Chapter V Text of the important part of the entire convention, and reads as follows: "Nothing contained in this Convention shall be so Declaration. construed as to require the United States of America to depart from its traditional policy of not entering upon, interfering with, or entangling itself in the political questions or internal administration of any foreign state, nor shall anything contained in the said Convention be so construed as to require the relinquishment, by the United States of America, of its traditional attitude toward purely American questions." The Monroe The adoption of the treaty without any qualification of Article 27, would undoubtedly have meant, on the part of the United States, a complete abandonment of its time-honored policy known originally as the Monroe Doctrine. This is not the place to discuss the merits of that policy, or the truth and wisdom of that doctrine. It is, however, a fact that the United States of America is determined more firmly than ever before in its history, to maintain this policy and the Monroe Doctrine, in its later approved and extended form, carefully and energetically. Not even in the supposed interest of universal peace would the American people have sanctioned for one moment an abandonment or the slightest infraction of a policy which appeals to them as being founded, not only upon legitimate national desires and requirements, but upon the highest interests of peace and progress throughout the world. To recognize the American Continents as proper objects of any kind of European expansion, or interference on the part of one or more Chapter V Powers, would not promote or increase the peace, prosperity, or happiness of a single human being; and assuming, in ever so small a degree, the responsibility for the status of so large a part of the earth's surface, it is only fair that the great peace power of the West should not be required to interfere against its will in any other quarrel. Nor is any meritorious interest in the world unfavorably affected by this attitude of the United States an attitude assumed and maintained, not as a challenge, not boastfully toward Europe, nor patronizingly toward its sister States on the American Continent, but simply in pursuance of a wise and far-seeing recognition of obvious facts and their logical bearings. tion accepted. The declaration was presented in the full session The declaraof the Conference on July 25, read by the Secretary of the Conference, and unanimously directed to be spread upon the minutes, and added to the Convention by a reference opposite the signatures of the American plenipotentiaries. tance. The importance of this proceeding, so far as the Its imporUnited States of America is concerned, will readily be seen. Never before that day had the Monroe Doctrine been officially communicated to the representatives of all the great Powers, and never before was it received with all the consent implied by a cordial acquiescence, and the immediate and unanimous adoption of the treaty upon that condition. An express acceptance or recognition was, of course, impossible, but there can be no doubt that the decla Chapter V Cordial welcome to the United States. ration, as presented, constitutes a binding notice upon every Power represented at the Conference, forever estopping each one of them from thereafter quoting the treaty to the United States Government in a sense contrary to the declaration itself. The greatest advantage of the latter, however, is the fact that it leaves to the United States absolute and perfect freedom of action, and this, in view of the recent extension of American power, especially in the far East, is of incalculable importance. Whatever may be the view of certain critics in America, there can be no doubt that the representatives of Europe at The Hague were impressed with the spectacle of the great Republic of the West, crowned with the prestige of a recent brilliantly successful war, proclaiming itself, nevertheless, in the most solemn manner possible, a member of the family of civilized States, — abandoning its time-honored but inadequate policy of selfish isolation, and, without departing in the least from the true ideals of Washington and Monroe, still coöperating cordially with European and Asiatic nations for the highest objects of human endeavor. Nor did any of them, it may safely be assumed, agree with the curious and preposterous contention that the consequences of the Spanish-American War, especially in the far East, had in the slightest degree impaired the value or force of the Monroe Doctrine. It was with particular pleasure that the United States, having safeguarded the principal interests committed to it, by this declaration, coöperated most cordially and unre servedly with the delegation from the great Republic Chapter V of Europe, in impressing the idea of the duty of joint efforts for peace on the part of all civilized nations, into the international law of the future. strike out the The representatives of the Balkan States, notably Efforts to of Servia and Roumania, made strenuous efforts to word "duty." omit the word "duty," and their repeated reference to the distinctions between great and small Powers gave occasion for a spirited reply from Professor Zorn of Germany, in which the cordial adherence of the German Empire to the Convention as reported by the Committee was most forcibly and unreservedly declared, and later on for a speech from M. Bourgeois, which ended with an outburst of eloquence which electrified the Conference and led to a withdrawal of all hostile motions: Bourgeois. "The moral duty," said M. Bourgeois, " of the pro-Speech of M. visions of Article 27 is to be found entirely in the fact that a common duty for the maintenance of peace among men is recognized and affirmed among the nations. Do you believe that it is a small matter that in this Conference - not in an assembly of theorists and philosophers, debating freely and entirely upon their own responsibility, but in an assembly where the Governments of nearly all the civilized nations are officially represented the existence of this international duty has been proclaimed, and that the idea of this duty, henceforth introduced forever into the conscience of the people, is imposed for the future upon the acts of the Governments and of the nations? My colleagues who oppose this Article T Chapter V Bourgeois. will, I hope. permit me to say this: I fear their Speech of M. eyes are not fixed on what should be their real purpose. In this question of arbitration they appeared to be concerned with the conflicting interests of the great and small Powers. I say, with Count Nigra, here there are no great, no small Powers; all are equal in view of the task to be accomplished. But should our work give greater advantages to any Powers, would it not assuredly be to the weakest? Yesterday, in the Come the same strain to my opposing colleagues. Is not every establishment of a tribunal, every triumph of an impartial and well-considered decision over waring interests and passions, one more safeguard for the weak against the abuses of power? Ecumen, I spoke in -Gentlemen, what is now the rule among individual men will hereafter obtain among nations. Such international Institutions as these will be the protection of the weak against the powerful. In the confiets of brute force, where Eghters of flesh and with steel are in line, we may speak of great Powers and small, of weak and of mighty. When swords are thrown in the balance, one sile may easily outweigh the other. But in the weighing of rights and ideas disparity ceases, and the rights of the smallest and the weakest Powers count as much in the scales as those of the mightiest. -This conviction has guided our work, and throughout its pursuit our constant thought has been for the weak. May they at least understand our idea, and justify our hopes, by joining in the |