for it was the example of American statesmen that changed
diplomacy from an extensive system of lying into a frank
and candid discussion of the differences between nations.
Our policy in dealing with the South American republics
has also been a step in the right direction; and one cause for
the ill feeling that at present exists in Europe against the
United States is that we will neither override the South
American states ourselves nor permit any European power
to do so. But how about Cuba? Was our disinterested in
tervention in her behalf in 1898 only a pretext to bring her
people under the control of this country? Cubans look upon
the celebrated Platt amendment as “an attempt to place
Cuba under the jurisdiction, sovereignty and control of the
United States” without their consent, and it appears as if
they have good reasons for so thinking. Such an attempt
would be a disgrace to the spirit that animated the founders
of this nation, contrary to the high standard which this
country has always maintained in its intercourse with other
nations, contrary to the wishes of every true and patriotic
American citizen, and it could only act as a boomerang upon
the heads of those bringing it about. Many of our latter
day politicians would no doubt attempt to explain away
such a disgraceful action by laying it to national destiny,
but much of the destiny we hear so much about these days
is of the jumping-jack variety, for in the first place it is a
manufactured article, and then, too it can be made to twist
and turn as best suits the pleasure of the one having it in
hand. This country of ours has a national destiny to work
out but it is the destiny of the statesman rather than that
of the politician. It is,—to stand before all future genera
tions as a proof that man can govern himself and can do it
well; and that candor and justice in dealing with a weaker
nation is the true policy of a great people.