Richmond daily times. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1853, 1853-02-17
Douglas on the Monroe Doctrine.

Douglas on the Monroe Doctrine.
Senator Douglas made II vigorous onslaught on
;en. Cass' Monroe doctrine resolutions day or
vo ago. These old fogy declarations are not
rong enough for the ''litte Giant" and he takes
ccasion to belabor them most numerically. He
vers that whilst all of our politicians have pro-
ssed the Monroe doctrine for the last thirty
ears, they have invariably shrunk from enforcing
when there was opportunity of doing so.-
5e points to the Oregon treaty one case in point
Ito the Clayton Bulwer treaty another, and
tsails Cass resolutions the ground that they
cquiesce by implication in these violations ofthe
cry doctrine waich they profess to rnartain.-
6r. Douglas can see no virtue ia continually re-
firmiug the Monroe declaration. He goes for
Immediate action, and for making practical is
ue with Great Britain at once. His programme
the immediate reputation of the Clayton
rsaty, aud the abolition of Eugland's new colony
n the Bay of Island, peaceaby if we can, forci-
bly, if we must.
The young Giants remarks are characterised
throughout by spirit of extreme irreverence
or the grave resolves of his antquated rival from
Michigan. tits evident that good feeling pre-
Wis O6lWeeu tuSSo tWO flCtliiilS5u Teslu6uIldl
aspirants. and that Douglas speech was made for
the sole purpose of repudiating Cass' authority
30 declare the policy of the Democratic party.
Gen. Cass' resolution respecting Cuba is par
ticularly Objectionable to the fllibustering Ssna-
tor from Illinois. He seems to think that it was
levelled at himself. There might The sadly be in
these clauses of the resolutions lurking au-
sion to certain individual of about his pro-
portions. 1t was customary with some persons
to attributethese awless and marauding purposes
TO portion of the people whom they designate as
.sY Dung America" and he had been referred to
the other day as being identified with that party
+ lie knew of nothing in his political conduct
deserving such an mputation. He had for six
| years past uniformly voted treaties and other
matters to sustain the Monroe doctrine. He
had done no more. The difference between him
and those with whom he had not voted was this
that he was against giving pledges for flu
1ure conduct, aud then submitting to their gross
aud open violation.
At the conclusion of Mr.. Douglas speech the
following explanations took place between the
respective champions of Old and Young Ameri-
Mr.. CAss said tho Senator had INDUCED in
some pretty free remarks the resolution, and
hs thought he could show them to be mere hyper.
criticisms The Senator objects because the reso
tuition says we have no intention to interfere with
disturb existing rights Does the Senator de-
sire to destroy existing rights!
Mr.. DousLAs, (emphatically.) No.
Mr.. CAss. Why not say SO then in the reso-
luton! The words were used by Mr.. Polk
Existing rights does not mean existing wrongs.
accin aft h tItna fsa
wrong, it is not existing right, but an exis-
ting wrong and is not protected by the reso-
luton. The resolution does not wipe out the
past, but leaves US free as ever to act upon past
wrongs. 1.-THE Bay Islands were taken in the
face Of the treaty, aud oar declared doctrine, it
is an existing wrong, and is not therefore an ex-
listing right. in the words of the resolution
Possessory wrongs were not existing rights.
He thought there was use for this declaration
of the Monroe doctrine. Monroe, Jefferson, and
Polk, thought there was use in laying this doc
trine down. But it had laid idle in the archives
of the nation, and should now be put in some
authoritative shape. The Monroe doctrine
not violated in the Oregon treaty. The Senator
had entirely mlsconceiyed the question. The
moment we conceded the British line as coming
down to 40 degrees, we conceded thatthe Monroe
doctrine did not apply above that line. We have
given up nothing in the Bay Islands affair, for it
was not known here till within six weeks. We
have done nothing here condemning any British
rights. As TO Nicaragua we could get no treaty
there; and the easiest way to enforce the Mon
doctrine in Central America was to agree
with Great Britain to keep hands off. The gen.
teman was in favor of protest by the President.
Of what value is that 1t had been already
been made by Messrs Monroe and Polk but
when put in this shape it will be the protest of
the American people 10 authoritative, shape.
and 40 nation in Europe would disregard it. 10
l.
would bring forth, it proper that this nation
should notify the world of what lis policy was to
be. He did not intend, by the disclaimer of any
intention to disturb the rights of Spain, to imply
the existence of any turpitude on the American
character.
Mr. DOUGLAS said such would be the inference
of other nations.
Mr.. CAss said it had not occurred to him in that
light. He nothing of the kind in it. As to
what was said about Old and Young America,
it not fit for the Senate. Old America
had to bear It's burden of abuse, and Young
America got old it would have to stand the same
stream.
Mr.. DOUGLAS said as to the remark about
Young America, he had never introduced it into
the Senate till after it had been commented upon
in speech this bject the other day-the
only speech made yet the subject to which
the Senator from Michigan had not replied. He
could therefore, understand, certainly did not
expect TO receives the lecture tor using those
words from the Senator.
Mr.. CAss said he had not lectured the Sena-
tor. He had always taken Old Fogy to him
self.
Mr.. DouGLAs said if it was fit for the Senator
TO use the words Old Fogy and Young America
for year within the Senate, it was fit for him to
use it on this occasion in reply to speech made
by another Senator
The Senator says that this words. existing
rights do not Justify the past. Do they ,ustify tho
taking of Jamaica. seized by an usurpef. whose
saet was disagowed, but the territory retained