
ment of the boundary which that country
may deem for her advantage and may
enter into of her own free will cannot,
States
Venezuela might thus cede by treaty
the half of her territory. and yet we
if any part of it is taken by force, we
are then bound to intervene and resist
the attempt by, force, Great Britain may
get the whole disputed territory by treaty
or purchase. and neither our safety nor
the integrity of our institutions IS in
volyed. But if there is a quarrel, then
our own and resist by armed interyen-
tion the attempt of Great Britain to take
forcible possession of the disputed lands.
This appears to be inconsistent with
the previous position taken in the mes
sage that it can make no difference
ed by by an IA advance e Of frontier q or other
wise But, whether it be Inconsistent
or not, the deduction to be drawn from
the spirit and the letter of the message
is that the mere acquisition of territory
is not the cause of offense. but the real
cause is the attempt of European pow
er to impose upon and Cypress weaker
American State or nation.
Il can but think that this is new de-
parture; that it practically means that
this Government must assume a protec-
torate. over Mexico. Central America.
and all the South American States, and
that, no matter whether these States
lAa .ixrl,r in, So of
q conflict with European power we
men and munitions of war and force
enough to protect the weaker American
power against the stronger European
power. This seems to me to be the plain
inference to be de5uced 15..o fr9Ea the atti- tt
Secretary of State in the correspondence
with Great Britain.
Again, corfceding that the message
does. not go SO far as have endeayored
to show, it may be that our safety and
the integrity of our institutions would
not be in the least affected or endangered
pean power under such c.rcums stances.
and and yet the position Of 1lIe Presiaen5 aa @
room ' for inquiry as to whether we
would suffer any damage under those
circumstances. With them it seems that
the mere enforcement of a claim by a
stronger European power which may re-
suit IN the acquisition of more or less
territory is in itself. the injury and
safety and the integrity of our institu-
tions.
trine. 1t is to be borne in mind that
Venezuela is 5000 miles distant. Accord
ing to estimates which have been MADE
of its population it has about 2,2o0,000 in
about 900, are said to be whites, while
the rest of the population consists of In
dams. negroes, and mixed breeds. It is
States. and Venezuela especially. nave
been IN a state of revcIa - more or
less, eyer since they threw off the Span
in his correspondence. which accompa-
MES the Presidents message
In 1S4S Venezuela entered upon a pc
riod of civil commoIions, which lasted
for more than a quarter of a century,
and the negotiations thus interrupted in
1874 were not resumed until 1885,
.Certainly a nation which was SO re-
Gently in state of practical revolution
for period of twenty-five years can
hardly commend itself to US as a proper
ward over whom we should be willing
to assume guardianship, and we know
that the same condition of things has
been more or less true of all the. South
it .behooves us to pause and consider
well before we agree to an extension
and development OF the Monroe doctrine
to point which involves our taking
ing to protect them as against European
powers. 1t cannot be that population
50 Unstable in their forms Of government
and systems of policy as they are, can
fail to embroi themselves with foreign
powers, sometimes when they are right
and perhaps more frequently when they
are wrong. If We lead them once to un-
derstand that we will stand between
them and foreign powers, they will be
reckless, hasty, and violent, and we shall
find ourselves in nterminable trouble in
consequence Besides, it may be fairly
supposed that foreign powers would say
TO US that our interposition as now pro-
posed would lay upon us the duty OF
making good all undertakings on the
part of these governments and being re-
commit. That would be the effect Of a
protectorate, and / do not myself very
well see how position of that kind could
be successfully contested if we do under
take to interfere as is now proposed.
81 do not wish to be understood as
affirming that there are no cases in which
it is not our right. and our duty to our
selves, to interfere; but the test is not
whether stronger power is impossible
upon feeble one or not 1t is not that
or to any other power on the face of the
earth except ourselves. If we are to in
terfere, it must be simply and solely be-
cause our duty to ourselves and our own
rights and interests absolutely require it
Il am fully aware of the fact that the
commonly received Interpretation of the
Monroe doctrine is much broader and the
understanding of its binding force much
stronger than l have adopted. But 1t has
not yet been 50 engrafted upon OF
incorporated with our system, with the
latitude to which l refer, as that, when
a proper case arises, we may not review
it's history, its past application, and its
adaptation to the conditions now exist
ing
Il can but think that the public mind
as well as many OF our public men; has