Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1915-09-05

they made notable impression on the
mass of the people.
Administrations have changed. but
there has been no reversal of this gen
eral policy of mutual Cancellation.
In consequence of these systematic
efforts in the three countries the
ground was well prepared for the
somewhat despairing appeal of the
United States more than year ago to
help end the Mexican imbroglio by
means of mediation. The three coun-
tries were in a position to act in con-
cert on this subject without encoun-
tering marked antagonism at home.
They were also in "a position to take
advantage of the situation to let the
world know that an A. Is. c. league had
been in process of formation in South
America.
Before the Niagara mediation some
hints of the drift had been given
through the visit Of Col. Roosevelt to
South America. The colonel made sure
nous repetition of colorless receptions
by jumping into discussion OF the
Monroe doctrine He got the attitude
Of the various South American coun-
tries on that subject with distinctness.
The substance of it all was that each
and all of the stronger countries felt
that the doctrine YVES an impertinence.
since they could take care of them
selves.
Col. Roosevelt's position. in substance.
was that the doctrine did not apply
to any country which could do without
it. but that the evidence was not con-
vfncing that various South American
countries could do without 1T. IL the
Argentine Republic. for example. was
strong enough to maintain its own ter
ritorial integrity as against any nos
sihle European invasion, then the doc
trine would not apply to Argentina
But there were other countries.
&
Dr. Zeballos the former minister OF
foreign affairs in Argentina. after Col
Roosevelt's visit, promulgated what he
called the Zeballos Roosevelt protocol
modifying the Monroe doctrine in this
sense The world at large, however,
still views the Monroe doctrine as
something in itself, and does not seem
to have heard of the Zeballos- Roosevelt
protocol.
In the discussion growing out of Col
Roosevelt's visit there were hints OF
the various powers cooperating to
maintain their nationa Integrity, but
at the same time 1t was strenuously
asserted that this situation would not
arise because there was no danger or
any violation of the national sovereign
ty of any of the powers.
The world war caused a doubt on TINS
point and also a doubt whether the
Monroe doctrine really was obsolete
and-whether the United States might
not, in some circumstances, be appealed
to in order to make it effective.
The world powers in their naval
movements showed the most cynical
disregard for the rights of neutrals
when those neutralss were South Amer
lean countries Nor did they urge the
violations of the rules of civilized war
fare by the enemy as reason They
simply found it convenient to disregard
the accepted principles of international
law, and did so. This disregard was
most pronounced in Chilean waters.
both by the British and the German
warships, but it was shown also fur
Their up the coast.
Japanese and British warships ap-
peared off the Panama coast and did as
they pleased, regardless Of the protests
of the authorities. A Japanese warship
steamed into the harbor of Guayaquil
and contemptuously ignored the notice
from the authorities to depart after the
limit fixed by international law was up.
The Galapagos Islands were used as the
base of naval operations by the German
cruisers with entire Indifference to the
wishes of the Ecuadorian government.
In the waters of the east-coast coun
tries there were no fragrant violations
of neutral hospitality. but the case of
Chile caused a query to be made as to
what joint action might be expected
from Argentina and Brazil II the bel
lfgerent powers continued their ignor-
ing Of the principles Of neutrality in
South American waters. The intima-
hat