The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1897-12-09
THE UNITED STATES AND GERMANY.

1t is very seldom that anything occurs to
create any friction between the United
States and Germany, but the recent Ger
manhattan incident has ELECTED a little
warmth of expression on both sides. Some
American newspapers, jumping hastily to
the conclusion that Germany intended to
''gobble up Haiti, or at least take a piece
off the island, have prematurely Haunted the
Monroe doctrine and warned her to keep off,
while on the other side Prince Bismarck is
reported as saying: I'VE deem it political
necessity to oppose this American arrogance
often and emphatcally, and certainly when
directed against Germany" These express
sions on both sides are uncalled for, and in
so far as they are calculated to AFFECT pub
lie opinion, unfortunate. 1t is evident that
Germany has no intention of appropriatng
any part of the island of Haiti inter-
fering with its government in any manner
beyond demanding apology and indem-
nifty for an outrage on a German citizen.
The United States would have done the
same thing under similar circumstances,
has done it more than once. Every govern
ment worthy of the name claims and ex-
ercises the right of protecting its citizens
wherever they may be, and sort of claim
is better deserving of prompt and vigorous
enforcement. Germany's demand upon
Haiti is just one, and even if it is a little
severe it is not for us to complain On the
other hand, it is not American arrogance"
for us to refer to the Monroe doctrine as
affording ground for a protest against ter
ritorial aggression in this hemisphere by
any European government. The fact that
the doctrine has no application TO the pres
ent case does not lessen its force or i'm
portance from an American point of view.
1t is not an outgrowth of arrogance, but of
the doctrine of self-protection and self
preservation The United States does not
intend to have any more European powers
camping around her borders or appropri-
atng territory within striking distance Of
this country, and without intending to be
arrogant she intends to maintain and en-
force this doctrine.
AS for the United States and Germany.
they should always be good friends No
other country in Europe is so well entitled
as Germany to be regarded as our natural
friend and ally. great deal has been
said first and last about our traditional
friendship" with France, and our long
standing friendship with Russia, etc. In so
far as these relations exist they are artificial
friendships of accident or convenience
There is no natural congeniality or kinship
OF nature between the United States and
France or Russia. There is little or no re-
lationship between our peoples or languages
We are originally Anglo-Saxons, with an
immense addition of the Saxon element by
immigration, while the French belong to the
Latin races and the Russians are Mongo-
liam, Finnish, Turco-Tartaric, and heaven
only knows what else. There is no common
ground on which Americans can fraternize
with the people of either country. The aid
furnished by France to the American col
onies during the revolutionary war was
purely selfish-done to hurt England, and
for that alone. Since then she has done
nothing to deserve our friendship and not a
few things to forfeit it. At the beginning
of our civil war she entered into secret
understanding with Great Britain that they
were to act together in regard to American
affairs, and they were first to acknowledge
the Confederates as 'belligerents-Grea
Britain on May 49, 1861, and France June
Ii. At the same time the Emperor of the
French entered into political combinations
for the propagation of Imperialism in North
America, which resulted in the attempt to
establish monarchy in Mexico with Maxi
milan on the throne. This was worse than
~
menace, and well understood as such. We
do owe something to Russia for her friendly
attitude firmly maintained during the civil
war, but we owe nothing to France.
on the other hand. we are related to Ger