The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1896-01-08
PRIVACY IN AMERICA
THE MONROE DOCTRINE DEFINED
BY AN ENGLISH EXPERT.
The United States the Warder Of the
from an Eminent Authority.


THE Principles OF International Law" by
DIR. Thomas ]. Lawrence Cd. c. Heath &
Co., Boston,, bearing on the Monroe doc
trine. Dr. Lawrence is an Englishman and
lecturer on international law at the Royal
Naval College. at Greenwich. therefore. his
opinion is of special value at this time. He
is an associate of the British Institute OF
international Law; was, from 1888 to 1885.
deputy TO Sir William Harcourt, then pro-
fessor of international law in the University
of Cambridge. England. and from 1882 TO
1893 professor of International law in the
University of Chicago, and during that time
was prominent in the West as a university
extension lecturer on this and related ques-
tions. 1t will thus be seen that, while an
Englishman. ne is thoroughly familiar with
the American law and spirit:
THE position of the United States on the
American continent is in some respects like
and in others exceedingly unlike that which
is accorded in Europe to the six great pow
ers. The great Republic of the new world
stands out as giant among pygmies. There
is no other State in the same hemisphere
which can be compared to her in strength
and influence. If il be true that there is a
primacy in America comparable in any way
with that which exists in Europe, it must
be welded by her and by her alone. There
is no room for that machinery of confer
ences, congresses and diplomatic communi-
cations which plays so large a part in the
proceedings of the great powers. The SUI
premacy of a committee of States and the
supremacy of a single State cannot be ex-
ercised in the same manner. What in Eu-
rope Is done after long and tedious negotia-
lions, and much discussion between repre-
sentatives of no less than six countries. can
be done in America by the decision of one
Cabinet discussing In secret at Washing
must be different. the kind of control must be
the same. We cannot assert that any Presi-
dent has gone TO the length of assuming
the powers exercised by the European con-
cert In debating territorial arrangements
or calling new states into being. An Amer
lean Belgium does not exist; and no Amer
ritory from some decsylng neighbor on the
demand of the United States. But though
supremacy has never been exercised in this
extreme form, there can be no doubt that
very large powers of supervision have been
claimed for certain definite purposes which
tend rather to increase in number than to
decrease.
THE AMERICAN POSITION
''The doctrines of Washington's farewell
address, eloquently paraphrased by Jeffer-
son in his inaugural, in the famous words.
peace, commerce, and honest friendship
none,' grew in the hands Of President Mon
roe, and. under the circumstances connected
with the project of the holy alliance to re-
store the dominion of Spain over her re-
volted American colonies into an assertion
that the United States would consider any
attempt on the part of European powers to
extend their system to any portion of this
hemisphere as dangerous to our peace and
salty. With this was Joined in the same
a re- i'm hat fha rfnot,
continents, by the free and independent
condition which they have assumed ana
maintained are henceforth not 10 h. con-
sidered as subjects for future colonization
by any European powers These two prin-
ciples taken together. form the Monroe
doctrine. which has been repeated again and
executive department 1t has been the SUBJ
ject of vast amount of comment, and the
CLOSES upon 1T sometimes go far beyond
the original text. We will not attempt to
collect, still less to reconcile the various
statements that have been put forth from
time to time. What we have to do is to
make clear the position which the United
States does in fact occupy with regard to
the other powers of the new world.
soon after the assertion of the Monroe
doctrine in the presidential message of Dec
2. 1873, the revoted colonies of Spain then
newly recognized Independent states,
took the ground that the utterances of
President Monroe constituted a pledge of
support from the United States to the other
American republics in excluding European
interference from the political complica-
tons of the American continent and pre-
venting any European state from acquiring
by colonization further dominion of the
new world. They, therefore, proposed a con-
greSS at Panama, with a view to the forma-
ton OF all alliance for mutual support The
scheme, however, ended in nothing. owing
to the opposition of the congress and peo-
pie of the United States to any agreement
each action on each case as
it arose. In April. 1885, the
House OF Representatives resolved
that the government Of the United States
ought not TO be represented at the con-
gress of Panama. except in diplomatic
character, nor ought they to form any al
respecting such an alliance with all or any
of the Spanish-American republics; nor
ought they TO become parties with them.
or either Of them, to any joint declaration
for the purpose of preventing the Interior
ence of any of the European powers with
their independence or form of government.
or to any comCact for the purpose of pre-
venting colonization upon the continent OF
America: but that the people of the United
States should be left free to act, in any
crisis in such manner as their feelings
Of friendship toward these republics and as
their own honor and policy may at the tine
dictate.
EUROPEAN INTERVENTION.
'This attitude of noncommittal has been
maintained ever since. The United States
is bound by no pledge to any other American
state to assist it by force of arms in resist
ing European Intervention. But at the same
time ii has acted again and again upon the
principle laid down by Jefferson when he
was consulted by President Monroe in the
autumn of 1923. He then wrote: Our first
maxim should he. never 10 entangie our
selves in the broils of Europe; our second
never to suffer Europe TO intermeddle with
cis-Atlantic affairs More than once Great
Britain and France have been informed that
the United States would not see with indif-
any other European power. fhe Clayton
Buwer treaty OF 1850 bound England not to
exercise dominion over any part of Central
America and. in the course Of the long dis
cussions which followed to the exact
meaning and extent of the obligation there
bv imposed. persistent diplomatic pressure
at last prevailed upon the British govern
quired long before the treaty was signed
over the Indians of the Mosquito coast. The
French intervention in Mexico conceded In
point of time with the great American civil
war; but the federal government. preoccu-
pied as X was, did not neglect to prote ST
whenever opportunity offered, nor, indeed
against the attempt on the part of the
French army of occupation OF the country
and set up an emperor. contrary. IL was
maintained, to the wishes Of the great ma
jorty of the Mexican people. The downfall
of the Confederacy enabled the admInistra-
ton at Washington to act with greater
vgor than before: and its energetic remon-
strances. coupled with the knowledge that II
they were disregarded force would in all
probability be used. caused France 10 with
draw her troops and led 10 the speedy down
f,x-f