INTERNATIONAL PEACE

From the outset the administration had been credited with a desire to further projects for insuring international peace. During the previous administration the sentiment for arbitration had made progress under the leadership of President Taft. President Wilson favoured arbitration, but his administration went a step further. As a means of arresting the development of controversies, and thus of avoiding the necessity of arbitration or war, a plan was proposed for preliminary inquiry into the causes of dispute. In his address to Congress in December of 1913 the President related the success of this effort. (Statement No. 13.) In April of 1913 Secretary Bryan had presented to the diplomats at Washington a plan providing "that whenever differences of interest or of policy arise that could not be resolved by the ordinary processes of diplomacy they shall be publicly analyzed, discussed, and reported upon by a tribunal chosen by the parties before either nation determines its course of action." In the ensuing eight months assent, in principle, had been gained from thirty-one governments representing four-fifths of the population of the world. Thus the President found " many happy manifestations . . . of a growing cordiality and sense of community of interest among the nations, foreshadowing an age of settled peace and good will."

Pending controversies with England, Russia, Japan and Colombia were not mentioned in this message.

But

the attitude of the administration toward the settlement of these disputes was foreshadowed thus: "There is only one possible standard by which to determine controversies between the United States and other nations, and that is compounded of these two elements: Our own honor and our obligations to the peace of the world. A test so compounded ought easily to be made to govern both the establishment of new treaty obligations and the interpretation of those already assumed."

The foundations for the foreign policy of the administration of Woodrow Wilson had been firmly laid before the expiration of the year. In Latin America, particularly in Mexico, and in the Far East, particularly in China, fair dealing involving a refusal to countenance the extension of the financial interests of the United States at the expense of peoples less advanced industrially, friendly co-operation embodied in a moral support of the forces of law and order and a reliance upon the universal principle of self-government,- these had characterized the action of the government at Washington. In controversies, notably in that with Japan, guidance had been found in the reasonableness of deciding disputed questions by orderly processes, and in the importance of deliberation and patience and mutual understanding. At all times emphasis had been placed upon the spirit of the people of the United States rather than upon their might as a nation.

CHAPTER II

PRINCIPLES IN PRACTICE

Pre-eminent Importance of the Mexican Question - Development of the Policy of the Administration — President Wilson's Treatment of the Panama Tolls Controversy - Inviolability of Treaties Crisis in the Relations with Huerta - Mediation by the "A. B. C." Powers Triumph of the President's Policies.

MEXICO demanded of the administration increasing attention. In the midst of what the President some three years later called "this perplexing business," it was repeatedly asserted, and the statement met with general acceptance, that however much the American people rejoiced in the fact that the administration had not intervened in Mexico, a great portion did not understand the policy of the President and were frequently baffled by the changes in that policy. In its development the policy of the administration by the opening of 1914 had passed through two stages. In the first the President had merely refused to recognize the government of Huerta, in the second, signalized by the mission of Lind, he had tendered the good offices of the United States in an effort to bring the warring factions together. In spite of the rejection by Huerta of this proffered aid, the President's personal representative had remained in Mexico and

the President had maintained an attitude of "watchful waiting."

He felt that peace in America was not assured until a constitutional government had been established in Mexico, and he held that an elimination of those who exercised arbitrary and illegal power must necessarily precede the formation of a permanent concert of power for the Americas. The United States was particularly on trial in this matter partly because of its course toward Mexico in earlier years and partly because its predominant size in the Americas naturally engendered the suspicion of possible aggression. Consequently the President wished to emphasize the peculiar burden of responsibility resting upon the United States.

In his message to Congress in December of 1913 he said, "We are the friends of constitutional government in America; we are more than its friends, we are its champions; because in no other way can our neighbors to whom we would wish in every way to make proof of our friendship, work out their own development in peace and liberty." 1 His meaning here was subject to two possible interpretations. Championship might imply merely continued refusal to recognize Huerta or it might mean adoption of measures of some sort to hasten the downfall of any who exercised arbitrary authority. Late in January of 1914 the President took a step that marked entrance upon the third stage in the development of his

1 In this message greater powers in self-government were asked for Porto Rico and Hawaii and ultimate independence for the Philippines was stressed.

policy. He made known to the members of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations that he intended to raise the embargo on the shipment of arms into Mexico.1

In his explanation of February 3, 1914, there is a frank statement of the reasons for the use

of this weapon

This was cham

66

against Huerta. (Statement No. 14.) pionship of those who were waging war for a constitutional government. Said the President: The executive order under which the exportation of arms and ammunition into Mexico is forbidden was a departure from the accepted practices of neutrality - -a deliberate departure from those practices under a well-considered joint resolution of Congress, determined in circumstances which have now ceased to exist.2 It was intended to discourage incipient revolts against the regularly constituted authorities of Mexico. Since that order was issued the circumstances of the case have undergone a radical change. There is now no Constitutional Government in Mexico; and the existence of this order hinders and delays the very thing that the Government of the United States is now insisting upon, namely, that Mexico shall be left free to settle her own affairs and as soon as possible put them on a constitutional footing by her own force and counsel." Critics of the President pointed out that this order would result in arming those whom the

1 On January 2, 1914, the President had conferred with John Lind, his personal representative in Mexico.

2 The order of Taft of March 14, 1912, had forbidden all export except to the government of Madero. The order of Wilson in 1913 had made no exception.