MONROE DOCTRINE MONROE DOCTRINE
Hemisphere, that we should do so. (At Monte-video,
November 1913.) J. H. Zahm, Through South America's
Southland. (D. Appleton & Co., N. Y., 1916), pp. 143-
and to exact justice from others; and therefore of
potential armed strength to enable it thus to act as a
guarantor of the doctrine.
In other words, keep these two facts distinctly in
your minds: 1) the doctrine itself; 2) the question as to
who the guarantor or guarantors of that doctrine shall
be. I am wholly unable to understand how any
farsighted patriot of the two Americas could fail to
recognize the vital importance of the doctrine to the
liberty and well-being of the nations of the Western
Hemisphere. The only differences that can arise are as
to the methods of its enforcement, and as to who shall
be its guarantors. On these points there must of
necessity be change as conditions change. (At Santiago,
November 24, 1913.) Souvenir of the visit of Colonel
Mr. Theodore Roosevelt, ex-President of the United
States of America, to Chile. (Santiago de Chile, 1914),
PP. 44-45.
144.
____________. Ninety years ago, when the doctrine
was first proclaimed, the only American nation that had
sufficient strength to gain a scanty and discourteous
hearing from the Old World was the United States of
America. At that time the only hearing even the United
States received was both scanty and discourteous;
nevertheless, it could at times make itself heard and
heeded; and therefore the guardianship of the doctrine
had to rest with the United States. But times have
changed. Certain of the Latin American nations have
grown with astonishing speed to a position of assured
and orderly political development, material prosperity,
readiness to do justice to others and potential strength
to enforce justice from the others. These nations are
able to enforce order at home and respect abroad. These
nations have so developed their institutions that they
themselves do not wrong others, and that they are able
to repel wrong from others. Every such nation, when
once it has achieved such a position, should become
itself a sponsor and guarantor of the doctrine; and its
relations with the other sponsors and guarantors should
be those of equality. (At Buenos Aires, Argentina,
November 12, 1913.) American Ideals. Speeches. . . of
Dr. Emilio Frers and of Col. Theodore Roosevelt.
(Buenos Aires, 1914), p. 23.
____________. This doctrine was perfectly simple. It
declared that the soil of the Western Hemisphere was no
longer to be treated as a subject for territorial conquest or
acquisitions by old-world powers. I wish you to
remember just what the Monroe Doctrine is. If any man
tells you that it is dead, ask him if he really means that
Old-World powers are to be permitted to acquire territory
by conquest or colonization in the Western Hemisphere.
Unless he so believes, he cannot assert that the doctrine
is dead. So far from its being dead, I think it is a great
deal more alive than ever before. I believe that there is a
less chance than ever before of the American nations
permitting any species of conquest or colonization on
this Continent by Old-World powers. Moreover, I
believe that the time has now come when the doctrine in
reality has the guarantee not only of the United States,
my own country, but of your country, Chile, and of every
other American nation which has risen to a sufficient
point of economic well-being, of stable and orderly
government, of power to do justice to others
MONROE DOCTRINE — APPLICATION OF. The
great nations of southernmost South America, Brazil,
the Argentine, and Chile, are now so far advanced in
stability and power that there is no longer any need of
applying the Monroe Doctrine as far as they are
concerned; and this also relieves us as regards Uruguay
and Paraguay, the former of which is well advanced and
neither of which has any interests with which we need
particularly concern ourselves. As regards all these
powers, therefore, we now have no duty save that
doubtless if they got into difficulties and desired our aid
we would gladly extend it, just as, for instance, we
would to Australia and Canada. But we can now
proceed on the assumption that they are able to help
themselves and that any help we should be required to
give would be given by us as an auxiliary rather than as
a principal. (New York Times, November 22, 1914.)
Mem. Ed. XX, 127; Nat. Ed. XVIII, 109.
____________. We need bother with the Monroe
Doctrine only so far as the approaches to the Panama
Canal are concerned, that is, so far as concerns the
territories between our Southern border and, roughly
speaking, the Equator. (Metropolitan, November 1915.)
Mem. Ed. XX, 389; Nat. Ed. XVIII, 333.
MONROE DOCTRINE — IMPLICATIONS OF.
We have not the slightest desire to secure any territory
at the expense of any of our neighbors. We wish to
work with them hand in hand, so that all of us may be
uplifted together, and we rejoice over the good fortune
of any of them, we gladly hail their material prosperity
and political stability, and are concerned and
[350]