Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-09-27
BY CASTOR NERvAL.
LTHoUGH MexicO's acceptance

A LTHOUGH MeXicoS acceptance
~ Of the Leagues invitation TO
"A become its f1fty-fifth member
4 a was unanimously expected, the
official announcement of the
Mexican government upon doing 1t
torial comment and political discus
sions in the last few days.
Evidently the way in which the Mex
loan government answered the invita-
ton is responsible for this excitement;
that is, the reservation it made in ref
erence to the Monroe doctrine.
Much more than the significance of
Mexico's entrance into the League,
newspapers throughout the continent
have been trying to ascertain whether
the Mexican foreign Office was right in
Iseiztng the opportunity to denounce the
Monroe Doctrine. And even If right,
whether 1t was wise In doing 1t or not
Latin American papers In general re-
joiced at the news that Mexico, In ac-
cepting the Leagues invitation, had
made clear that it never has admitted
the regional understandings mentioned
in Article XXI of the League pact"
Article XXI reads: Nothing in this
covenant shall be deemed to affect the
validity of international agreements,
such as treaties Of arbitration or re-
Doctrine, for securing the maintenance
Of peace"
Opposition Sees Victory.
Important Latin American states
men declared that they considered a
victory for their opposition to the
Monroe Doctrine the admission of
Mexico to the League after her clearly
expressed refusal to subscribe to Arti-
as a regional understanding"
The general reaction of the Latin
American press, as reported by cable
dispatches and special correspondents,
is the belief that the entrance of Mex
leo In the League signifies the ADAM
Comment of the Leagues policy of max
ing extreme concessions to the United
States in an effort to obtain her mem
bership.
Latin editors contend that Mexico
was not invited originally out of the
States, which at that time had no
diplomatic relations with Mexico, and
that her entrance now constitutes an
international triumph for Mexico, be-
cause the League now accepts the re-
pudiation OF provision which was
included IN the Covenant "only as q
| sop to the United States Senate"
American newspapers, on the other
hand, criticized the "untimely mem
ton Of the Monroe Doctrine" in the
Mexican reply, printing with promi-
nent headlines the communique from
! the State Department renewing I'M
| qualified adherence to the Monroe
Doctrine.
Claim Doctrine Stands.
They argued that neither the League
OF Nations nor the Mexican govern
ment had anything to do with the
Monroe Doctrine, and that, while Mex
leo or any other foreign government
may denounce 1t, such action means
nothing. The State Department ex-
planned further that, while the admin,
istration has no idea that there VIII
be any need TO invoke the Monroe Doc
trine TO repel any foreign domination
OF Latin America, its general purpose
is so helpful that it will never be dis
carded.
Some editorialists In this country
went much farther and zen once
overwhelmingly, Of course-n Lnt
error of stating that American mter
Vention in Nicaragua, Haiti, CUBA anc
partially in Mexico to restore Peaes
and protect foreign lives ana proPeIIS
are the outgrowth of the Monroe DOC
trine." and that sit was generally un.
derstood in Europe and Japan ina
the United States " assume tne ne
sponsibility of patrol in Latin America
SO that those countries VIII not naS'
to send ships or troops for that pur'
pose" Unfortunately, say, because
these are, precisely, the argumenU
that Latin Americans use TO denounc'
the Monroe Doctrine as sometning en-
tirely different from what 1t was orig
inaliy intended to pc. -. a.
whenever Q disc actrsns - Inv 1Svo,vs.
Il seems appropriate 70 Explain before