The Billings gazette. [volume] (Billings, Mont.) 1896-1919, 1901-03-15
ATTACKING MONROE DocrD1NE.

ate's amendments to the Hay-Paunce-
fote treaty, the British government
has not done so in a harsh or al arbitrary
manner which would act as a bar to
further negotiations tending to bring
the two countries to a point where by
mutual concessions they might arrive
at, an agreement satisfactory to both.
At no time can it be said did TIE adj
ministration entertain strong hope
that Downing street would acquiesce
in the conditions imposed by the SEN
ate. 1t was not reasonable to expect
it. Acceptance Of the amendments
would have been a complete surrender,
without a guild pro quo, of all the
claims and rights Great Britain ac-
quired under the Clayton-Bulwer
treaty. Nations are like individuals
in one Respectfully do not, unless alb
solutely forced to do so, as a rule:
yield anything without receiving
something in return. Particularly
does this hold good in respect to Eng
land. While the Americans may not
like Britain's attitude in the premises,
their love of fairness and liberality OF
mind causes them to harbor but little
resentment. Even were they inclined
to feel otherwise, by simply putting
themselves in the place occupied by
the English they would be compelled
to admit that, after all, England has
not done anything that America would
probably not have done under the
same circumstances and conditions.
Perhaps One of the most interesting
phases in connection with the matter
is the position taken by the British
press ON the subject. Without excep-
ton, SO far as known, every English
newspaper Of influence and standing
approves Of the answer. Some of
them aver go further, notably the
London Standard.
By reference to the news columns
of yesterdays Gazette it will be seen
that that publication is open in its adj
vocacy of attack on the Monroe doc
trine. With British plainness of
speech it says the time has come
when Europe should no longer be COL
tent with respecting the attitude of the
United States in reference to fur
Their acquisition by European powers
of territorial possessions on the West
ern Hemisphere. Apparently en-
boldened by British success in the
direction Of acquiring territorial ex-
tension at the expense of weaker or
savage nations, the Standard calls at
~tention to the possibilities in the
same direction offered by some of the
countries of South America.
1t may be contended that in making
the suggestion the Standard speaks for
itself only and presents the views of q
class no more numerous than is EN-.
braced in the payrolls representing its
editorial staff. But for all that the
article under consideration is moi
without significance, particularly al
this time. The Standard is an inf1u.
. entail paper, and as past events go tt
show, not so far removed from touch
with the government it supports
q While it may be expressing only 1T
!, own views, there is no way at thi'
d date OF proving that it may not bt
S acting on a hint coming from a higher
authority and speaking for one WHIT
represents the views and ideas of some
one OF greater power. If the Stand
ard article serves no other purpose, i
may be relied upon to be taken up b,
the German and other continental pap
ers, none of whom, no more than thei
governments, regard the Monroe doc
q trine with favor and have never MISE,
4 an opportunity to attack it and de
le mand that it be ignored by the oil
m world powers. No publication of tn
n standing of tile London Standard i
+, without its influence and following
0, and in making the demand it does
will not long be alone. England, a
well as the United States, has it jr
W goes and it need not be surprising j
the Standards editorial some time {
ae other finds echo in some of til
y. speeches that will be made in parlis
IT. ment. .
a 1t will be interesting to note no,
ne the article in question will be receive
IT, by the South American nations VIII