Evening star., 1914-11-28
SAYS BR|TA|N'S ENEMIES
COULD LAND IN CANADA
Former President Taft Sees Nothing
in Monroe Doctrine to Halt
an Invasion.
But Effort to Esta blish New Gov
ernment Would Be Barred, He De-
clares in Address.

MoNTCLAIR. y. J.. November as
The Monroe doctrine was strongly In
dorsed, its relation to the present Eu-
ropean war discussed and the declara-
tion that interference by the United
States in Mexico and Central American
states has had nothing to do with that
doctrine. was made by former Presi-
dent Taft in an address here last night.
These are some of the salient fea-
lures OF his remarks:
The landing of troops in Canada by
enemies Great Britain would not
constitute violation of the doctrine.
but an effort to establish a new form
of government in case of victory
would.
There is little likelihood OF the policy
being pressed in Argentina. Brazil and
Chile These countries are able to pro-
tect themselves and they are SO re-
mote from the United States that vio-
lation of the doctrine in respect to
them would not be harmful to this
country's interests and safety.
The doctrine has not been applied in
Mexico because there is nothing in 1t
which requires the United States to
prlnS about peace in that country.
Criticises Watchful Waiting"
"Watchful waiting" Mr. Taft said, was
the term applied to the United States
status. but, he went on, I'VE have neither
watched nor waited. but have, in fact,
most hastily interviewed. and thus find the
present anarchy charged as the logical
consequence of our policy
Mr.. Taft found much good to say about
the Monroe doctrine, and expressed the
hope that it might not be abandoned
1t has made for peace for ninety
years. he said. Why will it not make
for peace in the next one hundred years ?"
Rritains enemies landing troops in
Canada, Mr.. Taft cited the stand of Sec
retary Seward taken when Spain de-
clared war on Chile. He announced this
country could not interfere as long as
one country did not seek to infiict its
government on the conquered people nor
compel a permanent transfer of their ter
rltory, nor resort to any other unjustly
oppressive measure.
Couldn't Oppose War on Canada.
1t seems to me clear" Mr. Taft said,
from the history which I have given of
the Monroe doctrine, and from Secretary
Stewards declaration in the case Of the
war between Chile and Spain, that a con-
sistent pursuit OF the policy would not
require us to object to any warlike meas
ures under the rules of lawful war which
Englands enemies might take against
Canada.
Canada is already furnishing sub
stantial military aid to Great Britain
and the allies. She has sent a body
of 10000 men. Well equipped soldiers,
and is preparing more and intending to
send them. On that theory, therefore.
could we justly object to Germany's
taking countermeasures and carrying
the war into a country which is wag-
ing war upon her" All that the Mon
roe doctrine would consistently require
of us would be to insist that when the
war is over. if Germany were success
full. she could not take over the ter
ritory of Canada and overthrow her
government and establish her own
there. or take any oppressive measures
which would have similar effect. But
we could not object to her exacting an
indemnity if she were the victor"
Mr.. Taft sees little danger of the
policy drawing this country into trou-
bic with a European nation soon. at
least, one reason being that the present
struggle abroad will leave them ex-
hausted and, therefore, unlikely to be-
gin new hostilities.
Dangerous to Abandon Doctrine.