RELATIONS WITH ; JAPAN — DIPLOMATIC RELA TIONS WITH ; RUSSIA AND THE WAR.
5. Latin America in Modern Imperialism.— On account of its original settlement by Span ish, Portuguese and French, the American con tinent and adjacent islands from the southern boundary of the United States to Cape Horn arc conventionally known as "Latin The matter of the original settlement has been briefly alluded to in an earlier section of this article. It will be sufficient at this place to recall that this region was explored and settled mainly by the Spanish. with the exception of Portuguese Brazil and a few French settlements in the West Indies. Politically Spanish Amer ica was controlled through a highly centralized administrative system culminating in the Royal and Supreme Council of the Indies, estab lished in 1542. In an economic sense the trade of the Spanish colonies was regulated under the provisions of the extremely rigid Spanish mercantilism administered through the so-called 'House of Trade." which was created in 1503 and extended and systematized during the next half century. Dwelling under a corrupt and inefficient officialdom and a stifled commercial activity the inhabitants of Latin America made little general social and political progress until the era of the revolutions following 1810. The series of revolutions in the Latin-American states were closely related in their origin to contemporary events in European history. In 1808 Napoleon had invaded Spain and aroused the patriots and liberals to resistance. In 1812 they drew up a liberal constitution, modeled after the French constitution of 1791, and the wave of liberalism extended to the Spanish American colonies in the western hemisphere. After the overthrow of Napoleon in 1814 the reactionary regime under the unspeakable Ferdinand VII was restored in Spain and an attempt was made to revive it in the colonies, but the latter resisted. Spain, unaided, proved unequal to the task, but in the year 1823 the reactionary powers, joined together by the Quadruple Alliance of 20 Nov. 1815 and dominated by the sinister spirit of Metternich, determined to aid Spain in American inter vention against revolution. At this juncture Great Britain took a vigorous stand in oppo sition. She had welcomed the overthrow of the old Spanish trading restrictions after 1812 and had built up a lucrative and flour ishing trade with the Spanish colonies. This trade she feared she would lose in the event of the restoration of the Spanish domina tion. Therefore, on 23 Aug. 1Ee3. George Canning, the English foreign secretary, sug gested to Richard Rush, the American ambassador in London, that the United States join with Great Britain in a note to the group of reactionary powers warning them against inter vention in Latin America. While Rush was communicating with Washington Canning in formed Pohl-mac. the French ambassador at London, that Great Britain would oppose inter ventit by any country save Spain alone. Alarmed hv the European situation and by Rus sian aggression along the Pacific Coast of North America. President Monroe and his ad visers gladly accepted the suggestion of Canning in protesting al!.linst wt. r venti(0. The Secre tary of SIAlr. I lira Adam, however, convinced Monroe that the declaration should he made independent of Great Britain and he formulated what became the famous "Monroe Doctrine,• when embodied in the Presidential message of 2 Dec. 1823. The chief pronounce
ments were the declaration of the separation and distinctness of the two hemispheres; the doctrine of non-intervention of European powers in American domestic politics; the proclamation, set forth especially for the at tention of Russia, that the American continent was closed to further European colonization: and that the extension of absolutism to Amer ica would be unwelcome to the United States. Canning was pleased with the American at titude and gave notice that the British fleet would back up the policy enunciated by the United States. In this way the independence of the Latin-American states was assured and the first systematic formulation of American foreign policy definitely expressed to the work! The Anglo-American opposition to Metter nichian intervention clinched the movement toward independence and Latin America soon became a group of independent American states Haiti declared its independence in 1804, San Domingo in 1821 (1844), Cuba in 1902. Mexico in 1821, Guatemala in 1821 (1847), Salvador in 1821 (1838), Honduras rn 1821 (1839). Nicaragua in 1821 (1839), Costa Rica in 1821 (1838), Panama in 1903, Colombia in 1813. Venezuela in 1811 (1829). Ecuador in 181i (1830), Peru in 1821, Brazil in 1822, Bolivia is 1825, Paraguay in 1811, Uruguay in 1103. Ar gentine Republic in 1816 and Chile in 1818 (dates in parentheses refer to establishment of present independent states). As these dates will indicate, the two chief periods of national differentiation were from 1810 to 1830 and from 1838 to 1850, with two late additions at the very opening of the 20th century. Although with these independent states in Latin America there are the following foreign possessions. British Guiana, British Honduras, Jamaica. the Bahamas, the Barbados, the Leeward and Wind ward Islands, Trinidad and Tobago controlled by Great Britain; French Guiana, Martiniqne and Guadeloupe owned by France; Dutch Guiana, Curacao and some lesser islands be longing to Holland; and Porto Rico and the Virgin Islands possessed by the United States The development of the Latin-American intim since the establishment of their independence may be divided into three broad characterized by certain definite a That from independence to about 1852 'die age of dictatorsh; that from 1852 to 1876 as the era of the struggle for stability and organ ization; while that from Iff76 to the present was one notable for general social progress and the emergence of certain leading ican states. It might also be added that the period from 1898 to the present has been con spicuous for the development of international relations in this district, namely, the rise 01 a distinct Latin-American foreignpolk7 under the direction of the so-called 41A B C powavvi (Argentine, Brazil and Chile) which has chal lenged the Monroe Doctrine over Latin Amer ica generally and south of the equator in particular; the development of an opposite tendency in the aggressive imperialism of the rnited States in this region with a hold ex t•nsion of the implications of the Monroe Does trine for Latin America; and the attempt ft) compromise these two conflicting tendencies through the development of the Pan-American movement. which has been in progress since 1£09.