The Democratic advocate. [volume] (Westminster, Md.) 1865-1972, 1896-05-16
For the Democratic Advocate,
BY CHARLES l.. sHIPLEY.
PART FIRST.

What is the Monroe Doctrine? Where
did it originate-to what is it appied-and
for what purpose?
The questions quoted above are ones
that have been propounded innumerable
times, even by thousands of American
citizens, as well as by the subjects of lead
ing foreign powers.
Especially has this been the case since
the 18th of December, 1895, when Presi-
dent Cleveland sent to the American Con-
gress his special message, urging firm
application of the doctrine to the boundary
dispute between Great Britain and the
Republic of Venezuela, South America
To give correct review of explanation
of this interesting subject, we are COM
PEELED to carry the public back to the past
eighty years ago.
On the 10th of November, 1915, the
second treaty of Paris was concluded be-
tween France and the allied powers, a
treaty which was the result from the de-
feat and banishment of the great Napo-
leon, and treaty that brought peace to
Europe after twenty years Of war that had
deluged that continent in tears and blood.
On the same day that this treaty was
signed, a second one was concluded be-
tween Russia, Prussia, Austria and Eng
land, designed as a means of security for
the Allied Powers, by which it was de-
clared that Napoleon Bonaparte and has
tamily should be forever excluded from
the throne of France.
On the same day third treaty, and
one of notorious celebrity, called "The
Holy Alliance was signed by the EN-
perors of Russia and Austria, and the
King of Prussia, who bound themselves,
lin conformity with the principles of
Holy Scripture, to lend each other every
aid, assistance and succor, on every occa-
sion
This treaty was in short time acceded
to by nearly all the continental powers as
parties to the compact, although the
Prince Regent of England subsequently
George " declined to sign it, on the
ground that the English constitution pre-
vented him becoming party to any con-
vention that was not countersigned by
responsible Minister.
The terms of the Holy Alliance were
drawn up by the young Emperor of Rus
sia, Alexander l., who was undoubtedly
personal friend of Napoleon, and whose
great beneyolence of character prompted
him to devise plan of common interna-
tional law that should substitute the peace
full reign of the Gospel in place of the de-
structive rule of the sword.
But although the author Of the Holy
Alliance intended that it should be bene-
ficent in its application, it was yet to be
interpreted by absolute monarchs, and the
result was that it was received everywhere
in Europe by the liberal party with dread
and suspicion, they contending that, under
the mask of piety and religion, it was in
reality measure used as pretext for
enforcing the doctrine of passive obedience,
and one aiming at resistance to all efforts
for the establishment of constitutional
freedom. We shall soon see how this
prophecy became history.
The kingdom of Naples, embracing
Sicily and Southern Italy, nearly identical
with the Magma Grecia of antiquity, had
been erected into an Independent monarchy
in 1874, under the Infante Don Carlos of
Spain, who took the name of Charles III.
It continued under succession of tyranni-
cal rulers of the Bourbon dynasty until
1898, when the Italian portion of the
kingdom was then overcome by the French,
who held it from 1903 till 1875, when it
returned to its former sovereign, Ferdinand
VII, of Spain, who, during the French
rule and occupation Of his country, had
maintained his court in the Sicilian part Of
his kingdom.
Under the rule Of the monarch, the
kingdom was greatly neglected, yet the
people were oppressively taxed and denied
any form Of representative government.
This mode of rule soon produced its re-
suits, and on the I'd of July, 1920, the
people broke out in open instruction, and
remonstrance was sent to the court de-
manding representative constitution