THE CARIBBEAN

793

can-owned Panama Canal and steamship lines have created commercial currents, practically all of which now set toward the United States.

In China and Africa this sort of economic penetration by European powers has been named "imperialism," because it has been accompanied by more or less extensive plans of political control. For the same reason European commentators call the American advance into the Caribbean imperialism. The name for this sort of American expansion does not greatly matter, but the process itself is in many respects the most important phase of contemporary American growth. In connection with the Caribbean the United States has a persistent, constructive foreign policy, a policy pursued steadily for the last twenty-five years, by presidents of both parties.

In part this policy is still concerned with the Monroe Doctrine, with the prevention of European expansion or aggression in America. To this end the Doctrine has been invoked in a number of conspicuous instances, for example to force the French out of Mexico, to restrict British claims in Venezuela, and to keep Germany out of Venezuela. In these episodes the Doctrine was applied as a remedy, after crises had actually developed. There has been no sign of any diminution of American watchfulness in this respect.

Various secretaries of state have given emphatic reaffirmation to the Doctrine. Olney, in 1895, declared that "The United States is practically sovereign on this continent, and its fiat is law upon the subjects to which it confines its interposition." In 1904, Elihu Root made the attitude of the United States even plainer: "the Monroe Doctrine . . . is an assertion of our right for our own interest to interfere with the action of every other nation in those parts of this hemisphere where others are sovereign . . . and to say, if you do thus and so, even by the consent of the sovereign, we shall regard it as an unfriendly act because it will affect us injuriously.

"What we will not permit the great Powers of Europe to do, we will not permit any American republic to make it necessary for the great Powers of Europe to do."

In 1912, speaking of the Monroe Doctrine, Philander C. Knox declared: "it has in Providence been given to us of the North to state and interpret it." And he added: "the exercise of independent action by American republics is subject to limitations imposed by the United States for its own protection and in the interest of an enforcement of

the Monroe Doctrine, by obviating in advance any reason for its application."

At about the same time, in connection with rumors that Japan was about to acquire territory around Magdalena Bay, in Mexico, the Senate passed the following Lodge Resolution, by the emphatic vote of 51 to 4. "Resolved, That when any harbor or other place in the American continents is so situated that the occupation thereof for naval or military purposes might threaten the communication or safety of the United States, the Government of the United States could not see, without grave concern, the possession of such harbor or other place by any corporation or association which has such a relation to another government, not American, as to give that gov ernment practical power of control for naval or military purposes.'

EVOLUTION OF THE MONROE DOCTRINE

Since the Spanish-American War the Doctrine has acquired a new significance, and under it the United States has assumed additional responsibilities. Instead of waiting for trouble to become serious, the government at Washington has intervened to force certain small republics into good behavior, so that remedial intervention will be unnecessary. In some of the smaller Caribbean powers there has been a tendency to drift into bankruptcy. Then, when a new administration comes in, it will repudiate the debts contracted by its predecessors, thereby bringing upon itself the danger of European punishment. To prevent these complications the United States has already assumed responsibility for the fulfillment of the financial obligations of these states.

The old Spanish island colony of Hispaniola was finally divided into two parts, Santo Domingo, in Spanish hands, and Haiti, in French. When the Latin-American states became independent, two republics were set up. In 1904, Santo Domingo found itself involved in serious financial obligations. European bankers were pressing for payment on loans amounting to over thirty million dollars. When the republic stopped paying interest, France, Belgium, and Italy arranged to intervene. Before taking action these three governments notified the United States that they were about to occupy the ports on the island, in order to collect the customs revenue.

President Roosevelt held that the United States could not prevent the European powers from taking action, unless it was prepared to

EVOLUTION OF THE MONROE DOCTRINE

795

assume responsibility for the payment of the debts. In February, 1905, the United States and Santo Domingo signed an agreement, under which the United States was to take charge of the Dominican customs houses, and to administer the finances of the Republic. American officials would collect the money, turn 45 per cent over to the island authorities, and apply the rest toward the debts: when the United States Senate refused to ratify the agreement, Roosevelt put it into operation by executive order, and sent officers of the American navy in to take charge. In 1907, the Senate finally yielded, and accepted the arrangement.

Under American auspices, in spite of Mr. Bryan's desire to fill the Dominican customs houses with "deserving Democrats," the financial difficulties have been cleared away. Material conditions in the country are better than ever before, property and life are safer, and the farmers are more prosperous. There has been opposition to American rule, because the United States has "destroyed the soul" of the country-and because those who could plunder are held in check. Some of the natives cannot understand why, if the United States does not want to loot the treasury, it will not resign in favor of those who do.

The Dominican experiment worked so well that Taft planned for a similar course in Nicaragua and Honduras. Treaties were drawn, placing both countries under the financial supervision of the United States. Again the Senate refused its assent, but Taft lacked Roosevelt's determination and the treaties were dropped. In the Wilson administration Bryan revived them, and the Nicaragua treaty was finally ratified, in 1916.

While this expansion of the Monroe Doctrine was in progress, the completion of the Panama Canal in 1914 introduced a new factor in the Caribbean problem. The operation of the Canal is dependent upon a series of locks, the destruction of which would make the whole waterway, "one of the greatest commercial highways of the present and the future," simply useless. The locks could easily be destroyed by gunfire, or by bombs, therefore the United States has had to devise means for its protection. In substance this has led to the adoption of a policy of absolute naval supremacy in the Caribbean. Cuba and the Panama Republic are both American protectorates; these two countries, with Porto Rico, were the foundations of American power in the Caribbean. During the first twenty years of the

present century the extension of this power has been literally amazing. The financial hold on Santo Domingo could easily be converted into a military hold; something which actually took place in 1916. When civil war broke out there, American marines were sent in, and the American navy has been in charge ever since.

In the same year the treaty with Nicaragua was ratified. This gives to the United States the exclusive right of way for a canal

through Nicaragua, and leases to the United States for ninety-nine years a naval base on the Gulf of Fonseca and the Great Corn and Little Corn Islands. A garrison of United States marines as "legation guard" has been maintained in the capital of Nicaragua ever since.

Again in 1916 the United States secured a treaty with Haiti which

佣

marks a long step toward actual annexation. In this case the United States was led to intervene by the persistently bad financial situation. The year before a revolution had occurred, and American marines were landed to preserve order. American forces have remained there. The treaty authorized the United States to take control of the customs administration, as it had done in Santo Domingo, and to organize a native constabulary, under American supervision. As a result the United States was placed in full control. It would appear that the new election held in 1915 was conducted under the watchful supervision of the American marines stationed there, and that the treaty was signed under threat of military pressure.

aut

EVOLUTION OF THE MONROE DOCTRINE 797

Again in this same eventful year of 1916 the United States purchased the Danish West Indies for $25,000,000, thereby acquiring one of the strongest naval positions in the new world. With the European War going on, the administration was taking no chances. When these various strategic points had been acquired, it was plain that the United States had become "the supreme lord of the Caribbean."

"From Guantanamo, the United States can control the Windward Passage between Cuba and the Dominican Republic. From Porto Rico the United States can control the Mona Passage. Haiti and Santo Domingo . . . each has an excellent harbor for a naval station, Mole St. Nicholas and Samana Bay; the former commanding the eastern side of the Windward Passage, and the latter commanding the Mona Passage from the west. The treaty with Nicaragua gives the United States possession of the Great Corn and Little Corn Islands off the east coast of this republic together with the right to build a naval base on the Gulf of Fonseca. St. Thomas has a splendid harbor for a naval station too. Colon and the fortifications of the Canal, the Canal itself, which has become the center of the naval power of the United States, completes the picture of the southward progress of the United States."

In the words of Secretary Hughes, "the adequate protection of this canal-its complete immunity from any adverse control-is essential to our peace and security. We intend in all circumstances to safeguard the Panama Canal. We could not afford to take any different position with respect to any other waterway that may be built between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. Disturbances in the Caribbean region are therefore of special interest to us not for the purpose of seeking control over others but of being assured that our own safety is free from menace."

Statesmen and publicists in Latin America and in Europe are convinced that these advances made in 1916 were not the end of American expansion. They prophesy that in time the United States will own everything between the Rio Grande and the Canal.

In explaining the position of the United States with reference to its rights in Latin America, Professor Shepherd quotes the reply of a British minister, who was asked what reason Great Britain had for holding Egypt: "that of being in a position to give the khedive authoritative advice." But the American people in general have not asked for explanations; in fact, it is doubtful if many of them know what has been going on, or why it has been done. The Carib