Côi+b&lîc. A s 3 o o Î â 4 T o v ^ -fir Ito+ioI Tkaio. __ Ca.un / i m e r i c x t ^ U o î f e d i >tet&£- c . a t 4 B V / 3 7 S ~ PAMPHLET NO. 2 Latin America and the United States BACKGBOUNDS T H E BAGS CONTRAST T H E 19TH OENTUBY CONTEAST BELIGIOUS PERSECUTIONS FROM T H E MONROE DOCTRINE TO T H E 90'« FROM T H E 90 'S ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL PENETRATION T H B ECONOMIC PENETRATION ESTIMATED PANAMA CANAL AND MONROE DOCTBINE INTERVENTION LATIN-AMERICAN COURT UNITED STATES INFLUENCE A Prel iminary Beport of the Committee on Latin-American Belations WËÈ THE CATHOLIC ASSOCIATION FOR INTERNATIONAL PEACE 1312 Massachusetts Avenue, N. W. Washington, D. C. LATIN AMERICA AND THE UNITED STATES Preliminary Study Presented to The Catholic Association for International Peace by The Committee on LATIN-AMERICAN RELATIONS Price IS Cents COPYRIGHT 1 9 2 9 T H E C A T H O L I C A S S O C I A T I O N F O R I N T E R N A T I O N A L P E A C E 1312 Massachusetts Avenue, N. W., Washington, D. C. THE PAULIST PKESS 401 West 59th Street New York City TABLE OF CONTENTS CONTRASTS : „__ ___ > ' . , I I FROM T H E M O N R O E D O C T R I N E TO T H E 9 0 ' S _ _ 2 7 I I I FROM T H E 9 0 ' S " " " ' '•"* "' " ' ^ O I V PENETRATION . ! • '•'" ¿ • ^ R - * . " - __ ' _ . 3 7 V ECONOMIC RELATIONS • . 4 1 V I PANAMA CANAL AND M O N R O E D O C T R I N E : 4 9 V I I T H E I N F L U E N C E OF T H E U N I T E D STATES 5 3 A P P E N D I C E S APPENDIX A CULTURAL RELATIONS . 5 7 APPENDIX B R E C E N T DEVELOPMENTS - ^ 5 9 APPENDIX C I N T E R - A M E R I C A N I N S T I T U T E OF INTELLECTUAL COOP- ERATION Y " , ' 6 1 APPENDIX D BIBLIOGRAPHY 6 2 APPENDIX E N . C . W . C . STUDY C L U B O U T L I N E ON L A T I N AMERICA AND T H E U N I T E D STATUS- •:•'•"• ' • 6 3 G e a e t e d I CONTRASTS T W O facts seem to stand out above all others in the con- trasting life of the United States and the Latin-American republics. Because these facts are important in the internal life of the countries of the whole western world, they are im- portant in the relations between them. One is the way they have dealt with the native Indians and the negroes that several imported as slaves. The other is the way they have met the new regime, called variously the new regime, the era of pro- gress the age of science, bourgeois society, liberalism, industrial- ism, capitalism, the century of the individual, etc. Numerous other facts condition these two contrasts and are themselves important. But once these two and their implications are grasped, American relations become somewhat more intelligi- ble.1 1. BACKGROUNDS a. One must keep in mind the enormous size of Latin America—nearly three times as large as continental United States—and the geographical disunity of a score of countries which extend from the cone of land at the southern part of North America down the length and breadth of South America and spread to the islands of the Caribbean. One must remem- ber Latin-American deserts, jungles, its vast rivers, the vast coast line, the long and lofty mountain chain. One must re- member the great difficulty now and the still greater difficulty in the past of going from one to another country of Latin America or even from one part to another of the same coun- lThis report was prepared by the Committee on Relations with Latin America of the Catholic Association for International Peace. The report was presented and discussed at the regular annual meetmg of the organi- zation and is the joint work of the committee. The sections on ethics were presented to the Ethics Committee and the sections on international law to the Committee on International Law and Organization. It was also presented for criticism to others, both Catholics and non-Catholics, and both citizens of the United States and Latin Americans. Fmally upon presentation to the executive committee, it was ordered published. The notes and appendices were added in editing the report, except Ap- pendix A, which passed the committee. 3 4 Latin America and. the ̂ United, States 4 try. For example, to go by boat and train from the sea coast to the capital of Colombia requires from nine to sixteen days. b. One must remember the Caribbean itself and the Panama Canal which opens the Central American barrier and permits quick ocean traffic between the Caribbean and the At- lantic, and the Pacific. One must see the United States, twelve Latin-American countries and a score of European dependen- cies bordering the sea. One must note the La tin-American tangents to the Caribbean circle, especially the northern coun- tries on the west coast of South America, which the Panama Canal brings into the Caribbean area. c. One must remefriber that nearly all of Latin America either is tropical or enjoys mild year-round weather, and then contrast this with the extremes of heat and cold in most of the United States. One must know that latitude does not determine Latin-American climate and that by reason of winds and alti- tude tropical cities and whole regions may enjoy mild weather the year round.2 Geographical disunity, vastness, the Caribbean-Gulf of Mexico-Panama Canal area, the miasmic tropics or mild weather of Latin America and climatic extremes in the United States, all have a bearing on American life and relations. Still other facts are a part of the picture. d. Latin America was settled predominantly by Spaniards. Portuguese were limited to Brazil; the French in Haiti and the English on a few islands and scattering mainland settlements arrived much later. At the beginning of the 16th century Spain had just emerged into internal peace and nationhood af- ter centuries of turmoil, feudal wars, and conflicts with the in- vading Moors. Though far advanced in many respects and though influenced, for example, by the Catholic Church, the Renaissance, chartered cities, a national monarchy, and Moor- ish and Jewish blood and culture, Spain was only recently out 2The Pan-American Union, "Washington, D. 6., issues illustrated booklets on the Latin-American republics, one for each country (selling at five cents), one on "Seeing South America," one on "Seeing the Latin Republics of North America" and one on "Ports and Harbors of South America" (the last three selling for twenty-five cents). They are good elementary books upon many o'f the surface aspects of the Latin-Ameri- can countries. See also "South American Handbook" (H. W. Wilson Co.) for ample one volume guide to Latin America. Latin America and. the ^United, States 5 of the early military stage of European life. Economically the feudal landed system was still strong; in the cities the traders and artisans were holding to the moral law against usury and to the practice of the just price.3 The government and social system were in the mam ac- cepted and settled; indeed Spain's expulsion of the Jews in the year of the discovery of America, which was the year also of the final defeat of the Moors, was her way of affirming her so- cial system and national unity. Latin-American settlers came to the new world satisfied with a culture, a political system, a social system, a religion. They were its friends, legates and emissaries come to found another Spain. With some differences the same was true of the Portuguese in Brazil. Our colonists came as exiles and rebels. They began to come a century later and from parts of Europe which in the century had changed enormously. England was a social, po- litical and religious maelstrom. Feudalism had passed. Lands had been changing hands by war and confiscation for nearly two centuries. Enclosure of the common lands was moving along its course. The new regime of traders, unbound by moral laws, was on the move towards supremacy. The Tudor quar- rels, the Stuart debacle, the Puritan-traders' revolution, the en- trance of the Hanoverian line had been and were to make Eng- land unsettled politically during the whole colonial period. The Catholic Church had been finally abandoned amid tur- moil and disunion. If some of our English colonists founded what they called a new England they did not want here another England, but a new, different England. Yet their discontent was distanced by the hatred of England among the Irish and Scotch-Irish settlers. Refugee Huguenots, harried Germans from the Pala- tinate, Swedes and Dutch whose sovereignty had been taken in war by England, intensified the rebel atmosphere. The new strain of the north European 17th and 18th century indi- 3This is not to say that there were not deviations; people fell short of the ideal. But the Middle Age ideal of a religion suffusing all of life was still strong. For the English abandonment of the ideal confer Tawney's "Religion and the Rise of Capitalism" (Harcourt, Brace & Co.). For the ideal see Jarrett's "Social Theories of the Middle Ages" (Little, Brown & Co.), especially Chapters V, VI. 6 Latin America and. the ̂ United, States 6 vidualist trader was strong among them. The new individual- ist religions were strong among them. Heterogeneous rebels and exiles fleeing from Europe and carrying with them only part of Europe, and that a new and changing Europe, and emissaries and legates carrying their settled institutions characterized the two sets of colonists. e. All came as pioneers, braving months of travel over a wide, fearful ocean to reach a new world. The colonists of the United States came to a narrow strip of land along the At- lantic and clung cautiously to its coast for a hundred and fifty years. Their adventure was a saga, but it was the saga of men who braved a new world and then hesitated the while they built their strength for the century of further pioneering that followed our revolution. Latin Americans swarmed almost immediately but thinly over the vast coast line of one continent, over a large part of our continent and over the adjacent islands. They scaled higher mountains than any in the United States. They ex- plored longer rivers, deeper forests, longer coast lines. They met a more numerous native people. In search of land, they pioneered in the tropics and on the table lands. f. Latin Americans found rich mines, grazing lands, and farm lands that quickly grew products Europe wanted. Our colonists found no mines and in much of the country either poor land or land that could grow only products which Europe then did not need to import. Our settlers had to become small farmers or traders; only a few could become estate own- ers. Latin-American settlers could become rich mine owners, lordly owners of great landed estates. They could introduce the aristocratic social system of Spain. Our colonists could import England's unsettled aristocratic landed system only in a part of the country; elsewhere the small farmer, owning his own land, and the new trader formed the social structure. Our colonists were pioneer small farmers, pioneer traders and shippers, pioneer planters. To these much later were added roving frontiersmen, and pioneer cattlemen, miners and industrialists. Latin Americans were from the beginning sol- diers, miners, cattlemen and planters of the tropics. Some- thing of the opulence of the gold miner, the magnificence of the owner of uncounted herds, the arrogance of the conqueror, Latin America and. the ^United, States 7 the lordly ease of the planter of the tropics still clings to the national life of Latin America. In the United States we have had or still have all of these but we have had, too, the strain of the shrewd indefatigible business man and the independent, though pinched, pioneer farmer. g. The Latin-American colonists were governed under strict colonial government for three hundred years. Ours were governed less strictly and for only a hundred and fifty years. For example, the rich Latin-American trade was the monopoly of the home government, while in our colonies the policy varied and England was so unsettled that it could not strictly follow such a policy. For example, too, our colonies usually had by charter a measure of local government while the Latin Amer- icans were closely governed by viceroys who came out to rule the colonies in the name of the King. As a further example, our colonies were open to immigration from other countries while the Latin-American colonies were not. h Our colonies represented nearly every shade of religious faith in the turbulent life of 17th and 18th century Europe. The new British State church, all shades of come-outers, a few Catholics struggling to exist, in the later colonial period the "rational" Deists and the emotional Methodists, and on the frontiers persons of none but a vague and rarely practiced religion—all were represented. In Latin America the colo- nists were all Catholics. They were Catholics at home and they brought their Catholicity with them even though Spanish or Portuguese peculiarities and the pioneer conditions of the new world gave their lives certain oddities. 2 . CONTACT W I T H THE RACES The first great problem the colonists of the whole hemi- sphere met was the treatment they were to mete to the native Indians. a. A contingency of the social system throughout the col- onies of both Americas was the question of getting persons to work the plantations in both sets of colonies and the mines and ranches in Latin America and to serve as laborers in other lines of work. Neither could secure a sufficient supply of capable white laborers from the home countries. Here we come upon a key fact in Latin-American civilization, in the 8 Latin America and. the ̂ United, States 8 civilization of the United States and in the relations between them. It is the status of the native Indians and the imported negroes. b. In parts of Mexico, Central America and the upper coast of South America, the explorers and settlers found In- dians who were relatively of an advanced culture. They could serve as workers in the aristocratic social system which the conquerors desired to erect. Elsewhere it was more difficult because the Indians were nomad warriors, hunters, and fish- ers,. they were relatively few, and they would soon die off in a forced regime of work. Indeed, they were in these respects much like the Indians our colonists met. What was to be done with the Indians? Our colonists could exterminate those they met; or they could drive them back; or they could respect their rights and seek to train them to reach a higher status. Slavery was found to be impossible. Latin-American colonists could exterminate these Indians who were like ours and enslave the others; or by assuring some of the Indians land and by seeking to lift them through gen- erations of education and care into the cultural and social sys- tem of the country, they could establish a system which could give the Indians a measure of protection in an aristocratic so- cial system. Our colonists on the whole chose to exterminate our Indians and failing that to drive them back and back and finally con- sign them to reservations.4 Latin-American colonists were cruel at the beginning; they sought to enslave the Indians; they introduced a system of actual slavery under the guise of regulated labor; and they put many to the sword. But it is a fact of Latin-American history that on the whole this policy was not followed long. Indeed, the entrance of negro slavery was itself accepted as a compromise to protect the Indians from slavery and in the expectation that their slavery would pass. No such statement can be made of our adoption of negro slavery. 40ur attitude is summed up in our old saying: "The only good Indiaii is a dead Indian"; or in Edward Johnson's blasphemy uttered in the early days of the Puritan colony: "God cast out the heathen to make room for His people" in his "The Wonder-Working Providence of Sion's Saviour' (1628-1652), Massachusetts Historical Collection, Second Series. VNLC 0£$l i ' Latin America and. the ^United, States 9 In both Americas the Indians were conquered and their territory taken in the name of various kings. But in Latin America the Indians were neither to be exterminated nor con- signed to reservations. Aid must be given to convert them. Great masses of them must retain communal lands in their tribes and villages. New trades and further training in old trades must be assured them. Schools, universities even hos- pitals, asylums must be theirs. Negroes, brought in as slaves on the regretted compromise that they would save Indians from slavery, were to become Catholics and their future it was hoped, would bring them a share in the life of the country. Family life must be respected and strengthened. Peculiar customs must not be crushed. Religious orders were to come into the new world, settle among the native peoples, break, by word and example, the rigor of the military conquerors and adventurers, and with care for native culture commence the epic of conversion and civilization. Latin-American aristoc- racy was to be temporary through protection of the Indians, through communal land holding, and through aid given the Indians by the Church in religion, education and health. A social fusion was contemplated. These countries were not to be "white" countries. They were to be Catholic and civilized Indian and white countries. Nor were the Indians to ^Probably the best way to understand this situation is to note the following points: | g » ^ 4 M j g t<> t h e Indians 2 Their control thus acquired was changed by the Crown into trusteeships, at first unregulated though temporary, later regulated trus- teeships? but still temporary, and finally into permanent ownership of the lands. This established a landed aristocracy. 3 Both within and outside the trusteeships there were pueblos (or villages) holding land in common, which provided an extensive demo- cratic though often primitive element. (Note, for example, the pueblos of our Southwest.) . . m 4 There was also some smaller individual land ownership. S' Church institutions also possessed for their support landed trus- teeships The clergy ministered, as well, upon the landed estates, in the trustee pueblos, in the free pueblos, in the cities and among the still primitive tribes. The Paraguayan communal groups, under the divided rulership of their own elected chiefs, the Jesuits and the Spanish crown, were in less extensive form a usual feature of Latin-Amencan life. 6 The artisans, usually of Indian blood, followed either the old In- dian methods or the new methods, which many of them learned from the friars. 10 Latin America and. the ̂ United, States 10 be put through a mold and turned out good Europeans; their native customs were not only to be winnowed, but treasured also and improved. They were to be brought into the eco- nomic, social, cultural and religious life of the colonists. Their rights were to be respected. The negroes were not to be a race and class apart forever in subjection. Hand in hand with the social fusion went racial fusion due in part to the fact that white men alone and not families came in great numbers to the New World. The racial line has not broken down completely anywhere; but it has grown less and less in many countries until it has become shadowy and persons are judged not by their skin's pigment but by their own qualities. c. All of this was not only manifestly perilous to the whole life of Latin America but the thought of social fusion was anathema to the high spirited military and feudal adven- turers from Spain, from Portugal in Brazil and from France in Haiti. It was objected in Mexico, for example, that educa- tion would turn the Indians into heretics. Excuses were sought to enslave them. Baptism was declared to be enough for the negro slaves in Haiti; certainly religious training would give them ideas above their station. Moreover the ex- periment was in the hands of human beings, themselves living in the melting pot of an aristocracy in the great distances of a vast continent. The task was difficult and dangerous. The Indians were of many tribes, of many different languages, of many different levels of culture, of many different characters. They ranged from nomad savagery to a settled barbarism and to a devel- oped, though decaying, civilization. They were different in race and culture from the Spaniards. The negroes were fresh from the jungles. Both Indians and negroes could be easily oppressed, economically, socially, and in matters of religion. There is no thought here of agreeing to the theory of nat- ural racial inferiority. The social heritage of Indians and negroes is sufficient to explain the incalculable difficulty of what Latin America attempted. That it was and remains most difficult goes without saying. A white and Indian, or white and negro, social and racial melting pot was set up that has boiled furiously for four hundred years and that will burn Latin America and. the ^United, States 11 for generations to come. It has boiled unevenly. All of life is complicated by it. It complicates the relations of those peoples among themselves, with us and with all the world. If one wonders at the slowness of the fusion let him remember tenth or eleventh century Europe and let him note that here is attempted a fusion of cultures of peoples of different races on one side of which there was either barbarism or savagery. Such changes as these are epic and secular. d. Yet one must delimit this in two ways. Certain coun- tries such as the Argentine, Chile (to a less degree), Costa Rica and the South Brazil coast cities are overwhelmingly white. On the mainland, except in North Brazil, Venezuela, Colombia, and parts of Central America, there are practically no negroes. In the West Indies there are practically no In- dians. It is the Caribbean area and its immediate neighbors, especially the upper coasts of South America, that is the so- cial and racial melting pot. A second limitation is that the whites have been the conquering minority, who have tried to sit on the top of the heap and hold the power and wealth. Latin-American countries have been fundamentally aristocratic societies and the whites have sought to remain the chief aris- tocrats. Everywhere and down to the present day there has been enough injustice in the Latin-American countries towards In- dians and negroes to justify scathing indictment. But the dis- tinction between Latin America and ourselves remains true. e. Such fundamentally different treatment seems to have been rooted in an outstanding difference between the two peo- ples. Our colonists, for the most part, brought with them new unformed, individual and various religions with little traditional teaching and based upon personal interpretations ot a book that itself contained two diverse dispensations, the harsh history, code and prophecies of a segregated people, and the good tidings of universal redemption. Save for rare ex- ceptions, they were able to wrest from the Bible new and personal interpretations which would permit them to do as pleased them to the native Indians and imported negroes. The Latin-American settlers, on the other hand, had brought with them the one religion, its institutions, its moral code and its priests. They might wish and did wish to treat the Indians 12 Latin America and. the ̂ United, States 12 and negroes like animals. They might actually treat them like animals. But their religion, its priests, and the acceptance of its authoritative interpretation in these spheres by the home government finally barred the way. There is not room here for detailed proof of the origin of this distinctive treatment.6 One document will have to suffice, the order "Unigenitus," of Pope Paul III in 1537. "With Apostolic Authority," the document reads in part, "we define and declare that Indians and all other peoples whom Chris- tians in the future discover, although out of the Faith, are not to be deprived nor subject to be deprived of their liberty nor of the ownership of their goods, but instead can freely and lawfully possess and enjoy ownership and freedom, and they must not be reduced into slavery." f. Because in Latin America greater justice has been meted to Indian and negro, it must suffer greatly over long periods of time. They suffer for justice sake. And precisely, in the Caribbean area and the upper west coast, where our relations are the more intimate, the melting pot is at its hottest. 3 . T H E N I N E T E E N T H CENTURY a. The second key to inter-American life and relations is the way the various countries have met the time-spirit of the 19th century.7 At the end of the 18th and on into the 19th °For both the horrors of early Spanish colonization and something of the influence of the Church as reflected in one man's life, see: "Bar- tolome de las Casas—Father of the Indians" by Brion. (Dutton Co.) Note also the article on the Paraguay Reductions in the Catholic En- cyclopedia. 'Little space is possible here to show the way the scientific-business- skeptical era came to the United States. At the very beginnings of our history we belonged to its earlier developments and the same reasons that let us treat the Indians and negroes the way we did and now do, let us take up with the era as fully as we desired and without the wrench Latin America underwent. The element of the individualist trader who gradually freed himself from the laws of business morality was strong among us from the beginning. (On this confer Tawney's "Religion and the Rise of Capitalism" for the English backgrounds. We had taken the first long steps in this revolution as early as the 17th century in England, the Puritan-traders' revolution of that period being identical in most of its main lines with the French Revolution of the 18th and the Latin-American and world-wide revolutions of the 19th. Our Civil War, through its destruction of the power of the landed estate Latin America and. the ^United, States 13 an intellectual and social revolution was occurring. Three cen- turies earlier another great change had occurred and the signal and in part the cause of it was the discovery of a new world. Now another new world was discovered, not across the ocean, but everywhere, a new world of the resources of the earth, the air, and the water. It was the dawn of the age of science and material progress. The business man and scientist were the actual creators of the era. The scientist unfolded the secrets of physical nature. The business man seized upon the secrets and put them to practical use. The scientist discovered steam, electricity, and the laws of metals, and gases and oils. The business man financed the practical application of the discoveries and in- ventions, manufactured goods in quantity through their use and sold the goods in the world market. Under their com- bined pressure the old regime, wherein dominated small traders and artisans, and a landed interest, patriarchally administer- ing an estate, tended to disappear. The new regime spread rapidly over the world from England, its native habitat, to the United States, to France, to nearly all of continental Europe, to the Far East, to Latin America. Science, business, material progress and individualism became the god of nations every- where, even though each nation gave a national caste to the features of the idol. The material results of the new era were enormous and they are growing hourly. b. In every such period of great change (witness our own) the question arises: What rules are to be followed to make the changes suit human needs? The answer of the 19th century was the answer of despair. Let there be but the fewest of rules. Let everyone be given an education. Let everyone then compete with selfishness. All men are equal and therefore not only will there be unceasing progress in unfolding the secrets of nature but the reign of justice will come to men. in the Union's economic and political system and the definite victory of the commercial and industrial interests, was of the same nature.) There was also less of a leap from private interpretation of the Bible to skepticism than from the Catholic system. We have had, besides, industrial resources in abundance and a vast arable continent to expand in and exploit. For a brief treatment of this last point see Belaunde's essay on "The Frontier in Hispanic America" in the Rice Institute Pamphlet, October, 1923. 14 Latin America and. the ̂ United, States 14 It is to be noted that this disregards rules of right and wrong. It is to be noted also that if it separates the work of life from morals, it equally separates the work of life from religion, makes religion a conventional thing or a matter of emotional Sunday prayer or a guard only of family morals and personal habits, and it seeks to relegate God to a distant place in the scheme of things where He would not be heard. From still another angle disregard for God was made para- mount. Scientists began to think that their new knowledge was alone truth and that anything learned otherwise than by ex- periment was false. Some rejected God and the immortality of the soul; others stopped with rejecting Christianity and reve- lation. A few of the scientists kept the faith of a Pasteur but the tendency was towards infidelity. Their glory and their ac- complishments both tended to make infidelity and approaches to infidelity polite and customary. The scientists and the business men and more often still, their chief apologists, the philosophers of science and the economists, worked faithfully together. Fortunately the whole theory was so horrbile in the injus- tices it might inflict that men, moved by humaneness and the tradition of Christian faith and respect for manhood, refused to follow it to its bitter end. We in the United States had, too, an almost unlimited natural wealth and a resourceful people who in the rule of free competition would in part care for themselves against the very strong and the very shrewd. Moreover, the fundamental rule of free individual competition unrestrained by law was itself after a time invaded; the law stepped in to establish a few rules for the contest and the weak formed combinations to protect themselves from the will of the strong and the shrewd. c. When Latin America gained independence at the end of the first quarter of the 19 th century, the new world-era beckoned to it. Here, though, was a non-trading area. Here was a landed and in some places a mining aristocracy, that was tempered by communal Indian agriculture—a combined aristocratic and communal area. Here was a melting pot. Here had been strict colonial government. Here was rivalry between Spanish-born and native-born. Here was the striving for distinct national existence that was universal in that era. Latin America and. the ^United, States 15 Here, too, was a Church that was based upon revelation and that had been strong enough three centuries earlier to insist upon a degree of justice and charity to the Indians and negroes. It was an old regime mining and agricultural, aristocratic and communal area with the tradition of a revealed religion that held to a social code, an area under strict colonialism, and one engulfed by a race problem. Free from Spain after a generation first of committee rule during the Napoleonic Wars and then of revolutions to prevent Spain from thrusting her again into a strict colonial status, Latin America was at the crossing in its history. In nearly all of the Latin-American countries there was a group of men on fire for the new regime. New demands for Latin-American products were coming from the industrial nations of the north; the outside industrial and trading countries were knocking at the door and the people within wanted the door open wide. They had become acquainted with England during the Napo- leonic Wars when English traders had gained a foothold in exchange for the aid English soldiers had given Spain in her resistance to Napoleon. The material progress of the United States during the generation of her political independence was taken as an example in the Latin-American countries. The exploits of the French Revolution, itself a revolution in the spirit of the new age, were well known and widely heralded. The philosophers, and economists and their echoes among the playwrights, novelists and poets were being read and in the natural affinity for their brother Latins it was the French ex- ponents and Spanish interpreters of the French ideas (which were ultimately of English parentage) whose writers influ- enced them most. The avowedly naturalistic Masons of the continent spread throughout Latin America and became the seminaries of the new age. d. But in Latin America great obstacles stood in the way of the rule of pagan material progress and therefore Latin America would wade through blood to the new regime. Its physical resources for new regime development were scanty. It had practically no coal and little iron. It had not the great compact and temperate-zoned empire of fertile and accessible land that we had been given. It had not made a name for itself in the new physical 16 Latin America and. the ̂ United, States 16 sciences which were to mark, no less than business itself, the new era. There had not been and there was not then a coral growth of shrewd traders, bankers and manufacturers to build a new framework of society to take the place of the agricul- tural landlords and the communal Indians, a coral growth that might result in civil war but would be ready when the war ended to go about its normal life. The tradition of justice and charity and the old Christian emphasis upon brotherhood m everyday life still existed. There was widespread faith in a revealed and all-pervading religion to stand both in the way of the skeptics and in the way of those who wished to divorce religion from economic life. Latin America was, besides, a melting pot. The Indians and negroes were not yet lifted to the point where they could en masse take a place either in the ideal of the old or the ideal of the new regime. This was true even though some of them, indeed many of them, knowing that they were being shouldered aside by the traditional landed white aristocrats and wanting place and wealth in the new nations, burned with a greater fire against the ruling institutions. Great internal trade or a colonial system for foreign markets became the 19th century sign of the new trading and industrial area. But Latin Amer- ica was an area of large scale and either patriarchal or primi- tive communal agriculture and over much of it inhabited by peoples of primitive wants. It was besides a congeries of set- tlements around the coast line and in the mountains of one sprawling tropical continent and in part of another. e. Yet Latin America went "liberal," as it was called at that time. "New Men" sought political power. They sought a position among the landed aristocrats. As time went on they sought industrial development. They sought republican government, a federation of states like the United States. They wanted theirs to be trading nations with much buying and selling of land, houses, and commodities and much bor- rowing and lending of money. They heralded material pro- gress and the rule of reason. And. on several counts they like the French, waged war against the Catholic Church. ' f. Here were all the elements of a social war, not alone a social war that was also a war between sections, like our Civil War, but a war within each of many countries between a group Latin America and. the ^United, States 17 that held political and economic power under an aristocratic landed social system and another group that wanted political and economic power under a trading social system. The group that represented the new era could not point to scientific de- velopments or a strong trading class in their countries. And in the process of revolution they drove out or impoverished families that would have been of great service in the construc- tion of the new period. Surely this was fated to be a long drawn-out and well-nigh hopeless venture which would turn Bolivar into a pessimist prophesying eight hundred years of agony for Latin America. g. To gain power they had to wade through blood. When they gained it, they split into factions over ideals or over spoils. The conservatives were ready to attack and at times win. And always in the Caribbean area and the upper coasts of South America the struggle went on in the melting pot. The results have been extremely uneven and below the stand- ards usual in the new regime. Even the good has not been harvested and much of the bad has been gross because, for one reason, in an era of unrestrained competition and individual- ism the Indians and negroes were not prepared to protect them- selves, and because for another, Latin America was trying to lift itself to the new era by its political boot straps. h. Latin-American liberalism has not kept pace with the practical benefits of science. It has outstanding men but it lacks a sufficient supply of technical men to apply science to industry, agriculture, public health, education and the like. Indeed, there has been more of the so-called philosophy of science, especially positivism and the Spencerian system, than actual achievements in science itself. In a world that relies so much upon physical science and its practical application, Latin America is backward and for technical men it has to rely largely upon outsiders. i. Upon trade, industrial development, and finance, the backwardness of Latin America in physical science has left its mark. But besides, there is the relative capability of Latin- Americans and others, particularly British and North Amer- icans, in the new business itself. Besides the obstacles to success in the business era referred to above, Latin Americans are inclined to be more personal 18 Latin America and. the ̂ United, States 18 and less corporative than the new business. They are less in- clined to submit to the steady absorption required for its suc- cess. Many of them have retained also the persistent senti- ment that trade, manufacturing, and finance are not so digni- fied and worthy as the professions and the agricultural pur- suits of the old regime. What strikes deeper, the business sys- tem of hiring and buying in the cheapest market and selling in the dearest market, the system of the absolute right of proper- ty before government and before everyone is not wholly ac- cepted. More of the old mediaeval idea of the duty of property has persisted even when, as in certain of the countries, prop- erty is in actual danger of confiscation and public debts in peril of repudiation. In trade and industry it has come about therefore, first, that Latin America has been backward, and second, that for- eigners are the chief industrialists, traders and bankers, and even, in growing numbers, the mine owners and plantation owners. In the United States neither has been true. Early in the industrialization of the United States, much foreign money was invested here, but it entered alongside of money of our own citizens in companies that were controlled in the United States. In both, industry and trade are plutocratic as is the normal development; in Latin America industry and trade are less developed but they are plutocratic and also absentee. Foreigners and not Latin Americans have been the chief beneficiaries of the economic change. Through the 19th cen- tury long before United States Americans entered Latin Amer- ica other foreigners and not Latin Americans were the own- ers of the industries and railroads, and were the traders and bankers. Subjects of Great Britain have even now as much invested in Latin America as have citizens of the United States. j- Unprepared for a trading and industrial plutocracy, politics became the career of ambitious men and the means of wealth no less than power. In government most of Latin America and especially the Caribbean area has been traditionally unstable. The forms of a republic have masked often enough temporary oligarchy or temporary dictatorship while rivals to the political power were scheming how they might seize the government and then Latin America and. the ^United, States 19 use its power either selfishly or unselfishly. Free elections in many of the countries have not existed at all; there is what is called "election by revolution." This situation has been seized upon by foreign investors to establish themselves, increase their holdings, and demand the intervention of the home countries. k. Latin America is divided among a score of separate in- dependent republics, several of whom are jealous of one an- other, even contemptuous of one another and at outs on bound- ary questions. In this hemisphere they are sister republics of our rich and relatively cohesive republic. They are divided; as a French writer has it, they are the Disunited States. The United States is a unit. It is stronger than any one of them or perhaps of all combined. . . 1. In religion we have the anomaly of countries remaining Catholic and yet of often being ruled politically by anti-Cath- olics. To complete the circle of the anomaly, the anti-Cath- olics hav6 Catholic families and they themselves usually die in the Church. Catholics of the United States and indeed Protestants, too, find this the strangest anomaly of Latin-American life. Yet it seems to be explained by the two keys of Latin-American life the melting pot and the way the "new regime" seized upon Latin America. The melting pot made the Faith unevenly understood and unevenly practiced. That it was a melting pot in a white landed aristocracy made the situation more diffi- cult. Moreover the Church, which was the chief guardian of Indian and negro justice and charity, had in the 18th century suffered not alone from the state domination which character- ized the life of the Church in Spain, Portugal, France, Aus- tria and other Catholic countries but it suffered also from that virulent form of state domination in a colony. Then for a gen- eration, during a part of the Napoleonic Wars and the revo- lutions,' it had been disorganized and left to care for itself in the distant settlements of a straggling new world. The Church received little thanks for its efforts to protect and civilize the Indians and negroes, and when any of the clergy failed to live up to their mission, as did happen in the fires of Latin-Amer- ican life and in the disorganization of the Church, they could be attacked all the more because they had defaced their own ideals. Churchmen and church schools had become backward 20 Latin America and. the ̂ United, States 20 and slow during the long period of colonial subjection and the subsequent disorganization of the Church in the Napoleonic and revolutionary generation, and one suspects that they did not sense the good in the new era and seek to mold it into Christian life. But this is only part of the story. The other part was the "liberal" social and intellectual revolution to place science at the mast of life and to create trading and industrial coun- tries under the rule of individual competition. The situation seems to have had two elements, one an intellectual conflict and one a material conflict. It is to be remembered that this conflict we are speaking of is the old 19th century conflict which indeed continues as a tradition in some countries and in others takes on new forms and accretions. The intellectual leaders of the new regime made a religion out of "reason" and science, erected a morals-less code of morals which almost entirely disregarded duties in ordinary life and advocated individual conflict as against brotherhood and pagan competition as against social solidarity. On all these counts they clashed with the Church.8 The new leaders wanted to deprive the Church of its right to educate and administer charity. These functions were to be state monopolies, irreligious, and in part anti-religious, to correspond to their ideas of the importance of reason and science. In their passion for individualism they were against perma- nent social status and they argued from their opposition to serfdom or slavery or the old associative chartered rights of free men to a hatred of the vows taken by members of religious orders. Strangely the theory these men followed proclaimed that the state was omnipotent. This was a direct negation of near- ly all of the rest of their theory and it was wheeled into service only when the rulers of the new regime desired to use it In- ( «Salvador _de! Madariaga has a revealing sentence in his article on 1 he Three Latin Sisters" in the January, 1926 Foreign Affairs. He is writing of Spain but he might well have been writing of Latin Amer- ica. Her history,» he says, "became a long and laborious process of adaptation to a rationalistic world." It would be more satisfactory f it read, Her history became a long and laborious process of adapta- tion to a rationalistic and business age." Latin America and. the ̂ United, States 21 ternally it was used against the Church which had always main- tained the natural rights of individuals and associations. Ex- ternally it was used against other nations to justify national selfishness and the use of governments unhindered by law or morals in international competition. On both grounds there was conflict with the Church. But there was the material side of the question, too. Church institutions had tied their external position to the politicians of the old regime and to the aristocratic land system. Politically therefore they were the enemies of the "New Men." On eco- nomic grounds the "New Men" were also against the Church. The Church was wealthy; they were greedy for wealth. The Church was using the land to support parishes, schools, asy- lums and monasteries; the new regime would have no use for such when conducted by the Church; therefore the Church would have no need of the land. The Church held the land perpetually; this prevented a free flow of property ownership and the era of buying and selling; therefore Church lands must be taken from them. The earlier leaders of the liberals in robbing the Church were however usually idealists who did not rob the lands for themselves; they sold the lands for the benefit of the State. It was lesser men who were avaricious and into whose hands church property fell. Often enough foreigners built up rich estates for themselves out of the con- fiscated lands of the Church. Yet through it all Latin America remains Catholic. New persecutions are launched. Certain countries outgrow their .history. Others make adjustments. But, beneath the vagaries and in spite of the shallows and the swamps, the Catholic faith beats strongly in Latin America. If it can weather and take its part in the reaction to business liberalism that has already commenced and promises to grow, then the Church in Latin America may well have a most glorious future even though the race problem continues to afflict it in the Caribbean area and environs. m. In agriculture Latin-American liberalism did not estab- lish as did French liberalism a nation of peasant farmers. In- stead some men merely took the place of other men and of the religious institutions as landlords and in some countries no attempt at all was made; the system of landed estates was 22 Latin America and. the ̂ United, States 22 continued and those Indians and negroes who were property- less before were propertyless afterwards. In Haiti land was in- deed widely distributed, but at an earlier period in Latin-Ameri- can history and through wholesale expulsion of the whites. In Mexico a typically "liberal" land policy was inaugurated for the Indians; their old communal lands were divided among them and they were sent out into the world with a tradition of communal land tenure and a parcel of individually owned land. It was not long until, just as happened to our Indians when for a time some of them were similarly treated by doctrinaire office holders, they lost their land. They fell back then as day la- borers on the landed estates of the wealthy natives and for- eigners and in the factories and mines and on the railroads of the foreigners. The primitive democracy of communal farmers was destroyed, the Church endowments were scattered and the settled feudalism of patriarchal life weakened to make way for the new era. n. One must, however, pay tribute to certain elements of the "liberal" revolution everywhere. There was in it an element of respect for the average man, an intense desire for education and self-improvement, a strong admiration for self- government and an urge towards development of economic re- sources. It established, too, the forms of self-government after the period of absolutist kings, it exploited more of the re- sources of the earth, it lengthened the average term of life, and it laid a material groundwork for future intellectual, artistic and spiritual exploits. The pity is that the good in it has been perverted. o. The old regime Latin America, like our old South, had attained a high stage of civilization for its beneficiaries and unlike our old South was bringing to both Indians and negroes more of the benefits of its social system. We of the new re- gime find it difficult to put ourselves in the old regime; our first impulse is to condemn it completely and to praise all that is new. Yet much of the 19 th century newness was bad and much now of the 20th century reaction to the 19th century is an attempt to overcome the distinctively 19 th century "modernity." Latin-American architecture, sculpture and mu- sic, universities that were old when our first ones were estab- lished, the communal life destroyed or broken by 19th cen- Latin America and. the ^United, States 23 tury individualism were the outgrowth of a lofty civilization. Indeed in many respects Latin America was ahead of the United States when the series of revolutions began against the old regime and its culture. It was, though, a blend of the feudal and the communal and it had the defects normal to such systems. 4 . T H E T W E N T I E T H CENTURY The customary 20th century confusion has followed the 19th century liberalism of Latin America, heightened there as everywhere by an even more swiftly changing life than that of the 19 th century. In the 19 th century nearly everyone thought during the changes of material knowledge that material progress would bring its automatic intellectual, moral and spiritual rewards. Progress was inevitable. The world would continually and without interruption build more stately man- sions for the soul. Evolution was in the books of fate. Now the even greater changes disquiet minds and while they ac- cept and even hasten the pace of the changes they think of how the changes may be subjected to justice and equity or to the welfare of peoples or to the good of the nation or the fu- ture. Science, technical knowledge, the resources of the earth, the energies of men are not to be left wholly, as they were even a generation ago, to pure selfishness. The clash between the old "liberalism" and the multitude of new theories of so- cial restraint is on in Latin America just as it is on here in the United States and in all countries that were "liberal" in the 19th century. In Latin America, as elsewhere, the clash is confused and is the more confused by the extensive foreign ownership and influence and the long struggle of the social and racial fusion. Theories battle with one another at the same time that they battle with the old "liberalism." Theories of social restraint become also the mask of thieves and self- seekers. Religious persecutions grounded in the old animus and with 20th century modification continue in some places. This conflict between 19 th century results and 20th cen- tury aspirations has already begun in some countries and none will escape it. I t is superimposed or rather intermingled with the struggle of the melting pot and with the still surviving struggle between the old aristocratic-communal regime and the 24 Latin America and. the ̂ United, States 24 regime of the 19th century. Modified by a Latin-American environment, it is part of the world-wide struggle to over- come the evils of a generation which in the ordinary work of life rejected law, morals and God. And in Latin America it is and will be the more difficult a problem since so much of their economic life is under the control of foreigners. To all the rest will be and is added an international contest. In particular it is and will be a contest between Latin-American countries and our own country, within which, too, will go on the same struggle uncomplicated here though by a melting pot so grandiose as theirs or by an under-developed use of the 19th century scientific opportunities or by subordination to other countries. S. SUMMARY Sixteenth century Iberians still struggling to create the Catholic unity of life of the Middle Ages amid the Gothic traditions, Moorish and Jewish influences, and Renaissance pa- ganism, came as conquerors to continue under new conditions and in a new world the growth of Spanish civilization. They were a leaven in a mass of Indians of another culture and from the beginning a battle was on between a policy of sub- jecting the Indians and a policy of treating them with justice. The Catholic element in their life won a partial victory for the latter policy even though vile derogations in practice have continued to this day. Latin America was to be stamped with the Catholic view of life and it was to create a social fusion that would permit a new racial culture not Iberian alone nor even Iberian-American but Iberian-Indian-American, and in some places Iberian-Negro-American. The experiment was launched in the distant settlements of a new world, in mining camps, on tropical plantations, on cattle ranches, in colonial capitals, in communal Indian settle- ments. The experiment languished during the later eighteenth century lessening of Spanish ardor, the while colonial sub- jection continued. But it was moving onward with the slow pace and set-backs such marches of whole peoples seem always to suffer. One wonders what would have been the result in Latin America of this slow march of its peoples towards social, eco- Latin America and. the ^United, States 25 nomic and cultural fusion under the continued influence of the Church. One wonders what forms of society they would now possess. For in the old system there were the seeds of a new system and the seeds were the practical respect for the dignity of all men that the Church taught. Much of this remained under the ensuing period which was ushered in during the late 18th and early 19th centuries when came the world social, intellectual and religious revolution which Latin America did not escape, a revolution conditioned by the "new learning" of the material resources of the world and the desire to put them to practical use. The revolution was in the hands of skeptical scientists, selfish business men, theorists and writers and politicians. Yet Latin America lacked an abundance of the first two elements and an abundance of resources and its task of lifting itself to 19th century intellectual and business glory and baseness was left to its own governmental power (now independent of Spain) and the science and the business shrewdness, persistency and selfishiness of foreigners. The Church was of the old regime which this revolution sought to destroy. Under the old conditions it had been lead- ing the way to the new society of Latin America even though its life had been stunted by colonial subjection and later by internal chaos. In several of the countries its institutions were tied economically to the old regime through ownership of lands held as endowment; and politically its leaders went with the old regime leaders. The new skepticism and the new selfishness fought the Church in principle; economic and po- litical interests added their might. And so there was religious war. In the meantime the business century in Latin America was in the hands chiefly of foreigners. Latin-American coun- tries attained economic development but foreigners were reap- ing the fruits. But hardly had the 20th century dawned than a reaction, strong in some countries and probably strong in the future in all, arose against some of the 19th century ideas and prac- tices. Again Latin America is part of a world movement, modified by the melting pot and foreign ownership and in- fluence. The Catholic spirit, the Spanish tradition, Indian customs, 26 Latin America and. the ̂ United, States 26 in some countries a negro influence, the influence of the en- vironment of the new world, the "liberal" revolution, foreign ownership and influence, now the beginnings of the new changes, and all of these in various combinations (modified still further in southern South America by Italian, German, English and Irish immigrants and nearly everywhere by new Spaniards) make of Latin America an area of conflict. They are attempting an heroic thing. And they must go on facing an heroic task for generations. 6 . SUGGESTION It may be an odd comment to make on all the foregoing yet it appears to be the part of wisdom for the United States and Latin-American countries to show extraordinary patience with one another's faults, to help one another and not to try to dominate one another. The problems of all are similar in many respects; the history is in many respects similar; all of us are inhabitants of the same new hemisphere; each has something to contribute to the other. But we are all also different. In certain respects we of the United States have made a more workable compromise than has Latin America be- tween the old and the new; in other respects they have done better. We have stability in government to offer, technical knowledge and devolopment, religious freedom, concern for health. They offer a greater sense of justice (notwithstanding confiscation of property), a tradition of arbitration and inter- national law, respect for a man whatever be his color, a sense of the dignity of well-spent leisure, a lofty culture among their educated, a sense of beauty among all, a warmth of life, a cour- teousness and hospitality truly Latin and truly Catholic, a tradition of Catholicism, broken indeed but not splintered like ours, and, in spite of religious persecution or perhaps because of it, a pervading recognition of its importance. We can bor- row from one another and help one another. (See Appendix A.) II FROM THE MONROE DOCTRINE TO THE 90'S9 1. We have helped each other heretofore. We of the United States particularly look upon the Monroe Doctrine as an obligation we alone have borne and through which we have saved the La tin-American republics from colonial subjection. It is true, our citizens encouraged their independence and our country has helped them to fend off European aggression. But it was they who .threw off the foreign yoke and they who all along have determined to remain independent. Nor did the Monroe Doctrine rise from altruistic interest in Latin-American political and economic independence or from a desire to ex- tend republican government in the western hemisphere. In- stead it came from our fear when we were weak that other European powers might plant themselves strongly in our hemisphere, encircle us, prevent extension of territory, shut our merchants and shippers out of Latin-American trade for- ever, and probably wage war upon us and subjugate us. Latin-American determination to be independent politi- cally has helped us to preserve our own political independence. Our Monroe Doctrine helped them in their determination. We owe each other much. The Monroe Doctrine was formulated in 1823 after the United States had recognized new Latin-American govern- ments. It was directed not so much at Spain as at France, which sought Latin-American colonies and a series of French protected monarchical states, and at Russia which might help France and also extend her own territory and trade down the Pacific Coast. With some hesitation England was in accord with Latin-American independence which suited better her traders' interests than the resurgence of France and the growth of Russia in the new world. The United States was also in controversy with Spain over Florida. There was besides the fear of English control of Cuba and thus of our gulf ports and 9On sections II, III and IV consult Latane's "The United States and Latin America" (Doubleday Co.); Sears' "History of American Foreign Relations" (Crowell Co.); Moon's "Imperialism and World Politics," Chapter XVI (Macmillan Co.); and bibliographies included in all three books. 28 Latin America and. the ̂ United, States 28 the Mississippi trade. Hopes were high, too, of expansion westward beyond the boundaries of the Louisiana purchase. The Monroe Doctrine thus looked in several directions. Its more important clauses are the following: "The Ameri- can 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." "We consider any attempt on their (the European powers) part to extend their system to any portion of this hemisphere as dangerous to our peace and safety. . . . With the govern- ments (of Latin America) who have declared their inde- pendence and maintained it and whose independence we have . . . acknowledged, we could not view any interposition for the purpose of oppressing them or controlling in any other man- ner their destiny, by any European power in any other light than as the manifestation of an unfriendly disposition towards the United States." Following this was a warning that the policy of neutrality towards the new Latin-American govern- ments and Spain would not continue if the situation changed i. e., if any other power interceded. The language carried a plain warning and veiled a prophecy. The American continent was no longer open to new colonists, Spain could not hold her old ones, and the independence of the Latin-American countries would be defended by the United States if Spain gained help or if other powers sought to take them. The Monroe Doctrine has changed and grown in the last thirty years but certainly in its early record it was benevo- lent to Latin-American independence at a time when European powers gathered about Spain's empire and planned a raid on Latin America like that they later made upon Africa. 2. a. Yet flies alighted soon in the Monroe ointment. There was the Mexican War which to La tin-Americans (and to many in the United States) will always be a war of con- quest waged by a giant against a government in chaos. Through it we gained much new territory and had it not been for the refusal of Trist, the American negotiator, to return when he was recalled, and his unauthorized signing of a peace treaty with Mexico, our southern boundary would probably have been for a time at least not the Texas border, but either Latin America and. the ^United, States 29 the southern boundary of Mexico or a line through central Mexico. There were some who were known also to have designs on Cuba; filibustering, offers to purchase Cuba and ambassadorial threats of war against Spain made it a matter of international concern. The plantation interests who controlled our federal government sought it as a protection of slavery and to aid in the control of the Gulf of Mexico so as to protect the New Orleans' export trade which then exceeded in value that of New York, Boston, Philadelphia and Baltimore combined. Longing eyes were cast also at Yucatan which in fear of Mexico was in turn seeking our government's protection. We entered into a treaty with Colombia for joint canal rights at Panama. We entered into a treaty with England for joint canal rights in Nicaragua or elsewhere in Central America. Those were the years of our continental expansion, in the Southwest to suit our plantation interests, in the upper Middle- west for the small farmers, and on the Pacific Coast to suit our bolder adventurers and our commercial interests. Spain's em- pire in the present continental United States fell in great blocks into our hands from Florida to California. Even Louisiana, though bought from France, was once part of the Spanish Empire of the new world. Reaching the waters of the Pacific and turned back at the Canadian line, "Manifest Destiny," some declared, faced now the South and should march to the Isthmus of Panama and encompass the islands off the Florida coast. But the Civil War intervened. b. The major factors in our international relations in the forty years between the Latin-American revolutions and our Civil War appear to have been fear of Europe, the desire of slave territory, expansion to the Pacific, protection of the Gulf and Mississippi trade, and partial control of the Central American water route to California. One must assume also the exuberant eagerness of a people who reached out conquer- ingly. Those were violent days; the eagle flew far and screamed loud and long; a candid eye will see the roll of injustices and recognize them as such. When the Civil War intervened the United States government was, it seems, on the high road to an imperialism that would substitute aggres- sion by the United States in Latin America for aggression by 30 Latin America and. the ̂ United, States 30 European powers. Both the industrial and commercial inter- ests, the war ended, found themselves occupied to satiety at home. The plantation interests were prostrate. Railroads could and wished to carry goods to and from the Pacific coast, the East and the Mississippi basin. The prairies of the West were being given away in square farm plots by the govern- ment and by land-rich railroads. Eastern ports leaped into first importance. Indeed, it remained for the middle nineties to usher in the new period of Pan-American relations. c. The United States had, it is true, intimated to France after the Civil War that it would be well for her to withdraw her troops from Mexico where they were keeping Maximillian in power, and following France's heed to our suggestion,' Mexico had become again nominally a republic. We had sought without success a change in the English treaty of the fifties over joint control of a Central American canal. We had timidly waved the Monroe Doctrine in the case of a pro- posed French canal at Panama. Grant had been barred by the Senate from accepting Santo Domingo as a United States pro- tectorate. The Cuban revolutions against Spain had aroused our interest and once because of it during the seventies we came close to war. Early in the eighties invitations had been sent by the United States government, and then recalled, for a Pan-American Congress and in the late eighties when Blaine, its earlier sponsor, returned to the Secretaryship of State, the Congress had been held. Early in the nineties we had acted arrogantly over a sailors' brawl in Chile. We had sent, with- out success, seven warships and a commissioner to get a harbor lease from Haiti. Blaine had his ambitions for the United States to exercise a moral hegemony over the Western Hemi- sphere. But these scattered efforts were desultory, and not enough pressure was behind them to continue the policy that was being developed before the Civil War and that was in- augurated again on a larger scale in the nineties. I l l FROM THE 90'S 1. By the nineties the eagle was ready to fly again, and again it flew south. One might date the new era from Cleve- Latin America and. the ^United, States 31 land's sharp and decisive diplomatic victory over England in the Venezuela boundary case. One might date it from the five year campaign for annexation of distant Hawaii. But this campaign did not succeed until another event had occurred, the Spanish War, which appears to be the real beginning of the present era in Latin-American relations. a. Several outstanding facts must here be taken into ac- count.10 First, the United States had developed an extra- ordinarily wealthy, shrewd, and ambitious class of business men who looked for other fields to conquer in production, in banking, and in trade. The manufacturing, commercial and financial machine of the country had grown so strong that it could deal with other countries and other peoples. Moreover the distribution of the annual income was so narrow at home that other markets for goods and money must be searched for. The course of capitalist business was about to enter its normal second phase. Latin America was close at hand; Africa was European controlled; Asia was, too; where better opportunity to begin? b. At the same time that our business men were preparing to act as the agents of the industrial and agricultural develop- ment of parts of Latin America, that development itself was necessary for the good of those peoples themselves and for the good of the United States and the world. This is true even though there is an important distinction, to be considered again, between the need of industrial and agricultural develop- ment in accord with the new technical methods, and the type of ownership, finance and management to which the develop- ment is harnessed. c. Another fact is the importance to us, geographically, of the American Mediterranean and the American Suez. The same economic development which made Latin-American in- vestment important to our wealthy men and adventurers, made the Isthmus of Panama important as a gate-way to world trade. Ever since the Spanish explorers sailed the Central American coast in search for a water-way to the Indies, men had dreamed of piercing the barrier to the Pacific across which 10On this point special use was made of the report on the Causes of War prepared by the Committee on the Causes of International Enmity of the Catholic Association for International Peace. 32 Latin America and. the ̂ United, States 32 Balboa, first of the white men, had marched. Before the Civil War in the days of our gulf trade, our new China trade, our extension to California and Oregon and our new found Pacific wealth in gold and furs and when railroads extended but half way across the country, we, too, had dreams of helping to build a canal, in partnership though with England, which was considered necessary because of English economic and political strength at that time in Central America. Now again we wanted a canal, not only for trade purposes but also for quick transit of navy and army should a war come, and this time we wanted complete control. Central American countries were sovereign over the canal sites and they surrounded the Atlantic approach to those sites on three sides. d. Many of those countries and particularly those which surround the Caribbean, including Spain with its control then of Cuba and Porto Rico, were poltically weak. Several were subject to recurring spasms of the liberal-conservative fight which had become, in some places, merely a fight between the ins and the outs, waged, in the Caribbean area, in the melting e. Finally, though a later development, there are the oil fields and prospective oil fields of Latin America. Oil must be put in a class apart because of the growing use of oil as a fuel for warships. The usual consideration of foreign owner- ship and development of resources must be supplemented in the case of oil by the interest governments take in having their citizens control oil deposits.11 f. Throughout all this weaves still one further fact. In the case of investment and trade it is the competition and rivalry of various national groups of capitalists backed, each of them, by their governments. In the case of the Panama Canal and the protecting islands, etc., it is the fear that European powers will obtain further footholds in the American hemis- phere. Economic desires of our citizens, development in an area that was commercially and militarily of great importance to us, oil, competition with other powers and national groups of capitalists, politically unstable peoples who were not accom- plished in the new business methods and morals, and who were "See Ludwell Denny's "We Fight for Oil" (Knopf Co.). Latin America and. the ̂ United, States 33 themselves disunited and even hostile to one another—this set of conditions was made for us. We were wealthy, we were politically strong, and facts had shown that at times our gov- ernment could overcome the opposition of a part of our citizens to foreign marauding. It might be hard for Latin America, harder for those countries that bordered the Caribbean, harder still for those islands that hemmed in the Caribbean from the Atlantic and hardest of all for those countries where we wished to build a canal.12 2. a. The scene opened dramatically. Spain was sup- pressing brutally the Cuban revolt; we were protesting. After two years of self-imposed restriction we sent a battleship for purposes of ceremony to Havana harbor. It was blown up at night by whom no one to this day knows, but in all probability not by agents of the Spanish government. Our government de- manded redress, autonomy for the Cubans and cessation of the war against the revolutionists. Spain acceded to the first and second, and to the third also on condition that the revolution- ists would ask for the armistice. Later, persuaded by Pope Leo, it agreed without condition to end the war against the revolutionists.13 But the note informing the President of this,- President McKinley did not make public. Our yellow press clamored for war. Our people torn and depressed and losing 12See Report of Committee on Causes of International Enmity of the Catholic Association for International Peace. 13Our State Department has recently published a memorandum re- ceived by President McKinley from the American Minister to Spain on 'the eve of the Spanish-American War: "In view of action of Spanish government as cabled, Saturday, April 9th, I hope that you can obtain full authority from Congress to do whatever you shall deem necessary to secure immediate and permanent peace in Cuba by negotiation including the full power to employ the army and navy, according to your own judgment to aid and enforce your action. If this be secured, I believe you will get final settlement before August 1st on one of the following bases: Either such autonomy as the insurgents may agree to accept; or recognition by Spain of the independence of the island; or cession of the island to the United States. "I hope that nothing will now be done to humiliate Spain, as I am satisfied that the present government is going and is loyally ready to go as fast and as far as it can. With your power of action sufficiently free, you will win the fight on your own lines. I do not expect immediate reply but will be glad to have an early acknowledgment of receipt. "(Signed) Woodford." Latin America and. the ̂ United, States 34 faith in their own national life during those black nineties, took up the clamor. The war was quickly over. Under the treaty we had Cuba in the implied obligation to make it a re- public, and Porto Rico and the distant Philippines to do with as we saw fit. This was in 1897 and 1898. b. In 1903 our executive department was negotiating slowly and tediously with Colombia for canal rights at Panama, which she controlled and whose rights under an old treaty we were obligated to recognize. Two years before, an agreement had been reached with England that would permit us to go ahead without her partnership in canal control. The Pana- manian section of Colombia revolted. With unseemly haste our executive department recognized it and warned Colombia not to suppress the revolution. Then Roosevelt, as he after- wards boasted, "took the Canal Zone and let Congress debate." c. There had been trouble in Central America and Nica- ragua was the chief trouble maker. Nicaragua had a desirable canal site. A revolution occurred there. In the settlement of it our executive department provided in 1907 for the creation of a Central American Court of Justice. The Nicaraguan President was not our friend. Two years later, friends of our official policy led a revolution against him. Our executive department declared for the revolution and when it was losing intervened to help it. It won. From the new government we could have had anything we wanted had our Senate not stood in the way. Finally in 1913 we tapered a treaty with Nica- ragua down to a canal site, and islands and a naval base to fortify it; but already by executive aid our bankers had funded the loan, were controlling the collection of customs, had estab- lished a bank which they controlled and had taken over con- trol of the railroads. d. Costa Rica and Salvador protested the right of Nica- ragua to lease the islands and a naval base. The Central American Court decided against Nicaragua and, by inference, against the United States Government. Nicaragua disregarded it. Our executive department backed her. The Central Ameri- can Court collapsed. In 1923 our State Department assisted in a conference from which issued a treaty to establish a Cen- tral American Tribunal and commissions of inquiry, and the Central American states obligated themselves not to recognize Latin America and. the ^United, States 35 a revolutionary government and to reduce their armies to a few thousand. The actual results of the treaty have been few and the United States still exercises the right of armed inter- vention, as now in Nicaragua. e. Haiti stands as one of the many outposts of the canal. A New York bank was heavily involved in both the govern- ment and the Haitian railway. Haiti fell into chaos. Our gov- ernment intervened in 1915 and to this day controls it, partly directly and partly through a Haitian President. Another Roosevelt of another political party said later that he wrote the new constitution of Haiti in which he lifted the ban that the negro republic, remembering the colonial years of slavery, had laid on foreign ownership of lands. f. Salvador in 1922 borrowed twenty-one and a half mil- lion dollars from Minor C. Keith, the head of the United Fruit Company, through the manager of the International Railways of Central America, itself partially a United Fruit concern. A New York bank, named by Keith, supervises the collection of customs. Salvador agrees not to reduce the total amount of its customs, the loan has a mortgage on 70% of the customs, and in case of dispute the Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court through the United States Secretary of State shall be the arbiter. The bank in advertising the bonds said that "it is simply not thinkable" under such a condition that the United States Government would not enforce the decision in the same way that "a warship was sent to carry out the verdict of the arbitrators" in the dispute between Costa Rica ,and Panama. 3. a. These events are briefly outlined to show that a change in the Monroe Doctrine and in our policy towards Latin America has taken place. Indeed, a distinction has been erected between the Monroe Doctrine and a so-called Isthmian Doctrine under which in the Isthmian or canal sphere of Latin America, i. e., the Caribbean area, the Monroe Doctrine is no longer operative. The "European system" of colonies and de- pendencies was to be debarred under the Monroe Doctrine from extension to Latin America. Explicitly it forbade only European colonies and dependencies; implicitly it forbade also dependencies of the United States and there is a steady tradi- tion of statements by public men of the United States who re- 36 Latin America and. the ̂ United, States 36 nounced aggression by us. Under the new doctrine whatever is considered necessary for the interests of the United States, as interpreted usually by the executive department alone of our government, is to be done in the Caribbean area. This region is held to be so vital to American interests that the United States, it is said, should establish over it such approximations of the "European system" as our executive department deems necessary. b. The new doctrine was implicit in President Hayes' dic- tum of the 80's that an interoceanic canal would be a part of the coast line of the United States. It is argued that the United States alone must control and protect the canal even though all peoples may use it in time of peace on equal terms. By an extension of the argument the United States must ade- quately control, it is declared, the approaches to the canal, those Caribbean islands and mainland countries which sur- round the eastern entrance to the canal and those countries to the south such as Ecuador and Peru, which along with Cen- tral America stand guard at the west of the canal. c. The Monroe Doctrine has been modified in another way. Roosevelt by threatening war forced the German gov- ernment to agree to arbitrate claims her nationals had against Venezuela. Since then a double policy has developed. No European country is either to be the arbiter or is to intervene even temporarily in the Caribbean area. The United States is to keep the peace in that area and act (at least at times) as agent of European claimants; and since investments by other than United States citizens invites the political ambitions of European or Asiatic governments in those politically unstable areas, investment by United States citizens is to be encouraged Where necessary the collection of the customs, the chief source of government money in those countries, is either to be in the hands of representatives of our government (as in Haiti) or representatives of our bankers (as in Salvador). • , .i Another development is a policy, not, however, con- sistently followed, of refusing to recognize revolutionary gov- ernments and of forbidding arms to revolutionists. Wilson held to this policy, Harding continued it. It was adopted by the Central American states by their joint action which we supervised. In practice, however, it means that the United Latin America and. the ^United, States 37 States actually supports existing governments when they are not too much disliked by our executive department. This is apparently a policy only for the Caribbean area.14 IV PENETRATION Since the 90's there has been a rapid and very extensive economic penetration of Latin America and particularly of the Caribbean area by American investment and trade.15 The economic and political strength of the United States and its citizens in Latin America has become very great. 1. a. At the close of the century the investment18 of the United States citizens in Latin America was $290,000,000 of which $185,000,000 was in Mexico, $50,000,000 in Cuba and $55,000,000 in the rest of Latin America. On the eve of the war this had increased to around $1,500,- 000,000 or over four times as much, spread at an approximately equal rate of increase over all of Latin America.17 At the end of 1927 it was estimated that we had $5,200,000,000 invested in Latin America, eighteen times as much as in 1899 and four times as much as in 1913. Extraordinary growth in Cuba— six times the pre-war investment and twenty-eight times the pre-Spanish American War investment—marked this period. In Mexico the increase was great in the fifteen years before "Yet the Senate in its recent interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine, which it attached to its vote adopting the Kellogg renunciation of war pact, makes its own the original meaning of the Monroe Doctrine and quotes Professor Theodore Woolsey as follows: "There are now three fundamental principles which characterize the policy of President Mon- roe as it was and as it is. First, the Monroe doctrine was a statement of policy originated and maintained by reason of self-interest, not of altruism. Second, it was justifiable by. reason of the right of self- defense (which is a recognized principle of international law). Third, it called no new rights into being; therefore, whenever it oversteps the principle of self-defense, reasonably interpreted, the right disappears and the policy is questionable, because it then violates the rights of others. . . . The Monroe Doctrine is based upon the right of self-defense. This is the first law of nations, as of individuals." (See Appendix B for other very recent developments on this matter.) 16N. T. Bacon, Yale Review, Vol. 9, pp. 26S-28S. 1SH. E. Fisk, "Inter-ally Debts," p. 307. "Foreign Policy Association, New York City. 38 Latin America and. the ̂ United, States 38 their revolution began but only 61% of an increase in the past fifteen years. It is in the rest of Latin America that the growth in recent years has been so phenomenal—thirty-fold in Chile within fifteen years, tenfold in the Argentine, fifty- fold in Venezuela, sixty-fold in Colombia. Before the war, the investments of all the rest of Latin America barely topped those in Cuba and were only a third of those in Mexico. Now they equal the Cuban and Mexican investments combined. Considering the wealth of Latin America, the investment in the rest of Latin America under normal circumstances can be expected to grow greater and greater. I t is to be remem- bered however that these sums do not mean that over five billions of American money have gone into these countries. What is meant is that Americans own stock or bonds of com- panies or government, bonds to that paper value. In the stock there may be much water; and the bonds, both private and government, may have been bought at a discount, for example, the 12% discount of part of the Salvador bonds bought by Minor C. Keith. b. United States firms control the meat trade of the Argen- tine; the tin of Bolivia; Chilean copper and nitrates; Colom- bian oil; Cuban sugar, railroads, telephones and electric power; most of Mexican oil, its telephones and telegraph systems and much of its metal mines; Peruvian vanadium, and most of its oil and metal mining; Venezuelan oil and electric power; Cen- tral American fruit, railways, chicle and oil; Haitian and Dominican sugar. Besides this, government bond flotations have been con- ducted since the war almost solely through United States banks. Public works are being handled largely by United States companies, credit for private or semi-government ven- tures, such as control of Brazilian coffee, is secured through United States banks, and generally manufacturies, mining, trade, banking and in some countries agriculture fall more and more into the hands of United States companies or investors. In Argentine and Brazil, United States investment is greatly exceeded by British investment. But in the West In- dies, Central America, in Peru, Colombia, Venezuela, Mexico and now even in Chile, United States investors hold the su- premacy. Latin America and. the ^United, States 39 c Of the more than five billion invested, about three billion and a half is in the Caribbean area, including Mexico and also Porto Rico. This is about 70% of the total Latin- American investment of the United States. Another quarter of a billion is in Peru and Ecuador. d. Latin-American investments of United States citizens are nearly a billion more than their investments in Europe excluding war debts and are nearly as large as their invest- ments in all the rest of the world save Canada. Foreign in- vestments total fourteen billions five hundred millions. Of this 36% is in Latin America. By far the most of this is in indus- trial and agricultural properties and not in government obli- gations.18 e Over one third of the total Latin-American exports are to the United States. Its exports to us exceed the com- bined purchases of Great Britain, Germany and France. Over one-third of the total Latin-American imports were from us and again our sales to them exceeded the combined sales to them of Great Britain, Germany and France. S These figures include all of Latin America. The situation in the Carribean area is more symptomatic. Nearly three- fifths both of the exports and the imports of the Caribbean re- publics were in trade with us.19 2. Rapid and very extensive political encroachment of the United States upon Latin America and particularly the Caribbean area has taken place. (This account appears to be accurate but there may be errors in it; it is given merely to hint at the degree and extent of the domination by way of introduction to later investigations to correct or amplify the items.) „ , , a. We dominate the Greater Antilles, Cuba through our right to intervene and the facts of continuous quasi-official supervision; Haiti by occupation and complete supervision; the Dominican Republic through customs collection and through treaty rights imposed as a condition of withdrawal "See Dunn's "American Foreign Investments" (Viking Press); the Foreign Policy Association's Reports: "America, the World Banker and "The Ascendancy of the Dollar"; and the reports of the Department of Commerce on foreign investments. I H M "See "United States Trade with Latin America in 1927, United States Department oi Commerce. 40 Latin America and. the ̂ United, States 40 from a control like that in Haiti; and Porto Rico by owner- ship. At the turn of the Antilles, Greater and Lesser, which hem in the Caribbean, lie the Virgin Islands which we own by purchase. The other small Caribbean Islands are British and French. The Caribbean is bounded on the South by Venezuela and Colombia. Venezuela is ruled by a dictator who is very friendly to the financial and oil interests of our citizens. Co- lombia is in controversy with us over oil concessions. We prevented Colombia fifteen years ago from giving a British company oil concessions and railway and harbor works and we sent a financial mission to advise with it over the money given, actually, whatever the fiction, in return for our part m the Panama Revolution. b. The Caribbean is bounded on the west by Panama which is a military protectorate of ours, though, at least under the present terms, unwilling so to remain; by Costa Rica which came definitely into our sphere of influence when in 1919 we recognized a revolution against a government that was un- friendly to American oil companies; by Nicaragua which we now occupy; by Honduras wherein we intervened in 1924- by Salvador wherein our citizens are in financial control of thé government; by Guatemala wherein American fruit interests own enormous holdings of the land of the country and are de- clared to control the government. In Central America there is also British Honduras controlled by Great Britain. Then comes Mexico which, in spite of controversies with it, came definitely under our protection when we banned arms to revo- lutionists and sold United States government arms to Obregon and Calles. 6 c. On the upper west coast of South America tangent to the Caribbean, Ecuador and Peru have American financial ad- visors and Bolivia has its finances controlled by a committee of United States bankers. d. There remain in Latin America French, Dutch and British Guiana east of Venezuela and just east of the Carib- bean Sea, the ABC powers (Argentine, Brazil and Chile), and Uruguay and Paraguay. Except for the Monroe Doctrine these republics as far as is known and from all indications are free from domination by the United States or its citizens. 3. These political areas have not been colonized by our Latin America and. the ^United, States 41 citizens. The penetration has been through property owner- ship and rarely by seizure of their sovereignty but through financial power, control of arms shipments, influencing revo- lutions and election, temporary occupation, control of cus- toms and the treasury, or control or influence by citizens of the United States.20 V ECONOMIC RELATIONS 1. Some hold that the dangers of further economic de- velopment in Latin America are so great that the only sound policy for Latin-Americans and for Americans of the United States who wish to see justice done and brotherhood practiced in the western hemisphere is to oppose the economic develop- ment itself. The economic development, they contend, has been and will be accomplished largely by foreign capital and this spells out permanent absentee ownership, gross exploita- tion and political subjection. Better a generation of delay, they maintain, than this. Yet the economic development itself is good and under predominantly foreign ownership it is ac- tually proceeding apace. The logic of the facts is therefore to look vigilantly to the conditions of its development. 2. a. There is the primary question of whether in the economic development further areas should be turned over into the one-crop plantation type of farming owned by corporations under the plan called industrialized or commercialized agricul- ture. Let us consider, for example, Haiti. An industrialized Haiti would mean large sugar plantations and large rubber plantations. The country is relatively crowded. Extensive sugar and rubber plantations in Haiti would mean the with- drawal of the masses of the Haitians from their little farms and their change to casual farm and sugar mill laborers em- ployed part of the year, unemployed the rest of the year, and landless the year round. Even with the industrialization of Haiti that has come about in the last ten years, the Haitians are still for the most part small farmers. They are poor and 20This report has not considered Latin-American resentment towards the United States, which is widespread and often very bitter. "South America Looks at the United States" by Haring (Macmillan Co.) re- counts something of this resentment. 42 Latin America and. the ̂ United, States 42 primitive; but they can live the year round independently on their own farms. Under industrialization they would be casual farm laborers working at low wages part of the year, unemployed the rest of the time and in subjection to the owners of the industry. The country would be a country in which the masses of the people would be casual wage hands, a few would live in parasitical luxury, the cities would show superficial prosperity and a very few persons would be wealthy. If the industry were owned by foreigners, which is probable, the evil of absenteeism would be added to the rest of the evils; both small farm owners and the large owners would become landless. That this is not a mere deduction may be seen by the history of Cuba and Porto Rico in both of which the process of industrialized plantation agriculture is completed.21 A limited city prosperity, both city and rural business, and ab- sentee ownership characterize both islands. b. Indeed one cannot but question the value of indus- trialized agriculture in Latin America. There is the greater reason for question since in the regions where industrialized agriculture is most suited to the physical conditions, the masses of the(people are the people of the melting pot and are the more easily subject to exploitation and the less able to care for themselves. We have drawn in rigid form the contrast between a cer- tain kind of exploitation of natural resources and interna- tional intercourse, and on the other hand the conditions under which that physical exploitation and international intercourse shall proceed. Would it not be better to abandon thought of intensive industrialized exploitation of lands suitable to one crop plantation farming and go about the slow process of building nations of small farmers who would work their lands and market their crops cooperatively? Probably technical men experienced in tropical farming and other technical men experienced in group marketing would have to be brought in from outside to help in the development of such a policy. c. Yet large scale agriculture has so generally predominated "Several Cuban writers are emphasizing the growth of a new race problem in their country through the immigration of negroes from Haiti and Jamaica, particularly, to work on the plantations. Latin America and. the ^United, States 43 in Latin America that something like a revolution in mens minds is necessary to prevent its growth or attain a change. Furthermore Latin-American leaders in many countries are "liberals" who still see in large production of staple products, great foreign trade and plenty of money the signs of a success- ful and happy country. They are the more willing, therefore, to encourage the development of industrialized agriculture. Self-seekers among the politicians soon learn, too, the value of legal fees, for example, or some other method of making them retainers of the sugar, fruit, rubber or tobacco interests. The pressure of foreign citizens, corporations and banks to develop and extend industrialized agriculture finds allies in Latin America itself. . The Caribbean area is the place par excellence in Latin America for this form of agriculture. It is also the place where the governmental influence of the United States is strongest. The influence of our government has gone to the side of this form of agriculture. This is clearest in Haiti where we forced through changes in the Constitution to permit foreigners to own land and where we are now planning to in- vestigate the non-existent legal titles of the squatter peasants. Since our control of Haiti, industrialized agriculture has com- menced. d. A change in policy by the American government is here suggested. Since American political influence is either com- pelling or highly influential in the whole Caribbean region, its weight for or against industrialized agriculture will mean much. ,To the extent of our political control or influence, this policy should be changed in favor of the development of na- tions of farm owners marketing their crops and working their land cooperatively. Where plantation agriculture is already developed and we are in control we should aid the proper regulation of an evil system; perhaps the system itself or its form of ownership can be gradually changed. We should meanwhile seek to apply the laws of justice to the economic lives of those peoples on wages, hours, em- ployment right, right to organize, etc. Where we are not in control, the comments under the following section where indus- try in general is considered appear to apply. Commercialized agriculture under the still surviving rule of lawless and morals- 44 Latin America and. the ̂ United, States 44 less competition and conducted in the melting pot, is a heightened example of thoroughgoing 19th century paganism. 3. The strictures against industrialized agriculture do not stand, and certainly not to the samp degree at any point, against other forms of industrialism. Latin America needs railroads and electrical development. There is room for im- provement in its mining methods. Moreover foreign capital and foreign technical men appear by common consent to be still necessary. Yet there has arisen and with increasing frequency there will arise the question of how Latin America may subject foreign-owned industrial developments to the old rules of morality and overcome the evils of the 19th century regime which it once fought to obtain. One question regards the form of ownership of the domestic developments. Should they be owned solely by foreigners or, at least, should foreigners have majority ownership? Should the foreigners control the com- panies if they own them or should their capital be in the form of bonds or voteless stock, or should citizens of the countries where the investment lies be in majority control of the direc- tion? Should subsoil resources be the property of the nation and then fall under the heading of regulated concessions? To what degree should the taxing power be invoked? Should, for example, cooperative ownership in any of its forms be the aim sought for? Should public ownership and operation, for example, of natural resources be provided for now or in the future? Another question is the status of labor in such companies, the protection given them and their organizations, and the possibilities of their rising out of the status of employees. Still another question concerns the operations, status, inter- est rate and ownership of foreign banks in Latin America. 4. Over such questions as these fully as much as over revolutions and violent destruction of property the United States and Latin-American countries are in dispute. If there is to be peace between them based upon justice and the welfare of peoples these questions must be squarely met. The first point is our attitude when we exercise outright political control. We are not assuming here, any more than when the agricultural policy was considered, that the political Latin America and. the ^United, States 45 control is justly possessed. Instead we are considering the ob- ligations of de facto control. In cases of political control, it appears to be our obligation actively to aid the just subjection of industrial development to the welfare of the people our gov- ernment is ruling on the principle that political power over a people is their servant and must be used for their welfare. Yet, on the record, our government at present is not ready to do this. Indeed the influence of the United States in an area is now a handicap, probably insurmountable, to that area's subjection of industrial development to the rule of morals and general social welfare. We ourselves are still wedded to the 19 th century system and in relations between foreigners and our citizens, our government and public opinion will ordinarily rally to the interests of our own and will use political power to help them. 5. But the more frequent question concerns our action in cases where we do not exercise outright political control. In the first stages of regulatory action, either by governments or non-political groups, the boundary between just action and confiscation of property is not only itself hotly disputed but is easily crossed. Join this to the known record of our govern- ment and American public opinion and it becomes clear that our economic and political penetration of Latin America and the growing trend in Latin America towards subjecting agri- cultural and industrial development to certain rules presents one of the most serious problems of inter-American relations. It is all the more serious because such economic change is often accompanied in Latin America and will probably continue to be accompanied by revolutions, threatened or actual destruc- tion of property and defaulting on debts or delays in interest payments. At the present our executive department acts as the agent of our citizens in such cases and to a certain extent it acts also as the agent of nationals of other countries so as to pre- vent action by any government other than our own. Congress has not written a code of law for the guidance of our executive department in such cases nor has positive international law developed to the point of covering them. 6. Following the rules of international morality as laid down in the report of the Committee on International Ethics 46 Latin America and. the ̂ United, States 46 of the Catholic Association for International Peace, it appears that two general statements, one negative and one positive, meet the rules of right and wrong in this particular situation. The first is a negative rule: Where the action of a foreign government or a group within a foreign country is not clearly a case of confiscation, that is, unjust taking of actual property of our citizens without compensation or reasonable hope of compensation, then our government should not intervene to aid our citizens. Certainly our government should not inter- fere in the affairs of another country to protect doubtful rights of our citizens. A general negative rule such as this presents its difficul- ties when trying to decide whether this or that case is or is not incontestably confiscation of property. There may, for ex- ample, exist at the same time a controversy with one coun- try over regulatory laws which are in fact just and wise, a controversy over an actually unjust law, a controversy over payment of interest on the public debt, a contro- versy over our Panama Canal policy, a controversy over destruction of property in time of revolution, and perhaps a controversy over recognizing a revolutionary government. The issue would be so confused that we with our financial and po- litical strength might be able to force that country to give up or emasculate just and wise policies. For such a situation or even where the situation is unconfused it is difficult to see the answer in practice because of the present state of Ameri- can public opinion and the precedents that have been allowed to grow in our executive department. There will always be pressure upon our government to act in every case however dubious and it will be contended in each case that here is certain and incontestable confiscation of property. Frequent investigation by congressional committees and by private bodies of investments of our corporations and citizens and Latin-American regulatory action and of State Department policies would be a great help. Accurate rules regarding what is and what is not confiscation of property must also be developed in detail and for this much can be expected of Catholic moralists working in the double tradition of op- position to theft, even when legalized, and of severe limitations upon property rights. Latin America and. the ^United, States 47 In such cases reliance is often placed as a final recourse to a neutral board. And yet this merely puts the question further back. Upon what rules of justice, equity and public policy would the neutral board base its decision? No code of inter- national law formed and accepted at this time on these sub- jects would be adequate. If formed and accepted the code would be left to a board or court to interpret, it would come to have a certain rigidity, and while it might ease the con- flict could not completely settle it. Even this much though would be a help. Yet one must look elsewhere for a solution and perhaps it is to be found in the development of sound views on property rights to replace the still lingering 19th century unsound ones, an unwillingness among the people of the United States to let our government be used to protect any but incontestable rights abroad, a growth in political stability and economic inde- pendence among Latin-American countries themselves and their own unswerving determination to work out a thoroughgoing and at the same time just policy. 7. a. But where there is incontestable confiscation either in such cases or by violence or outright theft, then the right to intervene exists. Certain of the countries of Latin America are prone to confiscate property either directly or indirectly. Moreover where government is unstable, the violence of revolution may destroy property, or one administration may create large public debts, at high interest rate, due foreigners and now increas- ingly due citizens of the United States, which a succeeding administration may try to repudiate. One administration may give generous concessions, perhaps in . return for bribes, per- haps not, which a later will try to cancel, perhaps justly, per- haps unjustly. It is the United States citizens who own much of Latin-American property and paper. Our government has a peculiar political interest in those countries because of, the Panama Canal. Furthermore the instability of government and property ownership is at its peak precisely in the Carib- bean area where our political interest is the greatest. b. One must of course distinguish here between actual confiscation and reasonable regulatory action. One must dis- tinguish also between actual and honest investments and con- 48 Latin America and. the ̂ United, States 48 cessions or other business deals similar to that of our own Tea Pot Dome scandal. One must furthermore distinguish between a revolution in a Latin-American country and actual danger to the property and lives of foreigners; they have not always ex- isted together. One must also distinguish between the destruc- tion of property in time of revolution with and without rea- sonable hope of later compensation. c. The rule followed here upon the question of interven- tion for these purposes was given in the report of the Com- mittee on International Ethics. "Self preservation may include protection of the lives and property of nationals in foreign countries. That the natural law always requires states to perform this function may well be doubted. Conditions in a foreign territory might be so disturbed, the political authority might be so inadequate and so insecure, that sojourners or investors there would have no moral right to call upon their own governments for protection of either life or property. While existing international law recognizes this as a national right, it does not necessarily make the exercise of this power legitimate in morals. While citizens have in general a valid claim to protection by their govern- ment in foreign lands, it is limited by the right of their coun- try and their fellow citizens not to be exposed to dispropor- tionately grave inconveniences. Travelers and investors in foreign lands have no right to expect as much protection from their governments as they would have obtained had they re- mained at home. The situation involves the welfare of a small group of adventurous citizens versus the welfare of the community. In any case, armed intervention on behalf of the former interests is never justified when they can be se- cured through peaceful means, such as negotiation, arbitra- tion, severing diplomatic relations, and putting an embargo upon trade." d, This passage grants the right of intervention by the United States to protect the lives and property of its citizens. It appears to cover the case of incontestable confiscation of property rights as above described or loss of life. It does so though on several conditions. 1 First, the right may exist and not the duty. Very dis- turbed conditions and inadequate and unstable political au- Latin America and. the ^United, States 49 thority in a country may establish it that sojourners and in- vestors there are gambling with their life and property and have no . right to expose their country to disproportionately grave difficulties. It appears that in the past this has been true of certain of the Latin-American countries, but that it is so no longer true in its fullest meaning. To the degree that it is not true in any Latin-American country, to that degree our duty to protect investors there would not exist because of the known gamble such investors would have taken from the very beginning. The second condition is more relevant. It is that armed intervention is the last resort. The report mentions nego- tiation, arbitration, severing diplomatic relations, and putting an embargo on trade. Since armed intervention partakes of the nature of war, these rules for a just war given in the report on International Ethics of the Catholic Association for Inter- national Peace are applicable: Actual or imminent violation of rights; certainty that this is the situation; a degree of evil in the injury proportionate to the evils involved in war; in- efficiency of peaceful means; a well grounded hope of bringing about better condition; a right intention; and declaration of war by the sovereign authority. The type of intervention will be considered under the next heading; here it suffices to say that armed intervention is the last recourse. VI PANAMA CANAL AND MONROE DOCTRINE 1. a. Just as the old phase of the Monroe Doctrine was not primarily a Latin-American policy but a part of the world policy of the United States, so too are its newer phases. The Panama Canal, the Caribbean area and our political and eco- nomic penetration there are geographically Latin-American and they have a certain independent status. But they inter- twine with our world policy and world position. They are conceived in part as necessary elements of a world policy of development and protection. The whole situation is kaleidoscopic. Economic develop- so Latin America and. the ̂ United, States 50 ment in Latin America and the Caribbean, protection of exist- ing rights there, political encroachments, the Isthmian and the Monroe Doctrine intertwine with economic development in Europe, Asia, Africa, Canada and in the United States it- self, with the protection of existing economic interests every- where, with the protection of our world position and ambitions, with our political and economic ambitions, with our political relations with all the rest of the world. The Caribbean, made trebly important to our world position by the Canal, is strategic in our world policy; economic and political interests in a Caribbean country are not to be conceived of as stand- ing alone. The Canal is not a commercial route to Peru alone but to all the Seven Seas. It is not a military route to Costa Rica alone but .to all the Seven Seas. I t is a commercial and military route between our own two coasts and between them and the whole world.22 b. Because of this subordination of our Latin-American policy to our world policy, no final word upon our Latin- American policy is possible in a report on Latin America alone. It is necessary to probe our whole world position and_ in- vestigate economic and political plans of world relations and world peace in relationship to ourselves. It is necessary to de- termine whether our world relations are or are not just. That is to say, the alleged danger that other governments are actually seeking to dominate the Caribbean countries, and would succeed and from those vantage points then attack us, is not here conceded as true. But if true, the danger might be obviated by a different world policy. 2. a. Yet the Latin-American, Caribbean and Canal phases can be isolated. Thus far our government has acted on the general principle of intervening with armed force and dominating any Latin-American country and particularly any Caribbean country whenever and to the extent our executive departments think it advisable in the interest of our general world policy, our economic and political development and the protection of the property rights and lives of our citizens, b. Yet (granting that our world policy is correct) it is 22The proposal to build another canal across the Isthmus in Nica- ragua, now advancing towards adoption, strengthens the importance to us of this area. Latin America and. the ̂ United, States 51 still not just to dominate any of these peoples save on one sole condition. That sole condition is that domination would be clearly and with certainty necessary and alone adequate for our self-protection. The title of self-protection, it appears accord- ing to the Ethics Report, would permit this if the underlying facts justified it. Insofar as the question hinges upon the development of our country, we have no right of any sort to dominate them. The following passage from the report on International Ethics is to the point: "The right of a state to self-development must be exercised with due regard to the rights of other states. It does not justify conquest, nor making the flag follow either migration or trade." c. The question is therefore, granting the correctness oi our world policy, whether it is or is not with clear certainty necessary, as the solely adequate means of self-protection, to exercise political domination over thQse peoples. The point is limited to political domination and is not extended to the con- trol of the economic life of those countries because that is not necessary for political domination. When political domination is exercised, it should be said here again, the political domination carries with it the exten- sive obligations of all political rulership, to fulfill which open avowal appears necessary and careful consideration and able execution imperative. At the present our government en- deavors to keep much of this in a twilight zone where executive departments operate according to plans of civilian and military bureau chiefs. .3. a. The central question in this report on this phase of Latin-American relations, granting that other countries are with certainty and resoluteness seeking to dominate the Carib- bean countries, and would succeed and from those points would attack us and granting that this could not be obviated by a different world policy, is whether our domination of them is clearly necessary and alone adequate for our self-protection. To answer that in the affirmative one must say that a sim- ple warning against further European control in those coun- tries was adequate from the twenties to the nineties of the 19th century and has not been adequate since then, nor is ade- quate now. One must also assume that diplomatic negotiations 52 Latin America and. the ̂ United, States 52 and all other measures would fail. Such assumptions are, it seems, unfounded. Yet the final answer should be sought by future study on the part of this committee in collaboration with other committees of the Catholic Association for Inter- national Peace. b. Yet even if the ordinary methods of protecting the Mon- roe Doctrine have fallen down, that does not mean that domina- tion is the.only recourse. Other methods of dealing with the Caribbean countries are at least theoretically possible. Among others these may be listed: (1) Mutual agreement among the American republics upon their mutual rights and duties, formulated in a code of law. Creation of a Pan-American Court to interpret the code. Creation of a method of Inter-American sanction as contrasted with sanction by ourselves alone. Limitation of sanctions to peaceful means until there is hope in sufficiently important cases in none but armed intervention. (2) Systematic methods of conciliation and arbitration. (3) Advising with certain only of the Latin-American governments.. (4) Right of the Central American Court of Justice to enforce its de- cisions in its own region. All of these., and the first of them most extensively, seek to substitute moral right for the material force of arms in the reciprocal dealings of the American republics. c.' We are obligated as a government and a people to test patiently their feasibility and to select that policy which will most assure justice and peace. For the past generation our government has carried on a series of petty wars under the name of intervention. The moral rules for warfare apply and one of the chief rules is that "recourse to war is not justified until all peaceful methods have been tried and found inade- quate."23 Our policy now is to do what St. Augustine vetoed when he said, "A strong nation ought not to be a judge in its own case." And in ours it is our executive department almost exclusively that acts as judge. d. Of these proposals the first is theoretically the best. I t establishes a code of international law for the American sover- eign republics, it sets up a court to interpret the law and it provides a means'of joint rather than individual sanction. Under such an arrangement (or indeed under any of the ^International Ethics, p. 29, Catholic Association for International Peace. Latin America and. the ̂ United, States 53 plans mentioned above) the Monroe Doctrine could remain distinctively a policy of the United States at the same time that it would have inter-American reinforcement not only of the ban upon permanent colonization by non-American govern- ments (or an American government) but also of the ban upon military bases. e. Yet this theoretically best arrangement may be impos- sible of achievement, even if our government were to favor it, because of opposition by some of the Latin-American countries, an opposition engendered both by fear of us and their own mutual fears. Our conclusion therefore is the more tentative in that it depends upon a variety of conditions which this or another committee of the Catholic Association for International Peace should pursue further, to wit: the actual feasibility of a just policy. Still our government is obliged to try that policy which will best obviate the necessity of using armed intervention and domination for purposes of self-protection. It is to be further noted that the farther away a country actually lies from the Panama Canal, the less validity there is (if there is any at all) in the title of our dominating it for the sake of our self-protection. f. In December, 1928, a Pan-American meeting was held in Washington to discuss a basis of Pan-American conciliation and arbitration. This committee or its successor in the Cath- olic Association for International Peace should-prepare itself to present a report on the subject. The committee considers that .nothing will be satisfactory short of a regional association of American nations, that will be ruled by a code of inter- national positive law which will express the natural law as clarified by Christ's teachings, which will be inspired by the charity of Christ and which will be interpreted in the same spirit. Yet conciliation and arbitration are steps in the right direction. (Confer Appendices B and C.) VII THE INFLUENCE OF THE UNITED STATES 1. a. The first reason for inter-American arbitration and joint intervention when intervention is necessary, and not by the United States alone at its own will, is that in the circUm- 54 Latin America and. the ̂ United, States 54 stances of inter-American life this would more closely approach justice. Still another reason is that the United States would not then have an overweening influence on Latin-American life. Satisfaction of a sense of our own honor and glory and satisfaction of the belief that it is our duty to spread American ideas and institutions over the whole western hemisphere have been present in our Latin-American and Caribbean policies. There is no doubt that we have something to contribute to Latin America. On the basis of this and the strength and wealth of our country, we have felt that somehow new glory is cast on Old Glory and that we are doing our duty to Ameri- can life every time we force or influence Latin Americans to act as United States Americans. One man, for example, may wish the United States government to aid and protect his in- vestment or trade in Latin America which themselves, as well as the aid and protection, he may hold are a part of our mili- tary strategy. He will glory in this for the honor of his coun- try. And he may finally look upon himself and the interven- tion as missionaries in the cause of our business methods, our race prejudices, our science, our political principles, our practi- cal opportunism, our plumbing, our public school system and Protestantism. Some of his ideas may be good and both he and intervention may be and are in many ways benefactors. But also he and intervention may be and are also malefactors, honest enough but malefactors just the same. We have much that is good to give to them and the world but we have also bad to give. Even the good must go through the alembic of their minds and institutions before other peoples can adopt it with- out danger. b. This is an added reason why intervention by the United States alone is not for the general final welfare of these peo- ples. The anxiety of our citizens and officials to impress our customs, institutions and standards upon Latin-American peo- ples makes the situation dangerous to them. Borrowing of good institutions is one thing. Impressing upon a people for- eign institutions, both good and bad, is another. A history of our influence in Latin America, for both good and evil, would be an extraordinarily revealing piece of work; for all along one trouble has been that the average non-Catholic American thinks the influence is wholly good, and the average Catholic American that the influence is good except where it Latin America and. the ^United, States 55 has encouraged Protestant proselytizing. Even the history of the influence, good and bad, of the official agents of our gov- ernment would be revealing. In a particular case such as the Mexican persecution, for example, influence and pressure of Americans to end the persecution is good but the persecution was perhaps begun, in part, in the first place to elicit the sym- pathy of anti-Catholics in the United States and some of the "liberals" (of the new variety) throughout the world. c. There is no one who does not realize that save for rare cases the influence of United States officials is, for example, against religious education in daily schools because of the con- viction in the United States among all but Catholics and a few non-Catholics that religious education is a Sunday matter only or entirely foolish. The customs of a country of a hundred religions are considered by the average American best also for a country of one religion. In actual fact we have given aid and comfort and still give it to the traditional Latin-American "liberal" in the less drastic parts of his program. * * * * * The committee on Latin America, realizing the partial and preliminary nature of its report, lists the following subjects as requiring in its judgment at this time further detailed study: (1) The extent and influence of Protestant "missionary" activities in Latin America. . (2) The extent and influence of the Y. M. C. A. and Y. W. C. A. in Latin America. (3) The possibilities of a Catholic Pan-American Congress. (4)' The influence of United States officials upon the 19th century so- cial, intellectual and religious revolutions in Latin America. (5) Monographs on particular Latin-American countries and phases of particular Latin-American countries with special references to the United States. (6) The codification of American International Law. (7) Practicability of a. Pan-American Court and joint sanctions. (8) Economic penetration of Latin America and particularly the Carib- bean area by United States citizens and the United States gov- ernment. (9) Political control and influence by the United States government in Latin America and particularly the Caribbean area. (10) A Who's Who of Catholics in the United States acquamted first hand with Latin America or who have interested themselves in Latin America. . (11) An account of the Church in pre-19th century Latin America. 56 Latin America and. the ̂ United, States 56 B ^America100 t 0 1 9 t h C 6 n t U r y i d e a s o n ProPer ty '¡4 Latin m f a b o r Movement in Latin America. (14) Ine Latm-American Agrarian Policies. (15) Catholic Social Organizations in Latin America. (16; Agriculture in the Caribbean. (17) Oil Laws in Latin America. i l S f 5 6 ? 1 tf e&a l S t . a t u s o f the Church in Latin America. (19) The Latm-Amencan Anti-Clerical. (20) A Who's Who of Latin Americans in the United States who can pe called on for information and advice; and of non-Catholics , , -, M g i United States acquainted with Latin America. . (21) A Bibliography on Latin America. (22) Studies of the Mexican Oil, Land and Labor Laws or bills in the light of Catholic Social Teaching. (23) Methods of making contacts with Latin-American students in United States universities and colleges. * * * * C O M M I T T E E O N L A T I N - A M E R I C A N R E L A T I O N S , C A T H O L I C A S S O C I A T I O N F O R I N T E R N A T I O N A L P E A C E REV R A. MCGOWAN, Ass't. Dir., Department Social Action, National Catholic Welfare Conference, Chairman. MRS . W. J . BTJSHEA, Cleveland, Ohio. CARLOS CASTAÑEDA, A u s t i n , T e x a s . J . DE SIQUIERA COUTINHO , Washington, D . C. BENEDICT ELDER, Louisville, Kentucky. M i s s ANNA D . GAMBLE, Y o r k , P e n n s y l v a n i a . REV. ROBERT F . KEEGAN, New York City. REV. J O H N B . KELLY , N e w Y o r k C i t y . M i s s ROSE J . M C H U G H , W a s h i n g t o n , D . C . Miss MAY G. O'DONNELL, New York City. WILLIAM FRANKLIN SANDS, Washington, D . C. G . BUTLER SHERWELL , W a s h i n g t o n , D . C . Miss ELIZABETH B . SWEENEY , Washington, D . C. APPENDIX A CULTURAL RELATIONS One need but visit, for example, the ancient shrine of our Lady of Guadalupe just outside Mexico City to know the firm faith of Latin America, and to realize the shallowness of considering typical either the anti-Catholic or the indifferent Catholic, or the anti-clerical. One need but witness in a Mexican village on the Sundays when there is no priest for Mass the traditional procession of the whole village into the village church where prayers are said and hymns are sung under the direction of the elders of: the community. One need but see the pictures of Christ or the Blessed Virgin or the Saints in the little shops throughout Latin America; or remember Colombia's quarter of a century of dedication to the Sacred Heart; or behold the great statue of Christ reared to seal on the Andes the peace between Argentine and Chile; or hear of the intensely religious and beautiful Christmas customs in the families.1 The sojourner from the United States in Latin America rarely pene- trates the life of the people. His contact with them is limited usually to political arrangements with politicians, to business dealings with busi- ness men, to the working life of domestic servants and employees, and to casual sights on the streets. He is rarely • equipped to learn the life and thoughts of the people among whom he lives. Both he and they have walls already between them and both construct immediately other walls. The typical resident of the "American colony" in any Latin- American city is out of sympathy with the people among whom he lives and is the least reliable person from whom to learn their character and life. One "American colony" resident, for example, persisted in calling the people among whom he lived "chimpanzees," in spite of the world famous men they had produced. Another laughed at the infre- quent attendance of the people at Mass when it was their custom to at- tend Mass at four and five in the morning while he was still asleep. Another said their home life was abominable and then admitted that he had never visited one of their homes. Another called them all thieves when he himself had bribed politicians to let him set himself up in a legalized thievery. Individuals in the "American colonies" overcome the snobbish narrowness of their friends but they are exceptions. Perhaps one reason for this is the intimacy of the Latin-American home, which is the fountain of their lives, and is rarely known to the foreigner. The vagaries of the melting pot and the flood of 19th and 20th century influences have modified the ideal of the Latin-American home but it and not politics nor their work remains the center of their lives. As far as one not a Latin-American can judge, it appears that what we call the old time family flourishes in Latin America and that the family bonds are close, lasting and affectionate. Though women are rarely active in public life, yet without question their influence as wives and mothers is deep and strong. The love of a Latin-American father for his children is admirable. Their sense of the beautiful is great. Not only the Spanish in- fluence but the Indian or negro or both have combined with the lThis Appendix to P a r t I of the Report was passed upon by the com- mittee. 58 Latin America and. the ̂ United, States 58 Spanish (or Portuguese or French) to give them a delight in the beauti- ful things of nature and of art. Their churches adorned with wood and stone carvings done mainly by native workmen are a glory of the American hemisphere. Their polishing of semi-precious stones, their blanket weaving and pottery-molding, the old world architectural forms that they have modified to suit new world climate, landscape and as- pirations, their songs, the folk dances they have created or so modified as to become new creations, their music, their present-day poetry, sculpture and paintings are signs of an aptitude for the beautiful in art that has been carefully developed through generations. Their familiar love of mountains, rivers, forests, flowers, plains is not that of one seeking to hear old Triton blow his horn above the waves but of one who loves them as old friends that are at the same time the garment of God. Theirs is not a cult of nature but the love of the familiar and the love of that which shows forth the handi- craft of God. They have time to be courteous. Travelers in sparsely settled re- gions know of the overflowing hospitality of the very poorest. Travelers in the cities know of the unfailing kindness and dignified respect that they receive from those whom they encounter. More of the traditional regard for the amenities of life seems to be theirs and not only among the spiritual descendants of the old Sapnish grandees, but among all. A note of pessimism has crept into the recent writings of some of the countries. Some of the poets have begun to despair of the future of their countries and are bidding their generation exile themselves. This is an alien note. The ruling theme is a cheeriness under such difficulties as would engulf many others and a willingness to weave a path or cut a path through all obstacles. One people in straits, that objectively and coolly seem impossible to overcome, go about their daily work and life happily and their leaders with equal cheerfulness lead the attack reso- lutely upon evils that they know will be eased a trifle only after dec- ades of work and sacrifice. A person who moves among that people and comes to know them soon loves them if he has respect for un- assuming and happy heroism. It is not that they are not serious. Nor is it that they are not subject to melancholy; nor that they are not sober, nor quiet. But their prevailing note is cheerfulness. They are not dour. Not the complete reason but certainly one of the strongest of the reasons for this happiness of theirs is their trust in the mercy of God here and in the life to come, just as much of the dourness of Calvinist peoples comes from their belief that God predestined part of the. race, willy nilly, to Hell. Their Catholicity gives them happiness and even though some of the people of the melting pot have a truncated Catholi- cism and some of the people of the "liberal" revolution deny their faith, it is sufficiently strong in both groups and it is sufficiently strong throughout those societies to lay a stamp upon all. So many persons have attested it that it seems beyond question that there is far more joy in their life than there is in ours. The strong tie of Latin-American life is the unity of their faith and the unity of their dominant Hispanic tradition. The melting pot and the 19th century maelstrom have destroyed neither. There are strong Latin America and. the ^United, States 59 and sharply differentiated personalities in Latin America. There are social classes and the racial melting pot is still unevenly boiling. Each country and even every part of every country is a fatherland to itself. Some deny the faith which unites them and others deny the worth of the whole tradition of Spain and Portugal and seek the restoration of the old Indian culture or the wholesale adoption of either French or what they call Anglo-Saxon culture. Latin America is in the process of forming itself and it is successively many new combinations of all these elements, one predominating at one time or place and another predominating at another. But the two lasting and unquenchable strains in Latin-American life are the Catholic faith and the Iberian tradition. These must always be taken into account. The men who were charged with the safety of these two in those countries went about an heroic task together, in conflict at times and in partnership at other times, nobly at times and ignobly at other times. Of the two the Catholic bond has always been the greater and though • its servants sometimes belied their function, on the whole they have kept their trust. Their task was to keep the heritage of the faith among the con- querors and bring it to the conquered, prevent the conquerors from inflicting injustice and protect the conquered from evil and seek to bring conquered and conquerors together in the charity of a common citizenship in the Church of Christ. Consciously and unconsciously this worked for the creation of new nations in the Western hemisphere no longer solely Iberian but Iberian and Indian, or Iberian or French and negro, or Iberian as modified by the natural environment, and al- ways struggling to become Catholic in life as they are Catholic in either open or secret allegiance. Consciously and unconsciously it worked for the destruction of the rule of the conquerors and their children. Con- sciously and unconsciously now it works for the submission of the new era of business and science to the rules of morality and general social well-being. It has worked against the grain ever since the dis- covery of America and the launching of the experiment. Servants^ of it have forgotten or now forget their task. But the bond of faith, its insistence upon justice and charity throughout all of. life, its appeal to ajl of a person's nature, body and soul, is the chief saving grace of Latin-American life. Whoever can help to cement that bond and put in the hands of its servants means of working faithfully and wisely in the maelstrom of those countries will be a friend of all Latin America. A P P E N D I X B RECENT DEVELOPMENTS Just after this report was passed upon by the Executive Committee of the Catholic Association for International Peace certain events oc- curred which deserve mention: 1. The Pan-American Arbitration Conference held in Washington, December 10, 1928, to January 5, 1929, adopted two important treaties, one on conciliation and one on arbitration. All the American republics except Argentine were represented at the Conference. The conciliation treaty provides for immediate conciliatory efforts 60 Latin America and. the ̂ United, States 60 by the three senior American diplomats at Montevideo and Washington "on their own motion when it appears that there is a prospect of dis- turbance of peaceful relations," or upon request by a party to the dis- pute. A special commission is then set up to inquire into the dispute and pursue the conciliatory efforts. Recommendations of the commis- sion will of course not have binding force. If conciliation fails within a certain specified period, any other signer of the treaty may offer to conciliate the dispute. There are no reservations attached to this treaty. 2. It also adopted a treaty to arbitrate disputes over the interpre- tation of a treaty, any question of international law, the existence of a fact which, if established, would constitute a breach of international obligation, and the nature and the extent of the reparation to be made for the breach of an international obligation. Arbitration of such cases is binding. Disputes within the domestic jurisdiction of any of the parties to the dispute and not controlled by international law and dis- putes affecting states not a party to the Treaty are excepted. The signers gave themselves the right to make further reservations. The chief reservations (made immediately by thirteen countries) except from arbi- tration all present disputes, and all disputes over money claims of for- eigners until the case has gone through the domestic courts and justice has there been denied. This latter reservation is most important. It grows out of the matters discussed in Section V of this report. The treaty says that cases which fall within domestic jurisdiction are not arbitrable except when they are controlled by international law. To avoid the possibility of this permitting a short cut to the immediate arbitration of certain of the property disputes of foreigners, the reserva- tion is made that the case must go through the domestic courts. In one form or another Venezuela, Chile, Bolivia, Uruguay, Costa Rica (more extensively), Ecuador, Colombia, Mexico, El Salvador and the Dominican Republic make this reservation. Others hold the opinion that such a reservation is actually unnecessary under the wording of the treaty and that such cases under the treaty would have to go through the domestic courts. The arbitration body is chosen by the disputants. Rigid observance by ourselves and Latin America of this and the Conciliation treaty will change our whole practice in Latin America both in cases of threatened armed intervention by ourselves and in cases of disputes over Latin-American laws regulating property. The Monroe Doctrine in its original form of excluding further non- American dependencies upon the Western Hemisphere does not appear to be arbitrable under the treaty. The treaty excludes disputes "which af- fect the interest or refer to the action of a State not a Party" to the treaty. Some of the recent extensions of the Monroe Doctrine (as de- scribed above in the text of this report) do appear subject to both treaties. . 3. The other matter of interest is the interpretative understanding the Senate adopted when it passed the Kellogg renunciation of war treaty. The Senate said it understands that the treaty does not limit the rights of self-defense nor provide for sanctions and "the United States regards the Monroe Doctrine as a part of its national security and defense." The important point is that the Senate explains the Latin America and. the ^United, States 61 Monroe Doctrine and limits it to its original meaning. It adds, how- ever, Elihu Root's 1914 statement vetoing a change of the Monroe Doc- trine into a joint American doctrine—a statement, however, that has been interpreted as not a veto upon the Monroe Doctrine's becoming an inter-American doctrine so much as a denial that the United States could abandon it as a distinctive policy of ours even if it were formally adopted by an inter-American body. APPENDIX C INTER-AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF INTELLECTUAL COOPERATION To indicate the special importance placed upon inter-American understanding the following excerpts from a resolution of the Sixth International Conference of American States (held at Havana, January 16 to February 20, 1928) calling for an Inter-American Institute of In- tellectual Cooperation are given. Dr. James Brown Scott, a delegate to the Conference, says in "International Conciliation" (Carnegie En- dowment for International Peace, New York, No. 241) that "it is under- stood that the Inter-American Institute of Intellectual Cooperation is to be established in Habana." The more important excerpts of the resolu- tion are the following: ARTICLE I—That with a view to assisting and systematizing the ac- tivities that tend to establish intellectual cooperation in the branches of science, arts and letters between the nations of the American conti- nent, the "Inter-American Institute of Intellectual Cooperation" is es- tablished. ARTICLE II—The Inter-American Institute of Intellectual Cooperation shall have for its immediate aims: (a) To stimulate and systematize the exchange of professors and students, whether from universities or high and primary schools, of the different American countries. (b) To promote in the secondary and superior schools of all the American countries the creation of special chairs of history, geography, literature, sociology, hygiene and law, principally constitutional and com- mercial law, of all the signatory states. (c) To favor the creation of a university town, or students' home, in the countries of America. ARTICLE IV—The Pan American Union, within a period of two years, from the present date, shall call a congress of rectors, deans or edu- cators in general, which shall take under consideration the preliminary draft of a project prepared by said institution and shall prepare the definitive statutes of the institute. ARTICLE VI—Pending the definitive organization of the Inter-American Institute of Intellectual Cooperation, the Pan American Union will pro- ceed to inquire of the governments what number of scholarships they may grant to foreign students and what professors they may send to other countries, in order to effect the pertinent notifications to the end that both may be availed of without loss of time; to encourage and promote by all means within its power the creation of special chairs, supported or subsidized by the governments, for the study of the Span- ish, English, Portuguese and French languages and their respective his- 62 Latin America and. the ̂ United, States 62 tories and literatures, as well as the creation of special chairs in the universities of the countries members of the Pan American Union, for the purpose of studying commercial legislation and the history of com- mercial and diplomatic relations between the American republics. With respect to the study of comparative commercial legislation, the Union will immediately proceed to assemble the data and literature necessary therefor. The complete resolution will be found on page 304 and the account of its adoption on page 40 of the Report of the Delegates of the United States to the Sixth International Conference of American States (Gov- ernment Printing Office, Washington, D. C.). APPENDIX D BIBLIOGRAPHY Besides the material listed in the footnotes the following are of help: 1. "Americans in Santo Domingo." (Vanguard Press.) 2. "Bankers in Bolivia." (Vanguard Press.) 3. Current History, September. 1927. 4. "Destiny of a Continent," Ugarte; edited by Rippy. (Knopf Co.) 5. Foreign Loans (Senate Hearing 68th Congress, 2d Session, S. Con., Res. 22; and same 69th Congress, 2d Session, S. Con., Res. IS). 6. "History of the Latin-American Nations," Robertson. (Apple- ton Co.) 7. "Latin America and the United States," Stuart. (Century Co.) 8. "Latin America in World Politics," Rippy. (Knopf Co.) 9. "Nicaragua and the United States," Cox. (World Peace Founda- tion Pamphlets.) 10. "Observations on the Monroe Doctrine," Hughes. (U. S. Govern- ment Printing Office, Washington, D. C.) 11. "Our Cuban Colony," Jenks. (Vanguard Press.) 12. "Protection of United States Investments Abroad." (Debaters' Annual, H. W. Wilson Co.) 13. Report of the Delegates of the United Stated to the Sixth Inter- national Conference of American States. (U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C.) 14. Reports of the Foreign Policy Association, New York: Arbitration on the American Continent (Vol. IV, No. 17). Mexico, the Caribbean and Tacna Arica (Vol. Il l , No. 23). The Monroe Doctrine and Latin America (Vol. IV, No. 20). The Sixth Pan-American Conference, Parts I and II (Vol. IV, Nos. 4 and 9). 15. "South America: Observations and Impressions," Bryce. (Mac- millan Co.) 16. "South American Series." (Unwin Co.) This is a series of large volumes, one on Latin America by Garcia-Calderon, one on Central America, a volume on Mexico and one for each South American country. Latin America and. the ^United, States 63 APPENDIX E N. C. W. C. STUDY CLUB OUTLINE ON LATIN AMERICA AND THE UNITED STATES (Printed by Permission of the N. C. W. C. Study Club Committee) Lesson I BACKGROUNDS (Text—Section I , 1 ) TOPICS FOR DISCUSSION 1. Secure map of Latin America giving rivers and mountains. Note: (a) The size and physical characteristics. (b) The Caribbean countries and the upper South American countries on the west coast (Peru and Ecuador) in re- lation to the United States. (c) The mountain cities of the mainland tropic countries. 2. Spain in the 16th century and the Spanish colonists. 3. England in the 17th and 18th centuries and our colonists. 4. Economic conditions of the two sets of colonies. 5. Political government of the two. 6. Religion of the two. QUESTIONS 1. What influence does the difficulty of travel from one part to another of Latin America have upon its life? 2. What influence has temperate high altitude cities and hot sur- sounding lowlands upon the life of some of the tropic countries? 3. Why would different results be expected of colonists who were rebels to the home government than of colonists who were its legates? 4. Why was the large landed system easily possible in Latin America and why was it possible in only parts of our colonies? 5. Has the different experience in political self-government during colonial days an influence now? , PAPERS 1. Foundations of Modem Europe: "A Political and Social History of Modern Europe," Hayes. (Macmillan Co.) Vol. I, Part I. 2. A Latin-American Tour: Thé Booklets of the Pan-American Bureau (See Bibliography). "If You Go to South America." (Foster Travel Service.) "The South American Guide," Peck. (Doran and Co.) "The Republics of Latin America," James and Martin. (Har- per and-Co.) Lesson 11 T H E RACE CONTRAST (Text—Section I , 2 ) TOPICS FOR DISCUSSION 1. The Indians desired as laborers. 2. Our Colonies and the Indians. 64 Latin America and. the ̂ United, States 64 3. Latin-American treatment of the Indians at the beginning. 4. Changes. 5. Peril of the Policy. 6. Source, of the Policy. QUESTIONS 1. Why was the new policy followed faithfully by the Latin-Ameri- can whites? 2. Why was the new policy objectionable to the Latin-American whites? 3. Was there something else besides selfishness in their aristocratic policy or in our early exterminating policy? 4. Did the great number of Indians in the mainland tropics influence the Latin-American policy? 5. Were the differences in religion of the two sets of colonists the sole or only the determining influence in the two sets of policies? PAPERS 1. The California Missions and the Indians: "The Missions and Missionaries of California," Englehardt. (Herder & Co.) 2. A Review of "Bartolome de las Casas—Father of the Indians," Brion. (Dutton Co.) Lesson III T H E NINETEENTH CENTURY CONTRAST (Text—Section I , 3 a-1) TOPICS FOR DISCUSSION 1. Discuss the influence of the automobile on business and social life as a basis of comparison with the change in the late 18th and early 19th century when other scientific discoveries were made. 2. Discuss the importance of having a religion with a definite code of morals in the presence' of such a crisis in life as came in the late 18th and early 19th century and as is present now. 3. Morality and Religion in the New Era. 4. Latin-American "New Regime" Ambitions. 5. Obstacles. 6. Resulting Revolutions. QUESTIONS 1. What is lacking in the physical resources of Latin America that delayed its taking up 'with the new era fully? 2. What was lacking in its business history? 3. What was lacking in its business ideas? 4. Why was control of government important for the new class that was ambitious to introduce the "njaw regime"? 5. Why with their ideas did they find a revolution necessary? PAPERS 1. Review of Tawnfey's "Religion and the Rise of Capitalism." (Harcourt, Brace & Co.) 2. Review of Lemly's "Simon Bolivar." (Stratford Press;) Latin America and. the ^United, States 65 Lesson IV T H E NINETEENTH CENTURY (Continued) (Text—Section I, 3 L-o, 4, 5, 6 and Appendix A) TOPICS FOR DISCUSSION 1. The state of religion at the beginning of the revolution. 2. The intellectual revolt against the Church. 3.- The economic and political clash. 4. The agricultural change. 5. Latin-American religion. (Appendix A) and family life. 6. Latin-American courtesy. (Appendix A.) 7. Latin-American art. (Appendix A.) QUESTIONS 1. Is there some trace of this 19th century tradition in the Mexican persecution now? 2. What were the chief differences between the old regime era and the 19th century system? 3. What are the chief differences between the 19th and the 20th century system? PAPERS 1. Latin-American Poetry: • "Hispanic Anthology—Poems translated from the Spanish," Walsh. (Hispanic Society, N. Y.) "Studies in Spanish-American Literature," Goldberg. (Bren- tano's.) 2. Latin-American Architecture: "Mexican Architecture of the Vice-Regal Period, 1521-1821," Kilham. (Longmans Co.) Lesson V RELATIONS IN THE PAST (Text—Sections I I - I I I ) TOPICS FOR' DISCUSSION 1. The original Monroe Doctrine. 2. Reasons for our policy immediately before the Civil War. 3. Reasons for the change from the Civil War to the nineties. 4. Reasons for change thereafter. 5. Changes in the Monroe Doctrine. QUESTIONS 1. What did the Monroe Doctrine mean in terms of our self-defense? 2. Why is a distinction made now between the countries surround- ing and adjacent to the Caribbean Sea and the others? 3. Why is Nicaragua important? 4. Give at least two reasons for our government's encouraging in- vestment in Latin America. 66 Latin America and. the ^United, States 66 PAPERS 1. Roosevelt's Latin-American Policy. Books by Sears, Moon, La- tane in Bibliography and Hill's "Roosevelt and the Caribbean." (Chi- cago University Press.) Lesson VI ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL PENETRATION (Text—Section I V ) TOPICS FOR DISCUSSION 1. Growth of Latin-American investments in terms of the points discussed in outline V. 2. The same for Caribbean investments. 3. The same for Latin-American trade with us. 4. The same for Caribbean trade. 5. The same for Latin-American political penetration. 6. The same for Caribbean penetration. QUESTIONS 1. Why have we not colonized these areas? 2. Is this economic and political penetration a form of imperialism? 3. Would you resent any of this if done to the United States? 4. What reasons can you give for the special influence in the Carib- bean? PAPERS 1. A Review of Moon's "Imperialism and World Politics," Chapter XVI. (Macmillan Co.) 2. A Review of Jenks' "Our Cuban Colony." (Vanguard Press.) Lesson VII ECONOMIC RELATIONS (Text—Section V ) TOPICS FOR DISCUSSION 1. Absentee ownership of agricultural lands in the light of Irish ex- perience. 2. Add to this the element of the plantation one-crop system as dis- tinguished from the small farming system. 3. The possibilities of this among negro and Indian laborers. 4. Our obligations. 5. Absentee ownership of industry in a similar situation. 6. Interference only when justice is clearly violated. QUESTIONS 1. Why can we interfere in a foreign country to protect our citizens when injustice is done? 2. Why should we wait until the injustice is certain or inevitable? 3. Why should our intervention be peaceful until peaceful methods actually fail? Latin America and. the ^United, States 67 4. Are the current ideas held in the United States on property rights a sufficient guide in this situation? Si What connection is there between this section and the mSterial of III and IV of this outline? PAPERS 1. A Review of the Bishops' Program of Social Reconstruction. (National Catholic Welfare Conference Headquarters.) 2. A Review of "International Ethics." (Catholic Association for International Peace.) Lesson VIII POLITICAL RELATIONS (Text—Appendix B and Sections V I and V I I ) TOPICS FOR DISCUSSION 1. The importance to our government of the Canal as a measure of defense and as a commercial highway. 2. Limitations placed by thé report upon the judgment it makes regarding measures taken to defend the Canal. 3. Condition necessary to justify our domination in Latin America on the grounds of self-defense. 4. Other possible policies. 5. Best policy. 6. New policy promulgated. (Appendix B.) 7. Dangers to Latin America in our domination. QUESTIONS 1. What connection do you see between the Latin-American reserva- tions to the Arbitration Pact (Confer Appendix B) and the material in VII of this outline? 2. Do you consider any other policy than domination practicable? 3. If so, is an attempt at another policy morally demanded? 4.' Is the Caribbean area safer from attack by Europe than it was, say, twenty-five years ago ? 5. What in your judgment are the things Latin America should learn from us? 6. What not? 7. What can we learn from Latin America? PAPERS 1. The Panama Canal. "Four Centuries of the Panama Canal," Johnson. (Cassel and Co.) 2. A Pan-American Catholic Congress. (Commonweal, Vol. VII, p. 952 ; January 18, 1928.) The Catholic Association for International Peace Honorary President RT. REV. THOMAS F. LILLIS, D.D. PARKER T. MOON, President Vice Presidents M R S . WILLIAM J . BUSHEA REV. J O H N LAFARGE, S . J . MARIE J . CARROLL R E V . L I N U S A . LILLY, S . J . MICHAEL F . DOYLE R E V . ROBERT E . LUCEY ANNA DILL GAMBLE HERBERT F . WRIGHT FREDERICK P . KENKEL R E V . FRANCES J . HAAS, Ex-Officio MARIE R . MADDEN, Treasurer ELIZABETH B . SWEENEY, Executive Secretary COMMITTEES Ethics—REV. JOHN A. RYAN, Chairman. Law and Organization^-CHARLES G . FENWICK, Chairman. Economic Relations—PARKER T. MOON, Chairman. Agriculture—REV. EDGAR SCHMIEDELER, O . S . B . , Chairman. Historical-^WILLIAM F. ROEMTER, Chairman Peace Education^-REV. GEORGE JOHNSON, Chairman. National Attitudes—CARLTON J . H. HAYES. Chairman. U. S. Dependencies—WILLIAM F . MONTAVON, Chairman. , Canada—REV. MAURICE S . SHEEHY, Chairman. Latin America—REV. R . A . MCGOWAN, Chairman. Europe—REV. JOSEPH F . THORNING, S . J . , Chairman. REV. THOMAS F . DIVINE, S . J . , Acting Chairman. Asia—ELIZABETH M . LYNSKEY, Chairman. •"pHE Catholic Association for International Peace has 1 grown out of a series of meetings during 1926-1927. Fol- lowing the Eucharistic Congress in Chicago in 1926, represent- atives of a dozen nations met with Americans for discussion. In October of the same year a meeting was held in Cleveland where a temporary organization called The Catholic Commit- tee on International Relations was formed. The permanent name, The Catholic Association for International Peace, was adopted at a twc-day Conference in Washington in 1927. Three similar conferences were held in the same city in 1928, 1929, and 1930. An all-day regional Conference was held in Chicago on Armistice Day, 1930. The Fifth Annual Meeting was held in New York City in April, 1931. A one-day regional Conference was held in St. Louis on February 22, 1932. The Sixth Annual Meeting was held in Cleveland, March 28-29, 1932. Its objects and purposes are: To study, disseminate and apply the principles of natural law and Christian charity to international problems of the day; To consider the moral and legal aspects of any action which may be proposed or advocated in the international sphere; To examine and consider issues which bear upon international goodwill; To encourage the formation of conferences, lectures and study circles; To issue reports on questions of international importance; To further, in cooperation with similar Catholic organizations in other countries, in accord with the teachings of the Church, the object and purposes of world peace and happiness. The ultimate purpose is to promote, in conformity with the mind of the Church, "the Peace of Christ in the Kingdom of Christ." The Association works through the preparation of Com- mittee reports. Following careful preparation, these are dis- cussed both publicly and privately in order to secure able revision and they are then published by the organization. Additional committees will be created from time to time. The Association solicits the membership and cooperation of Cath- olics of like mind. It is seeking especially the membership and cooperation of those whose experience and studies _ are such that they can take part in the preparation of committee reports. The Committees on Ethics, Law and Organization, and Economic Relations serve as a guiding committee on the par- ticular questions for all other committees. Questions^ involv- ing moral judgments must be submitted to the Committee on Ethics. Publications of the Catholic Associa- tion for International Peace Pamphlet S e r i e s - No. 1—International Ethics. No. 2—Latin America and the United States. No. 3—Causes of War, and Security, Old and New. No. 4—Haiti, Past and Present. No. 5—Francis de Vitoria. No. 6—American Agriculture and International Affairs. No. 7—Porto Rico and the United States. No. 8—Europe and the United States—Elements in Their Relationship. No. 9—The Ethics of War. Miscellaneous Series— League of Nations in Its First Decade. The World State. Permanent Peace Program of Pope Benedict XV. Appeals for Peace of Pope Benedict XV and Pope Pius XI. Reports in Preparation- Tariffs and World Peace. Is War Justifiable Today? Disarmament. The Church and Peace Efforts. U. S. Relations with Asia. The World Court. International Cultural Relations. Peace Education. So-Called "Over Population." Catholicism—the Keynote of Pan-Americanism. National Attitudes in Children. N. C. W, C. Joint Committee on Peace— The Christian Way to Peace. Peace Statements of Recent Popes. « l > s i