Jflirwjr'
The Commoner
JANUARY. W20
5
The
Mexican
rnr nearly soven years Moxico has been in
. throes of successive revolutions. Near the
5 of February 1913tjust before- President
wiiRon was Inaugurated, General Huerta, by an
nf treacheryl captured President 'Madero
nfihortly afterward permitted if He did not
UnHfr-hlm to be put to death. Huerta repre-
nted tho Diaz element against whom Madero
bad led a successful revolution.
When President Wilson took the reins of gov
ernment, Americans who had largo investments
in Mexico at once urged him to recognize Huerta
(nearly all the European governments having
Jlrcady done so) but he steadfastly refused,
basing his refusal, first, n the manner -in which
Huerta obtained power treason supported by
assassination and, second, on the ground that
recognition would put this government back of
a despotic group of men who promised nothing
In the way of reform but merely sought to
crush complaint without any effort to remove
the cause of complaint.
It was not long before Carranza and Villa
organized a revolution against Huerta and final
ly overthrew him, the influence of tho United
States being cast against Huerta. But unfor
tunately, Carranza and Villa fell out and the
recognition of Carranza has failed to do what
Jt was hoped it would do; namely, strengthen
him sufficiently to enable him to restore order.
Murder and outrages have followed- one an
other, each one explained by those in authority
on the ground of their inability to protect
American interests at that particular place.
It is not the purpose of this article to enum
erate the offenses that have been- committed
against citizens ot the United- States or to .at
tempt any defense of them, but rather to call
attention to tho remedies whjch are proposed.
Intervention has been demanded ever since
Huerta was driven from power, the demand
coming mainly from two sources: first, from
those who have property interests in Mexico,
and, second, from those who., disinterested so
far as monetary investments are concerned, con
tend that we owe it to Mexico and the world to
enter the country, forcibly take possession of
the government and administer it until order
is restored. Lot us deal with these demands
In the order named
Intervention in behalf of financial interests,
followed by the assumption of all governmental
authority, is an old policy. Most of thd ter
ritory taken from so-called "inferior nations"
has been acquired in that way. A commercial
nation encourages its citizens to invest in de
velopment work and then, when an investor
Beems in danger of losing his money, the foreign
government enters the country on the plea that
protection to its "Nationals'Ms necessary. Of
course, intervention is objected to by the coun
try invaded, but, as it is usually helpless a
against such superior force, the result is de
feat and indemnity in land or money or both,
intervention was one of the issues in the cam
Rr,f ,1916' the President's policy of "Watch
ui Waiting" being denounced and ridiculed by
woBe who claimed to have a superior quality
m red in their blood and prided themselves
iff a ,hi&her .percentage of Americanism than
weir fellows.
tJLhi? demand brings us face to face with a
E, p?rtant Proposition, viz.,' is it proper
' an? ,8 for a government like ours to guar
juiee investments made by American citizens
n ?oi7 lands? The country answered "No"
Bpnii i tf as tho Proposition is again pre-
(l a U con8lder tho question raised.
In Va t Arotne Property rights of speculators
thn i countrtes Buperjor to the rights of
jZil 5e blood woud be shed to make those
vestments good?
a tax Is tllQ eovernment justified ln putting
to im,iIpon LL the American people in-order
of gaj? S0(l to these speculators their hope
to fni ,JD thls Particular, case, can we afford
ca in n i 0Ur infIunce with all Latin-Ameri-.
tho in!. . to uarantee the increased profits.
tho Invest0 Wh?Ch 13d the BPeculat0r8 t0 make
theorvn,?B can be answered together. The
as atiin ?n twaich the speculators are favored
theorv o? he sold?ers and taxpayers is .tho
which Tn emnlre and exploitation the theory
man tt alted the dollar and debased the
tWmxv? Jy U has been the favorites of a
wno have been nble to use tho army and
Problem
the navy for their enrichment, but a rapublio
may bo turned from its legitimate course when
the financial influenco is strong enough. Only
a few years ago Franco, for tho purposo of ad
vancing the intorosts of French investors in
Africa, risked a world war to increaso her pos
s6ssion in that latitude.
The laTgo influenco exerted by exploiters in
explained by tho fact that tho few, having a
great deal at stake, are able to attract atton
ton while most of tho men who die In battle
aro obscure and the average taxpayer ts un
known. In the campaign of 1916 I used a story told
on John Allen (of Mississippi) in his first con
gressional race. Ho was running against a
general who had won prominence in tho Con
federate army while Allen was only a prlvato.
His answer to his opponent's appeal for support
was that all tho generals should vote for Gen
eral -, and all tho privates for Privato
Allen. I ssisgosted an easy way of settling tho
question of intervention; viz., that all who had
pecuniary investments In Mexico and wanted
to shed other people's blood to enrich themselves
might vote for tho party which favored Inter
vention and tha.t all tho rest of the voters
should, support the President in his policy of
non-intervention . ,
Argument is not necessary to silence the de
mands of interested parties when their interest
is understood, and this fact suggests a remedy.
Publicity will usually rout the advocates of a
bad policy because error shuns the light and
does its planning under cover.
We should, therefore, require ovory person
who invests in a foroign country to report his
investment to the. Department of Commerce,
with a detailed statement of tho amount actual
ly invested and with an accurate statement of
the land or concession purchased. This record
should be open at all times to public inspection.
And we should have a law prohibiting any
senator or member from taking official action
in any matter in which he has a pecuniary in
terest. It Is widely charged and generally be
lieved, that some senators and members have
pecuniary interests in Mexico. It Is surely not
unreasonable to require an official record of
their, investments, and their own Bense of pro
priety ought to lead them to withhold their votes
upon measures, tho decision of which may af
fect them in a pecuniary, way. Tho effect of
intervention on Latin-America will be discussed
in connection with the next proposition.
Those who insist upon intervention on the
ground that we owo it to Mexico and the world
o restore order are in an entirely different class
from tho ones of whom we have been speaking
and must therefore be dealt with in a differ
ent way. A pecuniary interest is not danger
ous when it is known, but a difference as to.
tho government's duty is more important and
is due partly to different points of view and
partly to failure to take into consideration all
tho factors that enter into the problem. Inter
vention in Mexico would violate the precedents
which have given our nation its unique position
among .nations. Recently tho world has been
brought to recognize the right of "self-determination"
as an international doctrine, but for
a hundred years before it was announced by
President Wilson, it had been recognized by our
country. Tho Latin-American republics, espe
cially Mexico, have had revolutions innumer
able and we have not only refused to consider
these periods of disturbance as an excuse for
intervention by the United States, but we have
warned tho nations of Europe that they cannot
be made a pretext for European intervention. If
Intervention is proposed on tho theory that the
people of Mexico are incapable of self-government
the answer is that our nation is tho ex
tent of the doctrine that all people are cap
able of self-government-not EQUALLY capable
of self-government, any more than all people
are equal in self-restraint, which is the basis
Srself-government, but capable of devising and
inducting a government suited to their needs
SrvPlav nearly a century ago, condemned
Sp false doctrine taught by those who seek to
?ft?h throwing of a foreign government
JUSt Linl J ncop?o as a hunter throws a net
over helpless POJJJdrttlllt it WOuld bo a reflec
over a bird He oa id ti mi JJq wouW
tion upon the AhnlgMy to ,f ent and
make people IncwJ e o Ungg and
ZlrTvTcVlTo less faith today than
Clay had thon? Those who forcibly set them
selves up as instructors in tho art of &ocrn
mont are quite sure to chargo well "for tho
instruction given and tho rosult, without
exception until our nation adoptod a different
policy, has boon that tho instructor has grad
ually bwomo tho master of tho pupil. A NA
TION WHICH IS SELFISH ENOUGH TO DE
SIRE TO GOVERN ANOTHER NATION WITH
OUT ITS CONSENT IS NEVER WI8E ENOUGH
TO DO IT WELL. Our own oxporlonco with
Carpet- Baggors ought to warn us against tho
fallacies upon which "bonovolont intervention"
rests. If, aftor tho war botwoon tho states,
American officials could not bo trusted to ad
minister with justice and equity an aUon govern,
mont over pooplo of their own blood, language
and religion, how can wo hopo to do better in
governing a subject people In Moxico?
The same influonco that would load us to
intervono in Mexico would koop us thero perma
nently. Every Amorlcan with a property in
terest thero would clamor for a continuation
of American rule and tho animosity which
would bo excited by Invasion and occupancy
would insure enough acta of rcsontmont to
koep us busy putting down Insurrections, And
how could tho difference botwoon our capacity
for government and tho capacity of tho Mexi
cans decrease, unless they dovoloped mote rapid
ly than wo? '
But in addition to tho ordinary difficulties
wo would havo to oncountor In extending our
government over unwilling subjects, wo would
have tho vory weighty objection to bo found
In tho fact that Intervention In Moxico would
array against us all Latln-Amorlca. Our policy
of disinterested guardianship, known as tho
Monroo Doctrine, is so unprecedented that our
good faith has sometimes been questioned, al
though wo havo asked no favors or concessions
In return. In thox caso of Venezuela wo wore
oven willing to go to war with Groat Britain to
protect the formor's boundary lino, and yet,
notwithstanding the testimony that has bee
accumulating for a century to prove the beno
olenco of our motives, wo find our neighbor
distrustful. One reason is that a few jingoes
have excited fears by thoughtlossly suggesting
extension of territory. After Cuba had gained
independence by our aid, wo had a faction in
this country that strenuously demanded annex
ation, in spite of our pledge not to annex, and
ft took nearly twenty years to secure an act of
congress promising independence to the Fili
pinos. Occasionally some prominent American
has expressed himsolf in favor of an extension
of territory by conquest. Most of theso havo
had Moxico in mind one said that wo ought
to own everything between tho Rio Grande and
Panama. While these expressions do not reflect
tho sentiment of a' majority of our people, they
find more ready currency abroad than language
that expresses our nation's opposition to con-
quest. ' f
If the United States invaded Moxico for tho
purposo of pacifying tho country, tho whole of
Latin-America would bo suspicious; we would bo
accused of hypocrisy and our action would bo
attributed to selfishness and ambition rather
than to humanltarlanism. Wo cannot afford to
forfeit tho friendship of tho South American
republics which we havo gained during tho last
fifty years. Duties never conflict; and it Is not
our duty to exchange the possibility of holping
all the Spanish-speaking republics for the pleas
ure of forcing our authority upon one oMheso
republics.
But what should bo done? Our government
Is doing every thing now that can bo done,
except to intervene by force. American rights
can be protected without such intervention as
is desired by the concessionaires and by socio
who misconceive our national duty.
American citizens can bo called out of Mexi
co as they were early In tho President's first
term. In 1913 our nationals were not only
urged to come out of Mexico, but those who were
not able to pay their way were aided out of
tho treasury. If Americans can be brought out
of Moxico, further loss of life can bo prevented.
This remedy will not, of course, satisfy thoso
who contend that it is tho business of the gov
ernment to send an army to protect any man
who finds It moro profitable to do business In
Mexico rather than to employ himself under
the American flag. But calling tho Americans
out of Mexico was approved by a considerable
plurality at the Jast presidential election.
Second, It would be cheaper for our govern
ment to assume tho payment of all pecuniary
losses already suffered, or that may bo suffered
M4
Ll "
ftt i
XM
i
'?,
hi
i
ft!
ty
A,
.
a, , -w.fa-'to'Jf