authority of the same. The Bank of the United States paid no heed to this law. In the case at law which resulted (McCulloch v. Maryland), the tax was held to be unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of the United States. It was held that the Bank was constitutionally endowed with a right to establish branches in any State. These branches were not taxable by the State, but real estate, owned by the Bank, or the proprietary interest of citizens of the State in it, might be taxed like other property: Congress has power to charter a national bank as one means of carrying on the fiscal operation of the national government; the States cannot by taxation impede Congress in the exercise of any of its constitutional powers; if the end is legitimate and within the scope of the constitution, any means may be employed which are appropriate and not prohibited. WILLIAM GRAHam Sumner, History of Banking in the United States. I. 100. CHAPTER XX LIBERTIES OF OTHER AMERICAN PEOPLES (1823) SUGGESTIONS THIS document contains such portions of President Monroe's Message to Congress, Dec. 2, 1823, as bore upon the subject of international relationship. The President called the attention of Congress to the aggressive schemes of Russia, and the probable policy of the Holy Alliance. This memorable doctrine bears the name of the President, because of its place in his annual message; but the principles set forth therein are the embodiment of the thought of great American statesmen from the beginning of the nation. The spirit of "hands off," no "entangling alliances" and "remote situation can be traced throughout the writings and speeches of such diplomatists as Pownall, Jefferson, Washington, Adams, and John Quincy Adams. The writers upon foreign relationships since 1823 have examined the tenets of this document with great interest. Its power and influence have guided European as well as American thought. Before presenting the subject of the Monroe Doctrine to students, a certain amount of European history must be reviewed so that an intelligent understanding may be had of the bases of the principles set forth; Napoleon's aggrandizement, the fall of the great master of the French empire, the restoration of Louis XVIII. to the throne of France; Spain's colonies and their growing spirit of independence; Russia's aggression on the Pacific slope; the Holy Alliance with its conservative belief in monarchical government; the attitude of Great Britain towards the alliance and hence towards the United States, some knowledge of these questions is absolutely necessary before the document can be appreciated, and before the contemporaneous exposition can illuminate its text. For Outlines and Material, see Appendix B, § 6. DOCUMENT The Monroe Doctrine (1823) EMBODIED IN PRESIDENT MONROE'S MESSAGE AT THE J. D. RichCOMMENCEMENT OF THE FIRST SESSION OF THE EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS, DECEMBER 2, 1823. ardson: Compilation of the Messages and Papers of the At the proposal of the Russian Imperial Govern- Presidents. ment, made through the minister of the Emperor II. 209, 219. as to territory in the northwest was settled by a separate convention United States and signed at St. 1824. This principle declares that no new European colonial es residing here, a full power and instructions have been transmitted to the minister of the United States at St. Petersburg to arrange by amicable negotiation the respective rights and interests of the two nations on the northwest coast of this conThe dispute tinent. . . . In the discussions to which this interest has given rise and in the arrangements by which they may terminate, the occasion has been judged proper for asserting, as a principle in which the rights and interests of the United States are involved, that the between the American continents, by the free and independent condition which they have assumed and maintain, are henceforth not to be considered as subjects for future colonization by any European powers. The citizens of the United States cherish sentiments the most friendly in favour of the liberty and happiness of their fellow-men on that side of the Atlantic. In the wars of the European powers in matters relating to themselves we have never taken tablishments any part, nor does it comport with our policy so to do. It is only when our rights are invaded or seriously menaced that we resent injuries or make preparation for our defense. With the movements in this hemisphere we are of necessity more immediately connected, and by causes which must be obvious to all enlightened and impartial observers. The political system of the allied powers is essentially different in this respect from that of America. This difference proceeds from that which exists in their respective Governments; and to the defense of our own, which has been achieved by the loss of so much blood and treasure, and matured by the wisdom of their most enlightened citizens, and under which we have enjoyed unexampled felicity, this whole nation is devoted. We owe it, therefore, to candour and to the amicable relations existing between the United States and those powers to declare that we should consider any attempt on their part to extend political sys- their system to any portion of this hemisphere as shall be allowed on territory hitherto unoccupied. See Washington's Farewell Address. Since 1823 there have been no extensions of European dangerous to our peace and safety. With the exist- tems to any ing colonies or dependencies of any European power this hemiportion of we have not interfered and shall not interfere. But sphere exwith the Governments who have declared their in- cept the French independence and maintained it, and whose indepen- vasion of dence we have, on great consideration and on just Mexico, 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 the manifestation of an unfriendly disposition towards the United States. ... 1860-67 Our policy in regard to Europe, which was adopted at an early stage of the wars which have so long non-interPolicy of agitated that quarter of the globe, nevertheless re- vention in European mains the same, which is, not to interfere in the affairs. internal concerns of any of its powers; to consider the government de facto as the legitimate government for us; to cultivate friendly relations with it, and to preserve those relations by a frank, firm, and manly policy, meeting in all instances the just claims of every power, submitting to injuries from none. But in regard to those continents circumstances are eminently and conspicuously different. It is impossible that the allied powers should extend interposition their political system to any portion of either con- in the affairs of the Spantinent without endangering our peace and happiness; ish-American nor can anyone believe that our southern brethren, Republics. if left to themselves, would adopt it of their own accord. It is equally impossible, therefore, that we should behold such interposition in any form, with indifference. No European CONTEMPORARY EXPOSITION JOHN QUINCY ADAMS (1823) I 15th (1823). I received a note from Mr. D. Brent, saying that the President wished to see me at the office at noon. went and found him there. He asked for the correspondence relating to the intercourse with the British American colonies, with a view to the particular notice which he intends to take of it in the message; which I thought should have been only in general terms. He also showed me two letters which he had received one from Mr. Jefferson, 23d October, and one from Mr. Madison of 30th October, giving their opinions on the proposals of Mr. Canning. The President had sent them the two dispatches from R. Rush of 23d and 28th August, enclosing the correspondence between Canning and him, and requested their opinions on the proposals. Mr. Jefferson thinks them more important than anything that has happened since our Revolution. He is for acceding to the proposals, with a view to pledging Great Britain against the Holy Allies; though he thinks the island of Cuba would be a valuable and important acquisition to our Union. Mr. Madison's opinions are less decisively pronounced, and he thinks, as I do, that this movement on the part of Great Britain is impelled more by her interest than by a principle of general liberty. 21st. I mentioned also my wish to prepare a paper to be delivered confidentially to Baron Tuyl, and the substance of which I would in the first instance express to him in a verbal conference. It would refer to the verbal communications recently made by him, and to the sentiments and dispositions manifested in the extract of a dispatch relating to Spanish affairs which he lately put into my hands. My purpose would be in a moderate and conciliatory manner, but with a firm and determined spirit, to declare our dissent from the principles avowed in those communications; to assert those upon which our own Government is founded, and, while disclaiming all intention of attempting to propagate them by force, and all interference with the political affairs of Europe, to declare our expectation and hope that the European powers will equally abstain from the attempt to spread their principles in the American hemisphere, or to subjugate by force any part of these continents to their will. . . 4th. I went to the President's and found Gales, the half-editor of the National Intelligencer, there. He said the message was called a war message; and spoke of newspaper paragraphs from Europe announcing that an army of twelve thousand |