Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1911-03-10
The Monroe Doctrine and Mexico.

The subterfuge that was for diplomatic
reasons adopted at the outset OF TINS
movement of troops to the Mexican Dor
der has proved futile and was in fact I'M
necessary. The administration has al
lowed it to be known that It has a serious
purpose in mobilizing an army in Texas
and California; IN fact, three distinct pur-
poses: To prevent the formation of an in
surgent government in Lower California;
to safeguard American property rights in
Mexico and to give force to the self-de-
Tense aspect Of the Monroe doctrine:
finally, to shut OF the source Of insur-
rectionary supplies in this country so
as TO put an end the more speedily to the
uprising. In short, the movement of
troops southwark Is an act Of Intervention.
stopping short at this stage only OF actual
entry upon the Mexican territory.
It might have been foreseen that the
statement that these troops were being
sent to the boundary for the purpose of
engaging in maneuvers would fail OF its
purpose Of concealment. In fact, 1t has
served only to sharpen the expectation
Of the public leading to the belief that
the United States had been brought &C
tually to the point Of an armed invasion
OF Mexico. It would have been better had
the first orders to the troops to mobilize
in Texas been accompanied by a frank
statement Of the reasons animating the
administration. If, as is believed, this
action is intended as q notification to GER
tain European powers that Intervention
from that direction will not be tolerated,
it would have been more potent had It
been explicitly stated at the outset in
such terms.
The German government has, according
to a dispatch from Berlin, issued the fol-
lowing formal statement:
THE government has not yet received
any news that would indicate that a
dangerous condition Of affairs exists in
Mexico. If, however, the government
receives reports showing that German in
terests are menaced, Germany herself
will certainly, without the least delay,
take such measures as seem necessary
for the protection of German subjects
In Mexico"
Something of the same sort has been
heard before from that direction. Proba-
bly, similar expressions will be heard
again. But there need be no fear in this
country that Germany or any other Eu-
ropean power is going to challenge the
Monroe doctrine. In the first place, it is
not at all likely that the United States
will ever permit a situation to develop
justifying activity on the part of any
European power for the protection of its
own subjects. in the absence Of any local
authority or American Intervention
Under the Monroe doctrine we have as
sumed a certain definite esponsibility in
South and Central America. Warning off
all Of the powers Of Europe from inter-
ferences susceptible Of leading to terri
torial acquisitions, we by implication and
virtually by direct agreement pledge our
selves to stand ready to preserve the
peace II the South and Central American
governments themselves cannot do So
We cannot, nor have we ever thought we
could, prohibit European Intervention
and refuse ourselves to intervene when
occasion arises. The doctrine proclaimed
by President Monroe is not that of the
dog in the Manager
Again it is to be suggested that in
asmuch as this traditional principle of
the American foreign policy has from the
outset been involved in this situation, 1t
would have been better had the United
States plainly announced that the move
ment Of troops to the border was in
tended as our contribution, under our
.seif-declared responsibility, to the main
tenance of peace in this hemisphere
Now that it is SO understood in all
quarters there should be no difficulty
about it's recognition as peace move and
q warning.