Delaware gazette and state journal., 1895-12-12
THE PRESIDENT ON VENEZUELA.
a Question AS TO What is "the whole Con.
troversy." and Where tho Principle o

troversy." and Where tho Principle OF
Arbitration Applies.
New York Evening Post
The Presidents observations on the
Venezuela matter will probably satisfy
neither our own Jingoes nor the
British. He leaves the main points
OF the controversy in obscurity. He
protests against the enlargement of
the area of British Guiana in deroga-
tion of the rights'a and against the will
of Venezuela.' But this is begging
the question. 1t is taking the side OF
Venezuela in the controversy, and thus
disqualifying ourselves for acting as
arbitrators should We be asked to do
so. 1t assumes gross wrong doing on
the part of Great Britain before her
side of the case has been heard. II
Great Britain is really seeking to en-
tend her territory, sin derogation Of
tho rights and against the will of
Venezuela, there is nothing to ar
bitrate. We have only to consider
whether or not we will take up arms
in behalf Of Venezuela.
Nor does he throw any light on the
nature of the controversy. He pro-
poses TO submit "the whole contro-
versy'' to arbitration. But what is
the whole controversy?' As we
understand it Great Britain is willing
TO arbitrate as to the boundary line
through unoccupied territory, but de-
clines to do 80 as to territory of which
she has long had undisputed possess
sion. and which is now settled by
40, 900 British subjects, who do not
desire to become Venezuelans, and
have invested their capital without
anticipating any such contingency.
This territory the Venezuelans now
claim because it has recently become
a gold field. But IL they may call on
Great Britain to arbitrate her title to
this, mag they not call on her to arbi-
trate her title to other and more popu-
lous districts of Guiana, and in fact
to the whole of Guiana? II must be
remembered that Venezuela is semi
barbarons State. not in the least govern
ed by our notions of diplomatic reason
ableness and courtesy, and would Just
as soon claim tho whole of Guiana as
not, il she thought there was chance
OF our supporting her contention. She
does not belong TO 1.-THE family of
civilized nations" properly 80 called,
and we are just as much interested as
Great Britain, in fact more interested
than Great Britain, in REFRESHING
the eXtravagances and absurdities
OF these proteges of ours. To ask Great
Britain to arbitrate any and every
claim such a State may make is an ab
surdity which, if presented TO us, we
should promptly resent.
Moreover, the doctrine that all claims
OF a weak state on strong one ought
to be arbitrated because of its weak
ness, is novelty in international law
and morals. There are no warmer
friends of arbitration than we are, but
we have always supposed that the
reason for arbitration was TO be found
In the nature of the case and not the
comparative strength OF the parties.
II l am very strong man and have u
dispute with very small and weak
one, | cannot, because of my physical
superiority, let him slap my face when
he pleases, and then propose to arhi-
trate on the nature, extent, and gravity
of the insult. We should not think Of
accepting such doctrine for our own
use. When we were on the point of
going TO war with Chill IN 1891, We
should have secuted tho idea Of such a
thing. Its general acceptance by strong
powers would in truth put very
powerful weapon of injury and AFRO.
gance into the hands of weak and
semi civilized ones. We must remem- :
ber that in meddling in other peoples
quarrels We are making precedents by
which we must be bound ourselves,
unless we mean to part company with
the rest Of the civilized world and
throw in our lot with Debs, Coxey and
Altgeld.
The question, too, what we should
do il Venezuela were TO yield volun-
tarily to Great Britain by way of "a
trade" the territory which the Presi-
dent says Great Britain is now wrong
fully claiming, is ono on which the
President should have thrown some
light, for his remarks inevitably sug-
gest II. Should we be compelled to
forbid the settlement Of the controversy
in this way, and If We did forbid il,
what would become Of Nenezuela's
| sovereigntyP An such interference
with her discretion would be a tania.
| mount to the assumption of protec.
torate, which would inevitably carry
with it responsibility in general for the
acts OF her government and citizens
IN their foreign relations. The rest of
the civilized world would never tolerate
our protection of the whole of the
Spanish American States against tho
legitimate consequences Of tbcir own
wrong doing. There is dispute, lead
ing to suspension Of diplomatic rela-
tions, now pending between Venezuela
and France and Belgium. Arc we in
that also? Must we settle it, or ap-
prove of the settlement? The crop of
quarrels which might grow out of this
would speedily change the character
OF our own government and the course OF
our own political development. The
experience of mankind thus far shows
that fighting, aggressive republic
never romans real republic very long.
Lastly, let us say that it is car
dinal rule OF international intercourse
to carry ON negotiations on such terms
as shall make it easy for your adversary
TO yield your point, and the more diff
cult your point is the more careful
should you be in putting it to him.
| Tho 'mise en- demeure, which is the
French term for asking for categori-
cal, or, as Mr.. Cleveland calls it, "a
definite answer" is something which
diplomatists usually avoid, unless they
are prepared for the contingency of Il
refusal. Are we prepared for a refusal
on the part of Lord Salisbury 10 liti-
gate the title of England to territory
of which she has long held adverse
possession, and which is now settled
by large body Of her subjects? Have
we considered what we shall do if he
says, mo, | won't?" There are two
ways out of the embarrassment in
which this answer would place us.
One-is to fight: the other is to submit
TO the imputation of negotiating in
brave words which have no meaning,
which is not pleasant for first-c class
nnMer. Mr. Cleveland has doubtless