Page images
PDF
EPUB

or dependencies of any European power we have not interfered and shall not interfere."

The Monroe doctrine is wholesome and enduring. It is the faith of Americans of every creed and party -is of the very warp and woof of our political being. It was promulgated at the critical moment when the "Holy Alliance" was attempting to stifle the republican spirit and re-establish the despotism of Spain upon her revolted colonies in South America and Mexico. The essence of the doctrine, as understood by the world then, was, while we forbid the establishment of despotic governments upon the American continent, we recognize the corresponding obligation to refrain from any attempt to force our political system upon any part of the Old World. This has been our settled rule of faith and practice for seventy-five years. Its promulgation defeated the purpose of the Holy Alliance and destroyed fcrever the power of Spain upon this continent. Under it Louis Napoleon, a third of a century ago, was obliged to withdraw the French army from Mexico and leave the ill-starred Maximilian to his fate. Under it the empire established by foreign bayonets disappeared and the Republic was restored. Are we now to say that we still recognize the binding force of this doctrine upon other nations, but not upon ourselves?

If ultimate statehood for these remote islands be disclaimed, how, then, are they to be held and governed? The only alternative is by force-by the power of the Army and the Navy; and this not for a day or for a year, but for time. What then becomes of the bed-rock principle that "governments derive their just. powers from the consent of the governed?" If they are to be held permanently, as conquered provinces, then it will not only be in absolute disregard of all the traditions of the past, but in direct antagonism to

the letter and spirit of our Declaration of Independence. It is no less true now than in the days of our Revolution that "government by, arbitrary power is still despotism."

A question yet more grave can not escape our serious consideration. It is one that touches the good faith, the honor of our nation. Events have crowded in such rapid succession that we seem to have forgotten the avowed purpose of the war with Spain. It was declared to be a war solely in the interests of humanity-solely for the relief of the oppressed and starving at our door. An eminent Republican Senator a few months ago voiced the sentiments of the entire country when he said: "It is a war in which there does not enter the slightest thought or desire of foreign conquest or of national gain or advantage." Alas, what a change has come in so brief a time! The wrongs of the poor Cuban are forgotten, and the dream of the imperialist is now of untold commercial gain and of the United States becoming chief among the factors in European politics. "We can not escape history." For all time we will be judged by our solemn disclaimer, immediately following the formal declaration of war:

"The United States hereby disclaims any disposition to exercise sovereignty, jurisdiction, or control over said island, except for the pacification thereof, and asserts its determination when that is accomplished to leave the government and control of the island to its people."

It was this solemn disclaimer by the American Congress that justified the war at the bar of our own conscience and that of the world. To say now that our disclaimer applied only to Cuba and not to other Spanish dependencies would be only "to palter with words in a double sense." It is a subterfuge un

worthy of the greatest of nations. Is it too late even now to demand of those whose hands hold power to make good our solemn declaration that our war with Spain was waged not in the spirit of aggrandizement but solely in the interest of humanity?

CHAPTER XXV.

NECESSARY AND NATURAL TERRITORIAL

EXPANSION.

BY HON. WILLIAM V. ALLEN,

UNITED STATES SENATOR FROM NEBRASKA,

No attempt will be made by me to discuss the question of national expansion at any length. I will confine myself to referring to that subject in general language, but before I conclude I shall attempt to distinguish between necessary and natural territorial expansion and what may be called Napoleonic imperialism.

I shall vote to ratify the treaty of peace with Spain, and in doing so I must not be regarded as representing the views of anyone but those of my constituents and myself. I have necessarily been absent from the Chamber for some days and I have not had the full benefit of all the speeches that have been made during that time, but I have read sufficiently on the subject. to satisfy my mind as to what course I should pursue. I think, however, that I ought now to set at rest, as far as I am capable of doing so, a suggestion of the Sunday morning Washington Times, in which it is said:

If Senator Allen makes good his promise to enlighten the Senate and the country as to the motives that control Senator Gorman in committing his party in the Senate to a cause directly opposite to that recommended by William J. Bryan, and if all other things happen that it was said yesterday would happen, then the three hours of the Senate's session preceding the vote on the peace treaty will indeed be dramatic and exciting.

If there is anything I dislike, it is to be patted on the back and coddled and nursed like an infant by a

newspaper. I have the greatest respect for that kind of journalism that is cast on a high plane and takes a lofty view of public questions, but I have not the slightest regard for that kind that would deal with the prejudices of men or that would appeal to any real or supposed vanity that I might possess to influence my conduct regarding a public question. The statement of that paper is gratuitous. It is wholly inexcusable, for I have at no time "promised to enlighten the Senate and the country as to the motives that control the action of Senator Gorman." Nor do I know what his motives are or what he intends doing, nor am I concerned in knowing.

I am not the keeper of the conscience or of the opinions of Colonel Bryan. I know no more of his wishes or opinions than I gather from his public utterances, a means of information open to all. I do not presume to represent him here or elsewhere and assertions frequently made that I am doing so are utterly unfounded, sinister, and insincere. I am proud to admit that I at least regard myself as the personal, as I trust I am also his political, friend, and I may be permitted to say, in this presence, without intending to reflect in the slightest degree on any other gentleman in public life, that I regard him as easily the superior in point of knowledge and capacity for public duty of any living American statesman, and I do this. not because I am his debtor for political or other favors, as he is not my debtor. Whatever may betide him, I am clearly of the opinion that the impartial historian who may write in the calm of another age will rank him with Webster and Clay and that he will be regarded by future generations as one of the greatest statesmen our country has produced. I look upon him as a comet that has appeared in the political heavens, as those great statesmen appeared, that is

« PreviousContinue »