the path of empire-第3部分

快捷操作: 按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页 按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页 按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部! 如果本书没有阅读完，想下次继续接着阅读，可使用上方 "收藏到我的浏览器" 功能 和 "加入书签" 功能！

n　his　inaugural。　These　are　the　permanent　principles　which　have　controlled　enlightened　American　statesmen　in　their　attitude　toward　the　world；　from　the　days　of　John　Winthrop　to　those　of　Woodrow　Wilson。

It　was　early　found；　however；　that　the　affairs　of　the　immediate　neighbors　of　the　United　States　continually　and　from　day　to　day　affected　the　whole　texture　of　American　life　and　that　actually　they　limited　American　independence　and　therefore　could　not　be　left　out　of　the　policy　of　the　Government。　The　United　States　soon　began　to　recognize　that　there　was　a　region　in　the　affairs　of　which　it　must　take　a　more　active　interest。　As　early　as　1780　Thomas　Pownall；　an　English　colonial　official；　predicted　that　the　United　States　must　take　an　active　part　in　Cuban　affairs。　In　1806　Madison；　then　Secretary　of　State；　had　instructed　Monroe；　Minister　to　Great　Britain；　that　the　Government　began　to　broach　the　idea　that　the　whole　Gulf　Stream　was　within　its　maritime　jurisdiction。　The　message　of　Monroe　was　an　assertion　that　the　fate　of　both　the　Americas　was　of　immediate　concern　to　the　safety　of　the　United　States；　because　the　fate　of　its　sister　republics　intimately　affected　its　own　security。　This　proved　to　be　an　enduring　definition　of　policy；　because　for　many　years　there　was　a　real　institutional　difference　between　the　American　hemisphere　and　the　rest　of　the　world　and　because　oceanic　boundaries　were　the　most　substantial　that　the　world　affords。

Adams；　however；　would　have　been　the　last　to　claim　that　his　method　of　securing　the　fundamental　purposes　of　the　United　States　was　itself　fundamental。　It　is　particularly　important　for　Americans　to　make　a　distinction　between　the　things　which　they　have　always　wished　to　obtain　and　the　methods　which　they　have　from　time　to　time　used。　To　build　a　policy　today　on　the　alleged　isolation　of　the　American　continents　would　be　almost　as　absurd　as　to　try　to　build　a　government　on　the　belief　in　Divine　Right。　The　American　continents　are　no　longer　separated　from　the　rest　of　the　world　by　their　national　institutions；　because　the　spirit　of　these　institutions　has　permeated　much　of　Europe；　Asia；　and　even　Africa。　No　boundaries；　not　even　oceans；　can　today　prohibit　international　interference。　But　while　the　particular　method　followed　in　1823　is　no　longer　appropriate；　the　ends　which　the　United　States　set　out　to　attain　have　remained　the　same。　Independence；　absolute　and　complete；　including　the　absence　of　all　entanglements　which　might　draw　the　country　into　other　peoples'　quarrels；　the　recognition　of　a　similar　independence　in　all　other　peoples；　which　involves　both　keeping　its　own　hands　off　and　also　strongly　disapproving　of　interference　by　one　nation　with　anotherthese　have　been　the　guiding　principles　of　the　United　States。　These　principles　the　Government　has　maintained　by　such　means　as　seemed　appropriate　to　the　time。　In　colonial　days　the　people　of　America　fought　in　courts　for　their　charter　rights；　at　the　time　of　the　Revolution；　by　arms　for　their　independence　from　England；　during　the　Napoleonic　wars；　for　their　independence　from　the　whole　system　of　Europe。　The　Monroe　Doctrine　declared　that　to　maintain　American　independence　from　the　European　system　it　was　necessary　that　the　European　system　be　excluded　from　the　Americas。　In　entering　the　Great　War　in　the　twentieth　century　the　United　States　has　recognized　that　the　system　of　autocracy　against　which　Monroe　fulminated　must　disappear　from　the　entire　world　if；　under　modern　industrial　conditions；　real　independence　is　to　exist　anywhere。

It　is　the　purpose　of　the　following　chapters　to　trace　the　expansion　of　American　interests　in　the　light　of　the　Monroe　Doctrine　and　to　explain　those　controversies　which　accompanied　this　growth　and　taxed　the　diplomatic　resources　of　American　Secretaries　of　State　from　the　times　of　Adams　and　Webster　and　Seward　to　those　of　Blaine　and　Hay　and　Elihu　Root。　The　diplomacy　of　the　Great　War　is　reserved　for　another　volume　in　this　Series。



CHAPTER　II。　Controversies　With　Great　Britain

No　two　nations　have　ever　had　more　intimate　relationships　than　the　United　States　and　Great　Britain。　Speaking　the　same　language　and　owning　a　common　racial　origin　in　large　part；　they　have　traded　with　each　other　and　in　the　same　regions；　and　geographically　their　territories　touch　for　three　thousand　miles。　During　the　nineteenth　century　the　coastwise　shipping　of　the　United　States　was　often　forced　to　seek　the　shelter　of　the　British　West　Indies。　The　fisherfolk　of　England　and　America　mingled　on　the　Grand　Bank　of　Newfoundland　and　on　the　barren　shores　of　that　island　and　of　Labrador；　where　they　dried　their　fish。　Indians；　criminals；　and　game　crossed　the　Canadian　boundary　at　will；　streams　flowed　across　it；　and　the　coast　cities　vied　for　the　trade　of　the　interior；　indifferent　to　the　claims　of　national　allegiance。　One　cannot　but　believe　that　this　intimacy　has　in　the　long　run　made　for　friendship　and　peace；　but　it　has　also　meant　constant　controversy；　often　pressed　to　the　verge　of　war　by　the　pertinacious　insistence　of　both　nations　on　their　full　rights　as　they　saw　them。

The　fifteen　years　following　Adams's　encounter　with　Canning　saw　the　gradual　accumulation　of　a　number　of　such　disputes；　which　made　the　situation　in　1840　exceptionally　critical。　Great　Britain　was　angered　at　the　failure　of　the　United　States　to　grant　her　the　right　to　police　the　seas　for　the　suppression　of　the　slave　trade；　while　the　United　States；　with　memories　of　the　vicious　English　practice　of　impressment　before　the　War　of　1812；　distrusted　the　motives　of　Great　Britain　in　asking　for　this　right。　Nearly　every　mile　of　the　joint　boundary　in　North　America　was　in　dispute；　owing　to　the　vagueness　of　treaty　descriptions　or　to　the　errors　of　surveyors。　Twelve　thousand　square　miles　and　a　costly　American　fort　were　involved；　arbitration　had　failed；　rival　camps　of　lumberjacks　daily　imperiled　peace；　and　both　the　Maine　Legislature　and　the　National　Congress　had　voted　money　for　defense。　In　a　New　York　jail　Alexander　McLeod　was　awaiting　trial　in　a　state　court　for　the　murder　of　an　American　on　the　steamer　Caroline；　which　a　party　of　Canadian　militia　had　cut　out　from　the　American　shore　near　Buffalo　and　had　sent　to　destruction　over　Niagara　Falls。　The　British　Government；　holding　that　the　Caroline　was　at　the　time　illegally　employed　to　assist　Canadian　insurgents；　and　that　the　Canadian　militia　were　under　government　orders　justifiable　by　international　law；　assumed　the　responsibility　for　McLeod's　act　and　his　safety。　Ten　thousand　Americans　along　the　border；　members　of　〃Hunters'　Lodges；〃　were　anxious　for　a　war　which　would　unleash　them　for　the　conquest　of　Canada。　Delay　was　causing　all　these　disputes　to　fester；　and　the　public　mind　of　the　two　countries　was　infected　with　hostility。

Fortunately　in　1841　new　administrations　came　into　power　in　both　England　and　the　United　States。　Neither　the　English　Tories　nor　the　American　Whigs　felt　bound　to　maintain　all　the　contentions　of　their　predecessors；　and　both　desired　to　come　to　an　agreement。　The　responsibility　on　the　American　side　fell　upon　Daniel　Webster；　the　new　Secretary　of　State。　With　less　foreign　experience　than　John　Quincy　Adams；　he　was　more　a　man　of　the　world　and　a　man　among　men。　His　conversation　was　decidedly　less　ponderous　than　his　oratory；　and　there　was　no　more　desirable　dinner　guest　in　America。　Even　in　Webster's　lightest　moments；　his　majestic　head　gave　the　impression　of　colossal　mentality；　and　his　eyes；　when　he　was　in　earnest；　almost　hypnotized　those　upon　whom　he　bent　his　gaze。　A　leading　figure　in　public　life　for　twenty…five　years；　he　now　attained　administrative　position　for　the　first　time；　and　his　constant　practice　at　the　bar　had　given　something　of　a　lawyerlike　trend　to　his　mind。

The　desire　of　the　British　Government　for　an　agreement　with　the　United　States　was　shown　by　the　selection　of　Washington　instead　of　London　as　the　place　of　negotiation　and　of　Lord　Ashburton　as　negotiator。　The　head　of　the　great　banking　house　of　Baring　Brothers；　he　had　won　his　title　by　service　and　was；　moreover；　known　to　be　a　friend　of　the　United　States。　While　in　Philadelphia　in　his　youth；　he　had　married　Miss　Bingham　of　that　city；　and　she　still　had　American　interests。　In　the　controversies　before　the　War　of　1812　Lord　Ashburton　had　supported　many　of　the　American　contentions。　He　knew　Webster　personally；　and　they　both　looked　forward　to　the　social　pleasure　of　meeting　again　during　the　negotiations。　The　two　representatives　came　together　in　this　pleasant　frame　of　mind　and　did　most　of　their　business　at　the　dinner　table；　where　it　is　reported　that　more　than　diplomatic　conversation　flowed。　They　avoided　an　exchange　of　notes；　which　would　bind　each　to　a　position　once　taken；　but　first　came　to　an　agreement　and　then　prepared　the　documents。

It　must　not　be　supposed；　however；　that　either　Ashburton　or　Webster　sacrificed　the　claims　of　his　own　Government。　Webster　certainly　was　a　good　attorney　for　the　United　States　in　settling　the　boundary　disputes；　as　is　shown　by　the　battle　of　the　maps。　The　territorial　contentions　of　both　countries　hung　largely　upon　the　interpretation　of　certain　clauses　of　the　first　American　treaty　of　peace。　Webster　therefore　ordered　a　search　for　material　to　be　made　in　the　archives　of　Paris　and　London。　In　Paris　there　was　brought　to　light　a　map　with　the　boundary　drawn　in　red；　possibly　by　Franklin；　a