While the Hispanic republics were entering upon the second century of
their independent life, the idea of a certain community of interests
between themselves and the United States began to assume a fairly
definite form. Though emphasized by American statesmen and publicists
in particular, the new point of view was not generally understood or
appreciated by the people of either this country or its fellow nations
to the southward. It seemed, nevertheless, to promise an effective
cooperation in spirit and action between them and came therefore to be
called "Pan-Americanism."
This sentiment of inter-American solidarity sprang from several sources.
The periodical conferences of the United States and its sister republics
gave occasion for an interchange of official courtesies and expressions
of good feeling. Doubtless, also, the presence of delegates from the
Hispanic countries at the international gatherings at The Hague served
to acquaint the world at large with the stability, strength, wealth, and
culture of their respective lands. Individual Americans took an active
interest in their fellows of Hispanic stock and found their interest
reciprocated. Motives of business or pleasure and a desire to obtain
personal knowledge about one another led to visits and countervisits
that became steadily more frequent. Societies were created to encourage
the friendship and acquaintance thus formed. Scientific congresses were
held and institutes were founded in which both the United States and
Hispanic America were represented. Books, articles, and newspaper
accounts about one another's countries were published in increasing
volume. Educational institutions devoted a constantly growing attention
to inter-American affairs. Individuals and commissions were dispatched
by the Hispanic nations and the United States to study one another's
conditions and to confer about matters of mutual concern. Secretaries of
State, Ministers of Foreign Affairs, and other distinguished personages
interchanged visits. Above all, the common dangers and responsibilities
falling upon the Americas at large as a consequence of the European war
seemed likely to bring the several nations into a harmony of feeling and
relationship to which they had never before attained.
Pan-Americanism, however, was destined to remain largely a generous
ideal. The action of the United States in extending its direct influence
over the small republics in and around the Caribbean aroused
the suspicion and alarm of Hispanic Americans, who still feared
imperialistic designs on the part of that country now more than ever the
Colossus of the North. "The art of oratory among the Yankees," declared
a South American critic, "is lavish with a fraternal idealism; but
strong wills enforce their imperialistic ambitions." Impassioned
speakers and writers adjured the ghost of Hispanic confederation to rise
and confront the new northern peril. They even advocated an appeal
to Great Britain, Germany, or Japan, and they urged closer economic,
social, and intellectual relations with the countries of Europe.
It was while the United States was thus widening the sphere of its
influence in the Caribbean that the "A B C" powers--Argentina, Brazil,
and Chile--reached an understanding which was in a sense a measure of
self-defense. For some years cordial relations had existed among these
three nations which had grown so remarkably in strength and prestige.
It was felt that by united action they might set up in the New World
the European principle of a balance of power, assume the leadership
in Hispanic America, and serve in some degree as a counterpoise to the
United States. Nevertheless they were disposed to cooperate with their
northern neighbor in the peaceable adjustment of conflicts in which
other Hispanic countries were concerned, provided that the mediation
carried on by such a "concert of the western world" did not include
actual intervention in the internal affairs of the countries involved.
With this attitude of the public mind, it is not strange that the
Hispanic republics at large should have been inclined to look with scant
favor upon proposals made by the United States, in 1916, to render the
spirit of Pan-Americanism more precise in its operation. The proposals
in substance were these: that all the nations of America "mutually agree
to guarantee the territorial integrity" of one another; to "maintain a
republican form of government"; to prohibit the "exportation of arms
to any but the legally constituted governments"; and to adopt laws of
neutrality which would make it "impossible to filibustering expeditions
to threaten or carry on revolutions in neighboring republics." These
proposals appear to have received no formal approval beyond what is
signified by the diplomatic expression "in principle." Considering the
disparity in strength, wealth, and prestige between the northern
country and its southern fellows, suggestions of the sort could be made
practicable only by letting the United States do whatever it might
think needful to accomplish the objects which it sought. Obviously the
Hispanic nations, singly or collectively, would hardly venture to take
any such action within the borders of the United States itself, if, for
example, it failed to maintain what, in their opinion, was "a republican
form of government." A full acceptance of the plan accordingly would
have amounted to a recognition of American overlordship, and this they
were naturally not disposed to admit.
The common perils and duties confronting the Americas as a result of
the Great War, however, made close cooperation between the Hispanic
republics and the United States up to a certain point indispensable.
Toward that transatlantic struggle the attitude of all the nations of
the New World at the outset was substantially the same. Though strongly
sympathetic on the whole with the "Allies" and notably with France, the
southern countries nevertheless declared their neutrality. More than
that, they tried to convert neutrality into a Pan-American policy,
instead of regarding it as an official attitude to be adopted by the
republics separately. Thus when the conflict overseas began to injure
the rights of neutrals, Argentina and other nations urged that the
countries of the New World jointly agree to declare that direct maritime
commerce between American lands should be considered as "inter-American
coastwise trade," and that the merchant ships engaged in it, whatever
the flag under which they sailed, should be looked upon as neutral.
Though the South American countries failed to enlist the support of
their northern neighbor in this bold departure from international
precedent, they found some compensation for their disappointment in the
closer commercial and financial relations which they established with
the United States.
Because of the dependence of the Hispanic nations, and especially those
of the southern group, on the intimacy of their economic ties with the
belligerents overseas, they suffered from the ravages of the struggle
more perhaps than other lands outside of Europe. Negotiations for
prospective loans were dropped. Industries were suspended, work on
public improvements was checked, and commerce brought almost to a
standstill. As the revenues fell off and ready money became scarce,
drastic measures had to be devised to meet the financial strain. For the
protection of credit, bank holidays were declared, stock exchanges were
closed, moratoria were set up in nearly all the countries, taxes
and duties were increased, radical reductions in expenditure were
undertaken, and in a few cases large quantities of paper money were
issued.
With the European market thus wholly or partially cut off, the
Hispanic republics were forced to supply the consequent shortage with
manufactured articles and other goods from the United States and to send
thither their raw materials in exchange. To their northern neighbor they
had to turn also for pecuniary aid. A Pan-American financial conference
was held at Washington in 1915, and an international high commission was
appointed to carry its recommendations into effect. Gradually most of
the Hispanic countries came to show a favorable trade balance. Then, as
the war drew into its fourth year, several of them even began to enjoy
great prosperity. That Pan-Americanism had not meant much more than
cooperation for economic ends seemed evident when, on April 6, 1917,
the United States declared war on Germany. Instead of following
spontaneously in the wake of their great northern neighbor, the Hispanic
republics were divided by conflicting currents of opinion and hesitated
as to their proper course of procedure. While a majority of them
expressed approval of what the United States had done, and while Uruguay
for its part asserted that "no American country, which in defense of its
own rights should find itself in a state of war with nations of other
continents, would be treated as a belligerent," Mexico veered almost to
the other extreme by proposing that the republics of America agree to
lay an embargo on the shipment of munitions to the warring powers.
As a matter of fact, only seven out of the nineteen Hispanic nations saw
fit to imitate the example set by their northern neighbor and to declare
war on Germany. These were Cuba--in view of its "duty toward the United
States," Panama, Guatemala, Brazil, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Costa Rica.
Since the Dominican Republic at the time was under American military
control, it was not in a position to choose its course. Four countries
Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, and Uruguay--broke off diplomatic relations
with Germany. The other seven republics--Mexico, Salvador, Colombia,
Venezuela, Chile, Argentina, and Paraguay--continued their formal
neutrality. In spite of a disclosure made by the United States of
insulting and threatening utterances on the part of the German charge
d'affaires in Argentina, which led to popular outbreaks at the capital
and induced the national Congress to declare in favor of a severance of
diplomatic relations with that functionary's Government, the President
of the republic stood firm in his resolution to maintain neutrality.
If Pan-Americanism had ever involved the idea of political cooperation
among the nations of the New World, it broke down just when it might
have served the greatest of purposes. Even the "A B C" combination
itself had apparently been shattered.
A century and more had now passed since the Spanish and Portuguese
peoples of the New World had achieved their independence. Eighteen
political children of various sizes and stages of advancement, or
backwardness, were born of Spain in America, and one acknowledged the
maternity of Portugal. Big Brazil has always maintained the happiest
relations with the little mother in Europe, who still watches with
pride the growth of her strapping youngster. Between Spain and her
descendants, however, animosity endured for many years after they had
thrown off the parental yoke. Yet of late, much has been done on both
sides to render the relationship cordial. The graceful act of Spain in
sending the much-beloved Infanta Isabel to represent her in Argentina
and Chile at the celebration of the centennial anniversary of their cry
for independence, and to wish them Godspeed on their onward journey, was
typical of the yearning of the mother country for her children overseas,
despite the lapse of years and political ties. So, too, her ablest men
of intellect have striven nobly and with marked success to revive
among them a sense of filial affection and gratitude for all that Spain
contributed to mold the mind and heart of her kindred in distant
lands. On their part, the Hispanic Americans have come to a clearer
consciousness of the fact that on the continents of the New World there
are two distinct types of civilization, with all that each connotes of
differences in race, psychology, tradition, language, and custom--their
own, and that represented by the United States. Appreciative though
the southern countries are of their northern neighbor, they cling
nevertheless to their heritage from Spain and Portugal in whatever seems
conducive to the maintenance of their own ideals of life and thought.
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
For anything like a detailed study of the history of the Hispanic
nations of America, obviously one must consult works written in Spanish
and Portuguese. There are many important books, also, in French and
German; but, with few exceptions, the recommendations for the general
reader will be limited to accounts in English.
A very useful outline and guide to recent literature on the subject is
W. W. Pierson, Jr., "A Syllabus of Latin-American History" (Chapel Hill,
North Carolina, 1917). A brief introduction to the history and present
aspects of Hispanic American civilization is W. R. Shepherd, "Latin
America" (New York, 1914). The best general accounts of the Spanish
and Portuguese colonial systems will be found in Charles de Lannoy and
Herman van der Linden, "Histoire de L'Expansion Coloniale des Peuples
Europeans: Portugal et Espagne" (Brussels and Paris, 1907), and Kurt
Simon, "Spanien and Portugal als See and Kolonialmdchte" (Hamburg,
1913). For the Spanish colonial regime alone, E. G. Bourne, "Spain in
America" (New York, 1904) is excellent. The situation in southern South
America toward the close of Spanish rule is well described in Bernard
Moses, "South America on the Eve of Emancipation" (New York, 1908).
Among contemporary accounts of that period, Alexander von Humboldt and
Aime Bonpland, "Personal Narrative of Travels to the Equinoctial Regions
of America", 3 vols. (London, 1881); Alexander von Humboldt, "Political
Essay on the Kingdom of New Spain", 4 vols. (London,1811-1822); and F.
R. J. de Pons, "Travels in South America", 2 vols. (London, 1807), are
authoritative, even if not always easy to read.
On the wars of independence, see the scholarly treatise by W. S.
Robertson, "Rise of the Spanish-American Republics as Told in the
Lives of their Liberators" (New York, 1918); Bartolome Mitre, "The
Emancipation of South America" (London, 1893)--a condensed translation
of the author's "Historia de San Martin", and wholly favorable to that
patriot; and F. L. Petre, "Simon Bolivar" (London, 1910)--impartial
at the expense of the imagination. Among the numerous contemporary
accounts, the following will be found serviceable: W. D. Robinson,
"Memoirs of the Mexican Revolution" (Philadelphia, 1890); J. R.
Poinsett, "Notes on Mexico" (London, 1825); H. M. Brackenridge, "Voyage
to South America," 2 vols. (London, 1820); W. B. Stevenson, "Historical
and Descriptive Narrative of Twenty Years' Residence in South America",
3 vols. (London, 1895); J. Miller, "Memoirs of General Miller in the
Service of the Republic of Peru", 2 vols. (London, 1828); H. L. V.
Ducoudray Holstein, "Memoirs of Simon Bolivar", 2 vols. (London, 1830),
and John Armitage, "History of Brazil", 2 vols. (London, 1836).
The best books on the history of the republics as a whole since the
attainment of independence, and written from an Hispanic American
viewpoint, are F. Garcia Calderon, "Latin America, its Rise and
Progress" (New York, 1913), and M. de Oliveira Lima, "The Evolution of
Brazil Compared with that of Spanish and Anglo-Saxon America" (Stanford
University, California, 1914). The countries of Central America are
dealt with by W. H. Koebel, "Central America" (New York, 1917), and of
South America by T. C. Dawson, "The South American Republics", 2 vols.
(New York, 1903-1904), and C. E. Akers, "History of South America"
(London, 1912), though in a manner that often confuses rather than
enlightens.
Among the histories and descriptions of individual countries, arranged
in alphabetical order, the following are probably the most useful to the
general reader: W. A. Hirst, "Argentina" (New York, 1910); Paul Walle,
"Bolivia" (New York, 1914); Pierre Denis, "Brazil" (New York, 1911);
G. F. S. Elliot, "Chile" (New York, 1907); P. J. Eder, "Colombia" (New
York, 1913); J. B. Calvo, "The Republic of Costa Rica" (Chicago, 1890);
A. G. Robinson, "Cuba, Old and New" (New York, 1915); Otto Schoenrich,
"Santo Domingo" (New York, 1918); C. R. Enock, "Ecuador" (New York,
1914); C. R. Enock, "Mexico" (New York, 1909); W. H. Koebel, "Paraguay"
(New York, 1917); C. R. Enock, "Peru" (New York, 1910); W. H. Koebel,
"Uruguay" (New York, 1911), and L. V. Dalton, "Venezuela" (New York,
1912). Of these, the books by Robinson and Eder, on Cuba and Colombia,
respectively, are the most readable and reliable.
For additional bibliographical references see "South America" and the
articles on individual countries in "The Encyclopaedia Britannica", 11th
edition, and in Marrion Wilcox and G. E. Rines, "Encyclopedia of Latin
America" (New York, 1917).
Of contemporary or later works descriptive of the life and times of
eminent characters in the history of the Hispanic American republics
since 1830, a few may be taken as representative. Rosas: J. A. King,
"Twenty-four Years in the Argentine Republic" (London, 1846), and
Woodbine Parish, "Buenos Ayres and the Provinces of the Rio de la Plata"
(London, 1850). Francia: J. R. Rengger, "Reign of Dr. Joseph Gaspard
Roderick [!] de Francia in Paraguay" (London, 1827); J. P. and W. P.
Robertson, "Letters on South America", 3 vols. (London, 1843), and E.
L. White, "El Supremo", a novel (New York, 1916). Santa Anna: Waddy
Thompson, "Recollections of Mexico" (New York, 1846), and F. E. Ingles,
Calderon de la Barca, "Life in Mexico" (London, 1859.). Juarez: U.
R. Burke, "Life of Benito Juarez" (London, 1894). Solano Lopez: T. J.
Hutchinson, "Parana; with Incidents of the Paraguayan War and South
American Recollections" (London, 1868); George Thompson, "The War in
Paraguay" (London, 1869); R. F. Burton, "Letters from the Battle-fields
of Paraguay" (London, 1870), and C. A. Washburn, "The History of
Paraguay", 2 vols. (Boston, 1871). Pedro II: J. C. Fletcher and D. P.
Kidder, "Brazil and the Brazilians" (Boston, 1879), and Frank Bennett,
"Forty Years in Brazil"(London, 1914). Garcia Moreno: Frederick
Hassaurek, "Four Years among Spanish Americans"(New York, 1867). Guzman
Blanco: C. D. Dance, "Recollections of Four Years in Venezuela" (London,
1876). Diaz: James Creelman, "Diaz, Master of Mexico" (New York, 1911).
Balmaceda: M. H. Hervey, "Dark Days in Chile" (London, 1891-1890.
Carranza: L. Gutierrez de Lara and Edgcumb Pinchon, "The Mexican People:
their Struggle for Freedom" (New York, 1914).