Page images
PDF
EPUB

Monroe Doctrine. Modern meaning of the Monroe Doctrine. James M. Callahan. J. of Race Development, 4:359. Jan.

Jan.

Monroe Doctrine. Albert Bushnell Hart. J. of Race Development, 4:370.

Monroe doctrine. Liv. Age, 280:177. Feb.

Monroe doctrine and Latin America. F. Garcia Calderon. Atlantic, 113: 304. Mch.

Monroe doctrine. George F. Tucker. J. of Race Development, 4:324. Jan. Monroe doctrine from a South American viewpoint. Charles H. Sherrill. J. of Race Development, 4:319. Jan.

New basis for the Monroe Doctrine. R. of R. (N. Y.), 49:104. Jan. New Monroeism. W. A. Phillips. Edinburgh R., 219:212. Jan. Nueva doctrina de Monroe, La. M. Gorostiaga. Union-Ibero-Americana, 28:30. Jan.

Present day phase of the Monroe doctrine, The. F. E. Chadwick. J. of Race Development, 4:306. Jan.

[ocr errors]

Should we abandon the Monroe doctrine? Hiram Bingham. J. of Race Development, 4:334. Jan.

Vitality of the Monroe doctrine. W. C. Roberts. Craftsman, 25:311. Jan. Montenegro Montenegro. Graf Vay de Vaya. Deutsche R., 39:159. Feb.

Question Montenegrin, La. Chas. Lorseau. R. de Paris, 21:211. Jan. Morocco. Maroc française et la question indigène, Le. Robert de Caix. R. des deux mondes, 19(6):806. Feb.

Protectorat Français au Maroc, Le. Étienne Richet. Nouvelle R., 11(3): 329. Feb.

Most-favored-nation clause. Meistbegungstigungsklausel, Die. Dr. Pflaum. Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 3:20. Jan.

Panama Canal. Canal de Panama et l'impérialisme américain, Le. A de. Tarlé. Q. dipl., 37:88. Jan.

Canale de Panama, Le. Angelo Marin. Rivista Int., 64:3. Jan. Compounding a felony. W. S. Rainsford. Outlook, 106:256. Feb. États-Unis. Différent avec la Grande Bretagne en ce qui concerne la question des droits dans le canal de Panama. Récours à l'arbitrage. Thomas Willing Balch. R. gén. de dr. int. pub., 20:747. Nov.-Dec.

Panama canal tolls. Elihu Root. Canadian M., 42:494. Mch.

Panamakanal, Der. D. P. G. Hoffman. Deutsche Runds., 40:70, 214. Jan., Feb.

Pan-American Affairs. Central America in general and Nicaragua in particular. Outlook, 106:18. Jan.

Englishman on President Wilson's Latin American policy. R. of R. (N. Y.), 49:420. Feb.

Jan.

États-Unis et l'Amérique latine, Les. Henri Lorin. Q. dipl., 37:140. Feb.
To see ourselves. Outlook, 106:161. Jan.

Panaméricanisme, Le. Leopold Lugones. R. Sud-Américaine, 1:31. Jan.
President Wilson's Latin American policy. A. M. Low. Contemp., 105:21.

President Wilson's new Latin American policy. Cur. Opinion, 56:3. Jan.

President Wilson's South American policy. Economist, 78:75. Jan.

Président Woodrow Wilson et l'Amérique latine, Le. Angel Marvaud.

R. pol. et parl., 79:245. Feb.

[ocr errors]

Spain's plan for Latin America. Lit. Digest, 48:58. Jan.

Papacy. Völkerrechtliche Stellung des Papstes, Die. P. Augustin Backosten. Schweizerische Runds., 13:414.

Peace. Deutschland und das Haager Friedensproblem. D. le Juge. Österreich. Runds., 38:150. Feb.

[ocr errors][merged small]
[ocr errors]

Krieg und Frieden. Max B. Meinstein. Deutsche R., 39:62. Jan.
Machinery for peace, The. The Unpopular R., 1:200. Jan.

Peace and war in 1913. Frederick Lynch. Yale R., 3:272. Jan.
Practical suggestion, A. Sir Harry Johnston. R. of R. (Lond.), 49:105.

Sword of peace, The. Sir Wm. G. Knox. 19th Cent., 75:62. Jan.

War makers and the navy. Archibald Hurd. Fort. R., 95:418. Mch.
Naval prize money. David Hannay. British R., 5:199. Feb.

Private property at sea. Capture of private property at sea. Reginald Custance. 19th Cent., 75:225. Feb.

[ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small]

Commerce at sea. Economist, 78:14. Jan.

Right of capture. Lujo Brentano. Nation (Lond.), 14:638, 792, 867. Jan.

Right of capture and right of search. David A. Wilson. Nation (Lond.), 14:745. Jan.

Right of search and the right of capture. Sir Cyprian A. G. Bridge. Nation (Lond.), 14:674, 829. Jan., Feb.

[ocr errors]

Right of search and right of capture. Chas. Wright. Nation (Lond.), 14: 710, 867. Jan., Feb.

Roumania. Unser Beziehungen zu Rumänien. Von Vindobonensis. Österreich. Runds., 38:141. Feb.

Tizza und die Rümanien. E. Tremund. Österreich. Runds., 38:205. Feb. Safety at sea. International conference on safety at sea. Sci. Amer., 110:99. Jan. Safety at sea. Economist, 78:164. Jan.

Safety at sea. Spectator, 112:122. Jan.

Somewhat safer at sea. Lit. Digest, 48:190. Jan.

Servia. Serbie au lendemain de la guerre, La. Alphonse Muzet. J. des économistes, 63:65. Jan.

Succession. Staatensukzession. W. Schönborn. Handbuch des Völkerrecht. Band 2: Abteilung 2.

Switzerland. Point de vue suisse sur les affaires étrangères, Le. Albert Bonnard. Bib. Univ. et R. Suisse, 72:225. Feb.

Third Hague Conference. Dritten Haager Konferenz, Die. Friedens-Warte, 16:41. Feb.

Eerste officieele rapport voor de Derde Vredesconferentie, Het. Vrede door recht, 15:44. Feb.

Feb.

Programme for the Third Hague Conference, A. R. of R. (Lond.), 49:102.

Treaties. Treaty revision. R. of R. (Lond.), 49:103. Feb.

Triple Entente. Flotten der Tripelentente, Die. D. Glatzel. Deutsche R., 39:85. Jan..

United States. America moderna. Vincente Gay. La España Moderna, 302:137, 301. Etats Unis d'Amérique, Les. Pierre Jaudon. R. pol. et parl., 79:336.

Feb. War. Propriété publique en cas de guerre sur terre, La. M. Huber. R. gén. de dr. int. pub., 20:657. Nov., Dec.

[ocr errors]

Standing incentive to war, A. The Unpopular R., 1:185. Jan.

War and the interests of labor. Alvin S. Johnson. Atlantic, 118:344. March.

Westlake, John. John Westlake et la science du droit des gens. Ernest Nys. R. de dr. int. et de légis. comp., 15:705.

дает
417/14

KATHRYN SELLERS.

THE REAL MONROE DOCTRINE 1

I ask your attention for a few minutes to some observations upon the Monroe Doctrine. If I am justified in taking your time it will be not because I say anything novel, but because there is occasion for restating well settled matters which seem to have been overlooked in some recent writings on the subject.

We are all familiar with President Monroe's famous message of December 2, 1823.

The occasion has been judged proper for asserting as a principle in which the rights and interests of the United States are involved, that the American Continents, by the free and independent condition which they have assumed and maintain, are henceforth not to be considered as subjects for future colonization by any European Powers.

*

*

*

In the wars of the European Powers in matters relating to themselves we have never taken any part, nor does it comport with our policy to do so. It is only when our rights are invaded or seriously menaced that we resent injuries or make preparation for our defense. With the movements in this hemisphere we are of necessity more immediately connected and by causes which must be obvious to all enlightened and impartial observers.

We owe it, therefore, to candor, and to the amicable relations existing between the United States and those Powers, to declare that we should consider any attempt on their part to extend their system to any portion of this hemisphere as dangerous to our peace and safety. With the existing colonies or dependencies of any European Power we have not interfered and shall not interfere. But with the governments who have declared their independence and maintained it, and whose independence we have on great consideration and on just principles, acknowledged, we could not view any interposition for the purpose of oppressing them, or controlling in any other manner, their destiny, by any European Power, in any other light than as the manifestation of an unfriendly disposition toward the United States. In the war between these new governments and Spain we declared our neutrality at the time of their

1

1 Opening Address by Elihu Root, as President of the American Society of International Law, at the Eighth Annual Meeting of the Society, in Washington, April 22, 1914.

recognition, and to this we have adhered and shall continue to adhere, provided no change shall occur which, in the judgment of the competent authorities of this government, shall make a corresponding change on the part of the United States indispensable to their security.

* * *

It is impossible that the allied Powers should extend their political system to any portion of either continent without endangering our peace and happiness; nor can any one believe that our southern brethren, if left to themselves, would adopt it of their own accord. It is equally impossible, therefore, that we should behold such interposition, in any form, with indifference.

The occasion for these declarations is a familiar story-The revolt of the Spanish provinces in America which Spain, unaided, was plainly unable to reduce to their former condition of dependence; the reaction against liberalism in Europe which followed the downfall of Napoleon and the restoration of the Bourbons to the throne of France; the formation of the Holy Alliance; the agreement of its members at the Conferences of Aix la Chapelle and Laybach and Verona for the insurance of monarchy against revolution; the restoration of Ferdinand the Seventh to the throne of Spain by the armed power of France pursuant to this agreement; the purpose of the Alliance to follow the restoration of monarchy in Spain by the restoration of that monarchy's control over its colonies in the New World; the claims both of Russia and of Great Britain to rights of colonization on the Northwest coast; the proposals of Mr. Canning to Richard Rush for a joint declaration of principles by England and the United States adverse to the interference of any other European Power in the contest between Spain and her former colonies; the serious question raised by this proposal as to the effect of a joint declaration upon the American policy of avoiding entangling alliances.

The form and phrasing of President Monroe's message were adapted to meet these conditions. The statements made were intended to carry specific information to the members of the Holy Alliance that an attempt by any of them to coerce the new states of South America would be not a simple expedition against weak and disunited colonies, but the much more difficult and expensive task of dealing with the formidable maritime power of the United States as well as the opposition of England, and they were intended to carry to Russia and incidentally to England the idea that rights to territory in the New World must thenceforth rest

« PreviousContinue »