The Intermountain Catholic. (Salt Lake City [Utah] ;) 1899-1920, 1899-12-30
CANADA AND THE MONROE
DOCTRINE.

! Viewed from whatever point it NAV
be, the action of Canada in sending a
regiment to aseist. England in the Boer
war is a contention that the Monroe
doctrine is in future to be disregarded
by Canada and Therefore by England
as well, If Canada can assist England
in war in South Africa without inter
ference on the part of the United
States it is an opehhadnission that old
world governments have rights on this
continent which the fathers of the
government have ever stoutly denied.
1t matters little that the object of the
united action of England and Canada
is in South Africa, Once the principle
is admitted, governments on this con
tnent may take up arms in defense
and support of the encroachments of
European nations, principles for which
President Monroe eontended may we'll
be denied application hereafter. by any
government Whatsoever.
1t. seems to be generally conceded.
however, that England has a workable
understanding with the adminfstra-
ton at Washington and we may expect
her to so to the furthest limits of that
understanding. With assurances from
the administration at Washington that
under all circumstances the United
States government via remain neutral
England can well afford to laugh at
the notion of foreign interference.
M Without como ms
part of our government England would
hardly assume to take the action out
lined in the following dispatch:
Washington. Dec. 24.-Great Britain's
intention to blockade Lorenzo MARQUES
and to utilize Portuguese territory in
Africa for the invsGion Of the Transvaal
Is no longer discredited by the dipIo-
matte world here.
Such a violation of the laws of NEIL
LralitY, as either act would be, is, in
diplomatic opinion here tonight, es-
sential to the conquest by Great Brit
lin of the Transvaal.
Great Britain's blockade of Delagoa
IT Lorenzo would be bold and flag
ant violation of the laws of nations, as
laws prohibit the blockade
If p neutral port.
If Great Britain lands armed forces
IN Portuguese territory, it will be the
iuty of the Portugal to ddsarm them.
But it is believed that the violation
# the neutrality laws will not be re-
ented by Portugal
In that event, or even if Portugal will
Tot protest, it would be the duty of
2useia, France, Germany, Japan and |
tally to call Great Britain to account.
The United States will not permit it
elf to be entrafned in the International |
which are certain to |
rise, unless the rights of citizens of the |
United States in the South African re-
ublics demand the dispatch of an |
american squadron to Delagoa bay or I
Durham.
This is q brief summary of the South
.frican situation as it is viewed tonight
Y the most skiilful diplomats in Wash
lgton.
The cable news that Great Britain
ad actually established a, blockade of
.orenzo Marques, a neutral port, and
I'D undertaken to transport troops
cross. neutral territory to the Trans
aal, is regarded here as, perhaps, pre-
nature. Coupled, however, with the
iplonatic conviction that both of these
cts win be absolutely essential TO
reat Britain's arrival at Pretoria, the
eWS is or the nlcSt startling cHdIdCuel,
nd especially in view of the fact that
may soon become necessary for the
nited States to be rpresented at Della
GA bay or Durham.
The report that Great Britain would
eize Delagoa bay has been denied by
le British foreign Office, and it has
zen stated officially by Portugal that
he would not leave the port to Great
Titain.
Diplomats. however, put no faith in
lie technical denials of either country,
Id are certain of this alternative.
Great Britain will seize Delagoa bay
ithout the consent of Portugal. or
lie will seize it with the implied con-
mt of Portugal.
opinion favors the lapter
tentative, which in any event will re-
lit in general war.
Startling is this proposed action ON
e part of England, there is every !
ason 70 assume that she would have {
e passive support OF the United States ]