The salient passages in this declaration are as follows:

“In the wars of European powers in matters relating to themselves we have never taken any part, nor does it comport with our policy to do so.... With the existing colonies or dependencies of any European power we have not interfered and shall not interfere.... But with the governments which 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 a manifestation of an unfriendly disposition towards the United States.... The American continents, by the free and independent condition which they assumed and maintain, are henceforth not to be considered as subjects for future colonization by any European powers.”

This doctrine has remained the cornerstone of American policy with reference to the countries of Central and South America for one hundred years. |Its application.| On several occasions it has been invoked to protect these countries against armed pressure. During the Civil War, for example, the French government sent an army to Mexico and maintained an imperial administration there in defiance of the Mexican people. While the conflict between North and South continued the government of the United States was unable to take any firm action in this matter, but in 1866 France was requested to withdraw her troops from Mexico, which she did. Again, in 1895, President Cleveland informed the government of Great Britain that the United States would support Venezuela against any attempt to settle a boundary dispute otherwise than by arbitration.

Its status.

The Monroe Doctrine is not a part of international law. It is not even a law of the United States. It never received the approval of the Senate, which is supposed to be a check upon the President in deciding the permanent features of American foreign policy. Its validity has never been formally recognized either by the countries of Europe or by the states of South America whom the doctrine immediately concerns.[[293]] Its maintenance rests upon the vigilance and strength of the United States. In guarding the smaller states of the New World against European aggression the United States is taking what the American people regard as an essential measure of self-protection.

Is the Monroe Doctrine Obsolete?—We are sometimes told nowadays that the Monroe Doctrine is behind the times, that we have outgrown it, and ought to give it up.[[294]] When the doctrine was announced, a hundred years ago, the states of South America were too weak to defend themselves; the various countries of Continental Europe were governed despotically and maintained large standing armies. The states of Central and South America, likewise, were at that time glad to have American protection. But now, we are told, all this is changed. The Spanish-American states are strong and able to look out for themselves. They do not want our guardianship. The nations of Continental Europe, moreover, are no longer despotisms but republics and limited monarchies. They have enough problems to keep them employed for the next generation without interfering in the affairs of the New Hemisphere. So it has been suggested that the doctrine be given up, particularly as no one knows exactly what it means at the present day.[[295]] But the doctrine is deeply imbedded in the diplomatic traditions of the American people and there is nothing to be gained by giving it up unless the situation becomes very different from what it is today.

American Contributions to International Law.—The United States has rendered signal service in making the rules and usages of international law more enlightened and more humane. |1. Neutral rights.| At all times the American government has been a champion of neutral rights and particularly has insisted upon liberal rules concerning neutral commerce on the high seas. |2. Laws of war.| It has lent its influence to the movement for making the laws of war more human and for prohibiting all practices which needlessly endanger the lives of non-combatants. It has stood for freedom of trade and the “open door”. |3. Arbitration.| Among the nations of the world the United States has been foremost in the advocacy and use of arbitration as a means of settling international disputes. In keeping with this policy arbitration treaties have been concluded between the United States and twenty other countries, each treaty providing that all disputed questions, of whatsoever nature, shall be submitted to arbitration if they cannot be adjusted by diplomatic negotiation, and that no resort to war shall in any event take place until after the processes of arbitration have been exhausted. |4. Recent contributions.| At the Peace Conference which assembled in 1919 after the close of the World War, moreover, it was the United States that first put forward in definite form the plan for a League of Nations. And in 1921 it was the United States which took the initiative in calling the international conference which arranged for a great reduction in naval armaments.

General References

Charles A. Beard, American Government and Politics, pp. 315-341; Ibid., Readings in American Government and Politics, pp. 291-307;

Everett Kimball, National Government of the United States, pp. 540-573;