Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-sjtt6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-22T00:43:18.917Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Monroe Doctrine in 1940

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 April 2017

Philip C. Jessup
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Editorial Comment
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 34 , Issue 4 , October 1940 , pp. 704 - 711
Copyright
Copyright © by the American Society of International Law 1940

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Vol. 29 (1935), p. 105.

2 See Charles G. Fenwick, “The Buenos Aires Conference: 1936,” XIII Foreign Policy Reports (1937), pp. 90,92. The text of the convention is in Department of State Publication No. 1088, Conference Series No. 33, Report of the Delegation of the United States of America, p. 17; also in this Journal, Supplement, Vol. 31 (1937), p. 53.

3 Department of State Press Releases, Dec. 24, 1938, p. 474; this Journal, Supp., p. 199.

4 Department of State Bulletin, Oct. 7, 1939, p. 334.

5 The texts of the resolutions may be found in Department of State Bulletin, Aug. 24, 1940, p. 127 ff.

6 In his message to Congress, Dec. 6, 1869, President Grant declared that the Spanish “dependencies are no longer regarded as subject to transfer from one European power to another.” Richardson, Messages and Papers of the Presidents, Vol. VII, p. 32.

7 Senate Report No. 1770 to accompany S. J. Res. 271 ; House Report No. 2400 to accompany H. J. Res. 556.

8 Save for the italicized words which do not appear in the Senate Report.

9 As quoted in J. Reuben Clark, Memorandum on the Monroe Doctrine (1930), State Department Publication No. 37, p. xii. See Moore, Digest of International Law, Vol. 6, p. 372.

10 League of Nations Official Journal, 1928, p. 1606.

11 Ibid., p. 1608. Cf. Report of Sub-Committee No. 4 of the First Committee of the Assembly regarding Article 21 of the Covenant, Records of the Second Assembly, 1921, p. 22 ff.

12 Op. cit., supra, note 9, p. xi.

13 Department of State Bulletin, June 22, 1940, pp. 681–682.

14 Ibid., July 6, 1940, p. 3. The “legal validity” of the Monroe Doctrine is not actually involved.

15 H. J. Res. 556 was amended to substitute “this hemisphere” for “Western Hemisphere.”

16 Letter to Representative Edith Nourse Rogers, June 8, 1940, Congressional Record, June 10, 1940, Vol. 86, p. 11963.

17 “The Geography of the Monroe Doctrine and the Limits of the Western Hemisphere,” Geographical Review, July, 1940, p. 525.

18 Iceland: The First American Republic (1939).

19 Cf. President Wilson’s phrase in his speech of Jan. 22,1917: “The doctrine of President Monroe as the doctrine of the world.”