The Washington times., 1905-12-08
Paris in a Panic.


tums of newspapers on the Euro
pean continent. which traces its
origin to that portion of the Presi-
dents annual message dealing with
the Monroe Doctrine. Perhaps, "ex-
citement" is not strong enough and
hysteria would be the better word.
The Paris Temps, for example.
processes TO see in the message a
menace to the powers of the Old
World, and an attack upon their
sovereign dignities. The Temps
finds that the President is forbidding
an European nation to collect q debt
due IL by an American country, or
redress a grievance under which it
labors by the seizure of the customs
OF the offending state This leading
organ of French sentiment is dis
turbed that Mr.. Roosevelt has select
ed just this time. when France NAV
well be constrained to take such
action against Venezuela, for the pro-
mitigation of a new and enlarged
Monroe Doctrine
IL must be confessed that the para
graphs of the message bearing di-
rectly on this subject are not happily
phrased. 1t is conceivable, even, that
they warrant, if taken in their literal
sense, some of the fears expressed
by the Temps and other exponents
of continental opinion. The essen
tial portions of the message bearing
on this subject are as follows:
II republic TO the south Of us COM
mits tort against a foreign nation
such as an outrage against a citizen
OF that nation, then the Monroe Doctrine
does not force us TO interfere to prevent
punishment Of the tort, save TO see that
the punishment does not assume the
form of territorial occupation in any
shape.
The case is more difficult when II
refers 10 contractual obligation Our
Own Government has always refused to
enforce such contractual obligations on
benaif of its citizens by au appeal to
arms. 1t is much to b. wished that all
Foreign governments would take the
same view. But they 90 not; and in
consequence we are liable at any time
TO be brought fare to face with dis
agreeable alternatives
ON the one hand, this country would
vent a foreign government from collect
ing just debt; on the other hand, It is
very inadvisable 70 ner.:,tt any foreign
power to take possession, even tempo
rariiy. of the custom houses of an Amer
lean republic In order to enforce the pay
ment of its obligations; for such tempo
rary occupation might turn into per-
m2neDt occupation.
The only escape from these aIterna-
tives may at any time be that we must
ourselves undertake To bring about some
arrangement by which so much as pos
sible or just obligation shall be paid.
1t will be noticed Mr.. Roosevelt
endeavors to distinguish between diff
ferences based on contract and those
based on tort, as forming the line Of
demarcation between cases in which
this country should interfere and
those in which it should keep hands
off. AS a matter of fact, the distinc-
ton In the relations between Eu-
ropean nations and South and Cen
trail American republics is practically
impossible. Almost without excep-
ton the ground work OF these diff
ferences is a contract, but upon II is
erected always a superstructure of
tort, actual or alleged, which quite
obscures the foundation.
1t is true, however, that what Eu-
ropean governments generally desire
of American republics Is money
Whether the wrongs from which they
suffer be founded in contract or tort.
they have usually been reduced to
monetary equivalent and there never
has been a time, unless a memory
usually accurate is recreant oits trust,
when any European nation in this
situation was not willing to give a
full receipt for all claims in return
for SO much spot cash.
That being the case it is not for
European governments to be dis
turbed because of some alteration
in the manner in which such pay
ments shall be made, especially when
that alteration rebounds to their ad-