[§ 968. "V. The United States has never made any alliance with, or pledge to, any other American state on the subject covered by the declarations. "VI. The declaration respecting non-colonization was on a subject distinct from European intervention with American states, and related to the acquisition of sovereign title by any European power, by new and original occupation or colonization thereafter. Whatever were the political motives for resisting such colonization, the principle of public law upon which it was placed was, that the continent must be considered as already within the occupation and jurisdiction of independent civilized nations." Dana's note, Dana's Wheaton, § 67, note 36. 66 The position that Mr. Monroe's declaration was intended as a caveat to the designs of the allies, and as an earnest protest against the extension to this continent of the political system on which they were based" is supported at length in 82 N. Am. Rev. 488 (April, 1856). See 103, id. 471 (Oct. 1866). Wharton, in his International Law Digest, § 57, Vol. I., p. 295, cites Mr. Frelinghuysen, as Secretary of State, to the effect that, on the ground that "the decision of American questions pertains to America itself," the Department of State "will not sanction an arbitration by European states of South American difficulties, even with the consent of the parties." The instructions of Mr. Frelinghuysen, cited by the learned author, are given elsewhere in the present work, together with other documents relating to the same subject-matter. They do not appear to bear out the summary given of them. See correspondence above cited, in § 343, in relation to the arbitration of the boundary dispute between Colombia and Costa Rica. "From the foregoing historical review I think it may be fairly deduced that the principle or policy of the Government of the United States, known as the Monroe Doctrine, declares affirmatively: "First. That no European power, or combination of powers, can intervene in the affairs of this hemisphere for the purpose, or with the effect, of forcibly changing the form of government of the nations, or controlling the free will of their people. "Second. That no such power or powers can permanently acquire or hold any new territory or dominion on this hemisphere. "Third. That the colonies or territories now held by them can not be enlarged by encroachment on neighboring territory, nor be transferred to any other European power; and while the United States does not propose to interfere with existing colonies, 'it looks hopefully to the time when . . . America shall be wholly American.' "Fourth. That any interoceanic canal across the isthmus of Central America must be free from the control of European powers. "While each of the foregoing declarations has been officially recognized as a proper application of the Monroe doctrine, the Government of the United States reserves to decide, as each case arises, the time and manner of its interposition, and the extent and character of the same, whether moral or material, or both. "The Monroe doctrine, as negatively declared, may be stated as follows: "First. That the United States does not contemplate a permanent alliance with any other American power to enforce the doctrine, as it determines its action solely by its view of its own peace and safety; but it welcomes the concurrence and coöperation of the other in its enforcement, in the way that to the latter may seem best. "Second. That the United States does not insist upon the exclusive sway of republican government, but while favoring that system, it recognizes the right of the people of every country on this hemisphere to determine for themselves their form of government. "Third. That the United States does not deny the right of European governments to enforce their just demands against American nations, within the limits above indicated. "Fourth. That the United States does not contemplate a protectorate over any other American nation, seek to control the latter's conduct in relation to other nations, nor become responsible for its acts." Foster, Century of American Diplomacy, 475–477. See Hart's Foundations of American Foreign Policy, ch. vii. 211-234; XI. INTERNATIONAL AMERICAN CONFERENCES. § 969. By an act approved May 24, 1888, the Congress of the United States authorized the President to invite the Governments of the Republics of Mexico, Central and South America, Hayti, Santo Domingo, and the Empire of Brazil to join the United States in a conference to be held at Washington, in 1889. In extending the invitations, the President was to set forth that the conference was called to consider (1) measures tending to preserve the peace and promote the prosperity of the South American States; (2) measures looking to the formation of an American customs union; (3) the establishment of regular and frequent communication between the various countries; (4) the establishment of a uniform system of customs regulations, invoices, sanitation of ships, and quarantine; (5) the adoption of a uniform system of weights and measures, and of laws to protect patent rights, copyrights and trade-marks, and for the extradition of criminals; (6) the adoption of a common silver coin; (7) the adoption of a definite plan of arbitration of all questions, disputes, and differences, and (8) such other subjects relating to the welfare of the several States as might be presented by any of them. In pursuance of this act, an invitation was sent out by Mr. Bayard, as Secretary of State, on July 13, 1888, and a special commissioner was afterwards sent out to confer with the various governments upon the invitation. The conference assembled in Washington on October 2, 1889, the following countries being represented: Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Peru, Salvador, the United States, Uruguay, and Venezuela. Presently delegates also appeared from the Argentine Republic, Chile, Ecuador, Hayti, and Paraguay. By a joint resolution approved March 17, 1890, the King of the Hawaiian Islands was invited to send a delegate, but, before an appointment could be made, the conference, on April 19, 1890, adjourned. The conference adopted (1) a plan of arbitration for the settlement of differences between the American nations; (2) a recommendation of the conclusion of reciprocal commercial treaties; (3) a recommendation of a survey for an intercontinental railway, to connect North America and South America; (4) a report on postal and cable communication; (5) a report on sanitary regulations; (6) a report on customs regulations; (7) a report concerning an international monetary union; (8) a report on patents and trade-marks; (9) a report on weights and measures; (10) a report on a uniform system of port dues; (11) a report concerning a uniform code of civil and commercial law; (12) a report on uniform treaties for the extradition of criminals; (13) a report concerning an international American bank. The report on customs regulations embraced a recommendation for the establishment at Washington of an International Bureau of Information. This bureau was duly established, and is still in existence under the title of the Bureau of the American Republics. In 1899, by virtue of the accession of Chile, all the republics of Central and South America became represented in the bureau. The convention under which the bureau was organized provided that the union should continue for ten years, and that no country becoming a member of it should cease to be so during that period; and that, unless twelve months before the expiration of the period in question, a majority of the members had given to the United States official notice of their wish to terminate the union at the end of its first period it should continue to be maintained for another ten years, and thereafter under the same conditions for successive periods of ten years each. The period of notification expired on July 14, 1899, without any of the members having given the necessary notice of withdrawal, and the maintenance of the bureau was therefore assured for another ten years. The Proceedings and Minutes of the International American Conference The reports of the conference may elsewhere be found as follows: (1) The report of the intercontinental railway commission, under the presi- President Harrison, in his annual message of December 3, 1889, referred along the course mapped out. Three surveying parties are now in the field under the direction of the Commission. Nearly 1,000 miles of the proposed road have been surveyed, including the most difficult part, that through Ecuador and the southern part of Colombia. The reports of the engineers are very satisfactory and show that no insurmountable obstacles have been met with." (For. Rel. 1891, xi.) As to the Bureau of American Republics, see President McKinley's annual message, Dec. 5, 1899; also his annual message of Dec. 3, 1900. In the summer of 1896 an attempt was made to hold an international American congress in the City of Mexico. The congress was convoked for the 10th of August. On that day there appeared the representatives of only seven of the American states, including one from Mexico, one from Venezuela, and five from the Central American states. The American minister was instructed by telegraph, on the 12th of August, to attend the congress, but, owing to its evident failure, he did not attend. It was stated in an article in the Mexican Herald, August 16, 1896, that one of the principal objects in calling the congress was to discuss the scope and meaning of the Monroe Doctrine. Mr. Ransom, min. to Mexico, to Mr. Olney, Sec. of State, No. 186, Aug. 18, 1896, MS. Desp. from Mexico. President McKinley, in his annual message of December 5, 1899, after referring to the numerous questions of general interest which were considered by the First International American Conference but not finally settled and to others which had since grown in importance, observed that it seemed to be expedient "that the various republics constituting the International Union of American Republics should be invited to hold at an early date another conference in the capital of one of the countries other than the United States, which has already enjoyed this honor." A circular embodying this passage was sent out by the Department of State, with an expression of the hope that the President's recommendation might meet with approval. Mr. Hay, Sec. of State, to Mr. Bridgman, min. to Bolivia, circular, Feb. 8, 1900, MS. Inst. Bolivia, II. 138. As the result of this initiative, a Second International Conference of American States was held at the City of Mexico, from October 22, 1901, to January 22, 1902. All the American republics were represented. The invitation to the conference was sent out by the Government of Mexico. The conference formulated a protocol of adhesion of the American republics to the convention for the pacific settlement of international disputes signed at The Hague, July 22, 1899; a treaty of compulsory arbitration, signed by ten delegations, and a treaty for the arbitration of pecuniary claims. Resolutions were adopted in relation to the construction of the Pan-American Railway, and in |