happy and prosperous; and they cannot be happy and prosperous unless they maintain order within their boundaries and behave with a just regard for their obligations toward outsiders.  It must be understood that under no circumstances will the United States use the Monroe Doctrine as a cloak for territorial aggression.  We desire peace with all the world, but perhaps most of all with the other peoples of the American Continent.  There are, of course, limits to the wrongs which any self-respecting nation can endure.  It is always possible that wrong actions toward this Nation, or toward citizens of this Nation, in some State unable to keep order among its own people, unable to secure justice from outsiders, and unwilling to do justice to those outsiders who treat it well, may result in our having to take action to protect our rights; but such action will not be taken with a view to territorial aggression, and it will be taken at all only with extreme reluctance and when it has become evident that every other resource has been exhausted.

Moreover, we must make it evident that we do not intend to permit the Monroe Doctrine to be used by any nation on this Continent as a shield to protect it from the consequences of its own misdeeds against foreign nations.  If a republic to the south of us commits a tort against a foreign nation, such as an outrage against a citizen of that nation, then the Monroe Doctrine does not force us to interfere to prevent punishment of the tort, save to see that the punishment does not assume the form of territorial occupation in any shape.  The case is more difficult when it refers to a contractual obligation.  Our own Government has always refused to enforce such contractual obligations on behalf, of its citizens by an appeal to arms.  It is much to be wished that all foreign governments would take the same view.  But they do not; and in consequence we are liable at any time to be brought face to face with disagreeable alternatives.  On the one hand, this country would certainly decline to go to war to prevent a foreign government from collecting a just debt; on the other hand, it is very inadvisable to permit any foreign power to take possession, even temporarily, of the custom houses of an American Republic in order to enforce the payment of its obligations; for such temporary occupation might turn into a permanent occupation.  The only escape from these alternatives may at any time be that we must ourselves undertake to bring about some arrangement by which so much as possible of a just obligation shall be paid.  It is far better that this country should put through such an arrangement, rather than allow any foreign country to undertake it.  To do so insures the defaulting republic from having to pay debt of an improper character under duress, while it also insures honest creditors of the republic from being passed by in the interest of dishonest or grasping creditors.  Moreover, for the United States to take such a position offers the only possible way of insuring us against a clash with some foreign power.  The position is, therefore, in the interest of peace as well as in the interest of justice.  It is of benefit to our people; it is of benefit to foreign peoples; and most of all it is really of benefit to the people of the country concerned.