from the emancipation of both the American continents. It may be so developed to the new southern nations that they will all feel it as an essential appendage to their independence.3

On March 15, 1826, President Adams sent a message to the House of Representatives regarding the proposed conference at Panama. In the course of that message he said:

The late President of the United States, in his message to Congress of the 2d December, 1823, while announcing the negotiation then pending with Russia, relating to the northwest coast of this continent, observed that the occasion of the discussions to which that incident had given rise had been taken for asserting as a principle in which the rights and interests of the United States were involved that the American continents, by the free and independent condition which they had assumed and maintained, were thenceforward not to be considered as subjects for future colonization by any European power. The principle had first been assumed in that negotiation with Russia. It rested upon a course of reasoning equally simple and conclusive. With the exception of the existing European colonies, which it was in nowise intended to disturb, the two continents consisted of several sovereign and independent nations, whose territories covered their whole surface. By this their independent condition the United States enjoyed the right of commercial intercourse with every part of their possessions. To attempt the establishment of a colony in those possessions would be to usurp to the exclusion of others a commercial intercourse which was the common possession of all. It could not be done without encroaching upon existing rights of the United States. The Government of Russia has never disputed these positions nor manifested the slightest dissatisfaction at their having been taken. Most of the new American Republics have declared their entire assent to them, and they now propose, among the subjects of consultation at Panama, to take into consideration the means of making effectual the assertion of that principle, as well as the means of resisting interference from abroad with the domestic concerns of the American Governments. In alluding to these means it would obviously be premature at this time to anticipate that which is offered merely as matter for consultation, or to pronounce upon those measures which have been or may be suggested. The purpose of this Government is to concur in none which would import hostility to Europe or justly excite resentment in any of her States. Should it be deemed advisable to contract any conventional engagement on this topic, our views would extend no further than to a mutual pledge of the parties to the compact to maintain the principle in application to its own territory, and to permit no colonial lodgments or establishment of European jurisdiction upon its own soil; and with respect to the obtrusive interference from abroad-if its future character may be inferred from that which has been and perhaps still is exercised in more than one of the new States-a joint declaration of its character and exposure of it to the world may be probably all that the occasion would require. Whether the United States should or should not be parties to such a declaration may justly form a part of the deliberation. That there is an evil to be remedied needs little insight into the secret history of late years to know, and that this remedy may best be concerted at the Panama meeting deserves at least the experiment of consideration.*

*Ibid., p. 319.

*Ibid., pp. 334-335.

In the instructions issued by Secretary Clay to Mr. Poinsett, appointed Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary of the United States to Mexico, the following paragraphs occur:

You will bring to the notice of the Mexican Government, the Message of the late President of The United States to their Congress, on the 2d December, 1823, asserting certain important Principles of Inter-continental Law, in the relations of Europe and America. The first Principle asserted in that Message is, that the American Continents are not henceforth to be considered as subjects for future Colonization by any European Powers. In the maintenance of that Principle, all the Independent Governments of America have an interest, but that of The United States has, probably, the least. Whatever foundation may have existed three centuries ago, or even at a later period, when all this Continent was under European subjection, for the establishment of a rule, founded on priority of discovery and occupation, for apportioning among the Powers of Europe parts of this Continent, none can be now admitted as applicable to its present condition. There is no disposition to disturb the Colonial Possessions, as they may now exist, of any of the European Powers; but it is against the establishment of new European Colonies, upon this Continent, that the Principle is directed. The Countries in which any such new Establishments might be attempted, are now open to the enterprize and commerce of all Americans; and the justice or propriety cannot be recognized, of arbitrarily limiting and circumscribing that enterprize and commerce, by the act of voluntarily planting a new Colony, without the consent of America, under the auspices of Foreign Powers belonging to another and a distant Continent. Europe would be indignant at any American attempt to plant a Colony on any part of her Shores, and her justice must perceive, in the rule contended for, only perfect reciprocity.

The other Principle asserted in the Message, is, that whilst we do not desire to interfere in Europe, with the Political System of the Allied Powers, we should regard, as dangerous to our peace and safety, any attempt, on their part, to extend their System to any portion of this Hemisphere. The Political Systems of the two Continents are essentially different; each has an exclusive right to judge for itself, what is best suited to its own condition, and most likely to promote its happiness; but neither has a right to enforce upon the other the establishment of its peculiar System. This Principle was declared in the face of the World, at a moment when there was reason to apprehend that the Allied Powers were entertaining designs inimical to the Freedom, if not the Independence, of the New Governments. There is ground for believing, that the Declaration of it had considerable effect in preventing the maturity, if not in producing the abandonment, of all such designs. Both Principles were laid down, after much and anxious deliberation, on the part of the late Administration. The President, who then formed a part of it, continues entirely to coincide in both. And you will urge upon the Government of Mexico the utility and expediency of asserting the same Principles, on all proper occasions."

This proposal by President Adams called forth a considerable debate in Congress concerning the power of the Federal Executive and the Monroe Doctrine.

Mr. Poinsett in a letter dated September 28, 1825, had detailed a conversation which he had had with the Mexican Minister for For

'British and Foreign State Papers, vol. xIII, pp. 487–488.

eign Affairs. Mr. Poinsett stated that, replying to a statement of the Minister that the United States could not claim to be placed upon perfect equality with the Spanish Republics, he had rejoined:

To these observations I replied, that against the power of Spain they [the South American Republics] have given sufficient proof that they required no assistance, and The United States had pledged themselves not to permit any other Power to interfere either with their Independence or form of Government; and that, as in the event of such an attempt being made by the Powers of Europe, we would be compelled to take the most active and efficient part, and to bear the brunt of the Contest, it was not just that we should be placed on a less favourable footing than the other Republicks of America, whose existence we were ready to support at such hazards."

On November 9, 1825, Mr. Clay instructed Mr. Poinsett that:

No longer than about three months ago, when an invasion by France of the Island of Cuba was believed at Mexico, the United Mexican Government promptly called upon the Government of the United States, through you, to fulfil the memorable pledge of the President of the United States, in his message to Congress, of December, 1823.'

These statements characterizing the Monroe Doctrine as a pledge particularly drew the attention of Congress.

Mr. Webster, in response to Congressman Wright's observations concerning Mr. Poinsett's letter, stated on March 27, 1826:

As to the declaration of the President, in 1823, the circumstances which led, probably, to that declaration, had been stated, in general, by an honorable member from Kentucky. The proceedings of the Allied Powers, at Troppau, Laybach, and Verona, were well remembered; and, in the course of the very year then expiring, the King of Spain had been established on his throne by the army of France. This army had marched into Spain, with the consent of the other Powers of Europe, except England. It had accomplished its objects Ferdinand had been reinstated, by foreign force, in all his prerogatives. Unde these circumstances, the question was, how is it likely the Allied Powers will act towards the former Spanish Colonies in America. Having succeeded in establishing such a government as suited them in Spain, herself, would they not, or might they not, be willing to go farther, and to assist the Spanish Monarch in re-conquering his rebellious Provinces? It was possible they might do this—perhaps it was not very improbable. At this juncture, the President's declaration was made. It was wrapped up, he would not say in mysticism, but certainly in phrases sufficiently cautious. The amount of it was, that this Government could not look with indifference on any combination among other Powers, to assist Spain in her war against the South American States: that we could not but consider any such combination as dangerous or unfriendly to us: and that, if it should be formed, it would be for the competent authorities of this Government to decide, when the case arose, what course our duty and our interest should require us to pursue.

This was the substance of the declaration. He believed he might be, perhaps, the only member who, at that time, suggested, that this declaration, with all restrictions, was necessary to preserve our neutrality. It must, of course,

6 Ibid., p. 420.

* Congressional Debates, vol. I, pt. 2 (1826), pp. 2034–2035 (note).

happen, in every Government, that the Executive should undertake to speak, towards foreign nations, of the wishes and objects of the Government. It cannot be otherwise. But this it does on its responsibility. General Washington proclaimed neutrality at the breaking out of the great European wars. But it was competent to the two Houses to present him a law, the next day, declaring The intercourse of nations could hardly go on, and one great end of an Executive would be defeated, if it could not venture, on proper occasions, to express the views and wishes of the Government. It is responsible for this, as for its other acts.

war.

Now he (Mr. W.) had no question but that Mr. Poinsett was referring, merely, to this declaration. He did not speak of any pledge as given by him, or through him. He gave no present pledge, or assurance of any kind. He was, evidently, speaking of something precedent-something notorious; and that something was the declaration of 1823. Now, making allowance for incorrectness of expression, he saw nothing wrong. If he called anything by a wrong name-if he called that a pledge which was no pledge-still it does not appear that he deceived them, or meant to deceive them with whom he dealt.8

On March 29, 1826, Secretary Clay, reporting to the House of Representatives certain correspondence between the Department and Mr. Poinsett, our Minister to Mexico, stated:

That The United States have contracted no Engagement, nor made any Pledge to the Governments of Mexico and South America, or to either of them, that The United States would not permit the interference of any Foreign Powers, with the Independence or form of Government of those Nations; nor have any Instructions been issued, authorizing any such Engagement or Pledge. It will be seen that the Message of the late President of The United States of the 2d December, 1823, is adverted to in the Extracts now furnished from the Instructions to Mr. Poinsett, and that he is directed to impress its principles upon the Government of The United Mexican States.

All apprehensions of the danger, to which Mr. Monroe alludes, of an interference, by the Allied Powers of Europe, to introduce their Political Systems into this Hemisphere, have ceased. If, indeed, an attempt by force had been made, by Allied Europe, to subvert the Liberties of the Southern Nations on this Continent, and to erect, upon the ruins of their Free Institutions, Monarchical Systems, the People of The United States would have stood pledged, in the opinion of their Executive, not to any Foreign State, but to themselves and to their posterity, by their dearest interests, and highest duties, to resist, to the utmost, such attempt; and it is to a Pledge of that character that Mr. Poinsett alone refers."

In his speech of April 14, 1826 (which dealt with the mission to Panama, the appropriation to be made to defray the expenses thereof, the right of Congress to specify the powers of the commission, and with the Monroe Doctrine), Mr. Webster, after setting out the course of events in Europe which preceded the declaration, said:

It has been said, in the course of this debate, to have been a loose and vague declaration. It was, I believe, sufficiently studied. I have understood, from good authority, that it was considered, weighed, and distinctly and decidedly

8

Congressional Debates, vol. II, pt. 2 (1826), p. 1807.

'British and Foreign State Papers, vol. xIII, pp. 484–485.

approved by every one of the President's advisers, at that time. Our Government could not adopt, on that occasion, precisely the course which England had taken. England threatened the immediate recognition of the Provinces, if the allies should take part with Spain against them. We had already recognized them. It remained, therefore, only for our Government to say, how we should consider a combination of the Allied Powers to affect objects in America, as affecting ourselves; and the message was intended to say, what it does say, that we should regard such combination as dangerous to us. Sir, I agree with those who maintain the proposition, and I contend against those who deny it, that the message did mean something; that it meant much; and I maintain, against both, that the declaration effected much good, answered the end designed by it, did great honor to the foresight and spirit of the Government, and that it cannot now be taken back, retracted, or annulled, without disgrace. It met, Sir, with the entire concurrence, and the hearty approbation of the country. The tone which it uttered found a corresponding response in the breasts of the free People of the United States. That People saw, and they rejoiced to see, that, on a fit occasion, our weight had been thrown into the right scale, and that, without departing from our duty, we had done something useful, and something effectual, for the cause of civil liberty. One general glow of exultation-one universal feeling of the gratified love of liberty-one conscious and proud perception of the consideration which the country possessed of the respect and honor which belonged to it-pervaded all bosoms. Possibly the public enthusiasm went too far; it certainly did go far.

But, Sir, the sentiment which this declaration inspired was not confined to ourselves. Its force was felt every where, by all those who could understand its object and foresee its effect. In that very House of Commons, of which the gentleman from South Carolina has spoken with such commendation, how was it there received? Not only, Sir, with approbation, but, I may say, with no little enthusiasm. While the leading Minister expressed his entire concurrence in the sentiments and opinions of the American President, his distinguished competitor in that popular body, less restrained by official decorum, more at liberty to give utterance to the feelings of the occasion, declared, that no event had ever created greater joy, exultation, and gratitude, among all the freemen in Europe; that he felt pride in being connected, by blood and language, with the People of the United States; that the policy disclosed by the message became a great, a free, and an independent nation; and that he hoped his own country would be prevented by no mean pride, or paltry jealousy, from following so noble and glorious an example.

It is, doubtless, true, as I took occasion to observe the other day, that this declaration must be considered as founded on our rights, and to spring mainly from a regard to their preservation. It did not commit us, at all events, to take up arms, on any indication of hostile feeling by the Powers of Europe towards South America. If, for example, all the States of Europe had refused to trade with South America, until her States should return to their former allegiance, that would have furnished no cause of interference to us. Or, if an armament had been furnished by the allies to act against Provinces the most remote from us, as Chile or Buenos Ayres, the distance of the scene of action diminishing our apprehension of danger, and diminishing, also, our means of effectual interposition, might still have left us to content ourselves with remonstrance. But a very different case would have arisen, if an army, equipped and maintained by these Powers, had been landed on the shores of the Gulf of Mexico, and commenced the war in our own immediate neighborhood. Such an event might justly be regarded as dangerous to ourselves, and, on that ground, to have called