THE MONROE DOCTRINE 387 



Mr. Folk's desire to send prompt relief to a suffering people, 

 he believed that an urgent necessity called upon him to 

 maintain the integrity of the Monroe Doctrine. He believed 

 the doctrine not only forbade foreign interference for pur- 

 poses of dominion or control, but he further considered that 

 the duty of the United States extended to the prevention of 

 foreign interposition, even when offered in friendly spirit and 

 upon the invitation of American states. John C. Calhoun 

 was then a member of the Senate, and the only survivor of 

 President Monroe's cabinet. In his estimation, the true char- 

 acter of the Monroe Doctrine was misunderstood both by the 

 chief Executive and by the masses of the people. Emi- 

 nently qualified to speak, he delivered a speech in the Senate, 

 May 15, 1848, carefully reviewing the circumstances under 

 which the declaration of President Monroe was promulgated, 

 and gave as unavoidable deductions a series of conclusions. 

 It is difficult to qualify them. 



1. The declaration was made to meet but one special and 

 particular condition, to wit; the threatened interference of 

 the Holy Alliance in Spanish- American affairs, for the pur- 

 pose of preserving the revolting colonies to Spain, and forcing 

 their continued allegiance to monarchical institutions. The 

 danger soon after ceased to exist, and the warning of the 

 United States, supported by the sympathetic attitude of 

 Great Britain, had served its purpose. That part of the 

 declaration, therefore, must be considered in connection with 

 the circumstances under which it was announced ; otherwise 

 it " would have involved the absurdity of asserting that the 

 attempt of any European state to extend its system of gov- 

 ernment to this continent, the smallest as well as the greatest, 

 would endanger the peace and safety of our country." 



2. The next declaration, that the interposition of any 

 European power to oppress the governments of this conti- 

 nent, or to control their destiny in any manner whatever, 

 would be regarded as a manifestation of an unfriendly dispo- 

 sition toward the United States, arose from the same condi- 

 tions, and " belongs to the history of that day." It was an 

 appendage to the last declaration. The governments referred 



