The United States and Latin AmericaLatané, John Holladay
History
The United States and Latin America
Latané, John Holladay
Latin America -- Foreign relations -- United States; United States -- Foreign relations -- Latin America
In view of the very positive character of Mr. Olney's dispatch and of
the assertion that the honor and interests of the United States were
concerned, the refusal of Great Britain to arbitrate placed the
relations of the two countries in a very critical position. The American
executive, however, had intervened for the purpose of settling the
controversy, peaceably if possible, forcibly if need be, and President
Cleveland did not now shrink from the logic of events. In a message to
Congress, December 17, 1895,[245] he laid before that body Mr. Olney's
dispatch of July 20, together with Lord Salisbury's reply. He not only
reaffirmed the soundness of the Monroe Doctrine and its application to
the case in question, but claimed for that principle of American
diplomacy a place in the code of international law.
In regard to the applicability of the Monroe Doctrine to the Venezuelan
boundary dispute Mr. Cleveland declared:
If a European power by an extension of its boundaries takes
possession of the territory of one of our neighboring
republics against its will and in derogation of its rights,
it is difficult to see why to that extent such European
power does not thereby attempt to extend its system of
government to that portion of this continent which is thus
taken. This is the precise action which President Monroe
declared to be "dangerous to our peace and safety," and it
can make no difference whether the European system is
extended by an advance of frontier or otherwise.
In regard to the right of the United States to demand the observance of
this principle by other nations, Mr. Cleveland said:
Practically the principle for which we contend has peculiar,
if not exclusive, relation to the United States. It may not
have been admitted in so many words to the code of
international law, but since in international councils every
nation is entitled to the rights belonging to it, if the
enforcement of the Monroe Doctrine is something we may
justly claim, it has its place in the code of international
law as certainly and as securely as if it were specifically
mentioned; and when the United States is a suitor before the
high tribunal that administers international law the
question to be determined is whether or not we present
claims which the justice of that code of law can find to be
right and valid. The Monroe Doctrine finds its recognition
in those principles of international law which are based
upon the theory that every nation shall have its rights
protected and its just claims enforced.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account