The copper era and Morenci leader., 1913-06-06

principle of non-interference in
the internal affairs of an indie
pendent nation, was out of the
question. The dispatch of troops
in 1900 to cooperate with the Euro
pean powers in the relief of the
legation at Pekin 49,. .......
was not due to a desire to inter
vene in the affairs of the Chinese
empire
In the peace conference at The
Hague in 1899 the following declara
ton was adopted when the treaty was
signed:
Nothing in this convention
shall be so construed as to re-
quire the United States of Amer
lea to depart from its traditional
policy of not interfering with, in
truding upon or entangling itself
in the political questions or policy
or international administration of
any foreign state. Nor shall any
thing contained in the said con-
vention be construed to imply
REIMBURSEMENT of its traditional
attitude on purely American ques-
tons"
/ In narrating the settlement of the
claims of ten states against Vene
zuela in 1903, A. B. Hart says:
1T appears that there is a need
IOr 1nIoTUdIlOIdl justice dHu
ality on the part of the creditor
powers as well as on the part of
the debtor nations ......
Intervention such as that of Eng
land and Germany, coming in the
midst of civil instruction, en-
dangers the very existence of the
state, and the rights to continued
existence is the most sacred of all
sovereign rights"
1t seems that the Ell Paso Heral:
bases it's intervention idea upol
President Rooseyelt's message, Dec
6, 1904:
amy people whose people con-
duct themselves well, can count
upon our hearty friendship. If
a nation shows that it knows how
to act with reasonable efficiency
and decency in social and politi-
cal matters, if it keeps order and
pays it's obligations, it need not
fear any Intervention from the
United States.
Chronic wrong doing, or an
impotence which results in a
general loosening of the ties of
civilized society, may in America,
or, elsewhere, ultimately require
Intervention by some civilized ma
ton, and in the western hemis-
the dunSI0ICS VI Lie JILL
ed States to the Monroe Doctrine,
Ieuo!1eN uLsq1noS doI 6ulHioM
may force the United States, how
ever reluctantly in fragrant cases
of wrong doing, or impotency, to
the exercise of an international
police power"
If the Monroe Doctrine can be 81
stretched or perverted, that Uncle
Sam must act as paternal guardian
over the civil affairs of North anC
South American republics, and like
a stern father, make them do as ht
bids under threat of a threshing, b,
endangers the future existence of tina
state.
1t will be observed that the Mon
roe Doctrine has been considered q!
international law. If the doctrine i!
adhered to by the United States
President Roosevelt's suggestion fol
an International police power SHOULD
principle applied with extreme Can
ton.
In view of all former peaceful pre-
cedents, and in the face of our ira
ditional policy of non-interferencc
these interventionists expect us tt
break down the principles of the
Monroe Doctrine.
We are a family of republics. VIVA
right have we to intervene, that is
NEEDLE into the internal affairs of ont
or more of our neighbors? We would
not tell some neighboring town o.
state how to conduct its business, o.
pass and enforce it's laws
How do these good (and bad) Mexi
cans, these producers of chaos anC
civil wars in an effort to obtain in
dividual rights, regard the Monroe
Doctrine, when they are in constan
dread of Intervention? They mus
look upon it as a military conquest by
nation of landgrabbers, and not a.
it really is, a doctrine of protection
good will and friendly assistance
Mexico is another nation; MeXi
cans are a different race. Eithe
allow each nation and each race Z
attend to its own affairs or let eacl
nation become a province. the wOrlC