The Democratic advocate. [volume] (Westminster, Md.) 1865-1972, 1905-03-18
sANTo DOMINGO TREATY.
Democratic Protest and Dissent
From President Roosevelt's
Views.
The Real Meaning, Intent and Scope
of the Monroe Doctrine

presented IN committee VIII De presthteu "
the Senate in executive session:
1.-The undersigned. dissenting from the
views expressed by the President in his mes
sage 10 the Senate, in connection with the
protocol between the United States and Santo
Domingo. signed on the 9Th of February, 1908,
and sent to the Senate with view TO MS ratl-
6eation, consider it their duty 10 state the
grounds of their dissent.
1.-The Monroe doctrine has It's authentic de-
6n;tion in the message of President Monroe
to Congress on the 2nd day of December,
1923. Ne other definition, gloss. has re.
ceived the approval ofthe people fthe United
States. or of the Congress, or OF any President.
until the message of the President that ac-
companies this protocol which states the
grounds on which It's ratification Is recon
mended.
MONROE DOCTRINE SET FORTH.
"The Monroe doctrine, stated and defined
in the annual message of December :, 1873,
is in the following language:
The citizens of the United States cherish
sentiments the most friendly in favor OF the
liberty and happiness of their tellow-men on
that side of the Atlantic. In the wars OF the
European powers, in matters relating to them
selves, we have never taken any part, nor
does it eomport with our policy TO do So 1t
is only when our rights are invaded or seri-
make preparation for our defense. With the
movements in this hemisphere We are OF
necessity more Immediately connected, aud
by causes which must be obvi0us 10 an en-.
lightened aud impartial observers. The po-
litcal system of the allied powers is essentially
different in this respect from that OF America.
This difference proceeds from that which eX-
lists in their respective governments; and to
the defense of eur own, which has been achlev-
ed BY the loss of so much blood and treasure
and matured by the wisdom OF their most en-
lightened citizens, and under which We have
enjoyed unexampled felicity, this whole nation
is devoted. We owe il, therefore, to candor
aud to the amicable relations existing between
the United States and those powers to declare
that we should consider any attempt on their
part to extend their system TO any portion oil
this hemisphere rs dangerous to our peace and
safety. With the existing colonies and de
Tendencies of any European power We have
not inferfered and shall not interfere. But
with the governments who have declared
their Independence and maintained il, and
whose independence we have, on great con-
sideration and on just principles, ackGowl-
edged, we could not view any interposition
for the purpose of expressing them or con
trolling in any manner their destiny, by any
other light than as the manifestation 81 an
unfriendly disposition toward the United
States.
In the war between those new governments
and Spain we declared our neutrality at the
time of their recognition, and TO this we have
adhered and shall continue TO adhere, pro
vided no change shall occur which, in the
Judgment of the competent authorities of this
Government. shall make a corresponding
shange on the part of the United States indis
peusable to their security.
LAS statement Of the duty and policy Of
the United States with reference TO the Ameri-
can republics, this declaration needs no ex-
position to make it certain and complete in
its scope and meaning. Its limitations are
clearly understood when they are construed
in connection with the attitude Of nations Of
both hemispheres at the time when their doc
trines were announced and promulgated. as II
is stated in the message of President Aonroe.
ATTITUDE or NATIONS THES.
THAT history, upon which this declaration
was rested BY President Monroe, is thus
stated in bis message:
II was stated at the commencement of the
last session that great efort was then max
ing in Spain and Portugal TO improve the con
ditlon of the people Of those countries, and
that il appeared to be conducted with extra
ordinary moderation. Il need scarcely be
remarked that the result has been so far very
Of events IN that quarter of the globe, with
which we have so much intercourse and from
which we derive our origin, We have always
been anxious and interested spectators.
The late events IN SPAN and Portugal show
that Europe is still unsettled. OF this i'm
poriant fact no stronger proof can be addueed
than that the allied powers should have thought
it proper, on any principle satisfactory TO
themselves. to have interposed by force in the
internal concerns Of Spain. To what extent
such interpositioR may be carried on the same
principle is a question IN which all independ
ent powers whose governments differ from
theirs are interested. even those most remote,
and surely none more so than the United
States. Our policy in regard to Europe,
which was adopted al an early stage Of the
wars which have 10 long agitaied that quarter
of the globe, nevertheless remains the same.
which is not TO interfere IN the internal con
Germs of any of its powers; to consider the gov
eminent de facto as the legitimate government
for US; to cultivate friendly relations With il.
and TO preserve those relations by frank, firm
and manly policy, meeting IN all instances the
Just claims OF every power, submitting To in
juries from none. But in regard 10 those
continents circumstances are eTaiDeuiiy and
couspicuously different. II is impossible that
the allied powers should extend their political
without endangering our peace aud happiness >;
nor can anyone believe that our Southern
breihern, If left TO themselves, would adopt il
Of their own accord. It's equally impossible,
therefore, that we should behold such inter
position in any form with indifference If we
look TO the comparative strength and resources
of SPAN and those new governments, and
their distance from each other, il must be
obvious that she eau never snbdne them. II
Ill. IL 4
leave the parties to themselves, in the hope
that the other powers viii pursue the same
course.
NEUTRALITY LAW or NATIONS.
ssThe essential matter Of international law
aud of duty TO ourselves and 10 foreign conn
tries presented in the message of the President,
upon which the Senate is forced to act and
must adopt If the protocol is ratified, is n
question of neutrality and Hon-interveution in
case of diplomatic controversy between an
American republic and European or other
tahsoeeanie power, and 3 question whether
our neutrality and non-intervention is in such
case consistent with the Monroe doctrine,
when such American states consent to sur
render their revenues and their right to collect
them without coercion or oppressive duress,
TO a transoeeanie power for the payment OF
its bonds or other obligations due 10 the citi-
zens of such powers.
'The neutrality 60 which Mr. Monroe
pledged his country in his message on the
I'd day of December, 1928, is the accepted
law of nations, which we have enacted and
made compulsory in our statute of the 10Th OF
April, 1918, the first enactment of a law OF
neutrality that was ever recorded IN the statutes
of nation. That neutrality applies to an
existing state of war between beligerenls and
not to controversies that may or may not result
in actual war.
'If we interfere or intervene in any con-
troversy between an American state and a
European power on the ground that war is
probable, or ever certain TO occur, and that
it may result in the oppression or dismember
ment or the overthrow of such state, we 60
outside the requirements Of the Monroe doc
irine, which pledges us to neutrality. We
enter into alliance with the American state,
take up her controversy and become party
TO the war if it should ensue.
PANAMA THE ONLY EXCEPTION.
''There is no such promise, engagement or
intimation in the message of President Mon
roe, and no American state, except Panama,
has ever attempted to pledge the United
States in advance 10 the preservation of her
independence, wch includes her autonomy
and her sovereignty, and this pledge had no
reference to transoceanic powers, but applied
alone to Colombia.
Notwithstanding this special treaty guar
antee of her independence, Panama is under
the shelter of the Monroe doctrine, and was
40 nlaced by This RECOGNITION of her indepen-