Monroe Doctrine

On December 2, 1823, President James Monroe delivered this address to the newly inaugurated 18th Congress, which had started its term in March 1823. Overall, Monroe’s message is balanced between domestic concerns and questions of international relations and foreign policy. Its content portrays the United States as a new but growing country on a path to progress focused on westward expansion and exploration. The country is also beginning to assert itself in the international arena in its relations with great European powers such as Britain, Russia, France, and Spain and to defend what it perceives to be its vital security interests in the Western Hemisphere.

First, in the domestic sphere, Monroe emphasizes the need for Government Transparency and Accountability. Monroe is appealing here to the patriotism of his audience, whom he asks to envision themselves as merely the elected representatives of the only true sovereign: the people. The idea of popular sovereignty was still a fairly new one in 1823—only 50 years earlier, King George of England had been the sovereign. Monroe is looking both to win the legislators’ support for his policies and to ward off corruption, and to do so, he appeals to their pride in the ideals for which the revolution was fought. If the people are to be the sovereign, he says, they must have complete information about how the government is run. If they are “kept in the dark,” they will not be up to the task of sovereignty.

Having thus justified himself, he goes into some detail about how public money is being used. Monroe spends several lengthy paragraphs discussing the state of the post office, which shows the importance of developing and improving communication in a country that not only is new but also continues to add territories through frontier expansion or purchases from the European powers. The US is improving domestic communication in two ways: by building and extending postal roads and by adding post offices. Before the age of telegraphs and telephones, the postal system standardized and systematized communication in the US.

With a growing country and additional territories came new illnesses. Monroe describes a “very malignant fever”—later identified as Yellow Fever—on Thompson’s Island (Key West; 18). The island was of strategic importance to the US Navy following the acquisition of Florida from Spain two years prior. The illness struck everyone, including medical personnel, causing serious symptoms and, in some cases, deaths. For this reason, the government launched a novel investigation featuring the cooperation of the military and medics “to avoid the necessity of abandoning so important a station” (18). The President was aware of the dire situation on the island from the onset. The medical-military investigation involved the collection of data from the sick and from the local area to narrow down the possible causes of the illness. Monroe praised one of the investigators, Commodore Rogers, for “his skill and patriotism” (18). Considering the US expansion overseas after the Spanish-American War (1898), the systematized treatment of diseases, such as malaria, in the name of public health became even more important.

Another key domestic issue is the armed conflicts with Indigenous people. Monroe mentions a conflict with the Arikara, people to whom he refers as the “Ricaree,” in present-day South Dakota. The Arikara War lasted just two days in the summer of 1823, and at the time of his speech, Monroe hoped that hostilities in the region had been permanently brought to a close. Just a few decades later, between the 1850s and 1870s, came the Plains Wars in the region. In retrospect, the brief Arikara War foreshadows the enormous suffering and loss that, for Indigenous people, would attend the expansion of the United States across the North American continent. It is therefore important to consider the broader domestic context when reading Monroe’s reference to the Arikara people. The US Relationship With Indigenous Peoples theme discusses this consideration.

President Monroe takes a strong stance on the international trade of enslaved people (15). The practice became illegal in 1808 through the Act Prohibiting the Importation of Slaves. In this speech, the President seeks to classify this “odious and criminal practice” as piracy (15). Whereas slavery remained legal in the United States until 1865, these changes show the shifting societal attitudes toward the international commercial aspect of this practice. It is also important to note that Monroe came from a Virginia family that relied on enslaved labor and used this type of labor himself at home and at the White House (Costello, Matthew. “The Enslaved Households of President James Monroe.” The White House Historical Association).

Trade is another key area of development for the growing United States. To facilitate commercial development, Monroe seeks to establish a stable frontier free of conflicts with the Indigenous population. The President also supports “respecting the encouragement which ought to be given to our manufacturers” in domestic production (20). Internationally, this means deploying the US Navy, the size of which was being increased, to protect or enforce US trade interests: “The usual force has been maintained in the Mediterranean Sea, the Pacific Ocean, and along the Atlantic coast, and has afforded the necessary protection to our commerce in those seas” (18). Monroe also seeks to explore the benefits of economic protectionism through tariffs: “I recommend a review of the tariff for the purpose of affording such additional protection to those articles which we are prepared to manufacture, or which are more immediately connected with the defense and independence of the country” (20).

Monroe realized that there could be no clean separation between domestic concerns and foreign policy. The United states had won its independence less than half a century earlier, and European powers continued to control vast territories within North America—a subject that the President addresses in what came to be known as the Monroe Doctrine. At the same time, the War of 1812—a conflict between the United States and the British Empire over trade and territory, spurred by the British practice of forcing American citizens into service in the British Navy—had just concluded. The Treaty of Ghent, ratified in 1815, ended the war but not the issues that led to it. Thus, Monroe mentions the commissioners’ ruling on the question of borders and other clauses included in the peace treaty in this speech. Overall, Monroe’s perception of the war as defending American interests and the postwar agreement shows the United States as a country growing in size and significance. Only recently did the United States attain independence from Britain. Yet by the second decade of the 19th century, the United States was already challenging Britain in North America over what the country’s leadership perceived as its rights to trade and territory in North America. For Monroe, “[i]t is by rendering justice to other nations that we may expect it from them” (13). At the same time, the War of 1812 shows that attaining freedom from Britain in the revolutionary war did not resolve all the issues with the former imperial ruler. Not only were there disagreements over trade, borders, and access to waterways, but Britain also forced American sailors to serve on its ships through impressment. To complicate matters further, from the US perspective, the young country was standing up to the enormous British Empire from which it won independence through blood. Yet nascent Canadian nationalism perceived this war as an attack by a much larger neighbor, the US.

Monroe’s next concern at the intersection of domestic and foreign policy is Russian expansion into North America, as discussed in the US-European Relations theme. Russia first settled Alaska in 1732, pursuing the fur trade and engaging in limited missionary work by the Orthodox Church. In addition to Alaska, Russia settled or attempted to settle other parts of the Pacific coast, such as Fort Ross in California. In 1821, Tsar Alexander I issued a decree (ukaz) that everything north of the 51st parallel is Russian territory. The US was alarmed by this declaration. At the same time, in the early 19th century, Russia and the United States maintained an amicable relationship. For example, Russia aided the United States in its revolutionary war through diplomacy. It also acted as an arbitrator over disagreements stemming from the Treaty of Ghent and ruled in favor of the United States. Thus, the US was interested in maintaining an amicable relationship with Russia and other great European powers. Nonetheless, Tsar Alexander’s move became the key motivating factor for what came to be known as the Monroe Doctrine:

In the discussions to which this interest has given rise and in the arrangements by which they may terminate the occasion has been judged proper for asserting, as a principle in which the rights and interests of the United States are involved, that the American continents, by the free and independent condition which they have assumed and maintain, are henceforth not to be considered as subjects for future colonization by any European powers (14).

Thus, Monroe seeks to preserve the status quo in terms of the European presence in the Americas and wants to prevent further European colonization in the region. He notes that the US will not challenge existing colonies, such as British North America (Canada): “With the existing colonies or dependencies of any European power we have not interfered and shall not interfere” (22). However, the US seeks to prevent recolonization—for instance, in the case of the newly independent Mexico from Spain as of 1821:

But with the Governments who have declared their independence and maintained it, and whose independence we have, on great consideration and on just principles, acknowledged, we could not view any interposition for the purpose of oppressing them, or controlling in any other manner their destiny, by any European power in any other light than as the manifestation of an unfriendly disposition toward the United States (22-23).

This message can be interpreted in two ways. First, the United States was a young country, which meant that this policy was, at first, largely defensive:

It is only when our rights are invaded or seriously menaced that we resent injuries or make preparation for our defense. With the movements in this hemisphere we are of necessity more immediately connected, and by causes which must be obvious to all enlightened and impartial observers (22).

Second, US territorial expansion across the North American continent demonstrates that the desire to preserve the status quo in the Americas only pertained to the European powers. The US was busily expanding its own borders in North America and intended to continue doing so. Furthermore, it viewed the Western Hemisphere as its exclusive sphere of influence even outside of its borders. The concept of an exclusive sphere of influence became particularly relevant as the US became more powerful economically and militarily. US regional interventionism in the wake of the Spanish-American War (1898)—economic, cultural, political, and military—in places like Cuba showed the practical consequences of this concept, as discussed in the Background section.

In Monroe’s view, delineating the US sphere of influence in this way is logical, fair, and reasonable. Just as the US does not want the Europeans to further colonize or recolonize the Americas, neither does the US have any interest in meddling in European affairs: “In the wars of the European powers in matters relating to themselves we have never taken any part, nor does it comport with our policy so to do” (22). Thus, the President’s comments about different conflicts in Europe, such as the one between Spain and Portugal, should be interpreted as those of an observer rather than a willing participant. Furthermore, on a number of occasions, Monroe emphasizes the difference between the political system in the US and those of Europe. Regarding the Greek War of Independence against the Ottomans, Monroe’s sentimental verbal support of the Greeks seems to stem from the parallel between the Thirteen Colonies’ own struggle against Britain.