New-York tribune., 1900-05-10
THE REAL MONROE DOCTRINE.


Eminent statesmen and journalists of Europe
have been giving Americans much surprising in
formation about the Monroe Doctrine. Amer-
cans cannot help some surprise at finding that
it means many and such contradictory things.
If it means much as some Europeans suppose,
the wonder is that any European ever men
toned ii with respect If it means as little as
some of them suppose. the wonder is that any
body there or here ever mentioned it at all. AS
it is an American idea, OIL else nothing. it might
be as well to assume that it did not and does not
mean things hostile to the spirit and conduct of
the American Government In any rational dis
cusson the necessary first step Is to consider
what opponent really means, that bat
teres may be aimed at the place where he is
instead of the place where he is not.
President Monroe had taken part in the Louis
ana purchase from France in 1908 the most i'm
portant territorial expansion in the history of
this Nation. and as President he added Florida
in 1919. But the Monroe Doctrine had abso-
lutely nothing to do with acquisition of terri
tory, affirmatively or negatively. 1t was simply
a declaration that. as the United States would
take no part in controversies between European
Powers, so Europe should take part in Amer
lean controversies, and that "any Intervention
for the purpose of depressing" the American
States formerly Spanish, cor controlling in any
manner their destinies by any European Power"
would be regarded "as the manifestation of
IAN unfriendly disposition toward the United
States" There was not hint or thought
that the United States wanted to control or ac-
qure those States, and it has never attempted
either. The American doctrine was that our
neighbors should be left free to worit out their
destinies without European control The reason
needs no search Republican ideas of govern
ment did not seek to destroy monarcllies in
Europe. Neither should European monarches
seek TO overthrow American republics. What
ever possessions European Powers still bad Oh
this continent were not held dangerous to the
peace and safety of the United States" in the
words of Mr.. Monroe. but any and every attack
upon the self-governing States of America by
European Powers would be- II doctrine
that never had TO be stated again, because it
was an obvious truth.
The United States had no idea of acquiring
any of these possessions, with consent Of their
people without. Of that It's history has given
proof. But it could not with safety see the mon
archical system of Europe extended over Amer
lean States which had achieved their freedom
from Spain That was the beginning and the
end of the business. 1t had nothing to do with
the acquisitions OF either European or Ameri-
can Powers in the Pacific Ocean, in the South
Sea- in Asia or Asiatic waters. or in Africa.
Absolutely nothing was affirmed or denied about
any conceivable change except the then medi-
tated control of certain American States which
had secured freedom from Spanish oppression.
There was not a shadow of opposition to the
conquest Of the North Pole, the South Pole
Asia Africa by anybody. The United States
did not want more monarchical neighbors. the
spreading of feudal or aristocratic ideas about
its borders, the necessity of arnng and perpet-
ually defending itself against possible attack.
The last Spanish VicerOy had departed from
Mexico two years before Monroe spoke. The
United States hoped for such peace free gov
ernments promised. 1t did not even ask removal
of Spain from Porto Rico or Cuba but waited
sevenfy FIVE years before its patience there was
eXhaus ID. In 1898 it only said: Cease fighting
here to set up monarchies instead of freedom
Thus there is not a trace of reason for assert
ing that American acquisition of property in the
West Indies. the Hawaiian Islands or the Phil
ippines is abandonment of or departure from
the Monroe Doctrine 1t has nothing whatever
to do with the question whether E'f, opean mon
arches shall set up their power instead of free
dom at American doorsteps Any Power in
Europe, Gar Emperor or even the Turk.
might have taken all the Philippine Islands
from Spain in April 1SaS and it would have had
nothing whatever TO do with the Monroe Doc
trine. The establishment of n live and powerful
monarchy in place of fading Spain in Cuba
would have been in the words of Monroe dan
"gerous to the peace and safety of the United
States. But the Republic itself. without being
asked, gave its assurance that Cuba should have
freedom. Nothing could he more absurd than
the pretence that this Intervention in behalf Of
freedom and against monarchy was violation
of the Monroe Doctrine. 1t was but the flower
ing of the shrub Monroe had planted In 1923
the Republic said: "Other morarchies for neigh
bors are not wanted" In 1898 it said This
monarchy must go" Considering the antago-
nism between Spanish and American ideas of
justice, between Crown and Glass and Privilege
in Cuba. and Equal Laws. Equal Rights and
Freedom for all across the narrow channel the
wonder is not that other monarchies have not
been attempted on American soil but that Cuba
remained Spanish so long 1t would not have so
remained had there been in American character
the grasping spirit which some European critics
think they discover thee